Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="eyebeams" data-source="post: 3331210" data-attributes="member: 9225">The trouble with one year is that products are often planned up to two years in advance. Plus, you do have people who have low but regular working cycles, especially in layout and art.Experience is the last thing that should inform fan judging if the idea is to be representative of fan interests.That's arbitrarily appealing to the vote. If the voting process was designed to also determine  policy directly, then there wouldn't be *any* rules, would there? Hell, there wouldn't even be judges, just three rounds of voting for noms, categories, then winners.(In fact, such a system is perfectly workable. If you're serious about all democracy all the time, then you should argue to emove the judges. Arguing for the process as it is is not an argument in favour of the wisdom of the fans, but an argument that the fans are guided by policy X rather than Y.)Sure. What I've proposed is consistent with the stated goals of the awards. In this thread, Morrus talks about how he doesn't want industry interference. The virtue of the awards is that it's supposed to be by and for fans. I am confident that eliminating part-timers and repeat candidates will lead to more new faces with equally sharp insights. I'm disturbed at suggestions that fans need to be able to pick a past judge/past industry person. Why is that? If people think that there really are so few able potential judges, it actually shows *less* confidence in fandom, not more.</blockquote>

Verification