Opening can o' worms

[DaveMage]

Having a judge or two not affiliated is a good thing. EN World is a d20 haven and having everything happen here makes some people believe there is a bias towards those products. We have to fight the perception of being bias.

I disagree that having judges from elsewhere is (necessarily) a good thing, as I think it's a potentially dangerous road to go down. If we start that way, at what point do these become the Gen Con awards, and drop EN World altogether?

Also, the benefit of having the staff reviewers as judges is that staff reviewers have proven themselves able to read large amounts of products in a relatively short amount of time. This is a benefit, IMO. Frankly, I think part of the "job" of a staff reviewer should be to be an ENnies judge, unless they opt out.

 

[Ghostwind]

If we start that way, at what point do these become the Gen Con awards, and drop EN World altogether?

The day that Peter Adkinson gave backing and credibility to the awards by providing his support. At that point, they became the Gen Con Ennies Awards and no longer just the ENWorld awards. Hence the need for more involvement from others outside of EN World.

 

[DaveMage]

The day that Peter Adkinson gave backing and credibility to the awards by providing his support. At that point, they became the Gen Con Ennies Awards and no longer just the ENWorld awards. Hence the need for more involvement from others outside of EN World.

But Gen Con, despite the financial support, does not provide personnel or make any logistical arrangements (outside of the time at Gen Con itself). The EN World community is expected to do that. If Gen Con starts doing that, then (IMO) EN World should be dropped from the name.

The thing is, though, EN World is not a closed community. *Anyone* is free to join and participate (presuming they can follow the rules).

Of course, with d20 diminishing in its range of publishers, EN World itself may see a shift in its mission/purpose within the next few years, which might make it more open to other systems. Of course, should that happen, the site may become redundant. However, as long as EN World remains in the name, I see nothing wrong in making the judges EN World participants only.

 

[Ghostwind]

Ah, but there are things that Peter has dictated that Ennies are allowed to do and not to do regarding the awards and categories. For instance, in the past the Ennies were not allowed to hand out miniature awards in their own categories. Miniatures had to be related to roleplaying and gaming and fall under the Game Aid category. I also believe that the Ennies weren't allowed to award card games either so as not to compete with the Origins awards.

As far as EN World becoming less of a d20 community, it is already happening to a considerable margin. Just look at the number of threads popping up lately that deal with other systems like Savage Worlds. There is definitely a paradigm shift to gaming beyond d20. It only seems reasonable to seek out qualified judges from all walks of gaming and not just those who are popular here (unless voted in by the at-large population).

 

[DaveMage]

As far as EN World becoming less of a d20 community, it is already happening to a considerable margin. Just look at the number of threads popping up lately that deal with other systems like Savage Worlds. There is definitely a paradigm shift to gaming beyond d20. It only seems reasonable to seek out qualified judges from all walks of gaming and not just those who are popular here (unless voted in by the at-large population).

It will be interesting to see what happens with this site with regard to the decline of d20 (although D&D itself still seems to be king of the hill by a wide margin).

I still think, though, that if you want to be a judge for something with ENnies in the title, you should at least make the effort to participate in the community before becoming one.

 

[freebfrost]

I'm not sure I understand what you're arguing, here. Are you intimating that the votes are somehow fixed? Or rather that there's some inherent flaw in letting majority vote choose the Ennies judges?

I think Mark's point here is that the overall intent of the vote is lost in the sea of individual votes tallies.

Here's an example. Mark wants to send a message with his vote that he wants three judges, one of which is a long-time ENWorld poster (we'll call this hypothetical poster Crathion ), and two lurkers/newbies (we'll call them Lurker and Noob). I have the same intention, but my two "new" votes are for different people - Nurker and Loob - instead.

But the system doesn't look at the overall voter's intention, but tallies the individual votes. So Crathion wins the popular vote, but no one knows enough about all individual "new" judges (Mark votes for Lurker and Noob, I vote for Nurker and Loob) so they don't get enough individual votes to win. The overall intent (1 experienced judge and 2 new ones) gets lost in the numbers.

 

[The_Universe]

I think Mark's point here is that the overall intent of the vote is lost in the sea of individual votes tallies.

Here's an example. Mark wants to send a message with his vote that he wants three judges, one of which is a long-time ENWorld poster (we'll call this hypothetical poster Crathion ), and two lurkers/newbies (we'll call them Lurker and Noob). I have the same intention, but my two "new" votes are for different people - Nurker and Loob - instead.

But the system doesn't look at the overall voter's intention, but tallies the individual votes. So Crathion wins the popular vote, but no one knows enough about all individual "new" judges (Mark votes for Lurker and Noob, I vote for Nurker and Loob) so they don't get enough individual votes to win. The overall intent (1 experienced judge and 2 new ones) gets lost in the numbers.

The only solution I can fathom to that particular problem is to create some kind of telepathic supercomputer with a downlink into voters' immortal souls.

Nevertheless, I at last see the point that Mark was trying to make. Joking comments aside, I really don't see any way to solve this problem at the systemic level, even with some complex vote-weighing tabulation system (though that gets closer than the telepathic supercomputer ).

My advice would be for voters who really intend to "send a message" with their votes to attempt to organize themselves into a bloc, of some sort. If you don't really care if the hypothetical individuals known as Lurker, Noob, Nurker, or Loob get to be judges, and just want to have "somebody that's not part of the usual crowd," evaluating those products, get together with people who feel the same way.

Campaign Noob for Ennies Judge in 2007! All hail Noob!

(you get the idea)

 

[Hairy Minotaur]

I still think, though, that if you want to be a judge for something with ENnies in the title, you should at least make the effort to participate in the community before becoming one.

I agree with this statement, I also feel though if the awards grow to be what Orgins tried to be (an industry award the fans in masse cared about), we're going to need the involvement of people that don't frequent these boards. People tend to stay in their comfort area and tend to not frequent other sites. (I'm guilty of that, I come to ENWorld for 99% of my RPG news)

The difficult part of trying to be a judge coming from another site, is that they'll have a handful (maybe) of posts here. Definately not enough for anyone solely on ENWorld to make an infomred decision of that person's oppinions. I for one would have to seek out that person's main site of operation and hope look for their posts there.

The only way someone from another site could do that here is to buy the search feature. I ask would you do the same at another site just to look for someone else's oppinions, if for whatever reason you had no intention of staying on that site?

I don't know a good solution for that, or if there should even be one.

As long as the awards are called the GenCon/ENNie awards then judges would and should be primarily from this site. If/When they drop the Ennie part of the awards, then I no longer believe that should be the prevailing thought.

 

[Mark]

(. . . ) voters who really intend to "send a message" with their votes (. . .)

That's what voting does. No one is calling into question the abilities or jobs of past members, at least I haven't seen that here. There are some situations that exist that do need to be addressed. There is the possibility that there could be some conflicts of interest perceived and some people are offering solutions. You said you don't perceive a problem, and that's fine, but others do so it is something worth addressing. You've said you don't have any solutions, and that's fine, but others do and that's something worth exploring. I do not know why you want to marginalize people's opinions on future policies for the ENnies and the abilities of anyone you don't think should be a member of the nominations committee but I wish you would stop doing that. It does not seem to be constuctive or in the spirit of the intent of this thread.

 

[Ghostwind]

I almost get the impression that metaphorically, the ENnies has grown to be the teenager about to leave for college and EN World is the protective parent who isn't quite ready to let him go off on his own. There is a strong sense of pride with the awards, but an equally strong undercurrent of possessiveness ala "These are our awards. How dare you try to change them." Neither is a bad thing. But both can cloud a person's judgment and prevent him or her from seeing that certain changes do need to be made if the award is going to grow and gain the respect of the gaming audience at large (and not just the online EN World crowd).