Opening can o' worms

[Mark]

Yes, but a non-reviewer is also probably going to have personal biases, but we won't know about them as well.

The possible appearance of conflict of interest doesn't arise from the bias but from the position.

 

[DaveMage]

Well, do remember that there is an Ennies Board of Directors that sits over the entire thing. I've not seen any talk about letting go of seats on that board. So long as the board keeps an eye open, there's someone to steer us around outside forces.

Great point - I had forgotten about that.

 

[Mark]

(snip)

I think you have missed the point. In this particular section of this thread we're discussing avoiding the possible appearance of a conflict of interest.

 

[Psion]

I think you have missed the point. In this particular section of this thread we're discussing avoiding the possible appearance of a conflict of interest.

I do not see where this hypothetical conflict of interest you are suggesting arises. How does being a staff reviewer influence my opinion on products judge in the ennies? I am not seeing it.

I mean seriously. This is a topic that comes up all the time in my line of work, and we receive training on it regularly. We are taught to avoid things like having a government employee preside on a panel that will be judging on whether to buy a product produced by a company your wife works for. That's appearance of conflict of interest.

But you have presented no credible scenario here over which we should be concerned that I see.

You poo-poo me above, but I am not seeing how what you were saying there is any different than what you were saying earlier:

Staff reviewers on the committee? I've never been comfortable with that idea. We hear from them all year long. We know they all have some companies they don't care for and some who won't send them products.

So, by virtue of having made judgements on the quality of products, we are ineligible to make judgements on the quality of products? Because a publisher does not like the judgements we make, we should be barred from the committee? That's not preventing a conflict of interest, that's inviting one by allowing publishers to dictate who we put on the committe by objecting to them.

If a publisher or publishing segment is not represented, and the fans feel it is not represented, there is a mechanism for dealing with that: vote for someone who represents your standpoint. That is, arguably, why Diaglo took a seat this year. That is the principle on which a public nomination is founded.

 

[Mark]

I do not see where this hypothetical conflict of interest you are suggesting arises. How does being a staff reviewer influence my opinion on products judge in the ennies? I am not seeing it.

I know. You've said in the past that you don't see it but as a staff reviewer and board member for the ENnies this is an area where you might want to allow others to discuss it and allow other board members to shape this section of policy.

You're mischaracterizing it by calling it a "hypothetical conflict of interest" when it is, in fact, "the need to avoid the possible appearance of a conflict of interest" when it comes to the nominations committee members and people who work for EN World or the ENnies. We're not talking about an actual violation by anyone because of a conflict of interest. That would be dealt with in another manner, I have no doubt. Policies for actual (or hypothetical, since that would be what they are until they happen) conflicts of interest are another matter entirely and not something we're discussing at present.

Obviously, anyone who works for the ENnies or EN World can be seen as someone with the appearance of possible conflicts of interest. I think anyone who would dismiss the fact probably isn't looking at things clearly or seriously.

 

[Psion]

I know. You've said in the past that you don't see it but as a staff reviewer and board member for the ENnies this is an area where you might want to allow others to discuss it and allow other board members to shape this section of policy.

Fair enough. But I was authentically interested in where you saw it.

 

[Umbran]

Obviously, anyone who works for the ENnies or EN World can be seen as someone with the appearance of possible conflicts of interest. I think anyone who would dismiss the fact probably isn't looking at things clearly or seriously.

The point, Mark, is that it is not obvious.

A "conflict of interest" occurs when a judge has a bias for or against a contestant due to some concerns outside the competition. If I happen to work for a publisher, I stand to personally profit if my company wins, so I have an interest that conflicts with proper judging of the contestants.

I don't see how being staff on these boards automatically generates the appearance of such conflicts. We don't get paid for our services. We don't stand to win or lose a darned thing from how the results turn out.

Please, could you describe what conflicts of interest you think people might imagine exist?

 

[Thorin Stoutfoot]

1. Self nomination is fine.
2. If it's eligible for best d20, it's eligible for best game as well.
3. Multiple categories is fine. Ptolus, for instance, is both a campaign and a campaign setting. It should qualify for both if the judges deem it fit.
4-6: no opinion.

 

[Mark]

A "conflict of interest" occurs (. . .)

Again, not saying one has or even will occur. But the perception that one is possible given the positions of people is there. A conflict of interest is a conflict between the public and private interests of somebody in an official position, or conflicts between a number of public positions. Someone who works for EN World or the ENnies, both of which solicit and receive monies from publishers, simply has the perception of a possible conflict of interests when seated on the nominations committee. There's no way around it and it is obvious. Sorry.

 

[The_Universe]

Having read a bit about the voting method, it really is leaning a bit towards the "intelligent supercomputer" line. The intent of the system is to preserve some of the voter's intent, even if their first choice is thoroughly beaten out of the competition. Choose your priorities wisely, and even if Noob loses, you can throw some weight behind Loob instead.

What needs to go along with this is a good piece describing the voting method and how the voter should approach their options. That should help a good deal.

Ah - very true. I'd forgotten about the weighting system already in place, since it's been almost a year since I voted.