Why aren't you voting?

[Vigilance]

I'm not voting for the judges this year for the same reasons I didn't vote in the last ENnies' poll: the awards aren't relevant to me anymore. I admit, I'm a pretty niche gamer. I play & develop d20 Modern alost exclusively, and my favoured publishers run the gamut of minor celebrity (RPGObjects) to small press companies. Last year, these areas of interest just weren't represented at the ENnies. The year before, that representation was minor. It almost seems that Monte Cook's blasting rant against the 3rd party small press "takeover" of the ENnies has reduced the number of small press publishers of whom I enjoy from entering the ENnies. I'm not implying there is a connection here, only noting the coincidence.

I'll likely vote for next year's judges, mainly because I'll have a vested interest in the ENnies that year (ie, I will be submitting something for judgement). For now, though, there's just no reason for me to; I have my doubts that the ENnies will have more appeal for me this year than last year or the year before.

Sorry if this offends. The question was "why haven't you voted?" and I answered it honestly.

I can tell you we submitted products to the Ennies last year. I was disappointed we werent nominated for anything- which fine, but I personally consider the fact that there were two Modern products nominated last year (one of which was free) pretty disturbing.

 

[Roudi]

The apathetic attitude that you (and a few others- I'm not really trying to target you in particular) expressed that really gets my goat though. The awards aren't relevant to me, so why should I try and change them? Well, if they're not relevant to you, why NOT try and change them? Look through the list of candidates and find someone who has a soft spot for indie publishers? Or who truly knows and appreciates Modern? Ask the candidates some questions?

I have to admit, that's the most rational argument I've heard for voting, ENnies or otherwise. Thank you; I am going to make an informed vote, provided I can find a candidate worthy of my support.

Just to note, I've recently gone through a debacle with our local Student Union elections, where the current Union felt being less accomodating to voters was better for students, and that my complaint against them (because I was, as a Union executive told me, one student and therefore a minority) was insignificant.

Having this much attention and genuine care paid to whether I vote or not is very reassuring, in an otherwise absence of such elsewhere in my life.

 

[Alzrius]

I don't vote so that I can then justifiably complain, when the system inevitably fails or otherwise disappoints, that it doesn't represent me or my interests. This is the first point to stirring up what will eventually lead to a violent bloodbath that will overthrow the current order, allowing me to reshape things in my own image.

 

[Christoph the Magus]

I don't vote because I couldn't care less about the Ennies. I don't hate them or anything-they just don't mean anything to me. I've never bought a game product because it was "award" winning and I doubt that I ever will.

Christoph

 

[cignus_pfaccari]

I don't vote because I couldn't care less about the Ennies. I don't hate them or anything-they just don't mean anything to me. I've never bought a game product because it was "award" winning and I doubt that I ever will.

Ditto.

Especially since I rarely buy third-party stuff. I think I've bought...two third-party books in the last year, and both had the word "Iron" in them. (Both aren't being used, either, but that's beside the point.)

Brad

 

[Dextra]

About publicizing past judge votes

Not going to happen.
There's enough potential ill-will that we are not going to publish how individual judges voted. Some are more than glad to express their opinions on certain products, especially in reviews. Ask them directly a question about how they pick their products, how they do an initial sort, what they look for in a given category, fine. But we're not going to release those numbers.

I want the ENnies judges to remain a faceless entity. Being a judge is a hard enough job without having to worry about looking over your shoulder for fear of offending a publisher.

BTW, please don't take my tone as being adversarial to the publishers. It's just that if the judges had to worry about if their votes were going public, they might have to start making more political or strategic decisions, and that's not what the process is about.

So no public release of the individual judges' picks, sorry.

 

[Crothian]

It'd have enough meaning for me. I could possibly even establish a pattern of what you like and dislike.

Read my reviews, if you can't figure it out from that then no list of nominations will do that.

 

[Conaill]

Not going to happen.
There's enough potential ill-will that we are not going to publish how individual judges voted. Some are more than glad to express their opinions on certain products, especially in reviews. Ask them directly a question about how they pick their products, how they do an initial sort, what they look for in a given category, fine. But we're not going to release those numbers.

I want the ENnies judges to remain a faceless entity. Being a judge is a hard enough job without having to worry about looking over your shoulder for fear of offending a publisher.

That's what I thought you might say. I definitely understand that you would want to shield the judges from any repercussions. But note that it's not really that much different from writing a review - that is a *lot* more public, and often a lot more specific. Having the Ennies judges be a "faceless entity" does run somewhat counter to the goal of increased transparency, no?

As a compromise, would an opt-in process be acceptable, so the judges who are willing to do so can make their votes public? Sure, they can always post their opinions somewhere, but that is far less useful to the average voter than having some central repository with at least a partial voting history...

 

[Crothian]

That's what I thought you might say. I definitely understand that you would want to shield the judges from any repercussions. But note that it's not really that much different from writing a review - that is a *lot* more public, and often a lot more specific. Having the Ennies judges be a "faceless entity" does run somewhat counter to the goal of increased transparency, no?

The thing is knowing what each judge picked is going to make people assume if we didn't pick it we didn't like, and that is simple not the case. Some categories are extremely tough to narrow down and we have to eliminate books that we really like. But you'll never know that from the list. We get 5 books to choose, and trust me when I saw we see more then five good books per category.

And I its going to stop being about voting for the best judge, it's going to be about voting for the judges who support the books you want nominated even if they are not the best.

 

[Zenodotus of Ephesus]

Voting for ENnies judges is going on right now in athread sticked to the top of General Discuission. But the voter turn out is pretty bad. So, why are you not voting? Voting is very easy, takes little time, all the candidates have their info in one convient thread. The ENnies are part of EN World and grew out of the site. They have really grown into a large industry awards and have been recieving some high praises from a variety of people. But in the end it all comes back to you all, the people who visit the site. So, please go vote for people and support our awards.

Let's see if we can increase the vote count and profile of the election with some more prominent, front page news bytes for Friday, and perhaps Saturday and Sunday, too.