Why the merger of two categories?

[Mark]

Is it really worth all this complaining for $5?

I'm not complaining about the money, I'm saying the money should be channeled more responsibly. You and I are not discussing the original complaint about rich vs poor publishers, that's just you making the same argument when the conversation has moved on.


If every publisher/entrant had to pay a five dollar per submission entry fee, but publishers who had shipping costs could send in a copy of a receipt to offset (up to) those costs, the ENnies would probably be close to able to paying for themselves and not require publisher sponsors (though they could continue to explore this, as well, I suppose). It's fairly common practice to have entry fees for competitions such as this.

 

[fusangite]

If an entry fee is levied in only certain categories, a perception of asymmetry is created. Much as, in principle, I agree that it would be better for the cost of submission to be directed to the awards than to be wasted, the fact is that it is not a good idea to force an entry fee on entrants who have to mail their product, regardless, because this would entail an increased cost for them but not for podcasters for whom this would merely entail a redirection of their costs. The least available evil that maintains symmetry amongst entrants is to have podcasters and PDFers to waste their money on couriering and mailing. To do anything else would create far more problem than it solves.

 

[Mark]

(. . .) an entry fee on entrants who have to mail their product, regardless, because this would entail an increased cost for them (. . .)

Those with shipping costs would be excused the fees upp to the amount of the shipping (which would normally far exceed the shipping, since even shipping a single small book would range toward the five dollar fee). You're overthinking the concept in order to maintain the status quo.

 

[Jonny Nexus]

Those with shipping costs would be excused the fees upp to the amount of the shipping (which would normally far exceed the shipping, since even shipping a single small book would range toward the five dollar fee). You're overthinking the concept in order to maintain the status quo.

*ahem*

I think it cost me about £5.50 (or $11) to mail each copy of Game Night.

(Some of us are the other side of the pond).

 

[Jonny Nexus]

Having thought further about it, I thought sod it, I'll set my views out.

Firstly, the carbon footprint issue:

I'm not in the slightest bit worried about the carbon footprint involved in mailing six copies of my book to the judges for two reasons:

a) as carbon footprints go, it's probably not that much, since these are quite small packages; and

b) it's dwarfed by the carbon footprint that will be created when my wife and I fly 4000 miles from London to Gen Con to attend the awards ceremony. (Granted, we were going to Gen Con anyway, but it's still the point that a physical awards ceremony has a much bigger carbon footprint than an Internet only one would have).

Can I take it that should the entry process be made digital only for next year, and those who were concerned about their carbon footprint then enter, that they will abstain from travelling to the awards ceremony should they be nominated?

Secondly, on the cost of mailing the six copies out (which cost me about $66). I'm not at all bothered about this for two reasons:

a) I've mailed out a lot of promo copies, and in terms of "pay off" these will be by far the most worthwhile; and (and I think you can guess where I'm going here)

b) The cost of sending them out is dwarfed by the cost of my wife and I flying 4000 miles from London to attend the awards ceremony.

Again, those who are worried about cost etc. etc.

Just my two-penneth...

 

[Piratecat]

*ahem*

I think it cost me about £5.50 (or $11) to mail each copy of Game Night.

(Some of us are the other side of the pond).

Ironically, it would have probably been less expensive to have used Amazon.com. I bought a copy for a friend, and I think I paid less than your shipping!

 

[reveal]

I'm not complaining about the money, I'm saying the money should be channeled more responsibly. You and I are not discussing the original complaint about rich vs poor publishers, that's just you making the same argument when the conversation has moved on.

Don't patronize me. You told me my "logic did not computer" so I explained my logic.

Your ideas so far have done nothing to advance any type of fair way to channel the money more responsibly. All they would do is cause more headaches for the ENnies crew and I've explained why.

 

[Jonny Nexus]

Ironically, it would have probably been less expensive to have used Amazon.com. I bought a copy for a friend, and I think I paid less than your shipping!

Yeah, and as you point out, my $11 didn't actually include the cost to me of the book.

Maybe I should think about doing that next time...

 

[fusangite]

Those with shipping costs would be excused the fees upp to the amount of the shipping

So, now you're asking the ENnies to track everyone's shipping costs and to charge varying entry fees depending not only on category but on product size, weight and point of origin. As I said above, people seem to be being very generous with the time of ENnies volunteers.

You're overthinking the concept in order to maintain the status quo.

"Status quo"? As I said above, the idea of shipping podcasts was brand new this year. I'm defending a brand new reform to the system.

 

[HalWhitewyrm]

Dude, first of all, you need to chill down. No one on this thread has been vitriolitic so far and your anger doesn't help a bit.

Because those are the rules of the awards. They are asking you to incur less cost than anyone else. Everyone else is forced to send them copies of their products that vastly exceed the per-product value of a CD and an envelope. If the award is worth so little to you that it is not worth a few dollars to submit your product, then fine -- don't submit. Leave the awards to people who actually value receiving them.

No matter how you want to rationalize it, no matter how much you don't like the changing of the rules, it all boils down to this: If you truly, truly cared about the ENnies, if you believe that winning an ENnie is an honor and something to be proud of, then you would have burned the CDs and sent them in. You would have done whatever was necessary to win it, within the rules of course, no matter how much you disagreed with the rules.

And to be fair, that's exactly what happened: some went through the process of submitting their shows using the existing rules, and others disagreed with said process and did not, period. Don't get me wrong, I like the ENnies a lot, always have; my refusal to submit my two shows for consideration was a decision based on this one particular aspect, not as a blanket condemnation of the awards. I knew full well what I was doing, and I stand by it. I came here to explain because the question was asked why only a small number of podcasts submitted when it is well known there are at least 3 to 4 times as many out there.

I think fusangite nailed it. Anyone can send in a link. So what you get is any Tom, Dick, or Harry sending in a link for their one podcast they've ever made on something to do with RPGs because they think it would be "cool" to get an ENnie.

To restate, I, and most other podcasters, did not have a problem with the limit on shows submitted, so in order to submit for consideration, you had to have at least 6 shows under your belt, immediately weeding out a bunch of new, every-so-often and false-start shows. The objection I and others had was against the actual submission process with the CDs, not with the limit on shows.

You know: I have little patience for people who hide behind lame environmental rhetoric to make excuses for not having their excrement together.

Honestly, that makes me think you're just cheap, not that you are sticking to some sort of "principle."

Be that as it may, neither of you is in any kind of position to judge whether someone's principles are valid or not, so these parts of your comments are entirely irrelevant.

Please also note that already a solution was found that was agreeable to both the parties, that being to have a "consolidation house" for the podcasts submitted where one CD would have the required number of shows for a variety of podcasters, thus cutting down the amount of CDs mailed, and making things easier for everyone involved.

While I personally still think there is room for improvement in the submission process, and that digital downloads should be used for digital products instead of CDs, the consolidation idea works just fine until changes to the submission process can be evaluated and implemented in the future.