Zachary Houghton resigns as an ENnies judge

[Terramotus]

This is ridiculous.

It's not pretending to be an elf for 5 hours a week that can at times make me feel embarrassed about my hobby, it's tempest in a teapot garbage like this. This is not Serious Business, nor should it be.

1. If you think the awards are stupid and biased, don't submit, don't participate.

2. Public resignations and public complaining about situations you're involved in never make you look good, no matter how right you are. It's rather Buddhist, really.

3. Judges are supposed to judge, and they're elected to boot. I don't care about the results unless there is evidence that the guidelines aren't being followed. If you don't like the choices, run for judge, but make sure to submit any of your own work or work affiliated with your own. We wouldn't want favoritism.

Furthermore, I think that some individuals are revealing more than they think they are when they refuse to trust the judgment of others without strict guidelines.

4. If you're only doing a podcast out of love, then why is this that important? Show me lost profits leading to lost livelihoods and then I'll care. It shouldn't matter anyway; sustained quality always rises to the top.

5. Morrus, and others involved in the Ennies: thank you for your time and effort. Don't let trash like this get you down.

 

[JVisgaitis]

This is ridiculous.

Wow. Well said. My thoughts exactly...

 

[Maggan]

I believe (but I'm not going to assert as true) that the BG folks have established what they consider to be an objective, scientific approach to analysis of games in order to determine what makes them good or bad games. I do not believe that Meghan, Josh, or Zeke feel that their game analysis is opinion for this reason, and that judges should likewise establish this objective set of critera going forward.

Cheers,
Cam

I can believe that. What they should be doing with their set of criteria, is try to patent it, or package it in a way so that they can use it for other fields of publishing, for they would make billions.

If it is true that they have found a way to do away with opinions when it comes to judging a game, and have a pure and scientific method, there's some sort of Nobel prize waiting in their future, for they have done what all of humanity up until now have failed to achieve!

I'm very interested in seeing their method!

/M

 

[DaveMage]

Wow. Well said. My thoughts exactly...

Ditto.

 

[Staffan]

I think this really bears more thinking about for the future. If a cutoff is not really a cutoff, would someone making a 10 or 20 day mistake be allowed in? I have no problem with the staff's decision, however I can see how this looks to some gamers like it's no big deal, to others that it's an accommodation to Monte since he's popular, and yet others that this may be a bit of a slippery slope but the decision to keep the award as is was fair.

An idea for the future: allow for a period of something like a week between announcing the nominees and the start of voting. If someone has a problem with any of the nominees, this would give them time to file a complaint.

I don't follow the ins and outs of the ENnies, so it's possible this is already done.

 

[Truth Seeker]

-Finished reading the threads-

-Wiped the stain marks from the screen-


.....

 

[Monkey Boy]

Zach responds at theRPGsite

Zach backs himself in the discussion at theRPGsite:

http://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?t=12054&page=11

I'm not sure if it's all that damning.

While the drama is fun and all I think it's much ado about nothing. Also I think its sad that bridges are being burned. It's kind of like a car wreck, I can't stop watching.

 

[billd91]

Ah, and another cross board turf war flames up.
"Gotta love them crazies who think certain things are important enough to blather on on the internet," he said ironically.

 

[Umbran]

I believe (but I'm not going to assert as true) that the BG folks have established what they consider to be an objective, scientific approach to analysis of games in order to determine what makes them good or bad games.

I would expect that one might be able to do this for the game, insofar as game theory is a mathematical science, and could be applied.

I am highly skeptical that such analysis can be done for the role-playing part of the thing. Basically, if you're thinking in terms of GNS theory, you can do some objective analysis of the G, but the value of N and S are entirely subjective. You cannot objectively judge how things will mesh with people's imaginations.

 

[Cam Banks]

I am highly skeptical that such analysis can be done for the role-playing part of the thing. Basically, if you're thinking in terms of GNS theory, you can do some objective analysis of the G, but the value of N and S are entirely subjective. You cannot objectively judge how things will mesh with people's imaginations.

Oh, I agree. And there's an element of "you're playing it wrong" that comes out of that. In fact, I think they advocate the notion that many people are having fun playing bad games when they could be having MORE fun playing good games. Games they think are good: Savage Worlds, Spirit of the Century, Burning Wheel. Games they think are bad: All White Wolf Storyteller/Storytelling games, Serenity (and other games we make ), etc.

Cheers,
Cam