Zachary Houghton resigns as an ENnies judge

[The_Universe]

If you can come up with an objective way to regulate people's opinions I'd like to hear it. I'm not sure what you point here is, it is all subjective. Not everyone likes the Mona Lisa or the Beatles either.

That Da Vinci is a hack!

 

[Fifth Element]

Objective is right out the window. What the contest should be is fair.

Precisely. If it were objective they wouldn't be judges. They'd be measurers.

 

[Rodrigo Istalindir]

That Da Vinci is a hack!

Are you accusing him of badwrongart?

 

[Treebore]

I'd like to know when a human being is ever capable of being completely objective, there is always a degree of subjective in opinions of human beings.

Plus I find it immensely funny that Changling is called crap, but netted plenty of votes from other gamers to say its great. I guess Meghan's opinion is obviously in the minority. Not to mention she, by default, says everyone that voted for Changling has crappy tastes in RPG's.

So who knows what they are talking about? Meghan or all the people who voted for Changling?

Hmmmm...

 

[Psion]

So, Meghan is the new Rasyr?

 

[Runestar]

Precisely. If it were objective they wouldn't be judges. They'd be measurers.

What is the difference between objectiveness and fairness? If you cannot be objective in your judging, this suggests that by definition, you are already biased in your opinions, be it because you feel strongly for a certain product, and will not be swayed from your decision regardless of what other people say, or whatever?

I don't see why objectiveness cannot or should not be an ideal for the judges to strive towards and achieve. Just because they feel it cannot be done, that gives them all the justification they need to throw it out of the window altogether?

 

[billd91]

What is the difference between objectiveness and fairness? If you cannot be objective in your judging, this suggests that by definition, you are already biased in your opinions, be it because you feel strongly for a certain product, and will not be swayed from your decision regardless of what other people say, or whatever?

I don't see why objectiveness cannot or should not be an ideal for the judges to strive towards and achieve. Just because they feel it cannot be done, that gives them all the justification they need to throw it out of the window altogether?

It's not a question about feeling it cannot be done... it simply cannot be done. Being fair is giving everything an even shake, coming at it with an open mind, applying the same faculties of judgment to it that you apply to everything else. That's being fair. As humans, we can try our best at this and, if you'll note, even make a mistake about something as objective as a work's release date.

But when it comes to determining quality, which is what the ENnies are supposed to award, the judgments are primarily subjective. There's simply no way around it. This is also why there's a panel of judges instead of a single administrator applying some form of objective standard. A group can evaluate the materials, debate their relative merits over other entrants, in order to produce the set of nominees. But it's not an objective process at all. Some people happen to like certain styles of games, certain styles of art, certain turns of phrase and those preferences will appear in their individual choices. And again, because it's a panel of judges, the contest has the power to bring a diversity of opinions to the table to determine the final nominees.

 

[Crothian]

I don't see why objectiveness cannot or should not be an ideal for the judges to strive towards and achieve. Just because they feel it cannot be done, that gives them all the justification they need to throw it out of the window altogether?

It's very possible that the term objective is being read in different ways. Perhaps you could explain your point without the term.

What I got from Meghan's posts about it (and I could be way off here that's why I'm asking for more information on what people mean) is there would be a predetermined checklist of criteria that determines what is a good book.

If you are just saying that judges should be unbiased then I don't think there is an argument to made against that. Of course judges should be as unbiased as possible, but we are human so some bias will be there. Saying that I really like Behind the Spells: Compendium (which I really do) doesn't by itself mean that I am biased towards it and would be biased against books that competed with it. It just means I really like the book.

 

[roguerouge]

Dude, you quoted me from a different site-- a site which is for the podcast you don't want to listen to. You are taking my comments which refer to that episode.

I'm fine with you not wanting to listen- podcasts aren't for everyone and mine isn't for every podcast listener.

But you can't take what I say about an episode and bring it here and say I'm not supporting my evidence.

I followed your link from here.

I guess I'll never know why you feel Changeling the Lost is bad, why Animalcast is amateur, or why Epic Role Playing is in a worse class from the rest. You only tell me that they are.

Because all you will write is:

* You write: "the one who won, Changeling the Lost, had some of the writing I've ever seen in a book." Okay. Why? Can you give me some examples? Can you compare and contrast with other selections? Do you have any evidence other than that you say so? Let's see what your link says: "Changeling: The Lost: Idiot, Full of , and . Rating: 0" I see. So, still no examples.

* You write: "Animalcast has a lot wrong with it and just isn't nearly the quality of many other podcasts- audio or content. A true critical, objective analysis would not have placed it in the top of all submissions." Again, can you give examples? Will you provide evidence to back up your assertions? Is that really too much to ask?

* You write: "And then another book which we were just confounded by as a nomination- Epic Role Playing- wasn't in the same class as the other nominees. It seemed like a good start, but very amateurish." How so? Examples? Any piece of evidence beyond your unsupported opinion?

So, yes, there's still no evidence, just unsupported opinions for the real impact of your argument: that someone else should have been nominated. And since I've given you several opportunities to make your case on these issues—and you still haven't—I'll quote a VIP ENWorlder: "We're done here."

 

[Umbran]

If you are just saying that judges should be unbiased then I don't think there is an argument to made against that.

I can make such an argument - judges should be biased towards good products.

That sounds flip, but it is not.