People's Choice AwAARd - Can I start one?

[unmerged(17581)]

Basically, can I just go up and start my own AwAARd thing? I'm glad that the ReadAAR's Choice AwAARd is up and all, but I had a different thing in mind. Basically, for my AwAARd there are no preliminary votes, and no nominations. There is no buttoned poll at the top of the thread. All the voters do is post a single post that looks like this in the thread:

Best Overall AAR: xxxx
Best Humour AAR: xxxx
Best History-Book AAR: xxxx
Best Narrative AAR: xxxx (I suppose this category could be better described as Novel-like, or something)

At the end of the voting period, the votes are tallied up, and the AAR with the most votes wins the category. Very simple, very straightforward. My plan is basically run this thing every quarter, the quarters being Jan 1 - Mar 31, Apr 1 -Jun 30, Jul 1 - Sep 30, Oct 1 - Dec 31. I aim to have the first one running on Oct 1, covering the Jun 1 - Sep 30 quarter of 2005. Voting may last for two weeks, or maybe a month if need be, with the AARs that are eligible being any that have received an update in that period as long as the voter truly thinks the work is of the best quality in its category in that timeframe. That is, if Author X starts an AAR on Jun 28, and by Jul 13 it turns out the AAR is a masterpiece of masterpieces, I would like the voter to be honest and not vote for it in the second quarter vote, unless a mere introduction is enough to completely blow the voter away. If Master AuthAAR Y updates his Magnum Opus Spanning Three Years of Writing but once in that three-month span, it's a little harder to judge, but again I would like the voter to use fair judgment.

Anyways, very simple, very straightforward. I could just post a thread in the AAR General Discussion forums right now explaining the rules, and PM every one of my AuthAAR friends to plug it in their AARs to get some participants. But I'd like some official feedback on this idea.

So, canIcanIcanIcanIcanI?

 

[Sir Humphrey]

What safegaurds, practices and work limits are to be set? And also, if its set every quarter, would't that lessen its value and once all the "magnum opus" works had been set, you then end up scrapping the barrel as it were? Also, would it be forum wide or just a specific branch? As the readAArs awards are coming up soon.

 

[unmerged(17581)]

???

Actually, AARs can win the award twice. Also, I'm pretty sure there are at least four good AARs per sub-forum per year. Wouldn't you agree? (Well, maybe not the HOI1 and EU1 AAR forums) Sio I doubt that this will ever hit the bottom of the barrel. Yes, once every quarter is cheap, but I think that is the niche this award fills. (Yet if it is forum-wide, once every quarter is still unoften enough to be considered something special. Also, since this will be regular, AARs will not be forgotten simply because they started and ended between the year-long pause between AwAARds) Safeguards? Well, you need a forum account, and a dozen new just-registered-yesterday one-postcount accounts will be easily suspect. As for work limits, I will trust the judgment of the voters. If they think three updates in AAR X is enough to consider it the best in that quarter, so be it.

 

[Sir Humphrey]

What is to stop shameless self promotion for example:

Best Overall AAR: The Sacred Grove of Britannia
Best Humour AAR: The Sacred Grove of Britannia (witty counts)
Best History-Book AAR: Under the Crimson Skies
Best Narrative AAR: Lufthansa Terminal: A Cherry Blossom AAR

 

[unmerged(17581)]

It's only one vote among hopefully dozens... or something...

 

[Jestor]

I'd say most people here would be fair enough not to shamelessly self-promote, thus avoiding that pitfall.

So my vote is, sure, go ahead and do it. Anything to try and get some recognition for some more AAR authors (even though I suspect a lot of this might be duplication of the winners of other AAR-awardings).

And one of these, I'll write an AAR that's award-worthy gosh darn it!

 

[unmerged(45769)]

What is to stop shameless self promotion for example:

Best Overall AAR: The Sacred Grove of Britannia
Best Humour AAR: The Sacred Grove of Britannia (witty counts)
Best History-Book AAR: Under the Crimson Skies
Best Narrative AAR: Lufthansa Terminal: A Cherry Blossom AAR

Best Overall AAR: An American perspective of the early years of the cold war
Best Humour AAR: An American perspective of the early years of the cold war (jokes)
Best History Book AAR: Viva La Tacos
Best Narrative AAR: An AAR which is currently in the plotting stage

 

[CatKnight]

But we're not talking four AARs per forum (or overall) per year, anonymous. We're talking between one (apparently multiple categories are okay, and you already said an AAR could win more than once) and SIXTEEN.

I really don't like that these votes are public. Though people often share their reasons for voting even on a poll, the poll does grant some anonymity. No matter how well intentioned most of our readAARs are, public votes can get personal without warning.

It can also lead to manipulation. Let's say Crimson Skies (strictly as an example) is winning. Let's say I despise Crimson Skies. What stops me from figuring out who's currently in 2nd to try and break it?

Third, and I'm wrestling with this question right now while thinking about the Showcase, what if our definitions just plain differ? On these very boards I've heard narrative style used when referring to novels/stories AND history books. What if I think an author's funny as heck, and the author's trying to be serious?

Fourth, what if people want to add categories? Don't the AARs that focus solely on game play deserve consideration? They're not my personal cup of tea, but they're out there and arguably fit the definition of an AAR better than the others. How about awards for graphics? Some of those pics are hard to get or MAKE, one could easily argue they deserve attention. BTW, we're now up to 1-24/year winners if each forum is seperate.

Fifth, and if each forum is seperate, do we lump EU1/EU2 and HOI1/2 together? How will they feel about this? I don't know much about the HOI community, but it wasn't so long ago the remaining EU1ers didn't exactly love EU2. (1-36/year..)

Sixth, just for the sake of discussion....AARs are currently recognized in the Showcase, indirectly by Writer/Week, the award Humphrey's working on, and the seperate project he has to let authors showcase their own piece. That's ... not bad. How does your idea stand out?

Seventh, backtracking a little ..... doesn't this kind of award assume people read EVERYTHING in the affected area (forum or overall)? After all, if I vote for 'best history book AAR' doesn't that mean that I really should have, if I'm responsible, READ all the history book AARs so I can objectively and fairly decide? And if that's not true, and it's okay for me to focus on those few AARs I was reading anyway, doesn't that reduce this to a popularity contest?

-------

Your idea's interesting, anonymous and I'm certainly not trying to shoot you down or discourage you, but I do think you have some decisions to make and things to clarify. A 'simple' award system certainly has its advantages...but also its challenges. I'm also not sure quarterly isn't too often IMO.

 

[Lord Durham]

I appreciate that you're being proactive, but I'm not sold on the idea. We've already got the original OscAARs, in addition to all of the current initiatives. I really don't see anything new being brought to the table.

 

[Sir Humphrey]

I am inclined to agree with Catnight, especially about the public voting.

It can also lead to manipulation. Let's say Crimson Skies (strictly as an example) is winning. Let's say I despise Crimson Skies. What stops me from figuring out who's currently in 2nd to try and break it?

I think that is a very valid point, and I hope its only an example.

 

[unmerged(17581)]

But we're not talking four AARs per forum (or overall) per year, anonymous. We're talking between one (apparently multiple categories are okay, and you already said an AAR could win more than once) and SIXTEEN.

I really don't like that these votes are public. Though people often share their reasons for voting even on a poll, the poll does grant some anonymity. No matter how well intentioned most of our readAARs are, public votes can get personal without warning.

It can also lead to manipulation. Let's say Crimson Skies (strictly as an example) is winning. Let's say I despise Crimson Skies. What stops me from figuring out who's currently in 2nd to try and break it?

Alright, so the voting mechanism can be abused. However, I see that as likely as everyone voting for their own AARs, unless there is a Secrets of the AARk Haters Club, or something like that. (I hope that is just an example) Well, the voting for the own AAR thing can be avoided by prohibiting authors voting for their own works entirely. Anyways, I don't see how this voting mechanism is any more susceptible to manipulation than the OscAARs/VictAARian Cross/ReadAAR's Choice Award, as a group of voters working in concert or an author overstepping his bounds could manipulate either. Anyways, I can mitigate even this by allowing voters to vote privately by sending me a PM or publicly by posting. (Though I'd need a bigger PM box for that. ) This will also solve the potential problem of the author's feelings getting hurt and whatnot.

Third, and I'm wrestling with this question right now while thinking about the Showcase, what if our definitions just plain differ? On these very boards I've heard narrative style used when referring to novels/stories AND history books. What if I think an author's funny as heck, and the author's trying to be serious?

Yes, the categories are vague. I'm working on that. But in the end it's People's Choice, and if the people think Author A's AAR is hilarious when he meant it to be a serious retrospective on the evolution of naval intelligence in medieval Korea, well, tough nugget-monkeys, the AAR will take the Best Comedy AAR.

Fourth, what if people want to add categories? Don't the AARs that focus solely on game play deserve consideration? They're not my personal cup of tea, but they're out there and arguably fit the definition of an AAR better than the others. How about awards for graphics? Some of those pics are hard to get or MAKE, one could easily argue they deserve attention. BTW, we're now up to 1-24/year winners if each forum is seperate.

I might have one 'special' category per quarter, that can change at my discretion or even be voted on by the voters of a previous quarter, covering graphics, or best character, or best MP AAR, and arranged so that these special categories do not duplicate themselves within one year. I hope that will take care of everything.

Fifth, and if each forum is seperate, do we lump EU1/EU2 and HOI1/2 together? How will they feel about this? I don't know much about the HOI community, but it wasn't so long ago the remaining EU1ers didn't exactly love EU2. (1-36/year..)

Well, if I don't lump EU1 and 2 and HOI1 and 2, then I'll miss the main goal of this award, that is letting every AAR have a chance of winning some sort of award without having to be written at a certain time or subforum to get noticed. When's the last time there was an EU1 or HOI1 award? How many AARs have been written, finished, and forgotten since then? (Well, not much, and that's the reason why there haven't been many awards for them since then, I suppose)

Sixth, just for the sake of discussion....AARs are currently recognized in the Showcase, indirectly by Writer/Week, the award Humphrey's working on, and the seperate project he has to let authors showcase their own piece. That's ... not bad. How does your idea stand out?

By filling in a niche between the all-too-infrequent-yet-precious OscAAR/ReadAAR's Choice/What-have-you and not getting anything at all. If the OscAAR/ReadAAR's Choice/What-have-you awards were on some sort of set schedule that made sure that it rotated among subforums and genres so that every great AAR written regardless of the time in which it was written can get a chance at recognition, this award will not be needed.

Seventh, backtracking a little ..... doesn't this kind of award assume people read EVERYTHING in the affected area (forum or overall)? After all, if I vote for 'best history book AAR' doesn't that mean that I really should have, if I'm responsible, READ all the history book AARs so I can objectively and fairly decide? And if that's not true, and it's okay for me to focus on those few AARs I was reading anyway, doesn't that reduce this to a popularity contest?

Every voted-on award-type thing will suffer this problem, which will only get worse as AARland grows. But this system ensures that if I read the three good history-book-style AARs that were written in Vicky in the past three months, I won't have to wait a year to vote on one of them.

Sorry if I misunderstood your questions, and I hope I answered the ones I understood correctly

 

[unmerged(11366)]

There are still the OscAARs. Maybe you want them to be more frequent?

P.S. Simple rule, "Thou shalt not vote for thyself."

 

[unmerged(17581)]

More frequent so that they cover every subforum and major genre regularly, yes.

I also don't like the 'you don't know what category it will be next' part of the OscAARs. While this doesn't mean that categories will be missed, it might end up being that as it is not coordinated and scheduled well in advance.

 

[Lord Durham]

Ah, it appears people have ignored my post... Bad form...

Suggestions should be PM'd, anyway.

 

[Sir Humphrey]

More frequent so that they cover every subforum and major genre regularly, yes

Given the hypothetical position that this awards were going to be done, hypothetically and for the purposes of working on the original thesis, there is one problem, particulary this, that must warrant further discussion in a hypothetical nature, in that in the forums such as Eu1, or HoI, which are basically not very active now that they have been somewhat superceded, so to speak that there may not be enough material to warrant such a regular and far reaching awards system, given the hypothetical situation, should it present itself.

 

[unmerged(17581)]

Ah, it appears people have ignored my post... Bad form...

Suggestions should be PM'd, anyway.

Terribly sorry. o I thought I did answer your post indirectly, though in retrospect I should have been more direct.

What this new award contributes is a regularly scheduled award system that gives even neglected AAR forums their chance to shine without being too clumsy. (By putting EU1 and EU2 together, as well as HOI1 and HOI2) It also skips the nomination process, so AARs aren't ignored simply because the fans of those AARs didn't catch the nomination thread. It will not be as prestigious as the OscAARs. More like the Golden Globes of AARland, really.

Again, sorry for not PMing the suggestion. I was ignorant of that rule.

 

[Sir Humphrey]

so AARs aren't ignored simply because the fans of those AARs didn't catch the nomination thread.

Well in all fairness, that is why the Awards were designed to people could nominate their own works as well, but not neccessarily vote for them in the poll.

 

[Jestor]

Well in all fairness, that is why the Awards were designed to people could nominate their own works as well, but not neccessarily vote for them in the poll.

I consider nominating your own works to be in as bad a form as voting for them.

 

[Sir Humphrey]

Politians vote for themselves in democratic elections. Same principal here.