I agree with DLR that being made to vote might have screwed it up quite a lot. For me a new comer section was a big problem as I don't really like anyone of the authors there so had to do the whole "Which do I dislike the least" Also having to vote for 3 when I feel only 1 or 2 deserve a vote. I think that would be a good and easy change to make.

 

Agree about forced votes. But I don't think we should repeat the voting. That would seriously devaluate the awards. Maybe add another competition in 6 months? Make it a bi-annual contest?

I'm indifferent about the post count restriction. Still, minimal 350 posts sounds like a nice limit... hmm...

 

350 posts may be just a bit high. I cast my vote (heh) for 200 posts in order to be able to vote in the DLP fic awards.

 

350 seems a bit high. I have been around since the end of 2005 and my post count is quite low, but I do visit the site almost everyday, and I know what is a good fic and what isn't. Basically you dont need a high post count to be able to vote for a story which will reflect the values held on DLP. However it does seem the only way.

 

No, a count of 50-75 seems like it would work best if we did it. That way most of the morons who sign up just to tip the scales would likly get banned from the spamming.

 

It would be interesting to know how many of our 2500+ members have posted more than 50, 100, 300 times just for curiosity if Raven can easily access that info.

A quick bit of math.

Members 2500ish

Posts 98,000ish

Average posts per member 40ish

 

More than 300: 72
More than 100: 178
More than 50: 273

(Approx. numbers, including banstick recipients)

Not very encouraging numbers, huh?

EDIT

Number of people who visited the forum during the last week: more than 500
Lots of lurkers I guess.

 

I'd agree with this if it was 60 days membership, at least 50 posts (or 75, whichever, don't care much).

I was thinking that somone should be able to win most innovative and best though. The two aren't necessarily linked, and it seems that the most innovative isn't necessarily best.

Hmmm. Yeah, those numbers IP posted aren't good.

I don't think there should be a re-vote. Next year's awards will be better then this year's. That's the thing to do I think.

Last, the mandatory voting was BAD. I haven't had as much time for fandom the past few months (I won't have time until approximately May), and I simply haven't read anything. I remember there were a couple of times where I was filling in the number 3 slot, and hadn't read it.

That's it from me.

See ya later, alligator.

 

Wow that is way lower than I expected.

I bet most of the vets here could name most of the 72 if they tried. So going by those numbers the 100-300 field would be the place to put the posts count at. Have 100 voters.

But then we have to remeber that out of those 72 and 178 a lot would have left the site so you could probably chop 30% of those numbers off (Pulls number out of his ass) which would give 150 voters.

 

Meh. Somehow I don't agree really see the point with the high postcount thing. I only have like forty-something posts, but I've been here since the end of 2005 and I can assure you that I visit this site pretty much every day. So really, low postcount =! inability to vote properly.

 

I didn't want to vote on Crossover, Romance, and Original Character. Luckily the script literally had a loophole otherwise I would have voted like TEAOS - eliminating those I didn't like and voting for the rest.

The problems started with the nominations. Once they were allowed to, people rushed into the nomination-threads to be the first to post something, thus nominating the first fic that came to their mind. I wonder if some stories would have been nominated if people were forced to reason why they suggested it for a certain category. That’s not a problem of ‘new’ but also of ‘older’ members. TFTCD was nominated for 'Noir' by a member who joined May 2006 and has 161 posts.

The guy/girl/bot who nominated Bobmin for "Best" with his/her/its first post proves that there should be some minimum-requirements for people to nominate and vote. Nevertheless - I doubt the suggested rules would change the outcome that much. One look at the reviews of TFTCD and ‘Bungle’ in the library reveals the stories are very popular among several 'older' members with way more than 50 posts as well. I'm sure Jbern would have won even with the suggested limitations in force. i. e. the outcome of 'Best Villain' was certainly more influenced by Jbern's last chapter than by the structure of the voting masses.

 

I didn't actually vote at all for the awards. I didnt really see a point in it since the only award Id actually read enough stories nominated to make a decision for was Noir.

I think there is certainly a point about limiting votes to people who have been here for at least 60 days. It means that the results aren't skewed by masses of people who dont contribute to the community, and it gives people the chance to actually read the nominations if they havent already done so.

 

- All members who are allowed to vote must have over 50 posts. These are community awards, meaning this is a community.-

I don't agree with that
personaly I've been a member of this community for a long time. I visite this site on a if not daily basis then cetainely a weekly basis.
I know my contribution to this site may be minimal but I'm more of a passive person who likes to look how things unfold.
I have a great deal of respect for the people who helped with the construction of the site and making the site to what it is today but I can't agree with this point of view, has a person who is a post-freak a better taste then one who isn't?

 

Making a compromise between post count and length of membership is the best.

Like for example:

• All members with at least 1 month of membership can vote.
• If less than a month, he/she should have at least 50 post in the forum before he/she could vote.

 

Yeah, but you're going to run into troubles there with cockfaces who post like 200 posts in their first day. I'm not overly fond of either, because I'm not a high-count poster myself, but I don't think that anyone who sits around on the site for two-and-a-half years and doesn't say more than the occasional word represents the community.

My honest (yet imperfect) suggestion would be to do it based on rep. Minimum of 1 rep to vote - if you're even mildly witty in your introduction, you can nail this right away. If you've sat around for a year and said 'Hi' once, you're eligible. You might get problems with people abusing the system, but I'd fancy myself that they're not as troubling as the current system.

 

It'd have to be more than one month.

I definitely agree with the bit about forced voting. For example, I voted for JBern's fics in Romance because I had never read any of the others.

Edit: I don't like that Rep idea, just because I don't have much of it. (It acctually might be a good idea, but I still don't like it)

 

It's not about how much you have of it. It's about meeting the minimum requirements. You've got enough to vote - you really don't need more than that; your rep power does not give your vote any additional weight. It's just an enumeration passcard.

 

This appears to be the generic "let's gripe about the awards thread," so let me add my two cents and congratulate everyone on a job well done (especially considering how quickly these nominations and awards were thrown together).

You could make a case for us having thrown things together too quickly and of course there are always going to be ways to improve on the process. I agree the mandatory voting may not have been ideal when there are categories and stories many haven't even read. And in those cases it's easiest to simply vote for the fics they have read (which given most people's response is the best explanation for Kendra not even cracking the top 3 in romance). I like many others, hadn't read it, though I have read most of jbern's. In fairness though, I voted for Lorddwar's to win that category and it didn't place either.

I know people will never be happy with the way the awards went. It's completely to be expected, but look how far we've come in a year. Last year the winner and runner-up for Story of the Year (then the category was "Best All-Around FanFicition") went to Jeconais and Vorlon. One, an excellent author many members love to hate and who hasn't never posted a word around here. The other, was a bit confrontational and had somewhat of a hissyfit with the board in the general.

This year though? The winner (and third place) went to the board's most popular author, whose two fics have more comments, author/reader interaction, hits, and general discussion than almost any other. I don't see how people can be surprised jbern was the default choice when two of the biggest threads in the library are for his two fics.

I was shocked my fic came in second, but I picked up the comedy award last year and have been pretty active on the boards too. I know not everyone liked my fic, but I think some recognized just for the fact that it was a nice long completed fic over the course of the year. For example, I never considered Thal's fic in the Story of the Year category because last I checked it was a prologue and chapter one. Even if Chapter two is the last chapter, which is a somewhat ridiculous concept, that's still not enough of the fic for me to base much of an opinion on. I think Sera's Happy Red Prince had a grand total of one chapter posted in 2006, so I didn't consider it really for the awards either. I was surprised Taliath came out empty-handed, as I really hoped his "In Light of Silver Memories" Harry/Dumbledore hero should have won Best Hero.

But the overall way the awards came down were hardly surprising. And I think it's great that so many of DLP's members were awarded for their work. The idea of a recount is laughable. And a redo vote sounds like a massive waste of time. This year's awards came together much quicker and were a nice improvement on last year's. I expect next year's to improve on these too. And I expect just as many complaints and bitching next year too.

Congrats to all the winners.

 

Regarding the minimum: for obvious reasons (see my post count ), I am opposed to the 200+ minimum limit. I've been a member since last May and even though I posted fairly often in the beginning, this has slowed to a trickle the last few months, as RL has been a bitch. However, I'm still around and read DLP, and in particular the library, pretty much every day. I'm sure there must be others in a similar situation and I believe we should be able to vote. The other option of course would be to make 100 irrelevant (to HP) posts in, say, Real Life Discussion. Would that really make us more qualified?

Something I do agree with and mentioned in another thread as well is to allow voters to skip a category, if they don't really know or even care to read the nominated fics.

 

Agreed, the voting system wasn't perfect - but what is? Considering the awards last year, there was a phenomenal improvement, and if there is the same improvement for next year, then I'll be delighted and, to be honest, astonished. However, I think that questioning the award system is very valid and one of the most effective ways of improving it for next year.

I like the idea of basing the eligibility on rep power, it seems the best way to incorporate both post count and duration of stay. However, I would be more inclined towards 2 rather than the one because you've got to take into account the fact that it's going to be a full year from now.

A recount is all well and good but looking at the numbers Raven posted on IRC, I don't think the winners in most categories will change much, particularly in 'Story of the Year' where it was, to be frank, not even close. I was disappointed with a lot of the winners, but then that's democracy.