September 19, 2019, 05:06:43 am

CY Awards Voting

Started by Commie, November 07, 2010, 01:14:00 am

Previous topic - Next topic

GSK

Quote from: Ferruruccruio on November 18, 2010, 06:23:27 am
I might not like the results of the CY's, generally, but I don't see any conclusive evidence supporting that rather outrageous claim O_o


While there might not be any conclusive evidence, you can ask pretty much anyone and you'll get relatively the same response.

Commie

Sounds like irrefutable proof to me! :@
Hoot hoot de doo! LOL

Seiya

Quote from: hicks8 on November 17, 2010, 08:54:32 pm
I'm guessing none of you voted for Sevens or I?


I did! I was really frustrated to see Greensville not win anything! [cry] My most difficult vote however, was between Ferr and Sirqus for best build. I thought Sirqus' Cobra Wing was really unique and well done, but I ultimately chose Ferr's Right Angle Offices because not only did it look good but I thought the geometry was unique, and especially that it was done nearly 2 years ago, and deserves alot more attention than it has received. I mean Veger's Mars Central really shouldnt have even come close to winning imo.

I mean go to AWMix07, you'll see all the whole clique of people there, and they all have photoshopped pics of their cavs up, like they are a super club, Veger, Za, Maxpoly, Class3, they are all there, I am telling you the whole circle jerk thing is true. And even if you dont agree with it, I am sure you can agree with the fact that not everyone who won deserves to have have the title of year's best or whatever.

AlexTheMartian

maybe there should be something more of an Academy Awards rather than a People's Choice Awards?

(hint to whoever don't understand my point: Academy Awards voted by members of the Academy, while the People's Choice Awards is voted by the general public)

God help us if this turns into the Kids Choice Arards  [grumble]
- Developing Seawing Island and SWanford University
- Founder of Moonlight Heights, AWTeen (2001-now?).
- Former AWTeen CT (aprox. 2003-2005), and Assistant CT (2007)    

Ferrbuttio

Quote from: GSK on November 18, 2010, 02:37:21 pm
While there might not be any conclusive evidence, you can ask pretty much anyone and you'll get relatively the same response.


Then, it's not knowledge!  That, my friend, is known as hysteria ;)


"I rejoice that there are owls\" - Henry David Thoreau


___
<^,^>
[`-']
-"-"-

GSK

November 18, 2010, 07:21:14 pm #30 Last Edit: November 18, 2010, 08:31:55 pm by GSK
Quote from: AlexTheMartian on November 18, 2010, 06:48:22 pm
maybe there should be something more of an Academy Awards rather than a People's Choice Awards?

(hint to whoever don't understand my point: Academy Awards voted by members of the Academy, while the People's Choice Awards is voted by the general public)

God help us if this turns into the Kids Choice Arards  [grumble]


There was something similar to the Academy Awards: Support AW Awards.

I'm kinda sad maki stopped doing those. They were infinitely better than the Cys and gave awards to those who sincerely deserved them.

Seiya

My thing is its easy for me to point out whats wrong with something, but not so easy to offer a solution. So if I were to figure out some kind of "fair" awards system, I would want it to be something along the lines of what Alex was talking about. But to me I have always wanted to see an awards system where they really scrutinize entries, to the point of writing small papers on a builds or communities assessment. CY awards does one thing very well, and that one thing is popularity, it proves not what is the best, but only what is the most popular, that is a simple thing to find.

If it had to be based only on public votie, I would like the voting system suggested by Ferr where you vote for not just one single best, but top three, thus you could actually never be voted best at all, but because more people per capita consider you top 3 over small spikes here and there, then you win.

But ultimately anything that would truly be called "top build" or "top community" or "top event" is going to have ridiculous amounts of time behind it. There is nothing quick and easy in AW, all great achievements are backed by great amounts of effort. Thus, a great amount of effort should be put into what deserves to be considered the best. Personally I would like to see the nominees (whether they are nominated by someone, or by themselves) they should write all about the build, not just a "I like it, its a good build." But talk about what they believe qualifies it as the best. I dont like it when people think "I hope I win." When in fact they dont believe it is the best. If they want it to win, then they have to believe it is the best, and treat it like so, even if it is seen as blowing your own horn.

Normally a nominee wants a judge to go from knowing nothing about their entry, to then learning everything about it. like a 0 - 100 type of thing, but I am proposing that the judge hears all about it, then after reading the nominees assessments, makes his own, and finds if this really is the best, like a 100 - 0 type of thing. I want to do away with the whole "Oh geez I hope I am lucky enough to win, I deserve it boo hoo." And I want to do more along the lines of "I deserve it this year because I earned it, and I will challenge anybody else who thinks they deserve it more than me." It wont be a pissing contest, but a real assessment between nominees, where it is a real challenge to find what is the best, even if peoples feelings get hurt. Ultimately though it is left to the judges, and hopefully the judges can be fair. Possibly you could have not just one person, but teams representing a build. So sure a build like Veger's might be the most popular and have more people behind it than say me, who would stand alone behind one of my build's and challenge that whole team.

On that note, there should be "best build" for multiple categories, and the winners of each of those categories are then assessed to see what ultimately is the best build. Kind of like how they do it on Deadliest Warrior at the end of the season.

GSK

Quote from: Seiya on November 18, 2010, 08:14:31 pmBut ultimately anything that would truly be called "top build" or "top community" or "top event" is going to have ridiculous amounts of time behind it. There is nothing quick and easy in AW, all great achievements are backed by great amounts of effort. Thus, a great amount of effort should be put into what deserves to be considered the best.


I agree completely. I mean, how many people have been working for a total of five years on one single build only to lose to a build which was probably completed in a month or less.

Commie

Quote from: GSK on November 18, 2010, 07:21:14 pm
There was something similar to the Academy Awards: Support AW Awards.

I'm kinda sad maki stopped doing those. They were infinitely better than the Cys and gave awards to those who sincerely deserved them.


The problem with the SAW awards, or anything similar, is that there are not many people in the AW Universe who have a broad view over everything to know what's out there. For example, I could never be a judge. I don't venture outside of SW City that often to know what else is out there.

You could perhaps get it to work if you had a panel of judges whom are all avid explorers. Maybe then their combined knowledge would truly allow them to decide on a best of the best. Earendil should be a judge :D
Hoot hoot de doo! LOL

Ferrbuttio

The inherent problem with the CY awards (and any award system) is it will always be biased, as it is right now.  Who runs the CYs? A subset of people in the community!  Those people have friends who will surely get more informed of their existence, as well as how the voting is done.  The Support AW awards happened the same way.  The community isn't really homogeneous, nor is there a standard system of advertising awards.  Some people get informed that they need to vote by friends telegramming them, while others read the forum.  Some people read the newsletters, while others don't read any of it, and just use AW to build.

So, is an awards ceremony really that important?  The best case scenario, as things are set up, is an awards ceremony who appeals to only a small demographic of the entire list of subscribers to AW.  Perhaps, in the past, the community amounted to a huge, contiguous, urban agglomeration, but as it has shrunk, those connections are a bit more tenuous, with islands of similarly minded people, so an awards ceremony for everyone makes much less sense these days, because it's much harder to push.


"I rejoice that there are owls\" - Henry David Thoreau


___
<^,^>
[`-']
-"-"-

s e v e n s

November 18, 2010, 10:57:13 pm #35 Last Edit: November 18, 2010, 11:01:13 pm by lucky sevens
I used to get my panties all up in a bunch back a few years ago but now, well...

I'm quite tuned in the way the cy's work. we don't have enough people on "the other side" to vote resulting in a decent turnout for all parties. Groups favor their own kind, huggles will vote huggles 7 out of 10 times. When I got my CY for best effects back when I took over the AWFX world, I only got that CY because it favored the majority (gate-like-people). lol I knew what it was :P - Funny thing is I wouldn't have had half as much experience as I did then if noble clock didn't give me the jump start he did. I just used some basic photoshop skills and popped out some cool textures that worked great for the desired effect as I just knew how they'd look after having my first lesson in particles. Simple stuff though, anyone could and have done it already. Then at that moment in time, I was rolling with the 'gaters and just getting into teh nougat city (swcity). Meh...

I voted for CCG's website.  [face_devil]
owl feathers http://www.moo2u.com | free porn http://www.digital4d.com | My sona is an ass... now not only can act like one but I CAN BE ONE TOO ^^

SW Chris

November 18, 2010, 11:23:53 pm #36 Last Edit: November 18, 2010, 11:33:48 pm by SW Chris
I already created a proposal for an academy-based system back in 2005.  Parts of it were used in the Support AW Awards.  A few highlights:

1.  Academy members chosen are on a per-category basis.  Members will have some familiarity with the thing they are judging.  People can be chosen for multiple categories.
2.  Nominations are submitted by citizens.  This is similar to what the CY Awards nominations process is.
3.  Prizes!

http://www.scribd.com/doc/43230930/AW-Academy-Awards-Proposal

I scanned through it and most of it is relevant to our current population size, imho, although the judging forms may have some balancing issues that need worked out and the organizing and committee portion may need to be streamlined.  Anybody has my permission to take this idea and run with it.
SW City Admin, River District  [face_grin]
Leadership
"The Knights of Good is my intellectual property.  I've trademarked a logo and hope to turn it into a legitimate business someday.  Possibly a delicious breakfast cereal." --Vork

Absolute Monarch

What was the population of our uni like back in 2005 compared to now? O_O
www.gotabmo.com

Absolute Monarch: :@ @  how you use google images to solve all your arguments
Ferruccio: better than waving my dick around

SW Comit: suuuchh a fight tit
SW Comit: tight fit*

Ferrbuttio

Quote from: SW Chris on November 18, 2010, 11:23:53 pm
I already created a proposal for an academy-based system back in 2005.  Parts of it were used in the Support AW Awards.  A few highlights:

1.  Academy members chosen are on a per-category basis.  Members will have some familiarity with the thing they are judging.  People can be chosen for multiple categories.
2.  Nominations are submitted by citizens.  This is similar to what the CY Awards nominations process is.
3.  Prizes!

http://www.scribd.com/doc/43230930/AW-Academy-Awards-Proposal

I scanned through it and most of it is relevant to our current population size, imho, although the judging forms may have some balancing issues that need worked out and the organizing and committee portion may need to be streamlined.  Anybody has my permission to take this idea and run with it.


I vaguely thought of such an idea, though I see a few problems.

Some categories have such few experts as it is, so I could see the judges for, say, bots, being a good percentage of the total bot programmers.

Also, obviously, there's the issue of arguing over credibility.  "Who says that's the expert on building??". I mean, as it's been pointed out before, the current voting system is as fair as such a system can be.  However, there still exist people who blindly claim it was rigged!


"I rejoice that there are owls\" - Henry David Thoreau


___
<^,^>
[`-']
-"-"-

AlexTheMartian

Maybe voting should be more on multi-category point system. What I mean is similar to how building contests are judged in the recent years. There is aesthetics, complexity, originality, detail, etc. Yes those are mainly building and object related descriptions, but similar thing can be brought up for bots, worlds, towns, etc.

Also, I did mention the Academy Awards, but also I remembered that that too is not a perfect system. Many times critics have different likes than the general public. There are classic examples of this. For example, the very first Star Wars: A New Hope, was nominated in many categories at the Academy Awards that year, but it did not win Best Picture, that went to Annie Hall, a Woody Allen movie. What, just because Woody Allen directs something they need to make it a best picture. I am sorry, but if it was directed good, give him Best Director, but let actual films that were the best get Best Picture.
- Developing Seawing Island and SWanford University
- Founder of Moonlight Heights, AWTeen (2001-now?).
- Former AWTeen CT (aprox. 2003-2005), and Assistant CT (2007)    

SW Chris

Quote from: Ferruruccruio on November 19, 2010, 03:10:07 am
I vaguely thought of such an idea, though I see a few problems.

Some categories have such few experts as it is, so I could see the judges for, say, bots, being a good percentage of the total bot programmers.

Also, obviously, there's the issue of arguing over credibility.  "Who says that's the expert on building??". I mean, as it's been pointed out before, the current voting system is as fair as such a system can be.  However, there still exist people who blindly claim it was rigged!

Yes, my proposal would need some tweaking since it was made in 2005 and things have changed a bit since then.  In the bots category for instance, whatever I called it, voting members would probably not just be limited to programmers but people who are familiar with using bots.  That would widen the margin enough to make it viable.

People will always complain, but you can stave some of that off by being as transparent as is possible without compromising the process.  So you can publish your procedures and selection criteria, but obviously you would want to avoid publishing who the academy is and leave it up to the individual members to reveal themselves.

Quote from: AlexTheMartian on November 19, 2010, 05:53:32 am
Maybe voting should be more on multi-category point system. What I mean is similar to how building contests are judged in the recent years. There is aesthetics, complexity, originality, detail, etc. Yes those are mainly building and object related descriptions, but similar thing can be brought up for bots, worlds, towns, etc.

Yes, that's exactly what my proposal strives to do.
SW City Admin, River District  [face_grin]
Leadership
"The Knights of Good is my intellectual property.  I've trademarked a logo and hope to turn it into a legitimate business someday.  Possibly a delicious breakfast cereal." --Vork