|
|
Post by Angel on May 10, 2009 20:02:16 GMT -5
"and knock down the nominees for most of them to about 4 or 5" <<
After reading this.. I'm a bit confused.. why eliminate any of them? By what process? Just what you feel like? That doesn't seem berry right..
|
|
|
|
Post by The King Of Darkness on May 11, 2009 7:44:24 GMT -5
Angel Brings up a good point. That does seem unfair. That could mean us POSTYS staff could just cut out anyone of the nominees just because we don't like that nominee or what not. Having more options to choose from makes a better chance of giving every nominee a fair chance. Take Best brawler. Say we have BB, Deft, Angel, Eiron, Cell, Steele, Star. They are ALL good brawlers but with this it makes us limit to 3-4 so say me choose Deft,Cell, Steele and Angel... well what about Star and BB? That's taking away from their opportunity to win possibly leading to a bit of tension and anger in the air. Now granted with more options it makes a tie between nominees more likely but cutting nominees from the ballot is not in by any means fair. So in the interest of fairness i say we keep all nominees.
|
|
ManOfSteele
Member
[M:-10000]
The Original
Posts: 2,695
|
Post by ManOfSteele on May 11, 2009 9:57:31 GMT -5
This is one of those moments where you should cry about it and move on. 1st off, it's been in the POSTYS rules since the beginning. Mvpguy made them up, I'm gonna stick to them 2ndly, it's been in the rules that have been posted for months: After all categories have been posted and have nominees, they will be locked. The moderators will decide on 4 nominees to be voted on. If you wanted to do something, action should have been taken months ago. |
|
|
|
Post by starprincess on May 11, 2009 10:52:40 GMT -5
This is one of those moments where you should cry about it and move on. 1st off, it's been in the POSTYS rules since the beginning. Mvpguy made them up, I'm gonna stick to them 2ndly, it's been in the rules that have been posted for months: After all categories have been posted and have nominees, they will be locked. The moderators will decide on 4 nominees to be voted on. If you wanted to do something, action should have been taken months ago. Ok no... You are basically saying that the postys staff gets to say who is the best out of all of them, then you want everyone else to vote on the candidates you choose.. That isn't right at all.. Why they hell are we nominating members in these categories if you guys are the only ones that get to determine who is good? Why should we even vote if the people we nominated aren't there? What is the point of the postys? |
|
ManOfSteele
Member
[M:-10000]
The Original
Posts: 2,695
|
Post by ManOfSteele on May 11, 2009 14:16:47 GMT -5
Again, let me reiterate.
It's been that way since the beginning, you're about 2 years late changing that.
It's also been in the rules for months now, I would have been happy to change them back then.
It's also not like I'm going to go through and take out people that I don't like for awards, or that I don't think deserve them. The best Brawler example was bad, cause out of that group I would take out myself and Angel cause out of the group we aren't the best in there.
In addition, if you look back in past POSTYS history, you'll find that not a lot of categories had to be knocked down to a few nominations. Usually we keep all of them, but ones with a crazy amount of nominations we do knock down.
Stop wining, it's not gonna get you anywhere. Angel started off with a legitimate question, it's turned into a wine fest.
Angel to answer the original question it's mainly to get rid of those who are waaaaaaaaaaaay outclassed by the other nominees (Ex, if SLE, Bert, The Link, Eiron and Ejak were up for Active-est member, we'd cut out Ejak cause he has 71 posts), and for those categories which have a lot of nominations. When deciding who gets cut out for certain categories, we use factual data. Stuff like "Best Avatar" we can't cut out people for, cause "Best" is opinionated. Stuff like Sports categories we can eliminate nominations cause we have factual data for them.
|
|
|
|
Post by Angel on Jun 8, 2009 6:12:38 GMT -5
I never got around to saying thank you for answering my question. Thanks! In the future, may I suggest a small change in procedure? Change it to where people can "Support" or "Dissaprove" of a nomination, but only whilst nominating someone else. Say, I think Bob_Snicket is the evilest member. But I also agree that Cell and KoD are indeed evil. I would nominate Bob_Snicket, then put in, "But I approve of the nominations of "Cell, KoD.".. Then, I could look and see.. Dobs and think, Dob's isn't evil! I would then say "But I dissaprove of the nomination of Dobs." the 4 or 5 or so with the highest amounts of "approval" would get the final cut. That way it's fair, but we can cut down.. it also allows for more activity during vote time, and more interaction. Just for future considering, I understand it's too late for it this time.  |
|
|
|
Post by ness11 on Jun 8, 2009 9:53:09 GMT -5
Basically what Steele said. Really, Mypguy insituted this for the following:
1. To limit it down to make it more fitting such category. Like Steele said, if there were six people nominated for most active memeber (Geo, Kin, Angel, Ejak, Bert, SLE) we'd drop Ejak because he doesn't have very many posts and Geo because Geo is never here.
2. In a sense, make it more well rounded. A winner of the award for two straight years in a row (Best Brawler: Deft) would be excluded because they've already won the award more than once and it gives the other nominees a chance at getting it for themselves. Deft would be eligible for the POSTY the following season.
It's just how we go about it. I mean for the Oscars do they let everyone be a nominee for whatever award? No, you scrap it up to the best of the best and let you guys decide from there on. There's a reason to nominate because in more ocasions than you may thing, the UNDERDOG, or someone who was a last minute entry can more than not win the award (I'm a prime example for that).
As for your logic Angel.....erm...sure? I mean it makes sense and all but it seems like too much of a hassle, really squaring down the nominees we usually leave reasons as too why and how. It's more of an on the spot ordeal. But we will consider it nevertheless.
|
|
ManOfSteele
Member
[M:-10000]
The Original
Posts: 2,695
|
Post by ManOfSteele on Jun 8, 2009 12:22:23 GMT -5
Hmmm... I like the idea, it would cut down on the "Oh, I like {Insert Member Here} a lot, so I'm gonna nominate them for an award even though they don't deserve it at all" deal.
We'll consider it deffinatley...
|
|
|
|
Post by Angel on Jun 8, 2009 12:24:58 GMT -5
I understand, I was just thinking it might be nice to have a way that didn't seem like the POSTY's staff was controlling the votes to a unfair extent. Like say.. taking me out of a category I might win at just because, yes, I did get nominated for quite alot. I'm going for the Queen of the Posty's for my first year  As long as I don't see myself cut from something I was sure I was going to win.. I'm be quiet and happeh as a clam. |
|
ManOfSteele
Member
[M:-10000]
The Original
Posts: 2,695
|
Post by ManOfSteele on Jun 8, 2009 12:37:41 GMT -5
Well the nominees are finalized now, I did the member ones and I'm pretty sure that I did a good job. You can check them out in the POSTYS Categories Board
|
|
[M:-5]
