Super Mario Boards

Archive => Mario Awards => 2015 => Topic started by: Anton on August 14, 2015, 10:41:04 PM

Title: Suggestions for next year
Post by: Anton on August 14, 2015, 10:41:04 PM
In a continuous effort to improve, please tell us things that could be changed, or new ideas, new awards, nominees, what worked, what didn't work, anything, we will look over everything posted in here.
Title: Re: Suggestions for next year
Post by: Anton on August 14, 2015, 10:43:14 PM
*ltq said something about time zone things, tell me how that works

*also we should double check every award count to prevent minor slip-ups that happened

*checkpoint worked out gr8 we're doing that again

*something about polls, I have logs somewhere but basically we found out that the main page polls get us a massive majority of the votes in a fairly short window of time, so that needs to be prioritized and then organized/automated with/by the poll committee
Title: Re: Suggestions for next year
Post by: Nyrie on August 14, 2015, 10:50:09 PM
add a "trifecta" button to the forum interface

*ltq said something about time zone things, tell me how that works
iirc it's a thing that changes the timezone it's showing based upon who's viewing it

so like if i was looking at it now it would say 10:50 PM but for someone in california it would say 7:50 PM
Title: Re: Suggestions for next year
Post by: NSY on August 14, 2015, 10:53:05 PM
i noticed a decrease in votes this year

what would the explanation be regarding that
Title: Re: Suggestions for next year
Post by: Lakituthequick on August 14, 2015, 10:56:59 PM
*ltq said something about time zone things, tell me how that works
Basic things about it I explained here (http://www.marioboards.com/index.php?topic=29223.msg1368629#msg1368629). You can get those fancy timestamps here (http://www.onlineconversion.com/unix_time.htm). I may make a thing for it if I feel for it.

Should note though (and this is important to know) that the forum software replaces the actual timestamps with the string when you edit/quote a post (PM's are safe), so you should either keep a text file with the raw post or include the plain stamp nearby for copypasting.
Title: Re: Suggestions for next year
Post by: Anton on August 14, 2015, 10:57:29 PM
i noticed a decrease in votes this year

what would the explanation be regarding that

our idea was that it was partly a flub in the front page polls, as they were not as easily visible unless you scrolled through the actual poll box

a few nights before polls closed we noticed a few key awards had dismal votes so we pushed them more into the open and literally hundreds of votes came rolling in within just a couple of hours

there could also easily be other reasons but this was the one we noticed that had quite an impact
Title: Re: Suggestions for next year
Post by: Anton on August 14, 2015, 10:58:28 PM
*ltq said something about time zone things, tell me how that works
Basic things about it I explained here (http://www.marioboards.com/index.php?topic=29223.msg1368629#msg1368629). You can get those fancy timestamps here (http://www.onlineconversion.com/unix_time.htm). I may make a thing for it if I feel for it.

Should note though (and this is important to know) that the forum software replaces the actual timestamps with the string when you edit/quote a post (PM's are safe), so you should either keep a text file with the raw post or include the plain stamp nearby for copypasting.

how much real effort would that be when you're dealing with the quantity of times that we have to, like, does the convenience for everyone else outweigh the extra work staff would have to do and maintain
Title: Re: Suggestions for next year
Post by: Yayoi Takatsuki on August 14, 2015, 11:00:55 PM
make turb do a presentation whether he likes it or not
Title: Re: Suggestions for next year
Post by: Gamefreak75 on August 14, 2015, 11:02:55 PM
To reiterate on Anton's final point, what we suggested was the Poll Committee basically goes on hiatus during the awards poll voting. That way we can prioritize the Mario and fail awards poll and prevent them from getting pitiful results (i.e. going from ~2400 votes last year to ~600 votes this year).

Like Anton said a few posts up, what we had noticed was that in a matter of <12 hours, the votes for some of the awards nearly doubled because they were front and center instead of being buried under a poll that had been done for 3 months or so.
Title: Re: Suggestions for next year
Post by: Gilgamesh on August 14, 2015, 11:05:48 PM
add a "trifecta" button to the forum interface
gotta say it was a really good idea banning those posts, i didn't see a single (serious) one during any of the ceremonies

keeping that rule for next year would be a good idea as well
Title: Re: Suggestions for next year
Post by: Stargazing on August 14, 2015, 11:21:59 PM
keeping that rule for next year would be a good idea as well
yes PLEASE
Title: Re: Suggestions for next year
Post by: Chiaki Nanami on August 14, 2015, 11:24:29 PM
keeping that rule for next year would be a good idea as well
this

it makes the threads not absolutely arse to keep up with
Title: Re: Suggestions for next year
Post by: Honoka's #5 Fan on August 14, 2015, 11:26:28 PM
i noticed a decrease in votes this year

what would the explanation be regarding that

our idea was that it was partly a flub in the front page polls, as they were not as easily visible unless you scrolled through the actual poll box

a few nights before polls closed we noticed a few key awards had dismal votes so we pushed them more into the open and literally hundreds of votes came rolling in within just a couple of hours

there could also easily be other reasons but this was the one we noticed that had quite an impact
It didn't help that the same poll ran the entire time the awards were up
Title: Re: Suggestions for next year
Post by: Glowsquid on August 14, 2015, 11:52:38 PM
suggestion for the indivdual awards:

1: remove the obvious protagonist options for the "Favourite ___ series characters" options. I mean, Donkey Kong is a Donkey KOng character and Wario is a Wario character but... gah, it just seems wrong.

2: Add a "Favourite Internal Development team" award, since there's a third-party one. There's definitely enough material on the wiki to get an idea of who the nintendo development teams are and what games they do.

I'll be massively butthurt if nintendo r&d1/spd1 isn't an option tho

Suggestion for the award flow:

Honestly I liked how it went this year. Add me to the row of the people who want the "hurr hurr trifecta" rule back next year.
Title: Re: Suggestions for next year
Post by: Lakituthequick on August 14, 2015, 11:58:16 PM
*ltq said something about time zone things, tell me how that works
Basic things about it I explained here (http://www.marioboards.com/index.php?topic=29223.msg1368629#msg1368629). You can get those fancy timestamps here (http://www.onlineconversion.com/unix_time.htm). I may make a thing for it if I feel for it.

Should note though (and this is important to know) that the forum software replaces the actual timestamps with the string when you edit/quote a post (PM's are safe), so you should either keep a text file with the raw post or include the plain stamp nearby for copypasting.

how much real effort would that be when you're dealing with the quantity of times that we have to, like, does the convenience for everyone else outweigh the extra work staff would have to do and maintain
The convenient thing about this is that times are always displayed in the timezone of the viewer (or EDT (server default) for guests).
I have whipped up something really basic that may lighten some work on this. (http://smw.ltquick.nl/MarioAwards/2016/time.php)
Title: Re: Suggestions for next year
Post by: Anton on August 15, 2015, 12:07:26 AM
but I mean like I have no idea what I'm doing with that and idk where things like 1439582400 are coming from

it's selfish wording it this way but is it really worth the tremendous effort on my part to deal with it or just tell people to add +5 to the time posted

like I can totally see it as being convenient and all but ???? <_> does the benefit outweigh the work
Title: Re: Suggestions for next year
Post by: Stargazing on August 15, 2015, 12:09:05 AM
there's also the [time][/time] tags
Title: Re: Suggestions for next year
Post by: Anton on August 15, 2015, 12:10:17 AM
there's also the [time][/time] tags

yeah that's literally what he's talking about; if it's easy to do then sure but if not then no
Title: Re: Suggestions for next year
Post by: Stargazing on August 15, 2015, 12:20:11 AM
[time]monday 12:00 est[/time] turns into August 17, 2015, 01:00:00 PM
Title: Re: Suggestions for next year
Post by: Anton on August 15, 2015, 12:23:21 AM
[time]monday 12:00 est[/time] turns into August 17, 2015, 01:00:00 PM

wow is it that easy let me try

August 19, 2015, 10:00:00 AM

ok but where did those numbers ltq had come from nvm 22 halped me figure it out
Title: Re: Suggestions for next year
Post by: Stargazing on August 15, 2015, 12:25:20 AM
they automatically do that for some reason
Title: Re: Suggestions for next year
Post by: Alexander Hamilton on August 15, 2015, 12:25:40 AM
*something about polls, I have logs somewhere but basically we found out that the main page polls get us a massive majority of the votes in a fairly short window of time, so that needs to be prioritized and then organized/automated with/by the poll committee

I will definitely make this a priority to discuss and work on between both the Poll Committee and Awards Committee, and I will definitely be a liaison in order to get this figured out and planned ahead and good to go come next year.
Title: Re: Suggestions for next year
Post by: Cirdec on August 15, 2015, 02:45:18 AM
I second LTQ for those timezones.
Gamefreak told me in PM the time of my presentation was PST (GMT-8), so I did the calculation and told Smg2daisy her presentation was at her 10:40 AM. But then I see the times in the ceremony were not matching, I realize the time said in the PM was not PST actually it was PDT (*bleep* daylight saving time). So Smg2daisy real time was 9:40 AM but she was sleeping when I told her I was wrong. She missed to post her presentation.

So yeah, be more careful when you post times next years or try to do Lakituthequick's suggestion.
Title: Re: Suggestions for next year
Post by: Anton on August 15, 2015, 02:50:41 AM
yeah daylight savings will do that, especially when it's things like Eastern where EST is short for literally "Eastern" and also "Eastern Standard Time", and people here don't even acknowledge whether it's daylight savings or not when saying it so I guess that wasn't really a mishap with gamefreak but like......a language quirk???  idk 22 will know more about that

I'll put effort into learning about the time tags because it's looking like the convenience will outweigh the effort, and that's my cue to do something about it.
Title: Re: Suggestions for next year
Post by: Chiaki Nanami on August 15, 2015, 07:18:53 AM
Next time, lock the GTR topic once the festivities have started. You can't edit them once it's started, so why should the thread not be locked?
Title: Re: Suggestions for next year
Post by: Chiaki Nanami on August 15, 2015, 08:36:11 AM
Favourite/least favourite Donkey Kong series level, y/n?
Title: Re: Suggestions for next year
Post by: Rintarou Okabe on August 15, 2015, 12:38:21 PM
more fail awards, make different categories for worst game so that it's not all clustered into the same award anymore (ex. "Worst Spin-off" includes *bleep* like mario is missing, "Worst Main Series Game").
Title: Re: Suggestions for next year
Post by: Hobbes on August 15, 2015, 12:57:07 PM
Maybe on Favorite Partner Developer include one of their most popular Mario series next to each one? It was a bit hard to remember who did what when voting.
Title: Re: Suggestions for next year
Post by: Anton on August 15, 2015, 02:04:05 PM
Next time, lock the GTR topic once the festivities have started. You can't edit them once it's started, so why should the thread not be locked?

because conversations and updates can still go on, it's not my responsibility to prevent someone from cheating, just punishing them for it
Title: Re: Suggestions for next year
Post by: Walkazo on August 15, 2015, 03:08:06 PM
For the time zones, another option is to just go by GMT/UTC. The wiki's been using it for proposals for years: it's a simple conversion to find (like, Google "EST" and you don't even need to click on the Wikipedia link to get the "UTC−05:00" result), and it just seems neutral and fair rather than choosing one of the NA time zones for one reason or another.

Another option individuals can do is change your preferences to whatever time zone's being used: on the wiki, I've had it set to GMT for years - that way I don't need to do the conversion by hand or look it up (although at this point, I can do it automatically anyway, but still, it's nice to have confirmation. I also have multiple clocks set up on my computer showing the time zones I'm interested in in addition to my current time: that's pretty easy to do too.

1: remove the obvious protagonist options for the "Favourite ___ series characters" options. I mean, Donkey Kong is a Donkey KOng character and Wario is a Wario character but... gah, it just seems wrong.
Agreed.

To reiterate on Anton's final point, what we suggested was the Poll Committee basically goes on hiatus during the awards poll voting. That way we can prioritize the Mario and fail awards poll and prevent them from getting pitiful results (i.e. going from ~2400 votes last year to ~600 votes this year).

Like Anton said a few posts up, what we had noticed was that in a matter of <12 hours, the votes for some of the awards nearly doubled because they were front and center instead of being buried under a poll that had been done for 3 months or so.
Cycling through the Mario and Fail awards seems like a much better use of the Main Page poll systems than having to scroll down below a regular poll, especially if a single regular poll just sits there like a lump. (Plus, it gives the regular polls a bit of a break to stockpile polls a bit, or however that works, so that polls don't sit around for a while.)
Title: Re: Suggestions for next year
Post by: Nyrie on August 15, 2015, 06:16:58 PM
i think we need more userpedia awards. if there were to be more, maybe some sort of "favorite community poll" category.
Title: Re: Suggestions for next year
Post by: Walkazo on August 15, 2015, 08:53:30 PM
I'd be down for more UP awards.

A favourite local meme/recurring-thing award could be fun (the $3000 medal, what / head asplosion, Loic, DK-approved rainbows, sippin' time, The Baby, etc.).

Also, it'd be nice to have some more awards for wiki editors and wiki/forum/chat staff besides the one retired user award and one community achievement award - which are both shared with culture icons / popular kids / big wigs, and so, means that folks who simply work hard without cultivating a big community presence on the side via chat, Shroom, forum posts, art skillz and/or wiki fiction have no hope in hell of getting more than a couple votes, if that.

I mean, the Shroom gives an award to a new writer, a veteran writer and a retired writer, a director, a core staff / team subdirector - and one or their teams as a whole, plus an individual's section that use images well, and of course the person of the year award. That's a lot of chances for recognition for doing something that the staff and writers would do anyway out of sheer love of the job - and similarly, while editing and doing staff bsns should be its own reward first and foremost, it'd still be nice if there was a chance for the folks who merely work hard at what they do to get some credit too.

At the very least, it'd be cool to see some sort of legacy award for long-time users who aren't retired, yet who have been around for so long and are still here, toiling away, but not necessarily with any sort of spotlight (but maybe with one in the past, or maybe never). U10 used to cover them too, but not anymore, since it shifted its focus to current community presence, but looking at U1 and U10 now, there's a few names missing that really should be somewhere.
Title: Re: Suggestions for next year
Post by: Nyrie on August 15, 2015, 08:59:36 PM
^i agree with basically everything said in that post
Title: Re: Suggestions for next year
Post by: Gamefreak75 on August 15, 2015, 09:12:53 PM
In regards to the time issue, PST is "Pacific Standard Time". I honestly didn't know the difference between that and pdt so apologies on that one.

1: remove the obvious protagonist options for the "Favourite ___ series characters" options. I mean, Donkey Kong is a Donkey KOng character and Wario is a Wario character but... gah, it just seems wrong.
Agreed.

To be fair, we didn't have Wario last year for this very reason. I forgot why we had added him this year, but it just only confirmed what everyone thought: the main character is just going to sweep the awards. It's why Hotel Mario was removed from Worst Game since that would always win and it still got an obscene amount of write-ins. I'll voucher for both dk's and wario's removal when meetings come around.

The problem with adding more awards is that we need to actually have people sign up for them. This year, we barely. barely passed the sign-ups and even then we had so many drop outs that some people had to take up like 5 awards. The best solution would be to swap out/rotate awards in. In regards to some people feeling that "X or Y" should be on the nominee, just say so in the General discussion topic for the next awards. You can also attend the meetings to place your vote there.

This is just me speaking and not on behalf of the awards staff.
Title: Re: Suggestions for next year
Post by: GalacticPetey on August 15, 2015, 10:16:01 PM
Not sure how much it help but I'll at least try to do more presentation next year. This was my first time actually doing a presentation so I only did the one.

Again, I'm just one person. But as you said GF, there are a lot of slots that need filling.
Title: Re: Suggestions for next year
Post by: Zant on August 16, 2015, 12:30:48 AM
Maybe more Fail Award Presentations?
Title: Re: Suggestions for next year
Post by: Hobbes on August 16, 2015, 12:35:21 AM
I'd be down for more UP awards.

A favourite local meme/recurring-thing award could be fun (the $3000 medal, what / head asplosion, Loic, DK-approved rainbows, sippin' time, The Baby, etc.).

Also, it'd be nice to have some more awards for wiki editors and wiki/forum/chat staff besides the one retired user award and one community achievement award - which are both shared with culture icons / popular kids / big wigs, and so, means that folks who simply work hard without cultivating a big community presence on the side via chat, Shroom, forum posts, art skillz and/or wiki fiction have no hope in hell of getting more than a couple votes, if that.

I mean, the Shroom gives an award to a new writer, a veteran writer and a retired writer, a director, a core staff / team subdirector - and one or their teams as a whole, plus an individual's section that use images well, and of course the person of the year award. That's a lot of chances for recognition for doing something that the staff and writers would do anyway out of sheer love of the job - and similarly, while editing and doing staff bsns should be its own reward first and foremost, it'd still be nice if there was a chance for the folks who merely work hard at what they do to get some credit too.

At the very least, it'd be cool to see some sort of legacy award for long-time users who aren't retired, yet who have been around for so long and are still here, toiling away, but not necessarily with any sort of spotlight (but maybe with one in the past, or maybe never). U10 used to cover them too, but not anymore, since it shifted its focus to current community presence, but looking at U1 and U10 now, there's a few names missing that really should be somewhere.
Per everything Walkazo said.
Title: Re: Suggestions for next year
Post by: Anton on August 16, 2015, 01:56:03 AM
To be fair, we didn't have Wario last year for this very reason. I forgot why we had added him this year, but it just only confirmed what everyone thought: the main character is just going to sweep the awards. It's why Hotel Mario was removed from Worst Game since that would always win and it still got an obscene amount of write-ins. I'll voucher for both dk's and wario's removal when meetings come around.

The problem with adding more awards is that we need to actually have people sign up for them. This year, we barely. barely passed the sign-ups and even then we had so many drop outs that some people had to take up like 5 awards. The best solution would be to swap out/rotate awards in. In regards to some people feeling that "X or Y" should be on the nominee, just say so in the General discussion topic for the next awards. You can also attend the meetings to place your vote there.

This is just me speaking and not on behalf of the awards staff.

Both of the sections GF gave I agree with.  We decided to give DK and Wario a chance within their respective awards just to see what would happen and now we know.  They'll likely be removed unless the next AC has other plans.

Also I like that people are wanting to see more awards, but yeah the there's time, the work that goes into them that no one sees, and that getting people to actually do the presentations without stretching the same few people even thinner is quite a concern.  It was a struggle this year getting people to sign up, to the point where we had to desperately offer a bribe in the form of tokens, and even that barely chipped away and like half of the people that ate into that bribe ended up dropping 2 weeks later.  I'd be game for swapping awards in/out, and the only way I'd be cool with bumping UP or Fail up some more is if we could reach the next level of +5 and actually have all 5 be strong, not just fillers so we can weasel in 1 that people want.



For the time zones, another option is to just go by GMT/UTC. The wiki's been using it for proposals for years: it's a simple conversion to find (like, Google "EST" and you don't even need to click on the Wikipedia link to get the "UTC−05:00" result), and it just seems neutral and fair rather than choosing one of the NA time zones for one reason or another.

Another option individuals can do is change your preferences to whatever time zone's being used: on the wiki, I've had it set to GMT for years - that way I don't need to do the conversion by hand or look it up (although at this point, I can do it automatically anyway, but still, it's nice to have confirmation. I also have multiple clocks set up on my computer showing the time zones I'm interested in in addition to my current time: that's pretty easy to do too.

I'd be game for setting it up as GMT as well but if fussing with converting times is still really that big of a concern to people I'll figure out how to use [time], but keep in mind that that's only good for the forum.  Standardizing at GMT could cover all venues.



I'd be down for more UP awards.

A favourite local meme/recurring-thing award could be fun (the $3000 medal, what / head asplosion, Loic, DK-approved rainbows, sippin' time, The Baby, etc.).

We already had Favorite Fad which was axed a while ago because it just wasn't strong, and I'm not sure if I'd be cool with nominated "memes" that are entirely based on ridiculing someone who is still an active community member.  I don't think that would be good PR.



Also, it'd be nice to have some more awards for wiki editors and wiki/forum/chat staff besides the one retired user award and one community achievement award - which are both shared with culture icons / popular kids / big wigs, and so, means that folks who simply work hard without cultivating a big community presence on the side via chat, Shroom, forum posts, art skillz and/or wiki fiction have no hope in hell of getting more than a couple votes, if that.

I mean, the Shroom gives an award to a new writer, a veteran writer and a retired writer, a director, a core staff / team subdirector - and one or their teams as a whole, plus an individual's section that use images well, and of course the person of the year award. That's a lot of chances for recognition for doing something that the staff and writers would do anyway out of sheer love of the job - and similarly, while editing and doing staff bsns should be its own reward first and foremost, it'd still be nice if there was a chance for the folks who merely work hard at what they do to get some credit too.

We tried doing that with the U10 and S10 awards already this year, with making them more contemporary and pretty much achievements within the last year or so, which gave people who haven't been able to rank up a laundry list of administrative positions a shot at recognition.  As for people who do hard work without cultivating a big community presence I...really don't know how to address that, because isn't it within the wording right there that they don't have a large presence?  How would they be nominated?  Who would be?  Like guess I just really don't understand what kind of people you're referring too if you're excluding those who "[cultivate] a big community presence on the side via chat, Shroom, forum posts, art skillz and/or wiki fiction."  I'd be up for that new award if it can be created while reaching the minimum amount with strong nominees.

I'm also not really sure what you mean by "Also, it'd be nice to have some more awards for wiki editors and wiki/forum/chat staff besides the one retired user award and one community achievement award - which are both shared with culture icons / popular kids / big wigs (...)" because as far as I can recall everyone in U10 has put in a lot of work within at least one of the administrative teams, and no one is being recognized just simply because they're popular posters.  If you mean you'd like an award for people who do a lot of work but keep to themselves or aren't as widely popular I'd really need to see nominees and perhaps a more clear definition for it.  It'd also need to be considered too that if the nominee is someone who does a lot of work but really pays absolutely no attention to the community at all outside of the pages they're editing info on, is it even worth it creating an award for them or nominating them for it?

In addition I just don't really see the staff ones working because I'm envisioning them to have polarized winners, or the real basis of them would not even be visible to the public, and the wiki editing award while I can see working, I don't really think it would fit in Userpedia or Shroom Awards.  Yes, Userpedia awards have become a bit more diluted towards 'Community Awards', but they're not.  A new venue would have to be made for them, or Userpedia Awards would have to be rebranded, and I'm not sure I like that 2nd option.

((P.S.  This was kind of stream of consciousness so soz if I asked the same question multiple times or answered them myself or whatevs))
At the very least, it'd be cool to see some sort of legacy award for long-time users who aren't retired, yet who have been around for so long and are still here, toiling away, but not necessarily with any sort of spotlight (but maybe with one in the past, or maybe never). U10 used to cover them too, but not anymore, since it shifted its focus to current community presence, but looking at U1 and U10 now, there's a few names missing that really should be somewhere.

Again, if an award title is crafted and nominees are suggested I'd be able to make a better decision because right now I can't really see it myself.



Also just covering my ass, before anyone snaps back at what I'm saying keep in mind that I'm also trying to play devil's advocate because it's safer to question big new ideas rather than just accepting them because they sound nice in theory.  I'd like for them to be structural sound all the way around.
Title: Re: Suggestions for next year
Post by: 2257 on August 16, 2015, 04:16:57 AM
donkey kong wasn't a new addition this year. he's been on it since favorite kong was first added and he has won every year. as for wario, he was added because in 2014 he was already doing better as a write-in than the majority of the nominees

anyway, i'm against removing them. if wario's 2014 performance is anything to go by, leaving them off won't do much more than force the staff to tally their votes manually. which is a pain in the ass because for write-in candidates, rather than having "wario: 8000000" like it gives you for nominees, polldaddy just prints the word "wario" eight million times. besides that, i don't see any benefit to removing them. it's not like we're giving out an actual prize and this year 9-volt got shafted because wario took what was rightfully his. and whether or not we try to artificially deflate wario's score, the other characters will all be ranked in the same order anyway
Title: Re: Suggestions for next year
Post by: Smasher on August 16, 2015, 08:57:19 AM
I oppose removing them as well. 22 pretty much summed up my thoughts perfectly.
Title: Re: Suggestions for next year
Post by: Anton on August 16, 2015, 11:43:47 AM
eh, yeah, that does make sense so my mind changed again yeah
Title: Re: Suggestions for next year
Post by: Walkazo on August 16, 2015, 01:51:25 PM
Also I like that people are wanting to see more awards, but yeah the there's time, the work that goes into them that no one sees, and that getting people to actually do the presentations without stretching the same few people even thinner is quite a concern.  It was a struggle this year getting people to sign up, to the point where we had to desperately offer a bribe in the form of tokens, and even that barely chipped away and like half of the people that ate into that bribe ended up dropping 2 weeks later.  I'd be game for swapping awards in/out, and the only way I'd be cool with bumping UP or Fail up some more is if we could reach the next level of +5 and actually have all 5 be strong, not just fillers so we can weasel in 1 that people want.
In the past, has there been this much struggle getting people to sign up for the presentations? It could be that there was just bad timing with peoples' RL business and/or other wiki things like the Shroom's 100th and 101st issues (the latter of which only got pushed back last minute, which was a smart move, but having it be automatically scheduled a week after the anniversary could make it easier for writers to commit to awards).

We already had Favorite Fad which was axed a while ago because it just wasn't strong, and I'm not sure if I'd be cool with nominated "memes" that are entirely based on ridiculing someone who is still an active community member.  I don't think that would be good PR.
Good points.

Also, it'd be nice to have some more awards for wiki editors and wiki/forum/chat staff besides the one retired user award and one community achievement award - which are both shared with culture icons / popular kids / big wigs, and so, means that folks who simply work hard without cultivating a big community presence on the side via chat, Shroom, forum posts, art skillz and/or wiki fiction have no hope in hell of getting more than a couple votes, if that.

I mean, the Shroom gives an award to a new writer, a veteran writer and a retired writer, a director, a core staff / team subdirector - and one or their teams as a whole, plus an individual's section that use images well, and of course the person of the year award. That's a lot of chances for recognition for doing something that the staff and writers would do anyway out of sheer love of the job - and similarly, while editing and doing staff bsns should be its own reward first and foremost, it'd still be nice if there was a chance for the folks who merely work hard at what they do to get some credit too.

We tried doing that with the U10 and S10 awards already this year, with making them more contemporary and pretty much achievements within the last year or so, which gave people who haven't been able to rank up a laundry list of administrative positions a shot at recognition.  As for people who do hard work without cultivating a big community presence I...really don't know how to address that, because isn't it within the wording right there that they don't have a large presence?  How would they be nominated?  Who would be?  Like guess I just really don't understand what kind of people you're referring too if you're excluding those who "[cultivate] a big community presence on the side via chat, Shroom, forum posts, art skillz and/or wiki fiction."  I'd be up for that new award if it can be created while reaching the minimum amount with strong nominees.

I'm also not really sure what you mean by "Also, it'd be nice to have some more awards for wiki editors and wiki/forum/chat staff besides the one retired user award and one community achievement award - which are both shared with culture icons / popular kids / big wigs (...)" because as far as I can recall everyone in U10 has put in a lot of work within at least one of the administrative teams, and no one is being recognized just simply because they're popular posters.  If you mean you'd like an award for people who do a lot of work but keep to themselves or aren't as widely popular I'd really need to see nominees and perhaps a more clear definition for it.  It'd also need to be considered too that if the nominee is someone who does a lot of work but really pays absolutely no attention to the community at all outside of the pages they're editing info on, is it even worth it creating an award for them or nominating them for it?

In addition I just don't really see the staff ones working because I'm envisioning them to have polarized winners, or the real basis of them would not even be visible to the public, and the wiki editing award while I can see working, I don't really think it would fit in Userpedia or Shroom Awards.  Yes, Userpedia awards have become a bit more diluted towards 'Community Awards', but they're not.  A new venue would have to be made for them, or Userpedia Awards would have to be rebranded, and I'm not sure I like that 2nd option.

((P.S.  This was kind of stream of consciousness so soz if I asked the same question multiple times or answered them myself or whatevs))
At the very least, it'd be cool to see some sort of legacy award for long-time users who aren't retired, yet who have been around for so long and are still here, toiling away, but not necessarily with any sort of spotlight (but maybe with one in the past, or maybe never). U10 used to cover them too, but not anymore, since it shifted its focus to current community presence, but looking at U1 and U10 now, there's a few names missing that really should be somewhere.

Again, if an award title is crafted and nominees are suggested I'd be able to make a better decision because right now I can't really see it myself.



Also just covering my ass, before anyone snaps back at what I'm saying keep in mind that I'm also trying to play devil's advocate because it's safer to question big new ideas rather than just accepting them because they sound nice in theory.  I'd like for them to be structural sound all the way around.
But that's my point: the fact that U10 now skews only towards contemporary people excludes any long-time folks who aren't retired, yet who aren't still in the thick of things, and yet upon whose backs the community was built. Yeah, there's merit to giving kudos to people who get involved in everything, so a community achievement award makes sense, but being social and having a finger in every pie isn't the be-all and end-all of being part of this wiki. The fact is that having a laundry list of stuff really does tip the scales in your favour: just look at the dossiers and tell me, honestly, that someone with 10 bullet points doesn't look more deserving of kudos than one with 3, no matter how impressive those three may be once you take the time to read them - and even then, things like "been an admin for X years" can't convey how much came out of those X years. I mean folks like (off the top of my head) Ghost Jam, Glowsquid, KPH, L151, Stooben Rooben (although he'll probably qualify for U10 next year anyway), numerous non-admin users, and all the retired U1 folks who got 0 votes despite largely being responsible for much of the policies and content that the wiki was built on - people who built this place and shaped the community, and who kept it running for years and/or are still keeping it running, but without doing anything showy/iconic/etc. on the side anymore (if ever).

It's like in high school when it didn't matter if you had a 90% graduating average - only the people who did that and worked 200 hours in soup kitchens and played sports got scholarships. Yeah, good for the extroverted over-achievers, they deserve awards, but do the merely studious book-worms deserve nothing?

I just don't see why the UP awards can't also recognize community members who have given and who still give to the Super Mario Wiki in less visible, but still important ways. And as for your worries about the staff awards, you said so yourself in the UP awards thread (http://www.marioboards.com/index.php?topic=35304.msg1759076#msg1759076) that these awards are already polarizing by nature. And the Shroom's got two dedicated staff awards without sparking rioting in the streets, so why not the other staff teams? It's a pretty thankless and periodically unpleasant job to be an admin - simply having the recognition of dedicated wiki/forum/chat staff award(s), regardless of who wins, would be a nice gesture, imho.
Title: Re: Suggestions for next year
Post by: Duskull on August 16, 2015, 05:15:52 PM
Personally, I think opinions should be removed from presentations, I find it kind of weird reading one and seeing the Award giver says "I thought this deserved more", or "I don't know how this got so many votes", or even their own personal thoughts on a character.
Title: Re: Suggestions for next year
Post by: Arataka Reigen on August 16, 2015, 05:33:48 PM
While I think presenters should remain appropriate and refrain from coming off as TOO opinionated and/or unpleasant, banning all opinions outright would probably be disastrous.

People will put a part of themselves into their presentations; That's what makes the good ones so enjoyable, because we may be able to relate. If you remove that element of self-expression, the presentations might become too clinical, and at that point you might as well just have a list and maybe some flavor text, and nothing else.
Title: Re: Suggestions for next year
Post by: Marcia on August 16, 2015, 06:09:18 PM
Personally, I think opinions should be removed from presentations, I find it kind of weird reading one and seeing the Award giver says "I thought this deserved more", or "I don't know how this got so many votes", or even their own personal thoughts on a character.

I think all I did was say that I didn't think Sluggers, but then said I understand why it had hate. I think I also said Daisy can be annoying.
Title: Re: Suggestions for next year
Post by: 2257 on August 16, 2015, 06:51:00 PM
tbh if getting presenters was as difficult as anton said, adding more restrictions to presentations probably isn't feasible anyway

regarding wiki contributors who don't have that big of a community presence, i think it could be cool to recognise those people. my concern is the informed...ness of the voters. this is already something that has been a problem for the community awards in general, but i feel like it would be particularly acute with this award. maybe things have changed since i was active on the wiki, or maybe i was just a weird contributor, but i never really had much awareness of what other people were doing. so long as they weren't vandalising or talking directly to me, i pretty much didn't notice anyone else. so for me, it would have been very difficult to make an informed choice about an award like "Best Wiki Editor". there's the dossiers, but i would question how effectively the kinds of things that make wiki editors outstanding could be conveyed in the dossier format. you can convey what people do as basic statistics like "Made 2700 edits to Kaettekita Mario Bros.", but that doesn't really tell the reader anything significant about the value of the nominee's contribution

anyway if people who are more in the loop about wiki matters think this is a non-issue, or at least a solvable issue, i'd support adding this kind of award. are pipe projects still a thing? a pipe project award would also be a nice way to recognise wiki contributors, and it would help this one to not stick out so much among the userpedia awards

also, if we decide to go forward with these types of awards but deem them not to fit under userpedia, i think the best course of action would be to unify the shroom and up awards into a single "community awards" category. that way if we've got two good new ideas for shroom, one for up, and two for the wiki, we can have 25 community awards instead of 12, 11, and 2 awards across three different categories. wiki, forum, and chat staff awards would also fit much more cleanly into that system than the current one, if we decided to include them. aside from that, u10 is already basically a community award since you could theoretically win it without ever even having acknowledged that userpedia exists. to me, it makes more sense to acknowledge that than to arbitrarily have the sole pan-community award grouped into the otherwise userpedia-specific category
Title: Re: Suggestions for next year
Post by: Walkazo on August 16, 2015, 08:47:17 PM
No, pipe projects were scrapped a while back. We have wiki collabs, but they're pretty informal and broad: some are for reaching specific goals, some are just asking questions, discussing or providing a place to dump misc, info about broad or narrow topics, some are raising awareness about perpetual wiki things, some are just a place to flag problems, request admin/translation/etc. help, or whatever.

One way to get around problems with uninformed users, unfairly imbalanced dossiers or un-illustrative stats would be to use paragraphs instead of bulleted lists, and then aim to get roughly the same length of paragraph for every nomination. Sorry to use my own writing as an example, but I did this sorta thing in my 2013 U10 presentation (http://www.marioboards.com/index.php?topic=26637.msg1209372#msg1209372), with each paragraph doing overviews about ranks and specific accomplishments, with the amount of detail varying to make up for the basic amount of stuff done. Admittedly, however, this takes a lot of work: basic stats can be gotten from Shroom writer history documents (and I have a spreadsheet for the wiki staff too) and the wiki and forum themselves, but looking through talk page histories, specific contributions and UP is also necessary. (Potentially asking people to help write their own paragraph or simply provide a list of stuff they think is noteworthy about themselves, and then simply verifying their claims and maybe adding or removing stuff could be a way to help with the process (for non-retired folks, anyway), like how the artists are asked for example pieces for that award, etc.) There's no guarantee that people will want to read the paragraphs even if we keep them on the short and succinct side, but we don't want uninformed votes anyway, and it means that lazy folks couldn't simply look at a list and vote on the longest one, since they'd all look equal superficially.

I'm still not sure why more wiki and stuff wouldn't fit in the UP awards: it's already dominated by forum or overall-community based awards anyway, but either way, I'd support the idea of simply rebranding and merging it with the Shroom awards (especially since the aforementioned community awards are largely influenced by Shroom participation already). Although tbh I dunno if there's really a need for more Shroom awards. They've got their stuff covered pretty well already (I can't think of another subject, anyway), and the newspaper having 10 / 25 community awards seems like a generous enough proportion. In fact, it kinda highlights why the UP awards sorta do deserve expansion: one single aspect of the community getting 10 awards all to itself, while the forum, wiki, chat and UP all get compacted into another set of 10 seems a bit off-balanced. If there's not enough confidence that we could make 5 more editor/staff/etc. awards (although I think we could), potentially some Shroom awards could even get replaced by a couple extra community things (i.e. the favourite special issue / past year's issue awards overlap a bit, and the image one is a bit filler-ish to me)... But I feel like that suggestion might not go down so well, hence I've been pushing for extra awards more than replacements. The current UP awards are similarly solid so pruning is a difficult prospect - I'd say remove the mafia one if we had to choose, since not everyone plays it, but I feel like that'd just mean the face game would be ruled by mafia forevermore, so maybe not, idk.
Title: Re: Suggestions for next year
Post by: 2257 on August 16, 2015, 09:20:08 PM
oh, i didn't necessarily mean that we would have any more shroom awards. its just that... everyone wants each category to have a multiple of five awards, so if we have 4 or 6 good ideas for an award, we end up having to cut a good idea or include a bad idea. with larger categories that's less likely

anyway, i guess there are more community awards than i remember, which in my opinion is just another reason to rebrand. no reason to call them what theyre not
Title: Re: Suggestions for next year
Post by: Anton on August 17, 2015, 12:43:02 AM
oh boy there sure is a lot to reply to now that I'm back from work, please excuse it if it's not super organized



Also I like that people are wanting to see more awards, but yeah the there's time, the work that goes into them that no one sees, and that getting people to actually do the presentations without stretching the same few people even thinner is quite a concern.  It was a struggle this year getting people to sign up, to the point where we had to desperately offer a bribe in the form of tokens, and even that barely chipped away and like half of the people that ate into that bribe ended up dropping 2 weeks later.  I'd be game for swapping awards in/out, and the only way I'd be cool with bumping UP or Fail up some more is if we could reach the next level of +5 and actually have all 5 be strong, not just fillers so we can weasel in 1 that people want.
In the past, has there been this much struggle getting people to sign up for the presentations? It could be that there was just bad timing with peoples' RL business and/or other wiki things like the Shroom's 100th and 101st issues (the latter of which only got pushed back last minute, which was a smart move, but having it be automatically scheduled a week after the anniversary could make it easier for writers to commit to awards).

It's been on a steady decline regarding peoples' participation in presentations.  I've also noticed that there's a steady incline in presentation quality though, so, !!  I'm very aware that the shroom's 100th issue put a wrench in presentation sign-ups seeing that a whole ton of people I asked directly if they want to do a presentation declined because they were doing sections for that, but I can't really declare that as "blame" and instead chalk it up to (in)convenient timing.



But that's my point: the fact that U10 now skews only towards contemporary people excludes any long-time folks who aren't retired, yet who aren't still in the thick of things, and yet upon whose backs the community was built.

Before we redefined U10 last year, it was an award based on someone's entire lifetime of contributions, we decided to redefine it because the same people won the award annually, or people doing stuff now were getting overlooked because of something someone did in 2007 which have all already had several years to get the recognition they deserve, and we thought this new version would make for more interesting, less stagnant results.

Yeah, there's merit to giving kudos to people who get involved in everything, so a community achievement award makes sense, but being social and having a finger in every pie isn't the be-all and end-all of being part of this wiki. The fact is that having a laundry list of stuff really does tip the scales in your favour: just look at the dossiers and tell me, honestly, that someone with 10 bullet points doesn't look more deserving of kudos than one with 3, no matter how impressive those three may be once you take the time to read them - and even then, things like "been an admin for X years" can't convey how much came out of those X years.

One way to get around problems with uninformed users, unfairly imbalanced dossiers or un-illustrative stats would be to use paragraphs instead of bulleted lists, and then aim to get roughly the same length of paragraph for every nomination. Sorry to use my own writing as an example, but I did this sorta thing in my 2013 U10 presentation (http://www.marioboards.com/index.php?topic=26637.msg1209372#msg1209372), with each paragraph doing overviews about ranks and specific accomplishments, with the amount of detail varying to make up for the basic amount of stuff done. Admittedly, however, this takes a lot of work: basic stats can be gotten from Shroom writer history documents (and I have a spreadsheet for the wiki staff too) and the wiki and forum themselves, but looking through talk page histories, specific contributions and UP is also necessary. (Potentially asking people to help write their own paragraph or simply provide a list of stuff they think is noteworthy about themselves, and then simply verifying their claims and maybe adding or removing stuff could be a way to help with the process (for non-retired folks, anyway), like how the artists are asked for example pieces for that award, etc.) There's no guarantee that people will want to read the paragraphs even if we keep them on the short and succinct side, but we don't want uninformed votes anyway, and it means that lazy folks couldn't simply look at a list and vote on the longest one, since they'd all look equal superficially.

I sincerely doubt that the style of the dossiers have this much of an effect.

The paragraphs do look longer though for people with more stuff.  It wouldn't be fair to condense someone's list of achievements if they legitimately have them all just so they're the same character length as everyone else.  The bullet points take just as much work, and if I remember correctly I did ask you to do / fact-check yours, so that's not a feature inherent in just paragraphs.  I did that with everyone.  I did try hard to get the bullet lists to be the same length but there's only so much that can physically be done until I either start adding fluff or knocking things off.

In addition my intention was to create the dossiers for people to read them, and frankly, if they're voting solely on the length of the section and not actually reading them there's literally nothing I can do about that other than personally shame them if they tell me that's what they did.  If someone's lazy enough to do that, they're lazy enough to not even read the blocks of text.  I struggled with people too lazy to even look at the dossiers when trying to rally in chat.

I just don't see why the UP awards can't also recognize community members who have given and who still give to the Super Mario Wiki in less visible, but still important ways. And as for your worries about the staff awards, you said so yourself in the UP awards thread (http://www.marioboards.com/index.php?topic=35304.msg1759076#msg1759076) that these awards are already polarizing by nature. And the Shroom's got two dedicated staff awards without sparking rioting in the streets, so why not the other staff teams? It's a pretty thankless and periodically unpleasant job to be an admin - simply having the recognition of dedicated wiki/forum/chat staff award(s), regardless of who wins, would be a nice gesture, imho.

Well what I meant by polarizing by nature was that there'd be obvious winners to them, or that they couldn't be feasible with mod work being mostly private.  Shroom staff is different because they're an online magazine, not a rule and policy governing body.



Personally, I think opinions should be removed from presentations, I find it kind of weird reading one and seeing the Award giver says "I thought this deserved more", or "I don't know how this got so many votes", or even their own personal thoughts on a character.
While I think presenters should remain appropriate and refrain from coming off as TOO opinionated and/or unpleasant, banning all opinions outright would probably be disastrous.

People will put a part of themselves into their presentations; That's what makes the good ones so enjoyable, because we may be able to relate. If you remove that element of self-expression, the presentations might become too clinical, and at that point you might as well just have a list and maybe some flavor text, and nothing else.

There were several presentations I felt uncomfortable with for the opinion thing as well but tbh there wasn't really any time to get them altered or covered and let it slide.  If they were that noticeable and off-putting I will make it an effort next year to make sure it's toned down, but like Edo said the opinions aren't inherently bad, just need to be used with some tact.



also, if we decide to go forward with these types of awards but deem them not to fit under userpedia, i think the best course of action would be to unify the shroom and up awards into a single "community awards" category. that way if we've got two good new ideas for shroom, one for up, and two for the wiki, we can have 25 community awards instead of 12, 11, and 2 awards across three different categories. wiki, forum, and chat staff awards would also fit much more cleanly into that system than the current one, if we decided to include them. aside from that, u10 is already basically a community award since you could theoretically win it without ever even having acknowledged that userpedia exists. to me, it makes more sense to acknowledge that than to arbitrarily have the sole pan-community award grouped into the otherwise userpedia-specific category
oh, i didn't necessarily mean that we would have any more shroom awards. its just that... everyone wants each category to have a multiple of five awards, so if we have 4 or 6 good ideas for an award, we end up having to cut a good idea or include a bad idea. with larger categories that's less likely

anyway, i guess there are more community awards than i remember, which in my opinion is just another reason to rebrand. no reason to call them what theyre not

I think it should be noted that last year I wanted to change Userpedia awards to Community awards for reasons that are just now being brought up, and at the time literally no one agreed with me, or only said to me that it was a bad idea.  I'm curious as to why that shifted immediately within just this last year.  I'd be up for a rebrand of Userpedia awards into Community awards as per my idea I had last year if it's expanded by 5 which I think we can fill, and also not a merger with Shroom, as Shroom awards are already unique enough on its own and can have its own host and governing body.  If we're to go with this idea it'd need to be done fast as prep work starts in like February, and I can't successfully manage the ceremony if we're spending time we should be working on awards to instead be figuring out what the awards are about.

I really don't see how merging them would be easy to manage at all.  Like, I understand the concept and like it in theory but I just......really can't see it working and coming together nicely in a decent time.  Like the only way I could see it working would be if UP and Shroom still were separately hosted but with like 12/13 awards and then when they're finalized they're just slammed together.  Or if there's a single host it would pretty much require its own director and be done separately and ....idk about that.  We can just add 5 awards to UP and Shroom respectively and just include these wiki contributor ideas and such into whichever one seems they would fit the best into, and then just lengthen the overall ceremony time.

22 and I have been talking in length about this and I'm thinking he's gonna post next.  I just really need like a complete idea on this and how every aspect will be covered before we go forward with anything.  If there's a merger I'd assume the separate bodies that manage UP and Shroom awards would then just have to be represented within the AC and all decisions would be made by them, rather than prior and just finalizing things.  Like I said 22's probably gonna post next.

I'd really need solid award ideas with titles, definitions, and a list of nominees and why.  If there's enough then we can discuss how best to approach it, but if there's only like 1 solid idea then I can just fit it into UP this year and then we can come back to all of this change-up another year from now.
Title: Re: Suggestions for next year
Post by: Anton on August 17, 2015, 12:49:23 AM
also just because I feel it affects the language I'm using, regarding me saying what can or can't happen next year as if I have any real control over it if I'm not director...

I plan on running again   :bowser:  Still figuring out precise details but there'll be a campaign posted in The 'Shroom when that comes out.
Title: Re: Suggestions for next year
Post by: 2257 on August 17, 2015, 01:35:42 AM
i can't tell which parts of my own ideas are unclear since everything i say makes sense to me, so i'm just going to publicly address the concerns he expressed to me in chat i guess

so, he asked me how the meetings to set up the combined up/shroom awards would go, since formerly each was handled by its own staff. my thought is that up and shroom staff with an interest in the awards for their projects would just attend the same meetings as everyone else and have discussions basically similar to what happens for the mario awards. it really isn't important for them to be separately handled, because the awards meetings are a very open process anyway. anyone can attend the meetings as long as theyre not actively being disruptive, and even people who aren't committee members are allowed to vote. also the bar for entry to the awards committee is low enough that i'm sure pretty much everyone on the up and shroom staffs could get in anyway. the meetings are run right now with the understanding that people who have no interest in certain awards are free to not participate in the relevant discussions, so this shouldnt be any more of a burden on the staffs of those projects than the current system. doing it this way would make the meetings run later into the year, but it wouldn't actually be more meetings. it would just be that meetings that are already happening privately and simultaneously with the ac meetings would instead be happening publicly after the discussion of mario and fail awards

to be honest i think this would be better even if we don't end up merging up and shroom. the current system basically has the up and shroom staffs having a discussion about the awards, deciding what they want, and then sending a list of awards to the ac who discuss it again. it makes a lot more sense to me to have a single discussion, so that both staff and non-staff who have an interest in the awards can communicate freely with each other

he also asked how the community awards would be directed. i just imagined this working the way fail always has, i.e. whichever ac member volunteers can do it

another thing was "what if the shroom doesn't like having their name removed from a section of the awards". i don't think that's a problem because they're still going to have their name on ten of the awards (e.g. "favorite team" will become "favorite shroom team") because otherwise it would be confusing. but obviously i'm not proposing that we go through with this without input from the shroom staff anyway; i definitely want everyone who would be affected by this to be heard in the process
Title: Re: Suggestions for next year
Post by: Anton on August 17, 2015, 01:41:41 AM
Quote
01:19   Anton{Politoed}   "the current system basically has the up and shroom staffs having a discussion about the awards, deciding what they want, and then sending a list of awards to the ac who discuss it again."
01:20   Anton{Politoed}   they don't discuss it again in the same length
01:20   Anton{Politoed}   unless each team didn't do their job
01:20   _2257   i know, but i still think its silly to have two discussions
01:20   _2257   when there could be one
01:20   Anton{Politoed}   they'd have to be more productive meetings
01:20   Anton{Politoed}   and expect to go on longer than they already do
01:21   Anton{Politoed}   maybe another 2 weeks
01:21   Anton{Politoed}   which I don't see as a problem
01:22   Anton{Politoed}   that it would just mean more meetings would need to be made
01:23   Anton{Politoed}   "he also asked who would direct the "community awards"."
01:23   Anton{Politoed}   my question wasn't really about exactly who
01:23   _2257   i wouldnt phrase it like that because its not really
01:23   Anton{Politoed}   so I don't think the rest of that part is like
01:23   Anton{Politoed}   relevant ?
01:23   _2257   more meetings
01:23   Anton{Politoed}   what I meant with that question was like
01:23   _2257   its just
01:23   Anton{Politoed}   would there even be a host
01:23   _2257   meetings that were already happening would now be under the auspices of the ac
01:23   Anton{Politoed}   or would it just be governed by the director/sub-director as the mario awards are
01:23   Anton{Politoed}   no it is more meetings
01:24   Anton{Politoed}   because instead of the two discussions happening simultaneously
01:24   Anton{Politoed}   it's now one at a time
01:24   _2257   but thats still the same number of meetings, they just take place over a longer time period
01:24   Anton{Politoed}   that's what I mean
01:24   _2257   ok
01:24   Anton{Politoed}   we wouldn't end meetings as soon as we have been
01:24   Anton{Politoed}   AC meetings that is
01:25   _2257   also ok yeah i was imagining there would be some kind of community awards director position
01:25   _2257   just like there always has been

01:26   Anton{Politoed}   what would fail be then
01:26   Anton{Politoed}   like would that have a separate host
01:28   _2257   ok i was honestly imagining that fail and community would each have a host who was not also awards director
01:29   _2257   mario could too if you want
01:29   _2257   but you do whatever you want
Title: Re: Suggestions for next year
Post by: Anton on August 17, 2015, 03:26:02 AM
had a discussion in chat and tl;dr shroom won't merge so let's go with some other idea

or not change anything !
Title: Re: Suggestions for next year
Post by: Chiaki Nanami on August 17, 2015, 03:11:31 PM
ok so, explain this to me

Userpedia Awards U#
'Shroom Awards S#
Fail Awards F#
Mario Awards A#

???????? why is this ????? why isn't it M# ??????
Title: Re: Suggestions for next year
Post by: Rintarou Okabe on August 17, 2015, 03:16:01 PM
Since next year is the 10th Mario Awards, it is maybe a good idea to broaden the awards by also including some general Nintendo stuff.

I was thinking something along the lines of "favorite Nintendo franchise", Mario excluded, for example. I personally think this could work as an one-off thing to be included with the main awards.
Title: Re: Suggestions for next year
Post by: Anton on August 17, 2015, 03:17:49 PM
ok so, explain this to me

Userpedia Awards U#
'Shroom Awards S#
Fail Awards F#
Mario Awards A#

???????? why is this ????? why isn't it M# ??????

I thought the same thing but I think it's just because that's for "Awards" and then the other ceremonies got added on later

Since next year is the 10th Mario Awards, it is maybe a good idea to broaden the awards by also including some general Nintendo stuff.

I was thinking something along the lines of "favorite Nintendo franchise", Mario excluded, for example. I personally think this could work as an one-off thing to be included with the main awards.

These are not the NIWA awards, if you'd like awards like that go ask NIWA to do a show.
Title: Re: Suggestions for next year
Post by: Rintarou Okabe on August 17, 2015, 03:20:27 PM
hey it was just an idea. Besides that, aren't we a part of NIWA?  :yoshi:
Title: Re: Suggestions for next year
Post by: Anton on August 17, 2015, 03:25:32 PM
it's an ok idea, it's just simply outside of our scope
Title: Re: Suggestions for next year
Post by: Chiaki Nanami on August 17, 2015, 03:26:42 PM
ok so, explain this to me

Userpedia Awards U#
'Shroom Awards S#
Fail Awards F#
Mario Awards A#

???????? why is this ????? why isn't it M# ??????

I thought the same thing but I think it's just because that's for "Awards" and then the other ceremonies got added on later
But why is it still inconsistent with the other categories?
Title: Re: Suggestions for next year
Post by: Anton on August 17, 2015, 03:30:13 PM
ok so, explain this to me

Userpedia Awards U#
'Shroom Awards S#
Fail Awards F#
Mario Awards A#

???????? why is this ????? why isn't it M# ??????

I thought the same thing but I think it's just because that's for "Awards" and then the other ceremonies got added on later
But why is it still inconsistent with the other categories?

because no one cares
Title: Re: Suggestions for next year
Post by: Arataka Reigen on August 17, 2015, 03:43:14 PM
The real reason is that, when viewed from a certain angle, Mario's hat kind of looks like a butt. So the A actually DOES stand for "Mario", only that "Mario" is to be used synonymously with "Asshat".
Title: Re: Suggestions for next year
Post by: Hobbes on August 17, 2015, 03:58:23 PM
I by no means speak in behalf of The 'Shroom Core Staff but rather from my own, past experience. The reason why UP and 'Shroom staff are asked to prepare the Awards beforehand is because they are assumed to have more knowledge in the matter. It's easier to do it that way, since the respective staff bodies present ten (or more) suggestions, and then the AC gives input on each of them, but it takes significantly less time as an almost-final draft has already been made.
Title: Re: Suggestions for next year
Post by: Gamefreak75 on August 17, 2015, 04:22:52 PM
I'm pretty sure the reason why Mario Awards are categorized by A rather than M was because the awards used to only be about Mario so A was just used for "Awards" and, like Anton said, nobody really gave enough of a *bleep* to correct it when more stuff was added.
Title: Re: Suggestions for next year
Post by: Ritsuko Akizuki on August 17, 2015, 06:34:03 PM
I can confirm that; in the original 2007 ceremony it just meant "Award 1" and so on. Then because we've had it that way for years nobody ever really wanted to change it.
Title: Re: Suggestions for next year
Post by: BEEEEEAAARRRS on August 17, 2015, 08:49:32 PM
its like we're purposefully making a confusing present with the history we had
Title: Re: Suggestions for next year
Post by: Walkazo on August 17, 2015, 08:54:14 PM
Trying to keep this short, but you know me...

I by no means speak in behalf of The 'Shroom Core Staff but rather from my own, past experience. The reason why UP and 'Shroom staff are asked to prepare the Awards beforehand is because they are assumed to have more knowledge in the matter. It's easier to do it that way, since the respective staff bodies present ten (or more) suggestions, and then the AC gives input on each of them, but it takes significantly less time as an almost-final draft has already been made.
But couldn't the Shroom folks still do their contributions separately, and then give it to the AC, but instead of like "here's the Shroom section", they'd be like "okay, here's the 10 Shroom awards for the overall community awards"? Then UP folks would be like "and here's our 10 fiction/art/community awards" and the staffs would be like "and here are our 5 editor/admin/mod awards", and the overall meeting/AC/whatever would still be like "oh yes, very good, we approve". Or some other division adding up to 25, or possibly 20: as mentioned way back, having one block of awards allows for more flexibility if we can't come up with 5 more awards, or if it really is that imperative that the number of awards doesn't increase.

Anyway, I feel like the procedure doesn't necessarily need to change very much to combine the two community awards - because honestly the Shroom is just as much a part of the overall community as any other aspect of the wiki: we write it and we read it, same as how we write and read comics and fanfics, and draw and admire art, and edit, post and chat. A lot of work goes into the Shroom, so it makes sense that it gets a nice slice of awards (in addition to their internal awards, btw), but if we're gonna rebrand UP awards to be "Community Awards", I just think it'd be awkward and artificial to keep that chunk of the community separate (save for the community-wide UP awards that factor the paper in anyway).

Plus, having the two sets of awards mixed together in the celebration could help keep things feeling varied and fresh. And anyone who might not necessarily be interested in the dedicated Shroom awards, or the dedicated UP awards, and just wants to see the other one, doesn't have to sit around waiting for either set to be over - who knows, maybe they'd even get interested in the other stuff by being exposed to it interspersed with the stuff they're interested in.

But I mean, it's easy for me to talk seeing as I don't really get involved with awards stuff personally outside these suggestion threads and the odd fact-checking PM and whatnot...



It's been on a steady decline regarding peoples' participation in presentations.  I've also noticed that there's a steady incline in presentation quality though, so, !!  I'm very aware that the shroom's 100th issue put a wrench in presentation sign-ups seeing that a whole ton of people I asked directly if they want to do a presentation declined because they were doing sections for that, but I can't really declare that as "blame" and instead chalk it up to (in)convenient timing.
Perhaps the increase in quality is why there's a decrease in sign-ups? I feel like there's a lot more pressure to do a good job these days - which is a much better time for the readers, but a much more daunting task for the writers. But hopefully the timing with the Shroom and whatnot won't be a factor next year, so maybe sign-ups will go up again anyway, idk.



But that's my point: the fact that U10 now skews only towards contemporary people excludes any long-time folks who aren't retired, yet who aren't still in the thick of things, and yet upon whose backs the community was built.
Before we redefined U10 last year, it was an award based on someone's entire lifetime of contributions, we decided to redefine it because the same people won the award annually, or people doing stuff now were getting overlooked because of something someone did in 2007 which have all already had several years to get the recognition they deserve, and we thought this new version would make for more interesting, less stagnant results.
I agree that it makes sense to have a current community award, and shortening the list of names this year by removing the old guard made sense too, so you don't need to defend U10's current format. All I'm saying is that it would be nice to ALSO recognize the old guard, separately, like in U1, but for folks who aren't retired and just taking a quieter approach to their hard work.

Especially because, if you look at the old U10 results, they actually didn't get recognition aside from the basic "it's good to be nominated" sort: at least for the previous few years, the top-placers were never folks getting votes because of ancient history - it was always current folks, and the placings actually did change around a lot (except SMB winning by a landslide three years in a row, but that was because anons were voting for his name, in addition to the legit votes he was getting for being so contemporarily active in the community - but either way, it was not because of ancient history overshadowing young bloods or whatever).




I sincerely doubt that the style of the dossiers have this much of an effect.

The paragraphs do look longer though for people with more stuff.  It wouldn't be fair to condense someone's list of achievements if they legitimately have them all just so they're the same character length as everyone else.  The bullet points take just as much work, and if I remember correctly I did ask you to do / fact-check yours, so that's not a feature inherent in just paragraphs.  I did that with everyone.  I did try hard to get the bullet lists to be the same length but there's only so much that can physically be done until I either start adding fluff or knocking things off.

In addition my intention was to create the dossiers for people to read them, and frankly, if they're voting solely on the length of the section and not actually reading them there's literally nothing I can do about that other than personally shame them if they tell me that's what they did.  If someone's lazy enough to do that, they're lazy enough to not even read the blocks of text.  I struggled with people too lazy to even look at the dossiers when trying to rally in chat.
Neither system is perfect, but I feel like summarizing a long list of achievements to be roughly the same length as a summary of few achievements is less unfair than the current situation, where years of hard work can get condensed into a couple one-liners just because someone focuses on one stream instead of a handful of things. Quality and quantity are both important, and if someone who did a bunch of stuff has quality as well as quantity, that will still be seen in the summary, whereas the list format tips towards quantity regardless of the quality - especially at a glance, which I DO think is a big problem. You said so yourself: people are lazy and don't always want to read the dossiers, but while we can't stop them from making uninformed votes, at least we can stop the "at a glance" bias.

As for my award still having different lengths, that's largely because I actively made the paragraphs shorter for the write-ins and longer for the folks who placed higher to reflect that more people voted for those accomplishments - it's still quite doable to shorten the longer ones and say more about the write-ins (example below). Of course, there's still wavering around even among paragraphs I aimed to make about the same (10-6, 5-2), but it's still decently balanced, especially compared to the lists, and a bit of variability isn't a bad thing. A rigid word limit would definitely be too restrictive and unfair, both to folks who'd get achievements cut, and folks who'd get obvious filler; simply saying you'd want paragraphs that are around 1000 characters, give or take 100 or so (but still no hard cutoffs), leaves room to work with, but also keeps the footing relatively even.




Well what I meant by polarizing by nature was that there'd be obvious winners to them, or that they couldn't be feasible with mod work being mostly private.  Shroom staff is different because they're an online magazine, not a rule and policy governing body.
But lots of stuff goes on behind the scenes at the 'Shroom that readers don't see too, and lots of wiki/etc. staff stuff is visible (and in both cases, the staffs are amongst the voters, so their insider knowledge will help contribute to the results). I also feel like there aren't obvious winners? I could guess at who'd be in the top circles, sure, but definitely not the specific order, seeing as there's so many different criteria that different voters could weigh more or less importantly - and probably differently from how I value things myself. Tenure length, rank, vandal-fighting effort, maintenance, leadership, helpfulness, community presence, personality - so much stuff to consider (at least for the wiki - the forum/chat admins would have better ideas of how folks might view their teams).
Title: Re: Suggestions for next year
Post by: Hobbes on August 17, 2015, 10:47:34 PM
But couldn't the Shroom folks still do their contributions separately, and then give it to the AC, but instead of like "here's the Shroom section", they'd be like "okay, here's the 10 Shroom awards for the overall community awards"? Then UP folks would be like "and here's our 10 fiction/art/community awards" and the staffs would be like "and here are our 5 editor/admin/mod awards", and the overall meeting/AC/whatever would still be like "oh yes, very good, we approve". Or some other division adding up to 25, or possibly 20: as mentioned way back, having one block of awards allows for more flexibility if we can't come up with 5 more awards, or if it really is that imperative that the number of awards doesn't increase.
Yes, that would work just as well.

For the record, I think this is a good idea and doesn't force us into having "filler" awards while another category might have a better one that just didn't get in because it would've been the eleventh award.
Title: Re: Suggestions for next year
Post by: Ritsuko Akizuki on August 17, 2015, 11:22:13 PM
Plus, having the two sets of awards mixed together in the celebration could help keep things feeling varied and fresh. And anyone who might not necessarily be interested in the dedicated Shroom awards, or the dedicated UP awards, and just wants to see the other one, doesn't have to sit around waiting for either set to be over - who knows, maybe they'd even get interested in the other stuff by being exposed to it interspersed with the stuff they're interested in.
Hi! Sorry to ignore most of your post, but this is the only part I have a real reply to. I don't know that that would actually help - people who would want to only see the dedicated Shroom or UP awards would probably not enjoy the combination. Rather than having an entire ceremony you can skip freely - get a snack, do something fun - and then come back for the stuff you care about, now you have to sit through a bunch of awards you don't care about in between all the ones you do care about. So you get award you want to see, award you don't, award you do, etc, and it probably gets annoying.

Just my view though - I can't speak for certain considering I always read them all
Title: Re: Suggestions for next year
Post by: Anton on August 17, 2015, 11:43:49 PM
Rather than replying piece-by-piece I'll just say again that there was a discussion in chat and tl;dr they're not merging.  UP and Shroom will remain separate and retain their titles.



Also as I'll say again, I agree that it would be nice to honor the older peeps and the work they've done, but I still need an award example if any of this idea is going through; I can't work with just hypotheticals and hopes.  I cannot debate the quality of an award and decide to add it until I see it.

Out of that part of the talk the only thing I'm going to bring up is:
Especially because, if you look at the old U10 results, they actually didn't get recognition aside from the basic "it's good to be nominated"

This is a general reply not directed at a single person, but this is not the first time that I've seen someone bring up that just getting nominated isn't enough.  There's literally nothing I can do to change the winners and I'm not going to create an award just to manipulate the voters into picking someone we want to win something.  It is good to be nominated and if I see one more person mention anything like this, or say that they're upset that they 'only' got 2nd place, I'm not going to be happy.  If you need an award to validate your position then perhaps you're not in the best position.



It's been on a steady decline regarding peoples' participation in presentations.  I've also noticed that there's a steady incline in presentation quality though, so, !!  I'm very aware that the shroom's 100th issue put a wrench in presentation sign-ups seeing that a whole ton of people I asked directly if they want to do a presentation declined because they were doing sections for that, but I can't really declare that as "blame" and instead chalk it up to (in)convenient timing.
Perhaps the increase in quality is why there's a decrease in sign-ups? I feel like there's a lot more pressure to do a good job these days - which is a much better time for the readers, but a much more daunting task for the writers. But hopefully the timing with the Shroom and whatnot won't be a factor next year, so maybe sign-ups will go up again anyway, idk.

As someone who's been dealing with this for easily 4 years now I really don't think people care about the quality of other presentations when taking into account their own.  The only pressure is don't make it a list and keep it relevant.  Any other pressure is artificial on behalf of the person feeling it.



I sincerely doubt that the style of the dossiers have this much of an effect.

The paragraphs do look longer though for people with more stuff.  It wouldn't be fair to condense someone's list of achievements if they legitimately have them all just so they're the same character length as everyone else.  The bullet points take just as much work, and if I remember correctly I did ask you to do / fact-check yours, so that's not a feature inherent in just paragraphs.  I did that with everyone.  I did try hard to get the bullet lists to be the same length but there's only so much that can physically be done until I either start adding fluff or knocking things off.

In addition my intention was to create the dossiers for people to read them, and frankly, if they're voting solely on the length of the section and not actually reading them there's literally nothing I can do about that other than personally shame them if they tell me that's what they did.  If someone's lazy enough to do that, they're lazy enough to not even read the blocks of text.  I struggled with people too lazy to even look at the dossiers when trying to rally in chat.
Neither system is perfect, but I feel like summarizing a long list of achievements to be roughly the same length as a summary of few achievements is less unfair than the current situation, where years of hard work can get condensed into a couple one-liners just because someone focuses on one stream instead of a handful of things. Quality and quantity are both important, and if someone who did a bunch of stuff has quality as well as quantity, that will still be seen in the summary, whereas the list format tips towards quantity regardless of the quality - especially at a glance, which I DO think is a big problem. You said so yourself: people are lazy and don't always want to read the dossiers, but while we can't stop them from making uninformed votes, at least we can stop the "at a glance" bias.

As for my award still having different lengths, that's largely because I actively made the paragraphs shorter for the write-ins and longer for the folks who placed higher to reflect that more people voted for those accomplishments - it's still quite doable to shorten the longer ones and say more about the write-ins (example below). Of course, there's still wavering around even among paragraphs I aimed to make about the same (10-6, 5-2), but it's still decently balanced, especially compared to the lists, and a bit of variability isn't a bad thing. A rigid word limit would definitely be too restrictive and unfair, both to folks who'd get achievements cut, and folks who'd get obvious filler; simply saying you'd want paragraphs that are around 1000 characters, give or take 100 or so (but still no hard cutoffs), leaves room to work with, but also keeps the footing relatively even.


I'm not saying that either method is valid over one or the other, I'm just saying that I really doubt that one method is going to have wildly different results than the other.  For what it's worth, when Dippy was writing up the dossier for the shroom she asked if she could write paragraphs and I said sure, just to be aware of attention spans.  It's not like I enforced a certain style, it's just personal.  If you're writing the dossier next year and want to use paragraphs, go for it.  I'm not going to stop using bullet points because I just really don't see the difference amounting to much, if anything at all.

Quote
Quality and quantity are both important, and if someone who did a bunch of stuff has quality as well as quantity, that will still be seen in the summary, whereas the list format tips towards quantity regardless of the quality - especially at a glance, which I DO think is a big problem. You said so yourself: people are lazy and don't always want to read the dossiers, but while we can't stop them from making uninformed votes, at least we can stop the "at a glance" bias.

The problem is not the dossier.

If a position needs to be elaborated upon it can easily be done in a list format as well.  And I really don't see what you're saying with the "at a glance" bias, like, are you concerned that people are voting just by length?  Is there any real way to even know that?



Well what I meant by polarizing by nature was that there'd be obvious winners to them, or that they couldn't be feasible with mod work being mostly private.  Shroom staff is different because they're an online magazine, not a rule and policy governing body.
But lots of stuff goes on behind the scenes at the 'Shroom that readers don't see too, and lots of wiki/etc. staff stuff is visible (and in both cases, the staffs are amongst the voters, so their insider knowledge will help contribute to the results). I also feel like there aren't obvious winners? I could guess at who'd be in the top circles, sure, but definitely not the specific order, seeing as there's so many different criteria that different voters could weigh more or less importantly - and probably differently from how I value things myself. Tenure length, rank, vandal-fighting effort, maintenance, leadership, helpfulness, community presence, personality - so much stuff to consider (at least for the wiki - the forum/chat admins would have better ideas of how folks might view their teams).

There's already plenty of Shroom staff awards so idk how to reply to that other than just dismiss it.

I get that staff are among the voters but they're not the only voters.  I've already asked around a few of the various wiki, forum, and chat staff and the opinion I'm seeing is that they'd either be horribly uninformed (especially in the case of the forum), or be even more of a popularity contest than any of the awards already are, or that it would just be completely problematic or wholly unnecessary.

I'd really need to see an award to argue this further.  If I don't get that, I'm not going to comment anymore because it's a waste of time.
Title: Re: Suggestions for next year
Post by: Hobbes on August 17, 2015, 11:44:55 PM
Plus, having the two sets of awards mixed together in the celebration could help keep things feeling varied and fresh. And anyone who might not necessarily be interested in the dedicated Shroom awards, or the dedicated UP awards, and just wants to see the other one, doesn't have to sit around waiting for either set to be over - who knows, maybe they'd even get interested in the other stuff by being exposed to it interspersed with the stuff they're interested in.
Hi! Sorry to ignore most of your post, but this is the only part I have a real reply to. I don't know that that would actually help - people who would want to only see the dedicated Shroom or UP awards would probably not enjoy the combination. Rather than having an entire ceremony you can skip freely - get a snack, do something fun - and then come back for the stuff you care about, now you have to sit through a bunch of awards you don't care about in between all the ones you do care about. So you get award you want to see, award you don't, award you do, etc, and it probably gets annoying.

Just my view though - I can't speak for certain considering I always read them all
Well, the obvious solution to this would be to have first the awards related to the 'Shroom, then UP, etc. But all together under the Community Awards
Title: Re: Suggestions for next year
Post by: Crocodile Dippy on August 18, 2015, 11:47:47 AM
OK, here it goes

1) Do not merge UP and 'Shroom awards together, we've done more than enough to warrant our own category and I'd hate to see us homogenised like that for... really, no reason at all.

2) No need to be calling anyone out for "lel you're just butthurt you didn't win," I'm sure we can be more civil than that. I, too, am miffed that some older users (such as Ghost Jam-senpai) didn't get more recognition than they did.

3) I honestly would prefer we go for paragraphs for the dossiers, since they can be written in a way that doesn't skewer them in favour of those with a long list of credentials instead of those with only one or two hyperdevoted credential. It's honestly not that hard, either...

4) Is it really that big a deal to add a few more awards for UP awards?
Title: Re: Suggestions for next year
Post by: Walkazo on August 18, 2015, 12:19:20 PM
If the Shroom's staff don't wanna merge the awards, no prob, I won't push - it was just a thought.

This is a general reply not directed at a single person, but this is not the first time that I've seen someone bring up that just getting nominated isn't enough.  There's literally nothing I can do to change the winners and I'm not going to create an award just to manipulate the voters into picking someone we want to win something.  It is good to be nominated and if I see one more person mention anything like this, or say that they're upset that they 'only' got 2nd place, I'm not going to be happy.  If you need an award to validate your position then perhaps you're not in the best position.
You really misinterpreted what I was saying, and I'm honestly a bit upset that me saying I'd like other people who don't get super involved with all aspects of the community to have a snowball's chance in hell of getting more than three-way ties for 12th with zero points or whatever, results in a big speech about how people shouldn't ever complain about their own ranking.

Quote
If a position needs to be elaborated upon it can easily be done in a list format as well.  And I really don't see what you're saying with the "at a glance" bias, like, are you concerned that people are voting just by length?  Is there any real way to even know that?
I can almost guarantee that at least some people are voting by length: people vote by length for all sorts of things all the time, so why would we be special? Especially when we even know for sure that some people don't even read the dossiers at all, which is

I already suggested awards: some sort of legacy award for folks who don't fit in U1 because they're not retired, but who aren't actively involved in enough aspects of the community to be in U10 (Ghost Jam, Stooben Rooben, Glowsquid, other folks who were cut out of U10, etc.), despite having contributed a lot to it in the past, wiki/forum/chat staff award(s) (like how the Shroom has staff awards), plus another award for editors (namely non-admins) who may have never been big names in the community, yet who do a lot of work for the wiki, and could deserve some props (Time Turner, BLOF, LGM, and many more).

The legacy one is the one I'm most keen on, since that can cover staff from any team and regular editors alike - but unless we can come up with one current award to replace, we'll need more than one new one, so here's some options.
Title: Re: Suggestions for next year
Post by: Northern Verve on August 18, 2015, 02:28:00 PM
How about Mario Maker Level contests?

Everyone participating would make a level.

And either there'd be official judges that play the levels and/or all participants will play eachother's levels and they'll vote for whichever ones they liked (They just can't vote for their own levels). Possibly an additional Public vote option similar to the Art contest too.

Tokens spread across through rankings
Title: Re: Suggestions for next year
Post by: Anton on August 18, 2015, 05:10:37 PM
OK, here it goes

1) Do not merge UP and 'Shroom awards together, we've done more than enough to warrant our own category and I'd hate to see us homogenised like that for... really, no reason at all.

2) No need to be calling anyone out for "lel you're just butthurt you didn't win," I'm sure we can be more civil than that. I, too, am miffed that some older users (such as Ghost Jam-senpai) didn't get more recognition than they did.

3) I honestly would prefer we go for paragraphs for the dossiers, since they can be written in a way that doesn't skewer them in favour of those with a long list of credentials instead of those with only one or two hyperdevoted credential. It's honestly not that hard, either...

4) Is it really that big a deal to add a few more awards for UP awards?

1)  Yeah we already covered that and I wasn't too fond of the idea either so don't worry

2)  No one said that so I guess things are fine!

3)  Then do paragraphs, like I said, it's up to your preference.  I just really feel like it doesn't have that much of an affect and I'm not really gonna go out and poll people on what methods they used to vote.

4)  Nah, that's an option I'm open to.



This is a general reply not directed at a single person, but this is not the first time that I've seen someone bring up that just getting nominated isn't enough.  There's literally nothing I can do to change the winners and I'm not going to create an award just to manipulate the voters into picking someone we want to win something.  It is good to be nominated and if I see one more person mention anything like this, or say that they're upset that they 'only' got 2nd place, I'm not going to be happy.  If you need an award to validate your position then perhaps you're not in the best position.
You really misinterpreted what I was saying, and I'm honestly a bit upset that me saying I'd like other people who don't get super involved with all aspects of the community to have a snowball's chance in hell of getting more than three-way ties for 12th with zero points or whatever, results in a big speech about how people shouldn't ever complain about their own ranking.

Well I did say it was a general statement not directed at anyone, but the thing that you said that I focused on was more about how you insinuated getting nominated isn't enough recognition and that only winning is.  That kind of logic upsets me which is why I called it out, and then went on a tangent about how I've seen other people discredit their placements that were not 1st.  If that's not what you meant, then I apologize, but like I already said it was a general statement and that entire paragraph was not focused on you.
 
Quote
If a position needs to be elaborated upon it can easily be done in a list format as well.  And I really don't see what you're saying with the "at a glance" bias, like, are you concerned that people are voting just by length?  Is there any real way to even know that?

I can almost guarantee that at least some people are voting by length: people vote by length for all sorts of things all the time, so why would we be special? Especially when we even know for sure that some people don't even read the dossiers at all, which is

I already suggested awards: some sort of legacy award for folks who don't fit in U1 because they're not retired, but who aren't actively involved in enough aspects of the community to be in U10 (Ghost Jam, Stooben Rooben, Glowsquid, other folks who were cut out of U10, etc.), despite having contributed a lot to it in the past, wiki/forum/chat staff award(s) (like how the Shroom has staff awards), plus another award for editors (namely non-admins) who may have never been big names in the community, yet who do a lot of work for the wiki, and could deserve some props (Time Turner, BLOF, LGM, and many more).

The legacy one is the one I'm most keen on, since that can cover staff from any team and regular editors alike - but unless we can come up with one current award to replace, we'll need more than one new one, so here's some options.

I'm not going to take your "almost guarantee" because that tells me nothing about how much of an affect it has.  It could be 1 vote, it could be all 60, there's literally no way to tell and I'm not basing any decision off of a wild guess.

In addition, I never declined the award ideas at all.  I know you've already suggested them, but I know I've already asked for clarification on them.  I've actually stated that I like a few of them and just need more information on them to actually OK them.  I can't do anything with half an idea and 3 nominees.  The staff awards are the ones I'm most skeptical of because like I said all of the staff members of each the wiki/forum/chat that I've asked all really didn't think they're be good or strong awards, and if the staff members who are being nominated think it's a weak award I'm not really willing to push the idea.  Many questions have to be asked and answered in order for the award to be solid and work out.  Some of these questions for the legacy one are:  What are the prerequisites for being nominated?  Who else would be nominated?  Is it possible to also be nominated for U10?  Why or why not?  How would we compare 'legacies' within each context of the wiki, forum, chat, and shroom?  Would the forum one include just good administration or would it include prolific posters and topic creators?  With the editor awards how exactly would we get nominees?  Is there a time frame to work within?  What exactly constitutes good editing?  Does having prior warnings and blocks affect the nomination?

I'm not dismissing the award ideas.  It's just that initially it was presented as being done for people who "aren't social" and that just doesn't...sound good, and sounds mostly like an adverse reaction to results instead of a cool idea.  If it's presented in the context of recognizing people with a lot of time put in, then that's completely different.  I'm just asking for them to be worked on as I cannot take them if they're just ideas.  There's plenty of time to do that.



How about Mario Maker Level contests?

Everyone participating would make a level.

And either there'd be official judges that play the levels and/or all participants will play eachother's levels and they'll vote for whichever ones they liked (They just can't vote for their own levels). Possibly an additional Public vote option similar to the Art contest too.

Tokens spread across through rankings

I'd be open to it so long as we get a host to host it and players to play it   :bowser:
Title: Re: Suggestions for next year
Post by: Walkazo on August 18, 2015, 10:58:18 PM
Quote
Well I did say it was a general statement not directed at anyone, but the thing that you said that I focused on was more about how you insinuated getting nominated isn't enough recognition and that only winning is.  That kind of logic upsets me which is why I called it out, and then went on a tangent about how I've seen other people discredit their placements that were not 1st.  If that's not what you meant, then I apologize, but like I already said it was a general statement and that entire paragraph was not focused on you.
No, more like being guaranteed to lose sorta makes being nominated a bit less point-ful - and not lose as in, not get 1st, but like, no chance of placing very high at all ever because of the nature of the award itself more than the competition. Specifically, I was thinking about how U10 used to be, since, while there was change-ups from year to year, especially higher up, you still usually had the same few veteran users placing very low, hence I felt like they were a bit under-served in the recognition department - it was your  "[they] have all already had several years to get the recognition they deserve" comment in particular that I was disagreeing with.

But if you're cool with a legacy award, then I guess that's neither here nor there anyway. The idea I've been trying to convey IS "recognizing people with a lot of time put in", just in ways that haven't traditionally gotten very much attention despite being integral to the site, like editing and tedious upkeep stuff, or oldschool things that kids these days don't know about (*shakes cane*), yet which have really influenced what the place is like now. Not so much "boo, popular kids get all the love" and more like "that's cool, but give the old farts and maintenance gnomes love too".

Specific Q&A stuff...

Is it possible to also be nominated for U10?  Why or why not?
I'd say no: U1, U10 and the new one should all be mutually exclusive, since each award is geared towards users from different walks of life and/or current statuses. U10 is about people who loom large in the community as a whole in the present, while the new one would be about people who are just as important to the continued existence of a nice, robust, peaceful wiki, yet who are working more in the background these days (they could always have been background people, or they could have been U10-level community folks in their heyday, but aren't anymore). Both awards would be for users who are still around, while U1 is for people who are retired - whether gone completely, or still checking in from time to time but no longer posting, editing or chatting on a regular basis. (To be clear, U1 and U10 would stay the same as they are now, we'd just be filling a gap that' currently there.)

What are the prerequisites for being nominated?
Does having prior warnings and blocks affect the nomination?
How would we compare 'legacies' within each context of the wiki, forum, chat, and shroom?

Been here a few years and still actively editing, posting, administratoring, etc. (so not U1), but not high-profile enough now (or ever) to fit in U10. It's a bit of a grab-bag thing, since a user's legacy could take many forms, but basically, without them, the site would be a different place even if we don't really notice them on a day-to-day basis - either because a lot of maintenance work and editing would never have been done, thousands of images never been uploaded, key aspects of the wiki/community never been established, etc. The award will probably skew to folks who were more active before, and who did at least a couple big things, but folks who have just always been around and always doing little things should be considered too. Not having warnings definitely helps the odds, but some people get over rocky pasts to become good users, so it shouldn't be automatic disqualification.

With the editor awards how exactly would we get nominees?
Is there a time frame to work within?
What exactly constitutes good editing?
Does having prior warnings and blocks affect the nomination?

Ask for suggestions and double-check their histories and contributions to make sure they really are deserving, I guess. The longer they've been around, the better, but even relative young bloods who have only been around for a year but made the most of it could be considered. Good editing is a mix of quality and quantity: thousands of gnomework edits are good, but taking the time to rewrite the odd page in addition to maintenance, is even better. Or, if someone uploads tonnes of images, that's great, but if they don't bother to format the aboutfiles for any of them, and someone else has to clean up their mess, then it's not so good. Personality and attitude should be kept in mind (if someone's a prolific editor, but they're an *bleep* and no one likes them, it's probably better to give that slot to someone who works hard and plays nice), but old warnings and issues shouldn't matter as much as long as they weren't about really serious problems like vandalism or trolling, and aren't an problem anymore.

I can't really comment on anything forum or chat related: those admin teams and/or frequent posters would have a better idea on what sort of criteria and awards (if any) they want, or how best to incorporate that stuff into overall awards.

I'll try to think of some more names, but I can't single-handedly make list of nominees for these awards, even for wiki editor/staff stuff: what I hold in high regards is different from what others may want to put more stock in.

(Sorry for any typos or ineloquent speech, btw - I was getting pretty sleepy by the end here. Hopefully no more misunderstandings will arise despite tha.t)