Jump to content
Yoda

2018 P&W Award Voting

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Buorhann said:

I say give this a shot.  See where it goes to.  It's one of the few things that's making this interesting.  I'll definitely be tuning into the show if I can, to listen in to who won.  While people criticize about transparency and "awards don't matter", this is an attempt to fix some of the poorly done stuff from the past.  If it goes bad, so what, just chalk it up to another year of badly done awards.

If it goes mediocre, then at least we have a foundation to work off of to make it better.  If it goes well (That is, if TGH and it's allies wins every award, including knocking TheNG from Worst Leader), then great - let's keep it going as is!~~~

Multiple years we've had spam votes on obvious bias choices.  While you cannot remove bias votes completely, we can come up with ideas to limit it if we want to legitimize the awards.

-----

Personally I'm all for this idea.  I'd like to flesh out the committee over seeing it though, but since it's a group of volunteers - I can't gripe about it.  Plus it's the first attempt at this so I'd like to see where they take it.

While this is odd, I also appreciate the non-transparency of this to an extent.  On one hand, people don't know who's winning.  On the other hand, people also don't know who's spam voting what.

At the end of 2019 (Or hell, even now), I'd like to see a elected committee to oversee the private voting process and cast in their own votes.  Like how the Electoral College does for the US.  While at the same time, we hold a public, fully transparent vote for the masses to contribute.

Then we can see the differences of it between both the committee and the popular vote, and come to a general consensus.

 

The biggest issue I have with myself recognizing these awards is the fact that the majority of those voting have no idea of "other" votes.  There's little to no campaigning or reasoning to who should win what.  There's a major difference between say...  @Prefontaine and @Thanos arguing who should win what to me and Roqbot #4599 arguing it out.  (As in, there are players who are much more knowledgeable about who contributes what compared to others)

Other than that, at least the award threads are entertaining to read when the low tide washes out and reveals all the salt left.

Since you gave some effort, I'll give some effort rather than just rambling/trolling. The problem with the "awards" is it's too much about what the people running it want. It started with Kastor, who is one of the worst choices in the pool of people who aren't going to make it shit for the lulz. While I agree with you that having an informed panel is likely your best chance at getting accurate results for each category it's also a shit way to do it. 

The only real way is to run tandem voting, a panel of informed, and the general panel. Winner and peoples winner for each category. Or even each alliance gets to vote for a #1 #2 #3 and based on some alliance metric their vote carries a certain weight. Not to mention the nomination process is complete rubbish. Alliances that have no earthly right in both good and bad categories are there. People base yearly awards on what happened in the last few months. The process is ruined each year by letting idiots nominate.

 

Enough constructiveness. This is a contest for idiots, run by idiots. I would rather not have my name anywhere on any ballot. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the current method. If you do not, why not do your own awards?  Golden Globes v. Oscars.  There's room for more. I'd support that more than trying to see that every person with an issue has that issue addressed to their satisfaction by volunteers.

You need like six people, apparently. You have a subforum and Alex offers hosting.  Create your Golden Globes just the way you like them.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Frankly, it was a piss poor idea to host the official voting on an unofficial domain, for a multitude of reasons. It's also bad form for the head honcho of this project to go around dismissing people and their opinions because he doesn't like them. There should be some level of professionalism if you're going to take on a task in the name of the game. That being said, it looks like its over and done with. Perhaps next year, the people who put it together might consider actually listening to feedback. Or maybe not, who knows?

Edited by Senpai
  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While I agree with a lot of the points made on it not making sense to host it off site & people having reasonable concerns about that; I also agree with those saying these award things are pointless popularity contests which don’t matter anyways. So not worth getting worked up over.

Edited by Noctis
  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Itachi said:

Frankly, it was a piss poor idea to host the official voting on an unofficial domain, for a multitude of reasons. It's also bad form for the head honcho of this project to go around dismissing people and their opinions because he doesn't like them. There should be some level of professionalism if you're going to take on a task in the name of the game. Are we paying them?

That being said, it looks like its over and done with. Perhaps next year, the people who put it together might consider actually listening to feedback. Or maybe not, who knows? Or the people who want' something different can do one of their own?

 

4 hours ago, Noctis said:

While I agree with a lot of the points made on it not making sense to host it off site & people having reasonable concerns about that; I also agree with those saying these award things are pointless popularity contests which don’t matter anyways. So not worth getting worked up over.

They've always been that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/7/2019 at 11:38 AM, Shadowthrone said:

 

Kastor knew of our opinions the moment the thread was made, and hasn't done anything to answer them except call those issues "dumb" and also ignore it. A lot of people knew about the opinions, theres a thread on it. He ignored it, and went on with it anyway, and here we are, with folks not particularly interested in secret ballots. 

This is why Kastor is so well liked. Trust in the process guys...besides, the game is as rigged as the voting system. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ComradeMilton said:

 

They've always been that.

If its going to be officially endorsed by Alex, then it doesn't matter if they're being paid. This is supposed to represent the entire community, not just the people running the show. Everyone should have an equal voice in these things. If this wasn't the 'official Orbis awards' then I wouldn't care, but Alex endorsed this system, and Kastor is openly disregarding anything that he doesn't personally like. There are plenty of people who could have put this together without letting their ego get in the way of taking in feedback from the community. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Itachi said:

If its going to be officially endorsed by Alex, then it doesn't matter if they're being paid. This is supposed to represent the entire community, not just the people running the show. Everyone should have an equal voice in these things. If this wasn't the 'official Orbis awards' then I wouldn't care, but Alex endorsed this system, and Kastor is openly disregarding anything that he doesn't personally like. There are plenty of people who could have put this together without letting their ego get in the way of taking in feedback from the community. 

Professionalism refers to a profession which is paid. If you want more of say, create your own version.  Let those people put on competing awards shows if they like. Golden Globes/Oscars/Emmys all co-exist IRL. They can exist together here too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, ComradeMilton said:

Professionalism refers to a profession which is paid. If you want more of say, create your own version.  Let those people put on competing awards shows if they like. Golden Globes/Oscars/Emmys all co-exist IRL. They can exist together here too.

This isn't a private awards system, this is the 'official' awards. Alex endorses them, and the awards are presented as authentic because of this. Professionalism refers to the behavior expected of a professional. If you're going to volunteer to do extra work in the name of an 'official' awards system, then you should act like a professional whether you're paid or not. Because, as stated previously, plenty of people are capable of acting like a professional if that's too much for some people.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, ComradeMilton said:

Professionalism refers to a profession which is paid. If you want more of say, create your own version.  Let those people put on competing awards shows if they like. Golden Globes/Oscars/Emmys all co-exist IRL. They can exist together here too.

When Kastor has been endorsed by the admin of the game to host the awards, he's accountable to the community at large. There does not need to be alternate awards, when its easy enough to make these transparent and solve literally the majority of issues. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Itachi said:

This isn't a private awards system, this is the 'official' awards. Alex endorses them, and the awards are presented as authentic because of this. Professionalism refers to the behavior expected of a professional. If you're going to volunteer to do extra work in the name of an 'official' awards system, then you should act like a professional whether you're paid or not. Because, as stated previously, plenty of people are capable of acting like a professional if that's too much for some people.

It's their profession to volunteer time to help with the awards?  Start recruiting your awards crew for next year, I guess, if you dislike how it works now. If you disagree with the current system the logical solution is to create a new one. That means you need to replace all that volunteer labor and be prepared next year, particularly for all of the new complaints you'll receive about the different system.

1 minute ago, Shadowthrone said:

When Kastor has been endorsed by the admin of the game to host the awards, he's accountable to the community at large. There does not need to be alternate awards, when its easy enough to make these transparent and solve literally the majority of issues. 

Clearly this isn't or wasn't the case as we're not having those.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*deleted*

Edited by Inst

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like if we could host it onsite or these forums, have the results secret and announced on whatever radio show it is, that'd be fine. My two concerns are giving IP etc. data to complete strangers on their word that'll be fine and making sure the results are legit, both of which were fine last year but not with this change to some offsite thing. 

And re the NPO angle, someone in #public from outside our alliance was talking about that. Prior to that I brought it up in the Discord mod channel. Idk if Roq even cares about it and Keshav we persuaded him about it being worth standing up to now rather than dealing with it next year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/8/2019 at 2:51 PM, Yoda said:

While I support moving the site to politicsandwar.com domain for the next award, there is nothing sketchy about Dynamic's site. I use one of the best antimalware programs and it didn't detect anything bad on his site. If you run a scan on virustotal and other similar sites, it will show that the site is perfectly safe.

pnwaward.png

We're at war with Namic and his guys and yet I found his site to be very easy to use and was pretty impressed with how smoothly run the voting was and Kastor was great with the nominations. @Dynamic To Namic props mate you made a pretty sick voting site. Even if it was tracking IP addresses I wouldn't care what it was storing, if you really want to know stuff about me all you need to do is get to know me and I'll chat away (Within reason) ;,P 

On 1/8/2019 at 3:01 PM, Keegoz said:

It is a popularity contest that holds little weight. I'd prefer it if the vote was in the same form as the nominations where you had to justify why you were voting for who you were voting for. People before often just voted for their own alliance, hence why we got the results we did last year.

To the rest of you, you care far too much about this. It's a cheap/fun popularity contest, stop whining.

I tried to be as even and as unbiased in my voting as possible, I voted Leo (Not saying Thanos) for player of the year, and out of all the other categories EMC members only got 4 of my votes, (Myself Yui, Nizam and Cakey). If TFP didn't get rolled I probably would've voted for tCW as worst military.

Edited by Sphinx
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Sphinx said:

We're at war with Namic and his guys and yet I found his site to be very easy to use and was pretty impressed with how smoothly run the voting was and Kastor was great with the nominations. @Dynamic To Namic props mate you made a pretty sick voting site. Even if it was tracking IP addresses I wouldn't care what it was storing, if you really want to know stuff about me all you need to do is get to know me and I'll chat away (Within reason) ;,P 

I tried to be as even and as unbiased in my voting as possible, I voted Leo (Not saying Thanos) for player of the year, and out of all the other categories EMC members only got 4 of my votes, (Myself Yui, Nizam and Cakey). If TFP didn't get rolled I probably would've voted for tCW as worst military.

It's nice to see some positive comments amidst a sea of negativity.

And thanks for trying to be an unbiased voter! If more people thought this way when they vote, the Awards would be much better. More often than not, people vote for their own alliance and allies for the good awards

Edited by Yoda
grammar
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Yoda said:

It's nice to see some positive comments amidst a sea of negativity.

And thanks for trying to be an unbiased voter! If more people thought this way when they vote, the Awards would be much better. More often than not, people vote for their own alliance and allies for the good awards

It would just be better to have nominations process cleaned up so those who actually deserve to be in the running are, and those who don't are not. It isn't a complete fix but at least it doesn't result in people winning who have no right to even be there in the first place. Just food for thought for next time.

People who complain about it being on another website mostly were silent last year when the awards weren't even close to being done objectively and had more problems, so I'd take their comments with a grain of salt because if they cared about this vote they'd be suggesting ways to fix it than whine it isn't the same.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Keegoz said:

People who complain about it being on another website mostly were silent last year when the awards weren't even close to being done objectively

How, exactly, are this year's awards more "objective"? It's still a direct vote by the masses, the same mechanism as last year.

2 hours ago, Keegoz said:

if they cared about this vote they'd be suggesting ways to fix it than whine it isn't the same.

We did. We've said repeatedly, in multiple threads, that we want them hosted on the forums.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Edward I said:

We did. We've said repeatedly, in multiple threads, that we want them hosted on the forums.

How does it fix the issue again?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Edward I said:

How, exactly, are this year's awards more "objective"? It's still a direct vote by the masses, the same mechanism as last year.

We did. We've said repeatedly, in multiple threads, that we want them hosted on the forums.

So you want to fix the problem with the new method by going to the old one?

See that’s not how logic works, that’s not a fix for a newer way of doing things, that’s a whiny baby boomer complaining things used to be better before because he understood them.

bright side: Alex gets to add something new he didn’t have to code because the community cares more than he does and will do work for free. 

The awards are still as biased as ever and no matter how it’s done someone would cry rigged anyway.

Looks like a net gain to me.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Buorhann said:

How does it fix the issue again?

Which issue? Our objections have been almost entirely about the legitimacy and transparency of the official PW awards. Our proposed solution has, consistently, been to move the awards back to the politicsandwar.com domain.

Keegoz, intentionally or not, deflected by changing the subject to the "objectivity" of the awards. However, unless he's equating opacity or unaccountability (see: Kastor's refusal to entertain any criticism) with objectivity, I fail to see how moving the awards offsite addresses that "problem".

I put "problem" in quotation marks because it's not clear to me that the awards can (or even should be) "objective" in the first place. Objectivity, as the term has been used here this year and last year, rests on the notion that most players aren't qualified to have a say in who receives the various awards. Because I don't think anything other than direct, popular voting for the awards will be legitimate or transparent, I don't think this qualm is even worth trying to address: no mechanism besides direct democracy will satisfy the need to be transparent and legitimate.

Keegoz would have a point if the mechanism for determining the winners of the awards was different this year - say, a committee of prominent players, which has been proposed multiple times this year and last year. However, the mechanism for this year's awards is still direct democracy, which brings me back to my original characterization of Keegoz's post. He changes the subject and implies that offsite hosting somehow makes the awards "objective", but doesn't offer any explanation as to how. He also ignores the fact that the  awards were conducted on the forums last year, which is why we were silent last year - this year's problems didn't exist last year.

22 minutes ago, Akuryo said:

So you want to fix the problem with the new method by going to the old one?

See that’s not how logic works, that’s not a fix for a newer way of doing things, that’s a whiny baby boomer complaining things used to be better before because he understood them. 

bright side: Alex gets to add something new he didn’t have to code because the community cares more than he does and will do work for free. 

The awards are still as biased as ever and no matter how it’s done someone would cry rigged anyway.

Looks like a net gain to me.

If I'm reading this correctly, what I said in response to Buorhann also applies here.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Edward I said:

How, exactly, are this year's awards more "objective"? It's still a direct vote by the masses, the same mechanism as last year.

It's not but if you cared about these awards, you'd be whining about how shit the method is way more than it simply not being on the forums.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After reading some of the earlier comments from Buorhann and others, I think a panel of voters made up of prominent alliance leaders/gov members would be nice. I don't mind it being implemented for the current Awards if Kastor approves. Take both the vote of the panel and popular vote for the masses into account when choosing the winner. My list would be something like this:

 

IQ and friends

  • BK Representative: The Mad Titan
  • NPO Representative: Roquentin
  • GoG Representative: Seeker
  • Acadia Representative: TheNG

Vanguard

  • Polaris/Vanguard Representative: WSxPhoenix

TKR and friends

  • TKR Representative: Adrienne
  • TCW Representative: Yui or Sphinx
  • Grumpy Representative: Sweeeeet Ronny D or Samwise
  • Guardian Representative: JtTeE or another Guardian leader

TGH and friends

  • TGH Representative: Buorhann or Sketchy
  • KT Representative: Keegoz or Thalmor
  • Empyrea Representative: James XVI or The Royalist
  • Oblivion Representative: Ockey5

Syndi and friends

  • The Syndicate Representative: Hilmes or another t$ Leader
  • Pantheon Representative: The Emperor
  • Rose Representative: Dynamic
  • House Stark Representative: Zygon or Darth Revan
  • CoA Representative: James II or Keza Purple

Paperless

  • CoS Representative: Ripper or Spaceman Thrax
  • TEst Representative: Insert Name Here
  • SK Representative: Mikey
  • Arrgh Representative: Bluebear or Boyce

Others

  • Bad Company Representative: Alexio or HannaH
Edited by Yoda
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Yoda said:

After reading some of the earlier comments from Buorhann and others, I think a panel of voters made up of prominent alliance leaders/gov members would be nice. I don't mind it being implemented for the current Awards if Kastor approves.

Not sure I like this (see above for my reasons), but I appreciate the good faith response and the semi-concrete proposal.

1 hour ago, Yoda said:

Take both the vote of the panel and popular vote for the masses into account when choosing the winner.

How? You haven't proposed an explicit process, just said that a panel should be involved somehow. I don't think many people will be satisfied with another instance of "trust us, Kastor's got this" when it comes to the details.

1 hour ago, Yoda said:

My list would be something like this:

 

IQ and friends

  • BK Representative: The Mad Titan
  • NPO Representative: Roquentin
  • GoG Representative: Seeker
  • Acadia Representative: TheNG

Vanguard

  • Polaris/Vanguard Representative: WSxPhoenix

TKR and friends

  • TKR Representative: Adrienne
  • TCW Representative: Yui or Sphinx
  • Grumpy Representative: Sweeeeet Ronny D or Samwise
  • Guardian Representative: JtTeE or another Guardian leader

TGH and friends

  • TGH Representative: Buorhann or Sketchy
  • KT Representative: Keegoz or Thalmor
  • Empyrea Representative: James XVI or The Royalist
  • Oblivion Representative: Ockey5

Syndi and friends

  • The Syndicate Representative: Hilmes or another t$ Leader
  • Pantheon Representative: The Emperor
  • Rose Representative: Dynamic
  • House Stark Representative: Zygon or Darth Revan
  • CoA Representative: James II or Keza Purple

Paperless

  • CoS Representative: Ripper or Spaceman Thrax
  • TEst Representative: Insert Name Here
  • SK Representative: Mikey
  • Arrgh Representative: Bluebear or Boyce

Others

  • Bad Company Representative: Alexio or HannaH

Similar to my question above: how does voting/determination within the panel happen? Do alliances with high scores or lots of members get extra votes? Is every leader's vote equal? Does there need to be a supermajority, or even a majority for the winner of a category to be chosen? Or is the panel's choice determined by plurality opinion?

If a consensus can't be reached regarding how a panel choice and popular choice are reconciled, you could also do both and not attempt to reconcile them. If the awards are silly and subjective in the first place, the best practice is probably to avoid injecting contrived notions of "objectivity" into them, avoid making them exclusive or opaque, and aim to generate discussion rather than consensus.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Edward I said:

Not sure I like this (see above for my reasons), but I appreciate the good faith response and the semi-concrete proposal.

How? You haven't proposed an explicit process, just said that a panel should be involved somehow. I don't think many people will be satisfied with another instance of "trust us, Kastor's got this" when it comes to the details.

Similar to my question above: how does voting/determination within the panel happen? Do alliances with high scores or lots of members get extra votes? Is every leader's vote equal? Does there need to be a supermajority, or even a majority for the winner of a category to be chosen? Or is the panel's choice determined by plurality opinion?

If a consensus can't be reached regarding how a panel choice and popular choice are reconciled, you could also do both and not attempt to reconcile them. If the awards are silly and subjective in the first place, the best practice is probably to avoid injecting contrived notions of "objectivity" into them, avoid making them exclusive or opaque, and aim to generate discussion rather than consensus.

Every leader has an equal vote (Alliances with more members already have an advantage in the vote for the masses). The winner could be chosen by a simple majority of the votes.  But for this to work, we need enough alliance leaders to show interest, besides Kastor's approval

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and the Guidelines of the game and community.