Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [MEFAwards] Re: Post-Mortem Topic #1: Number of Nominations

Expand Messages
  • Anthony Holder
    Hey all, Someone asked about the distribution of nominations by nominator. Below are two lists. First, stories per nominator. Second, self-nominated stories by
    Message 1 of 116 , Nov 1, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      Hey all,

      Someone asked about the distribution of nominations by nominator.

      Below are two lists. First, stories per nominator.
      Second, self-nominated stories by author.

      About feasibility:
      #1, very possible, but duplicates and withdrawals will make it hard to
      get exact.

      #2, very easy. I might be able to re-count when stories are withdrawn
      or duplicates, which would otherwise limit someone's number.

      #3, relatively easy, but I don't like the idea.

      #4, I could do this. It would be relatively easy to say no more than X
      in the last Y days. The count would be updated all the time, rather
      than just once a week, and tell the user when they would be able to
      nominate another story.

      #5, I'm not sure I could do anything about this. It would be a liaison
      thing.

      #6, I could do this. My suggestion would be that if you wanted to, make
      the minimum a 4-5 pointer, except for ficlets or drabbles. It's not too
      hard to determine if the nominator is the author. I personally don't
      see why the nominator shouldn't be required to submit a good review as
      part of the nomination process, unless it is a self-nomination.

      Anthony

      Here's the number of stories nominated by each nominatorID. I didn't
      include the nominatorID, just the number. There were 74 unique
      nominators.

      | 1 |
      | 1 |
      | 1 |
      | 1 |
      | 1 |
      | 1 |
      | 1 |
      | 1 |
      | 1 |
      | 1 |
      | 1 |
      | 1 |
      | 1 |
      | 2 |
      | 2 |
      | 2 |
      | 2 |
      | 2 |
      | 2 |
      | 2 |
      | 2 |
      | 2 |
      | 2 |
      | 3 |
      | 3 |
      | 3 |
      | 3 |
      | 3 |
      | 3 |
      | 3 |
      | 4 |
      | 4 |
      | 4 |
      | 4 |
      | 4 |
      | 5 |
      | 5 |
      | 5 |
      | 5 |
      | 5 |
      | 6 |
      | 6 |
      | 6 |
      | 7 |
      | 7 |
      | 7 |
      | 8 |
      | 8 |
      | 8 |
      | 9 |
      | 9 |
      | 10 |
      | 10 |
      | 11 |
      | 12 |
      | 13 |
      | 16 |
      | 18 |
      | 22 |
      | 23 |
      | 23 |
      | 24 |
      | 24 |
      | 25 |
      | 26 |
      | 26 |
      | 27 |
      | 28 |
      | 38 |
      | 39 |
      | 59 |
      | 70 |
      | 74 |
      | 596 |



      The following is a list of self-nominated stories, again grouped by
      nominator/author.

      +----+
      | 1 |
      | 1 |
      | 1 |
      | 1 |
      | 1 |
      | 1 |
      | 1 |
      | 2 |
      | 2 |
      | 2 |
      | 2 |
      | 2 |
      | 2 |
      | 2 |
      | 2 |
      | 3 |
      | 3 |
      | 3 |
      | 3 |
      | 3 |
      | 3 |
      | 4 |
      | 4 |
      | 5 |
      | 5 |
      | 9 |
      | 10 |
      | 17 |
      | 44 |
      +----+
      29 authors self-nominated
    • Marta Layton
      Hi Chris, ... I can understand that. I m not sure if something s wrong with my memory ;-) but I can t remember stories properly either! I think a lot of people
      Message 116 of 116 , Nov 6, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        Hi Chris,

        On 3 Nov 2005, at 20:56, Chris Grzonka wrote:

        > > Because everyone has been
        > > reading them all year there is no need for a reading season. We
        > added that
        > > the first year of the MEFAs to give people a chance to read stories
        > posted
        > > to archives they did not usually read.
        >
        > I knew a lot of the nominated stories, but to write a review I still
        > had to
        > read at least part of it again.

        I can understand that. I'm not sure if something's wrong with my memory
        ;-) but I can't remember stories properly either! I think a lot of
        people try to re-read at least part of a story. Or at least I hope I'm
        not alone in that!

        So the period of the awards that was previously called reading season
        and voting season will be at least as long as it is now. It will
        probably get just a bit longer if we decide to shorten nomination
        season. I think that calling the whole thing voting season would make
        it more clear that people can vote for stories during what was formerly
        called reading season.

        > I didn't want to go back to the site where
        > the story is archived and read my original review to some of the
        > stories to
        > just repost it again. I thought it unfair to the author. But to write
        > something new I still had to read the story again. Unless I betaed a
        > story,
        > than I knew it by heart<g>. So, no matter that I knew stories I still
        > needed
        > time to read.
        >

        Thanks for that! I received a few of your reviews and really loved the
        new feedback. As I'm awful about leaving feedback at the original
        archives this isn't such a point for me.

        This is something that came up in a lot of reviews. People would say
        they were copying (or adapting) their review from such-and-such a
        sight, and I understand the need to get as many reviews done. I'm not
        saying people shouldn't be allowed to do this - but that I do enjoy the
        new reviews as well.

        > > In 2004 the volunteers had to copy each vote into
        > > Word, do a character count (using Word's word count feature), look
        > at a
        > > table to see how many points that character count got, and record
        > the
        > > information in an Excel document. Lots of behind-the-scenes work.
        >
        > This sounds very cumbersome. Thanks to Anthony for the nifty web
        > site<g>.
        >

        Oh yes! A series of family emergencies meant I couldn't participate in
        the voting part of last year, but from what I've heard it was very work
        intensive. That's why it took two weeks. (Another season that perhaps
        we need to re-evaluate - we certainly needed two weeks to check and
        compute results originally, even if we don't now.)

        Anyway, I've heard the stories... and YES. I cannot say it enough.
        Thank you, Anthony.

        Cheers,
        Marta


        *****
        "Our greatest fear is not that we are inadequate. Our greatest fear is
        that we are powerful beyond measure. It is our light, not our darkness
        that most frightens us. [...] As we let our own light shine, we
        unconsciously give other people permission to do the same."

        (Nelson Mandela)
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.