Readers Choice Questions

[Altimexis]

Ooooh. I see I already have a negative rating for my nominations entry. Last year when I raised this very same issue, someone said it was inappropriate to do so here, in the nominations forum. The rules are already set in stone for this year's contest, and I accept that. The trouble is, if I don't raise these issues here, then where is the appropriate place and when is the appropriate time to raise them. Now is when the process is on everyone's mind, and here is where the nominations are being made, so isn't this the perfect time and place to question the process itself? If people accept the process as it's handed down from above, then that means everyone is acquiescing to the process and that they feel it can't be improved upon.

 

The bottom line as far as I'm concerned as an author, is that it's not fair to an author to have a 200k word story that took years to complete go head-to-head in a popularity contest with a 5k word short story that was written in a day, no matter how clever it is. Also, it's not fair to have the completed story go head-to-head with serial story that just started to be posted a few months ago, and that may very well never be completed.

 

What I would like to suggest is that there be three story categories and four author categories, and that an award be given for each combination of the two. In addition, there could be a separate award for best new author, best protagonist, best antagonist and best king/queen of the cliffhangers. The three story categories would be best complete story of 50k or more words, best complete story or poem of less than 50k words, and best unfinished story or ongoing serial story of any length. The four author categories, based on their status at the time the nominations are made, would be hosted author, promising author, eFiction author and non-GA author. Unlike with the current system, this would be a fair division. It's similar to what I've proposed for the past couple of years, and it deserves a fair hearing, whenever and wherever that may be.

 

I'm not saying we should change the process this year, but I do think we should begin discussion on the process for next year now. I don't really care about whether or not I win an award, but as an author I care very deeply if a story that someone finally completed after some years in the making is beat out by a serial story that has only a few initial chapters posted, or that has been abandoned. Perseverance should be rewarded.

 

Please don't remove this post from the site - this discussion needs to be aired. I certainly mean no ill will by it, but in removing it, you would be telling everyone that you are not willing to listen to others when it comes to how these awards are made. Move it if you must to another, more appropriate forum, but please, please let me be heard on this.

 

Respectfully submitted,

Altimexis

[Tiger]

I negated it, Altimexis. No worries.

[Nephylim]

I thought that the nominations were only open to stories that had started posting this year. Was I wrong?

[Graeme]

I thought that the nominations were only open to stories that had started posting this year. Was I wrong?

You can nominate any story where something was posted in 2009, even if the story started posting earlier.

[TalonRider]

I didn't think we would need this topic as over the years, the questions concerning the nominations have decreased. It would appear there is a need for one.

 

When it comes to questions/concerns for the Readers Choice Awards during the year, you can contact a member of the Writers Support Team. C James is the team lead while I'm the Deputy Lead.

 

When it comes the Awards, I'm usually the one who chairs the discussion.

 

Talonrider

WST Deputy Lead

[Nephylim]

Yeah but now you have a whole new generation (in access to GA not chronological age) of imbeciles like myself who have no idea what's going on... well that's true in real life too but unfortunately there is no handy discussion thread to get answers on that one.

 

My only comment with regard to Graeme's post is.... *bugger... if only I had known* But haha my nominations are made now and I'm happy with them

[TalonRider]

At one time, the Awards was so large, it was hard to manage and they almost came to an end. At that time, the voting was done thru the software that Myr has and it ate up a lot of his time to set it up.

 

So the decision was made to downsize it to make it manageable.

[NaperVic]

I remember the thread where you made some of these similiar suggestions in the past and it seemed that explanations were given as to why/why not things were done a certain way. My understanding is that decisions were made by a committee that took into account suggestions as well as practical experience from previous years.

 

Here's the thread Readers Choice Awards Suggestions

 

[personal opinion]

As a reader/voter, I feel we have too many categories as it is and that the number of categories should be pared down. 16 separate categories would just seem too overwhelming and too granular. I know in that case I probably wouldn't vote for many of those.

 

I also wish the number of votes for each category (and possibly) each finalist be published. There was a good reason given why those numbers are not published (to preserve the feelings of nominees when the number of votes was dramatically different). However, I also feel that providing those numbers would help quantify the value of the award.

 

Or if they can't be published, perhaps drop any category that doesn't garner at least 50 votes (or some other number)?

 

For example, I run in races. They give awards by 10 year age range. Placing 2nd in the 40-49 male age range means more to me when there are 30 runners versus 3 runners.

 

Each readers choice award should mean that a significant number of voters cared enough to vote.

 

I have no idea on how many people actually vote on these, so if we're into the hundreds for each of these categories, my points are mute .

 

[/personal opinion]

 

Take Care®,

 

Vic

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[TalonRider]

When it comes to the final voting, we can take into consideration the posting of the number of votes for each candidate/category. That will of course depend upon the number of people who voted. The voter turn out for the 2008 awards was very low.

[Mark Arbour]

I remember the thread where you made some of these similiar suggestions in the past and it seemed that explanations were given as to why/why not things were done a certain way. My understanding is that decisions were made by a committee that took into account suggestions as well as practical experience from previous years.

 

Here's the thread Readers Choice Awards Suggestions

 

[personal opinion]

As a reader/voter, I feel we have too many categories as it is and that the number of categories should be pared down. 16 separate categories would just seem too overwhelming and too granular. I know in that case I probably wouldn't vote for many of those.

 

I also wish the number of votes for each category (and possibly) each finalist be published. There was a good reason given why those numbers are not published (to preserve the feelings of nominees when the number of votes was dramatically different). However, I also feel that providing those numbers would help quantify the value of the award.

 

Or if they can't be published, perhaps drop any category that doesn't garner at least 50 votes (or some other number)?

 

For example, I run in races. They give awards by 10 year age range. Placing 2nd in the 40-49 male age range means more to me when there are 30 runners versus 3 runners.

 

Each readers choice award should mean that a significant number of voters cared enough to vote.

 

I have no idea on how many people actually vote on these, so if we're into the hundreds for each of these categories, my points are mute .

 

[/personal opinion]

 

Take Care

[JamesSavik]

James Savik 2009

 

Catagory non-GA story

 

Remembering Joey - Short Story

 

Valhalla - Short Story

 

 

Twilight(soon to be renamed Childhood's End) - novel

[NaperVic]

When it comes to the final voting, we can take into consideration the posting of the number of votes for each candidate/category. That will of course depend upon the number of people who voted.

 

Perhaps just the total number of votes per category will suffice?

 

The voter turn out for the 2008 awards was very low.

 

That's too bad But that fact does provide data to help you decide how granular/complex the awards facility should be.

 

 

Thanks for the insight!

[sat8997]

Thank you!

[Nephylim]

So you're saying that we're raising the same issues again, spinning our wheels as it were?

 

Personally, win or lose, I'm pretty flattered to have my stories nominated.

 

 

 

 

 

Oh yes... me too...flattered and surprised to be honest.

[NaperVic]

So you're saying that we're raising the same issues again, spinning our wheels as it were?

 

Not exclusively . I think the major points I was trying to get across are:

 

1) the awards process shouldn't be so engineered or complicated, or

2) the number of awards awarded shouldn't be so numerous

 

when the number of actual voters don't warrant such effort.

 

If the number of voters for the voting year 2009 is as low as 2008, perhaps a more back to basics award structure should be created. Like two awards, 'Best Story of 2010' and 'Favorite Author of 2010'.

 

 

Take Care®,

 

Vic

Edited January 15, 2010 by NaperVic

[Altimexis]

Mark and Nephy,

 

No need to feel flattered - you're certainly the two most prolific authors at GA these days, so by shear numbers, your stories would have to stink for you to not be nominated. Seriously, though, you two contribute a lot to the site and deserve to be nominated.

 

If the numbers of voters is small, then perhaps we need to do more to encourage people to vote. People shouldn't vote unless they've actually read the stories, however, so there are limits to what can be done. Perhaps the decline in the number of votes is tied in with declining readership, which is a much more serious issue. Adding premium content helps shore up the bank, but it may turn casual readership away. I think the number of top authors at GA who have simply stopped writing also has a lot to do with it. If it weren't for Mark and Nephylim, there wouldn't be much new material on the site at all.

 

Getting back to the awards, however, I still think that short stories should be separated from full novels, but that the short story category could replace the Anthology category. I also feel that in the case of serial stories, incomplete stories or ongoing stories should be handled separately from completed stories. Ideally, a serial story shouldn't be eligible until it's finished. We need to encourage story completion, as I think the lack thereof is one of the things turning people away from the site.

 

The place where I think we can consolidate awards is in the categories of authorship. Frankly, I think we have as much talent among the promising authors as among those of us who are hosted, and our top e-fiction authors are advanced so quickly to promising author status these days that there seems little point in separating authorship categories. If we're trying to simplify things, why not just have the following categories:

 

 

[TalonRider]

I think the number of top authors at GA who have simply stopped writing also has a lot to do with it.

This could be a big part of it. Before life slowed Dom Luka down on his writing, he pretty much dominated the awards with his writing.

[Mark Arbour]

I have a question for the admins: Are you all pretty set with the way things are, or would you/are you willing to make changes to the format? That's not meant to be a loaded question. I'm just fine with the way things are now, but if we are considering changes, I could try to come up with a few suggestions. I don't want to do that, though, if you guys are happy with how things are structured. I don't want to look powerless (which is true) or bitchy (which is only sometimes true).

 

FYI: All Dom has to do is write a single story and he'll dominate the awards. The guy is just that good.

[KJames]

James Savik 2009

 

Catagory non-GA story

 

Remembering Joey - Short Story

 

Valhalla - Short Story

 

 

Twilight(soon to be renamed Childhood's End) - novel

 

 

James, you might want to rethink the title Childhood's End...it's been used before...not here, but in mainstream publishing.

[JamesSavik]

James, you might want to rethink the title Childhood's End...it's been used before...not here, but in mainstream publishing.

 

Not everyone has read Asimov but Twilight- I get hate email saying they thought it was fan-fic for those f*&^%g s*&^tty vampire movies.

 

I'm really surprised that Remembering Joey didn't get nominated. I get tons of email about it.

[Graeme]

Not everyone has read Asimov but Twilight- I get hate email saying they thought it was fan-fic for those f*&^%g s*&^tty vampire movies.

Childhood's End was by Arthur C. Clarke and, in my opinion, one of his better stories. Coincidentally and only tangentially, also about the end of the world.

 

I'm really surprised that Remembering Joey didn't get nominated. I get tons of email about it.

It's on the list (two or three lines above the others). You've got three stories on the list for best Non-GA story