Yahoo Forum Archive

--- In MEFAwards@yahoogroups.com, "Kathy" <inkling-tcbs@...> wrote:

>> --- In MEFAwards@yahoogroups.com, "sulriel" <Sulriel@h...> wrote:
> >> > > > Inkling: Yes, this discussion is only in regards to this

list. > > Membership will still be required to nominate/vote at the
database.

>
> Right, but I meant would membership in the *Yahoo group* still be a
> requirement to nominate, even if not to vote...or do you see
> nominating and voting privileges as needing to go together?
>
> Kathy

sorry.

this discussion is about if we should keep the rule that membership
is required at this yahoogroup in order to be a member at the MEFA
voting database.

Membership of some type will be required at the MEFA site.

the question of the value of *requiring* membership of this
yahoogroup (in addition to the MEFA site) has been raised and that is
what we're supposed to be discussing.

Sulriel

--- In MEFAwards@yahoogroups.com, rabidsamfan <rabidsamfan@...> wrote:

>
> Oh, I'm not saying it's necessarily unnecessary to have people join

the> Yahoo group -- but I think that having to create
two "memberships" -- one at> Yahoo and one at the main site -- is
something which discourages> participation. I mean, I was nominated
as an author and had an author> password, and *still* couldn't vote
until I'd gone through the Yahoo group > process. And I couldn't see
the use of it.

> For discussion like this, "the use of it" is a little more

apparent. But > there are other mechanisms which might do the same
job, like a message> board. An e-mail list could be used for
notifications, and in fact might> be advantageous for very important
announcements because it wouldn't be> overriden by someone who had
checked off a box to avoid getting the > run-of-the-mill e-mails.

it *may* be possible for the MEFA site to have forums, so that just
one membership will be needed.

At this point, two different memberships were needed because the
yahoogroups and the site are not linked in any way.

Sulriel

>
> So what does the Yahoo group do, what does it provide, that can't

be done at

> the other site?
>
>
> On 1/31/06, Kathy <inkling-tcbs@...> wrote:
> >
> > --- In MEFAwards@yahoogroups.com, "sulriel" <Sulriel@h...> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > Inkling: Yes, this discussion is only in regards to this list.
> > > Membership will still be required to nominate/vote at the

database.

> >
> > Right, but I meant would membership in the *Yahoo group* still be

a

> > requirement to nominate, even if not to vote...or do you see
> > nominating and voting privileges as needing to go together?
> >
> > Kathy
> >
> > >
> > > RSF: Those are the questions we need to kinda kick around.
> > >
> > > Are there any advantages to requiring memebership here that

aren't

> > > outweighed by the disadvantages?
> > >
> > > Sulriel
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------
> > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
> >
> >
> > - Visit your

group "MEFAwards<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MEFAwards>"

> > on the web.
> >
> > - To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > MEFAwards-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com<MEFAwards-

unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>

> >
> > - Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
> > Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------
> >
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

--- In MEFAwards@yahoogroups.com, "ainaechoiriel" <mefaadmin@...>

> > Are there any advantages to requiring memebership here that aren't
> > outweighed by the disadvantages?
> >
> > Sulriel
>
> Advantages (as I see them)
>
> <<snipped>> > --Ainaechoiriel

Is this something that is negotiable - or maybe needs to be tabled
until we know what capabilities the new site will have?

Sulriel

Unfortunately, there isn't really a way to automatically create a
MEFA2005/MEFA2006 membership when someone joins the Yahoo! group, at
least not that I know about. The databases cannot be
merged/synchronized, because I can't access the Yahoo! database
directly.

I might be able to figure out a way to parse the email that can be sent
to the group owner when someone joins/leaves, so that it could look for
them in the MEFA2005 database and add them if they're not present, or
remove their membership (but not their records) if they leave the
group. It could make the process much faster.

Once I finish the other things I need to do, I'll look at that
possibility.

If the group decides to get their own web server space, it could
transition to something like phpBB for the forum. It is a lot like a
Yahoo! group, but it has its own local database and could theoretically
be synced with the MEFA2006 database, providing a single user space.
I'm pretty sure that would be a lot of work to set up, though, because
I'd need to change some things like how Co-Author groups are handled
(they're a special type of person now, but that wouldn't work too well
in a phpBB-type setup, I think).

That might be a MEFA2007 thing, though. Actually, if it were to go that
far, I would probably want to start over with a full-featured
object-oriented open-source modular content management system (CMS) and
add a 'voting' module to it. Such things do exist, but I haven't wanted
to tackle learning a new system. It might be worthwhile, though, in the
long run. A big advantage to that would be that I might get someone
else that wants to use it to help with the coding.

A quick look shows that there are already some 'voting' modules out
there. They're more for simple voting systems, but I might be able to
use/extend one of them. Drupal's system (http://drupal.org/node/33629)
looks promising. I'm putting that link in there so I don't lose it.

I like this idea, but it would require quite a bit of work. The reviews
could be basically comments on a 'post' by the admins, which is part of
the ballot, and contains the basic story info, and links. The nice
thing is that there are a whole lot of things that Drupal can do
besides be modified to do comment-based voting, all with the same user
database, and has lots of features that the conftool-based sites will
never have.

Later,
Anthony

Here's my $.02 on this, quickly.

I have no problem making membership here not a requirement for voting,
but keeping it as one for nominating. The key thing in my mind is that
people be able to vote more easily. I'm not sure if this is technically
more complicated for Anthony or not.

And I am in favor of not requiring membership here for voting. For one
thing it's easier on the people trying to join, and for another it
makes the Yahoo group a useful tool and not a hoop to jump through. If
we're worried about contacting authors or members, there's easier ways
to do that. Yes, you can't contact them through the website, but
there's nothing that says we couldn't set up an email list in the
official email account so we could send an occasional announcement to
all the authors, or all the voters, or whatever. It would actually be
more efficient than this, where announcements may get drowned out by
all the discussion.

There are other reasons why I'm in favor of not requiring membership
here to vote, but those are the main points.

Thanks,
Marta

Hi Marta,

--- In MEFAwards@yahoogroups.com, Marta Layton <melayton@...> wrote:
> I have no problem making membership here not a requirement for
> voting, but keeping it as one for nominating.

If this is technically possible—to eliminate the Yahoo group
membership requirement for voting, but keep it for nominating stories—
then the proposal is more appealing to me.

To clarify my position, I'm all in favor of anything
that makes voting easier, and I agree that eliminating the dual
membership requirement would help accomplish this. But making it
easier to *nominate* does not strike me as such a good thing. We
spent a lot of time in this post-mortem figuring out a way to limit
nominations, in order to get the total number of nominated stories
back to a more manageable level. If the "extra hoop" of Yahoo group
membership helps keep that number down, removing it would seem
counter-productive.

This is why I was asking about whether it was possible to separate
voting and nominating privileges: under the current system (IIRC) you
first have to join the Yahoo group before you can get a password for
the MEFA site. But once you have that password, you're able to both
vote and nominate at the MEFA site. So if joining the Yahoo group is
eliminated as a first step, I'm not sure how you could restrict
nominating to Yahoo group members. And if not, then while voting
will be easier, so will nominating.

> The key thing in my mind is that people be able to vote more
> easily. I'm not sure if this is technically more complicated for
> Anthony or not.

Me neither. If it's not technically feasible to separate the two
functions, then the consensus may be that the advantages of making it
easier to vote may outweigh the disadvantages of making it easier to
nominate. But I just wanted raise the issue before a decision is made.

> If we're worried about contacting authors or members, there's
> easier ways to do that. Yes, you can't contact them through the
> website, but there's nothing that says we couldn't set up an email
> list in the official email account so we could send an occasional
> announcement to all the authors, or all the voters, or whatever. It
> would actually be more efficient than this, where announcements may
> get drowned out by all the discussion.
>
> There are other reasons why I'm in favor of not requiring
> membership here to vote, but those are the main points.

Ainae raised some interesting questions re: sock puppets and vote
stacking…are there ways to control that through a MEFA site
membership alone?

Kathy

If being an author and voting could be separate, I don't see why nominating
couldn't be.

As for sockpuppets... How does signing up for the Yahoo group prevent it?
I invented a YahooID to be here, after all, and if I were a shrinking violet
who never got e-mails, how would having a membership here let you know that
I wasn't bedecked with google-eyes and a bad attitude?

I'd like to see nominated authors get voting priveleges without jumping
through the hoops anyway. They're not very likely to be sockpuppets.

On 2/2/06, Kathy <inkling-tcbs@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
> Hi Marta,
>
> --- In MEFAwards@yahoogroups.com, Marta Layton <melayton@...> wrote:
> > I have no problem making membership here not a requirement for
> > voting, but keeping it as one for nominating.
>
> If this is technically possibleýto eliminate the Yahoo group
> membership requirement for voting, but keep it for nominating storiesý
> then the proposal is more appealing to me.
>
> To clarify my position, I'm all in favor of anything
> that makes voting easier, and I agree that eliminating the dual
> membership requirement would help accomplish this. But making it
> easier to *nominate* does not strike me as such a good thing. We
> spent a lot of time in this post-mortem figuring out a way to limit
> nominations, in order to get the total number of nominated stories
> back to a more manageable level. If the "extra hoop" of Yahoo group
> membership helps keep that number down, removing it would seem
> counter-productive.
>
> This is why I was asking about whether it was possible to separate
> voting and nominating privileges: under the current system (IIRC) you
> first have to join the Yahoo group before you can get a password for
> the MEFA site. But once you have that password, you're able to both
> vote and nominate at the MEFA site. So if joining the Yahoo group is
> eliminated as a first step, I'm not sure how you could restrict
> nominating to Yahoo group members. And if not, then while voting
> will be easier, so will nominating.
>
> > The key thing in my mind is that people be able to vote more
> > easily. I'm not sure if this is technically more complicated for
> > Anthony or not.
>
> Me neither. If it's not technically feasible to separate the two
> functions, then the consensus may be that the advantages of making it
> easier to vote may outweigh the disadvantages of making it easier to
> nominate. But I just wanted raise the issue before a decision is made.
>
> > If we're worried about contacting authors or members, there's
> > easier ways to do that. Yes, you can't contact them through the
> > website, but there's nothing that says we couldn't set up an email
> > list in the official email account so we could send an occasional
> > announcement to all the authors, or all the voters, or whatever. It
> > would actually be more efficient than this, where announcements may
> > get drowned out by all the discussion.
> >
> > There are other reasons why I'm in favor of not requiring
> > membership here to vote, but those are the main points.
>
> Ainae raised some interesting questions re: sock puppets and vote
> stackingýare there ways to control that through a MEFA site
> membership alone?
>
> Kathy
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
> YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
>
>
> - Visit your group "MEFAwards<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MEFAwards>"
> on the web.
>
> - To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> MEFAwards-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com<MEFAwards-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>
>
> - Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
> Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.
>
>
> ------------------------------
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

--- In MEFAwards@yahoogroups.com, "Kathy" <inkling-tcbs@...> wrote:

>
> Hi Marta,
>
> --- In MEFAwards@yahoogroups.com, Marta Layton <melayton@> wrote:
> > I have no problem making membership here not a requirement for
> > voting, but keeping it as one for nominating.
>
> If this is technically possible—to eliminate the Yahoo group
> membership requirement for voting, but keep it for nominating stories—
> then the proposal is more appealing to me.
>
> To clarify my position, I'm all in favor of anything
> that makes voting easier, and I agree that eliminating the dual
> membership requirement would help accomplish this. But making it
> easier to *nominate* does not strike me as such a good thing. We
> spent a lot of time in this post-mortem figuring out a way to limit
> nominations, in order to get the total number of nominated stories
> back to a more manageable level. If the "extra hoop" of Yahoo group
> membership helps keep that number down, removing it would seem
> counter-productive.
>

I can see your point here. Honestly, it had not occurred to me before
to split the two, since in the past nominations and voting had been
done by the same group. That doesn't mean we can't do it this way in
the future, though. I agree with you about keeping numbers down.

> This is why I was asking about whether it was possible to separate
> voting and nominating privileges: under the current system (IIRC) you
> first have to join the Yahoo group before you can get a password for
> the MEFA site. But once you have that password, you're able to both
> vote and nominate at the MEFA site. So if joining the Yahoo group is
> eliminated as a first step, I'm not sure how you could restrict
> nominating to Yahoo group members. And if not, then while voting
> will be easier, so will nominating.
>

That's correct. As it stands, when someone joins the group the mods
receive an email. Them someone (elliska, I think) sets them up an
account at the website and sends them their password. This has to be
done manually.

It all comes down to what Anthony says is possible. But I'm wondering
whether we could have two classes of members (like we do now) but have
them arranged a bit differently. Now we have authors and
voting/nominating members. Provided one can be an author without
having any stories entered, we could give voting privileges to the
author group. Then when someone wants to join to vote, the admins
could set them up an author account and they could go from there. Of
course we probably want to rename this group from "author".

This might make it difficult to display a list of people who have
stories entered. I don't know the technical details of the website, so
don't know if this is a concern. If it is, we maybe would need three
types of member:

1. Author: Has stories entered, can vote, maybe can nominate

2. Voter: May have stories entered, can vote, can't nominate

3. Voter/Nominator:O May have stories entered, can vote and nominate

(2) wouldn't have to be a member of MEFAwards; (3) would have to be a
member. (1)'s ability to nominate would come from whether it's a
MEFAwards member or not.

And given that I don't know how the programming works, I'm not sure
whether even something like this would work. I'm just speculating.

> > The key thing in my mind is that people be able to vote more
> > easily. I'm not sure if this is technically more complicated for
> > Anthony or not.
>
> Me neither. If it's not technically feasible to separate the two
> functions, then the consensus may be that the advantages of making it
> easier to vote may outweigh the disadvantages of making it easier to
> nominate. But I just wanted raise the issue before a decision is made.
>

I understand. My gut feeling is that it's worth it to make voting
easier, but it's a valid point to raise.

> > If we're worried about contacting authors or members, there's
> > easier ways to do that. Yes, you can't contact them through the
> > website, but there's nothing that says we couldn't set up an email
> > list in the official email account so we could send an occasional
> > announcement to all the authors, or all the voters, or whatever. It
> > would actually be more efficient than this, where announcements may
> > get drowned out by all the discussion.
> >
> > There are other reasons why I'm in favor of not requiring
> > membership here to vote, but those are the main points.
>
> Ainae raised some interesting questions re: sock puppets and vote
> stacking…are there ways to control that through a MEFA site
> membership alone?
>

At one point Anthony and I talked about logging the IP addressess
whenever someone voted. In theory, an IP address is unique to each
internet connection, i.e., the modem you use to connect you to the
internet. That way, if there was a suspicious voting pattern -- two
people joining within a week of each other and voting for all the same
stories -- we could look at whether they were voting from the same
computer.

As rabidsamfan pointed out, it's pretty easy to sign up for a new
Yahoo account if you want to be a sockpuppet. Most people have more
than one email address anyway; I have four, though I only use this one
regularly. So if I wanted I could create a Yahoo group for all four,
join the Yahoo group with all four, and get four different IDs to vote
under. So the Yahoo ID's don't provide *that* much protection to
someone who wants to work the system.

Anyway... I'll need to talk to Anthony, but if we can log IP
addresses, then if something's suspicious we can check to see if they
have the same IP address. And then we can ask them if they have an
explanation for it, and investigate from there.

Cheers,
Marta

I think that it's really vital for this very
thing! You can't have ANY say in what changes
are made to the awards in following years without
being a member. I really don't see the hassle in
being a member - it doesn't take very long to
sign up and you can elect to not receive emails
if you so wish.

If we drop the membership as a REQUIREMENT, I
think it should at least become something like:
"We highly recommend that you sign up as a member
of the MEFAwards Yahoo! Group. Every year we
dissect the awards and discuss if we need changes
and what they should be. If you wish to have a
say in how the awards are run next year and in
the following years, then joining this group is a
must!"

Personally - and I KNOW people won't like this -
I think that if someone doesn't like something
about the awards, then I feel that they should
take the time to sign up to the group and discuss
it openly with everyone. Also, it helps prevent
a topic being overlooked. If someone merely sent
in an email saying "I think XYZ should be done"
then there is the risk that it will be lost in a
single inbox (or two or three if it went to the
mefawardsowner... email address) and not brought
up in the group.

I know it's all for fun, but I really do feel
that if membership to a mailing list is causing
people all this hassle, then they need to take a
chill pill! :-P I'm on 30+ mailing lists with
this one email address and I get hundreds of
emails a day some times! But the ones I only
want to skim, I put on digest or special notice.
As I said before, it's not a difficult or lengthy
procedure to join the group and it allows them to
take part in the post mortem and see the various
notices of timings etc.


Naresha.

~To forgive calls upon our love, to forget calls upon our strength~

AIM: Naresha21 MSN: candyman_gypsy@hotmail.com Yahoo: fruitcake5m1
Personal LJ: http://www.livejournal.com/users/nareshaninya/
Writing LJ: http://www.livejournal.com/users/writingsofresha/

My Website! Slash Me Happy
http://www.websamba.com/SlashMeHappy

http://quiz.ravenblack.net/blood.pl?biter=Resha



____________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Find a local business fast with Yahoo! Local Search
http://au.local.yahoo.com

--- In MEFAwards@yahoogroups.com, "Marta" <melayton@...> wrote:

> Anyway... I'll need to talk to Anthony, but if we can log IP
> addresses, then if something's suspicious we can check to see if they
> have the same IP address. And then we can ask them if they have an
> explanation for it, and investigate from there.
>
> Cheers,
> Marta

My personal suggestion would be:

* *strongly encourage* membership at this yahoogroup and require
membership at the MEFAsite. (if at some point the MEFAsite can
support forums, these discussions should be moved there.)

* log IPs for the votes.
notes would have to be added in the rules. remember a dial-up will
reflect a *range* of IPs rather than the same one all the time. I
have hit counters and trackers on some of my personal pages, and there
are a lot of ways - not so much to identify who, but that it's
probably the same person. - for example, the same ISP service from the
same physical location and the IP numbers will fall within a fairly
range.

It's my personal opinion that the fandom is small enough and close
enough that a series of new IDs would be noticed and questioned. If
problems are suspected, they could be dealt with on an individual
basis.

Sulriel

--- In MEFAwards@yahoogroups.com, Naresha <north_shore_fruitcake@...>
wrote:

>> I think that it's really vital for this very
> thing! You can't have ANY say in what changes
> are made to the awards in following years without
> being a member. I really don't see the hassle in
> being a member - it doesn't take very long to
> sign up and you can elect to not receive emails
> if you so wish.

this is a point that could be emphasized. That they can sign up here
and go 'no mail', but they could still get any 'special announcements'
the moderators or admin need to put out.

> > > I know it's all for fun, but I really do feel
> that if membership to a mailing list is causing
> people all this hassle, then they need to take a
> chill pill! :-P I'm on 30+ mailing lists with
> this one email address and I get hundreds of
> emails a day some times! But the ones I only
> want to skim, I put on digest or special notice.
> As I said before, it's not a difficult or lengthy
> procedure to join the group and it allows them to
> take part in the post mortem and see the various
> notices of timings etc.>

I have strong opinions on personal responsibility and participation in
regards to being part of a community - with the balancing thought that
people should do what they reasonably can. (not stress about trying to
match what someone else can)

I do think that "joining another group" put some people off, I'm not
sure how many. I know we want to encourage reading and voting, and in
part that means keeping it as easy and simple as possible. but I also
wonder if the people who declined to join here because it was 'too
much trouble' (my own paraphrase) would have found their way to the
website and gone through the clicks there to read and vote? That's a
real question, not rhetorical. I agree about the hoops, I hate the
jumping through that has to happen sometimes, but I wonder, if this
case, what's really being lost.

Maybe this is another issue that needs to be left 'as is' for 2006
with a note to discuss again in next years PM.

Sulriel

Actually, I strongly feel that this shouldn't be put off -- if for no other
reason than that authors should be able to vote as soon as they have an ID
at the MEFAsite. *That's* what stuck in my craw -- that I had an identity
and a password there and I *still* couldn't get in the gate unless I did the
jellybelly dance.

This is probably a question that should be asked on the LJ comm, and pushed
through middleearthnews as well. If you were nominated as an author for the
MEFAs and you didn't vote, why didn't you? I'm willing to bet that some
folks just couldn't figure out how. Goodness knows *I* didn't scroll down
on the website for far too long, and ended up asking dumb questions, and I'm
a trained professional. *polishes dented librarian badge*.

If having two identities for authors/voters at the MEFAsite is an essential
for some technical reason, then why not add a clickybox at the beginning of
the story confirmation form saying "I'd like to vote at these awards"? Then
the second ID could be made and sent out to authors fairly easily.

So, I come down to:
Nominations and Discussions through the Yahoo group...
Voting at the MEFA site. Voting privileges to nominated authors who have
completed the confirmation process, nominators (via Yahoogroup) and past
participants automatically...

New voters who are not nominators or authors are the most likely sockpuppets
-- but I don't have strong opinions there. I don't see that the Yahoogroup
discourages sockpuppetry all that much, but I don't know how you'd handle
them at the MEFAsite either.

On 2/3/06, sulriel <Sulriel@htcomp.net> wrote:
>
>
> --- In MEFAwards@yahoogroups.com, Naresha <north_shore_fruitcake@...>
> wrote:
> >> I think that it's really vital for this very
> > thing! You can't have ANY say in what changes
> > are made to the awards in following years without
> > being a member. I really don't see the hassle in
> > being a member - it doesn't take very long to
> > sign up and you can elect to not receive emails
> > if you so wish.
>
>
> this is a point that could be emphasized. That they can sign up here
> and go 'no mail', but they could still get any 'special announcements'
> the moderators or admin need to put out.
>
>
> > > > I know it's all for fun, but I really do feel
> > that if membership to a mailing list is causing
> > people all this hassle, then they need to take a
> > chill pill! :-P I'm on 30+ mailing lists with
> > this one email address and I get hundreds of
> > emails a day some times! But the ones I only
> > want to skim, I put on digest or special notice.
> > As I said before, it's not a difficult or lengthy
> > procedure to join the group and it allows them to
> > take part in the post mortem and see the various
> > notices of timings etc.>
>
>
> I have strong opinions on personal responsibility and participation in
> regards to being part of a community - with the balancing thought that
> people should do what they reasonably can. (not stress about trying to
> match what someone else can)
>
> I do think that "joining another group" put some people off, I'm not
> sure how many. I know we want to encourage reading and voting, and in
> part that means keeping it as easy and simple as possible. but I also
> wonder if the people who declined to join here because it was 'too
> much trouble' (my own paraphrase) would have found their way to the
> website and gone through the clicks there to read and vote? That's a
> real question, not rhetorical. I agree about the hoops, I hate the
> jumping through that has to happen sometimes, but I wonder, if this
> case, what's really being lost.
>
> Maybe this is another issue that needs to be left 'as is' for 2006
> with a note to discuss again in next years PM.
>
> Sulriel
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
> YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
>
>
> - Visit your group "MEFAwards<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MEFAwards>"
> on the web.
>
> - To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> MEFAwards-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com<MEFAwards-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>
>
> - Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
> Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.
>
>
> ------------------------------
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

--- In MEFAwards@yahoogroups.com, rabidsamfan <rabidsamfan@...> wrote:

>
> Actually, I strongly feel that this shouldn't be put off -- if for

no other> reason than that authors should be able to vote as soon as
they have an ID> at the MEFAsite. *That's* what stuck in my craw --
that I had an identity> and a password there and I *still* couldn't
get in the gate unless I did the> jellybelly dance.


That seems like a valid point. If I understand, you're suggesting
that authors (basically) be automatically added as voters, and people
who want to read/vote who are not authors will still have to request
membership.

> > This is probably a question that should be asked on the LJ comm,

and pushed > through middleearthnews as well. If you were nominated
as an author for the > MEFAs and you didn't vote, why didn't you?


I would support this - as has been said here before, it's difficult
(if not impossible) to make changes for people who aren't here.

- Marta or Aine will have to answer this, if it needs to be done or
not, or more discussion.

> > If having two identities for authors/voters at the MEFAsite is an

essential> for some technical reason, then why not add a clickybox at
the beginning of> the story confirmation form saying "I'd like to
vote at these awards"?


sounds like a good idea.

> > So, I come down to:
> Nominations and Discussions through the Yahoo group...
> Voting at the MEFA site. Voting privileges to nominated authors

who have> completed the confirmation process, nominators (via
Yahoogroup) and past > participants automatically...


I like the clickbox idea more than adding anyone automatically.

Sulriel

I'm not jumping on the bandwagon of not requiring membership to this group
yet. Just entertaining a thought on security and sock-puppets, etc. on the
MEFA2006 site.

We wouldn't have to log IPs of every vote, because voting does require you
to login as SOMEONE to the MEFA2006 site. Thus an admin of proper security
level could pull up a list of votes for a particular user. So what would
need to be logged are IP addresses for user accounts.

Would that be harder or easier? Just hypothesize with me. I have a cable
connection, so my IP address stays stable for months. But then it suddenly
changes. It could change during the many-monthed MEFA year. A dial-up
connection will show more changes. But would that be a problem. It's not
multiple IP addresses that would be a problem, but multiple IDs. So would
it be suspicious to see 2 IDs with created with the same IP address?

Could it be flagged for further investigation, even if the IDs were created
months apart? But then how could you even get a flag if Mary Sockpuppet
decided to join with her real name in May, from a dial-up connection, and
three separate IDs with three separate e-mails in three consequetive
(spelling? Ah the last vestiges of my aphasic symptoms still creep up now
and then.) months from dial-up? 4 different IP addresses. How could we
spot her?

I will now continue reading posts as time allows.
--Ainaechoiriel
MEFA Admin and Founder

"This evil cannot be concealed by the power of the Elves," Elrond said, "for
it is Windows-compatible, and freeware at that." --H.F.

<http://gabrielle.sytes.net/mefa> http://gabrielle.sytes.net/mefa The
Middle-Earth Fanfiction Awards

Blog: <http://www.ainaechoiriel.blogspot.com/>
http://www.ainaechoiriel.blogspot.com



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Just a note on "identities".

I don't think we'd need separate identities, even with the present website
technology. Just different groups. Like there are now. Some had Author
Liaison privileges last year as well as Author and Member. Others had
Categorizer as well as those other basics. I had all of those as well as
Admin. Actually, just to keep Admin and Voter me's separate, I did have two
different logons for that. But that's a special case.

For each ID, we'd just need groups they could be members of:
Author (has stories)
Nominator (may nominate)
Voter (may vote)
Etc.

Anthony, do correct me if I'm wrong.

--Ainaechoiriel
MEFA Admin and Founder

"This evil cannot be concealed by the power of the Elves," Elrond said, "for
it is Windows-compatible, and freeware at that." --H.F.

http://gabrielle.sytes.net/mefa The Middle-Earth Fanfiction Awards

Blog: http://www.ainaechoiriel.blogspot.com

> -----Original Message-----
> From: MEFAwards@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:MEFAwards@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of rabidsamfan
> Sent: Friday, February 03, 2006 8:32 AM
> To: MEFAwards@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [MEFAwards] Re: post-mortem: Yahoo membership
> requirement to vote.
>
> Actually, I strongly feel that this shouldn't be put off --
> if for no other reason than that authors should be able to
> vote as soon as they have an ID at the MEFAsite. *That's*
> what stuck in my craw -- that I had an identity and a
> password there and I *still* couldn't get in the gate unless
> I did the jellybelly dance.
>
> This is probably a question that should be asked on the LJ
> comm, and pushed through middleearthnews as well. If you
> were nominated as an author for the MEFAs and you didn't
> vote, why didn't you? I'm willing to bet that some folks
> just couldn't figure out how. Goodness knows *I* didn't
> scroll down on the website for far too long, and ended up
> asking dumb questions, and I'm a trained professional.
> *polishes dented librarian badge*.
>
> If having two identities for authors/voters at the MEFAsite
> is an essential for some technical reason, then why not add a
> clickybox at the beginning of the story confirmation form
> saying "I'd like to vote at these awards"? Then the second
> ID could be made and sent out to authors fairly easily.
>
> So, I come down to:
> Nominations and Discussions through the Yahoo group...
> Voting at the MEFA site. Voting privileges to nominated
> authors who have completed the confirmation process,
> nominators (via Yahoogroup) and past participants automatically...
>
> New voters who are not nominators or authors are the most
> likely sockpuppets
> -- but I don't have strong opinions there. I don't see that
> the Yahoogroup discourages sockpuppetry all that much, but I
> don't know how you'd handle them at the MEFAsite either.
>
>
>
>
> On 2/3/06, sulriel <Sulriel@htcomp.net> wrote:
> >
> >
> > --- In MEFAwards@yahoogroups.com, Naresha
> <north_shore_fruitcake@...>
> > wrote:
> > >> I think that it's really vital for this very
> > > thing! You can't have ANY say in what changes are made to the
> > > awards in following years without being a member. I really don't
> > > see the hassle in being a member - it doesn't take very
> long to sign
> > > up and you can elect to not receive emails if you so wish.
> >
> >
> > this is a point that could be emphasized. That they can
> sign up here
> > and go 'no mail', but they could still get any 'special
> announcements'
> > the moderators or admin need to put out.
> >
> >
> > > > > I know it's all for fun, but I really do feel
> > > that if membership to a mailing list is causing people all this
> > > hassle, then they need to take a chill pill! :-P I'm on
> 30+ mailing
> > > lists with this one email address and I get hundreds of
> emails a day
> > > some times! But the ones I only want to skim, I put on digest or
> > > special notice.
> > > As I said before, it's not a difficult or lengthy
> procedure to join
> > > the group and it allows them to take part in the post
> mortem and see
> > > the various notices of timings etc.>
> >
> >
> > I have strong opinions on personal responsibility and
> participation in
> > regards to being part of a community - with the balancing
> thought that
> > people should do what they reasonably can. (not stress
> about trying to
> > match what someone else can)
> >
> > I do think that "joining another group" put some people off, I'm not
> > sure how many. I know we want to encourage reading and
> voting, and in
> > part that means keeping it as easy and simple as possible.
> but I also
> > wonder if the people who declined to join here because it was 'too
> > much trouble' (my own paraphrase) would have found their way to the
> > website and gone through the clicks there to read and vote?
> That's a
> > real question, not rhetorical. I agree about the hoops, I hate the
> > jumping through that has to happen sometimes, but I wonder, if this
> > case, what's really being lost.
> >
> > Maybe this is another issue that needs to be left 'as is' for 2006
> > with a note to discuss again in next years PM.
> >
> > Sulriel
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------
> > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
> >
> >
> > - Visit your group
> "MEFAwards<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MEFAwards>"
> > on the web.
> >
> > - To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> >
> MEFAwards-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com<MEFAwards-unsubscribe@ya
> hoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>
> >
> > - Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
> > Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------
> >
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

> this is a point that could be emphasized.
> That they can sign up here and go 'no mail',
> but they could still get any 'special
> announcements' the moderators or admin need to
> put out.

As I said, it should take all of two minutes to
join up! In terms of hoops that need jumping
through, I honestly think that this is a
relatively small one and I think that people like
to make a mountain out of a molehill when it
comes to joining mailing lists. I'm using a
dodgy old computer that requires me to reboot at
least once a night just to open a single web page
and has a 56K dialup that needs redialling every
4hrs and even *I* can join a mailing list in only
a couple of minutes! :-) As I said - I think
people just enjoy whinging about it and making a
massive problem out of what is really a minor
hassle at best.

> I have strong opinions on personal
> responsibility and participation in regards to
> being part of a community - with the balancing
> thought that people should do what they
> reasonably can. (not stress about trying to
> match what someone else can)

I do agree with this and whilst some people will
say "but you admit you feel strongly on this
issue", I don't think it's really all that fair
on those who do take the time to join the group -
even if they feel they can't or won't be
contributing much to discussion such as this. It
doesn't cost anything, it doesn't take a long
time and it makes mass mailings a LOT easier for
the moderators! The other thing we need to keep
in mind is that if we drop membership of this
group from required to recommended, we risk it
becoming an oligarchy (rule by a few) which can
upset/anger a lot of people. But as I said in my
last email, I don't feel it's fair for people who
don't join up to be able to have a say in how
it's all run - they don't take the time to join
one mailing list and become part of the
community, why should they be able to affect how
it's run?

> I do think that "joining another group" put
> some people off, I'm not sure how many.

Let's not forget that not all that long ago, we
were trying to CUT the number of nominations!
Realistically, putting people off should be
beneficial! (I'm playing devil's advocate here -
I know we wanted to cut individual nominations so
more people could nominate!)

> I know we want to encourage reading and
> voting, and in part that means keeping it as
> easy and simple as possible. but I also wonder
> if the people who declined to join here
> because it was 'too much trouble' (my own
> paraphrase) would have found their way to the >

website and gone through the clicks there to

> read and vote? That's a real question, not
> rhetorical.

I totally agree, Sulriel! It is food for thought
- how enthusiastic are people really if they
refuse to take the time to join one mailing list?
Also, the group provides a MUCH easier base for
newcomers to ask basic questions. It also
affords the chance for the burden of these
questions to be spread around several people as
opposed to only one. If people didn't join this
group, then in my mind, they would most likely
email Ainae - given she has MEFA Admin as her
email address - which would place the burden or
telling people things directly onto her. It
would also mean that the same questions would be
asked more than once, which is always an annoying
thing when you're the only one doing the
answering. The advantage of a mailing list is
that it is PUBLIC - everyone can see everyone
else's questions. And what one person wanted to
know on Tuesday, would most likely be the same
thing that some else wouldn't have been brave
enough to ask until Thursday - but with a mailing
list, they see the answer before they ask the
question. It will cut down on some of the
repetitiveness - I know there will be some given
new people join all the time but it will help a
fair bit.

> I agree about the hoops, I hate the jumping
> through that has to happen sometimes, but I
> wonder, if this case, what's really being lost.

Like I said above - the issue of joining the
Yahoo group really has become a whopping great
mountain of an issue when it is really just a
molehill of a problem. I think what has happend
is that we have let ourselves be swayed by just a
few people who felt the need to gripe about
SOMETHING and over time, people who haven't
really seen the point in joining, but have done
it because it's a requirement, have felt less
uncomfortable in voicing their opinion on the
matter too.

> Maybe this is another issue that needs to be
> left 'as is' for 2006 with a note to discuss
> again in next years PM.

What I would like to see happen is that we KEEP
the requirement for this year but poll people who
decline to join, asking them WHY they don't want
to and did the requirement of joining a yahoo
group have anything to do with it? It's all well
and good talking about what people are thinking,
but it's not much use making assumptions - we
have a 50% chance of being wrong (or right) about
them! Either it's a hassle to them or it isn't.
I'd like to see some more formal research put
into this topic before it's decided - I think we
run a very high risk of making things MUCH more
difficult for ourselves in terms of contacting
people. This group makes it a lot easier,
despite the issues people have with it.

Resha.

~To forgive calls upon our love, to forget calls upon our strength~

AIM: Naresha21 MSN: candyman_gypsy@hotmail.com Yahoo: fruitcake5m1
Personal LJ: http://www.livejournal.com/users/nareshaninya/
Writing LJ: http://www.livejournal.com/users/writingsofresha/

My Website! Slash Me Happy
http://www.websamba.com/SlashMeHappy

http://quiz.ravenblack.net/blood.pl?biter=Resha



____________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Never miss an Instant Message - Yahoo! Messenger for SMS
http://au.mobile.yahoo.com/mweb/index.html

It didn't take me two minutes to join. It took twenty minimum, a good deal
of which was reading through the fine print at Yahoo. I didn't need, or
want, another e-mail address, and not one, but two passwords to add to the
list. (One for the MEFAsite, which, thankfully, I didn't have to make
complicated, and one for Yahoo which I did.)

Strange as it may seem, there are people out here who limit their footprint
on the web as much as they reasonably can, and who only register for the
things they really need, rather than the things they merely want. They are
usually the same people whose innate honesty prevents them from registering
under a false identity. I thought long and hard about whether or not to
register at Yahoo. Did I want to add voting on the MEFAs to my list of
obligations? Did I want to risk revealing my identity to a bunch of people
I don't know? Only a handful of fans in LotR fandom knew my real name, and
I was perfectly happy with that, as it allowed me to fade from uncomfortable
discussions with few RL complications. (You might note that as soon as I
figured out how to get the e-mails here to use my nom de plume instead of my
real name I made the switch.)

Does anyone have the statistics on how many nominated authors didn't go
through the process of joining the Yahoo group to get voting rights? Both
the hard number and the percentage, if possible. Data is always the most
useful way to settle dustups.

Thank you.

On 2/4/06, Naresha <north_shore_fruitcake@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
>
> > this is a point that could be emphasized.
> > That they can sign up here and go 'no mail',
> > but they could still get any 'special
> > announcements' the moderators or admin need to
> > put out.
>
> As I said, it should take all of two minutes to
> join up! In terms of hoops that need jumping
> through, I honestly think that this is a
> relatively small one and I think that people like
> to make a mountain out of a molehill when it
> comes to joining mailing lists. I'm using a
> dodgy old computer that requires me to reboot at
> least once a night just to open a single web page
> and has a 56K dialup that needs redialling every
> 4hrs and even *I* can join a mailing list in only
> a couple of minutes! :-) As I said - I think
> people just enjoy whinging about it and making a
> massive problem out of what is really a minor
> hassle at best.
>
>
> > I have strong opinions on personal
> > responsibility and participation in regards to
> > being part of a community - with the balancing
> > thought that people should do what they
> > reasonably can. (not stress about trying to
> > match what someone else can)
>
> I do agree with this and whilst some people will
> say "but you admit you feel strongly on this
> issue", I don't think it's really all that fair
> on those who do take the time to join the group -
> even if they feel they can't or won't be
> contributing much to discussion such as this. It
> doesn't cost anything, it doesn't take a long
> time and it makes mass mailings a LOT easier for
> the moderators! The other thing we need to keep
> in mind is that if we drop membership of this
> group from required to recommended, we risk it
> becoming an oligarchy (rule by a few) which can
> upset/anger a lot of people. But as I said in my
> last email, I don't feel it's fair for people who
> don't join up to be able to have a say in how
> it's all run - they don't take the time to join
> one mailing list and become part of the
> community, why should they be able to affect how
> it's run?
>
> > I do think that "joining another group" put
> > some people off, I'm not sure how many.
>
> Let's not forget that not all that long ago, we
> were trying to CUT the number of nominations!
> Realistically, putting people off should be
> beneficial! (I'm playing devil's advocate here -
> I know we wanted to cut individual nominations so
> more people could nominate!)
>
> > I know we want to encourage reading and
> > voting, and in part that means keeping it as
> > easy and simple as possible. but I also wonder
> > if the people who declined to join here
> > because it was 'too much trouble' (my own
> > paraphrase) would have found their way to the >
> website and gone through the clicks there to
> > read and vote? That's a real question, not
> > rhetorical.
>
> I totally agree, Sulriel! It is food for thought
> - how enthusiastic are people really if they
> refuse to take the time to join one mailing list?
> Also, the group provides a MUCH easier base for
> newcomers to ask basic questions. It also
> affords the chance for the burden of these
> questions to be spread around several people as
> opposed to only one. If people didn't join this
> group, then in my mind, they would most likely
> email Ainae - given she has MEFA Admin as her
> email address - which would place the burden or
> telling people things directly onto her. It
> would also mean that the same questions would be
> asked more than once, which is always an annoying
> thing when you're the only one doing the
> answering. The advantage of a mailing list is
> that it is PUBLIC - everyone can see everyone
> else's questions. And what one person wanted to
> know on Tuesday, would most likely be the same
> thing that some else wouldn't have been brave
> enough to ask until Thursday - but with a mailing
> list, they see the answer before they ask the
> question. It will cut down on some of the
> repetitiveness - I know there will be some given
> new people join all the time but it will help a
> fair bit.
>
> > I agree about the hoops, I hate the jumping
> > through that has to happen sometimes, but I
> > wonder, if this case, what's really being lost.
>
> Like I said above - the issue of joining the
> Yahoo group really has become a whopping great
> mountain of an issue when it is really just a
> molehill of a problem. I think what has happend
> is that we have let ourselves be swayed by just a
> few people who felt the need to gripe about
> SOMETHING and over time, people who haven't
> really seen the point in joining, but have done
> it because it's a requirement, have felt less
> uncomfortable in voicing their opinion on the
> matter too.
>
> > Maybe this is another issue that needs to be
> > left 'as is' for 2006 with a note to discuss
> > again in next years PM.
>
> What I would like to see happen is that we KEEP
> the requirement for this year but poll people who
> decline to join, asking them WHY they don't want
> to and did the requirement of joining a yahoo
> group have anything to do with it? It's all well
> and good talking about what people are thinking,
> but it's not much use making assumptions - we
> have a 50% chance of being wrong (or right) about
> them! Either it's a hassle to them or it isn't.
> I'd like to see some more formal research put
> into this topic before it's decided - I think we
> run a very high risk of making things MUCH more
> difficult for ourselves in terms of contacting
> people. This group makes it a lot easier,
> despite the issues people have with it.
>
> Resha.
>
> ~To forgive calls upon our love, to forget calls upon our strength~
>
> AIM: Naresha21 MSN: candyman_gypsy@hotmail.com Yahoo: fruitcake5m1
> Personal LJ: http://www.livejournal.com/users/nareshaninya/
> Writing LJ: http://www.livejournal.com/users/writingsofresha/
>
> My Website! Slash Me Happy
> http://www.websamba.com/SlashMeHappy
>
> http://quiz.ravenblack.net/blood.pl?biter=Resha
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Never miss an Instant Message - Yahoo! Messenger for SMS
> http://au.mobile.yahoo.com/mweb/index.html
>
>
> SPONSORED LINKS
> Business writing book<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Business+writing+book&w1=Business+writing+book&w2=Book+writing+software&w3=Writing+and+publishing+a+book&w4=Writing+book&w5=Writing+child+book&w6=Creative+writing+book&c=6&s=158&.sig=dEtFe3pmNF77PrNNotLHHQ> Book
> writing software<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Book+writing+software&w1=Business+writing+book&w2=Book+writing+software&w3=Writing+and+publishing+a+book&w4=Writing+book&w5=Writing+child+book&w6=Creative+writing+book&c=6&s=158&.sig=rg0BUuA1FfCOEYMKdumjZw> Writing
> and publishing a book<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Writing+and+publishing+a+book&w1=Business+writing+book&w2=Book+writing+software&w3=Writing+and+publishing+a+book&w4=Writing+book&w5=Writing+child+book&w6=Creative+writing+book&c=6&s=158&.sig=AR_8hCxnU3k5UTdBz_enrg> Writing
> book<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Writing+book&w1=Business+writing+book&w2=Book+writing+software&w3=Writing+and+publishing+a+book&w4=Writing+book&w5=Writing+child+book&w6=Creative+writing+book&c=6&s=158&.sig=kSRYPnZ89SrMSNtGDh5Yzw> Writing
> child book<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Writing+child+book&w1=Business+writing+book&w2=Book+writing+software&w3=Writing+and+publishing+a+book&w4=Writing+book&w5=Writing+child+book&w6=Creative+writing+book&c=6&s=158&.sig=bTvrhp1NnrVCSIhFvlZLvw> Creative
> writing book<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Creative+writing+book&w1=Business+writing+book&w2=Book+writing+software&w3=Writing+and+publishing+a+book&w4=Writing+book&w5=Writing+child+book&w6=Creative+writing+book&c=6&s=158&.sig=yE-E0LiPh79HNQCJjL0Mmg>
> ------------------------------
> YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
>
>
> - Visit your group "MEFAwards<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MEFAwards>"
> on the web.
>
> - To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> MEFAwards-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com<MEFAwards-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>
>
> - Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
> Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.
>
>
> ------------------------------
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> I think that it's really vital for this very
> thing! You can't have ANY say in what changes
> are made to the awards in following years without
> being a member. I really don't see the hassle in
> being a member - it doesn't take very long to
> sign up and you can elect to not receive emails
> if you so wish.
>
> If we drop the membership as a REQUIREMENT, I
> think it should at least become something like:
> "We highly recommend that you sign up as a member
> of the MEFAwards Yahoo! Group. Every year we
> dissect the awards and discuss if we need changes
> and what they should be. If you wish to have a
> say in how the awards are run next year and in
> the following years, then joining this group is a
> must!"
>

Oh, yes, I completely agree; joining the Yahoo group would be strongly
encouraged. Like you said, there are definite reasons to do it:

* participate in policy-making discussions like this one
* have an easy avenue to ask questions
* keep up-to-date on official announcements
* receive calendar warnings when a certain season of the awards is
about to end.

And I'm sure others that I'm not even remembering. Plus, I like to
think we're a pretty fun gang of people. But I think encouraging it
will be a lot more productive than requiring it.

> Personally - and I KNOW people won't like this -
> I think that if someone doesn't like something
> about the awards, then I feel that they should
> take the time to sign up to the group and discuss
> it openly with everyone. Also, it helps prevent
> a topic being overlooked. If someone merely sent
> in an email saying "I think XYZ should be done"
> then there is the risk that it will be lost in a
> single inbox (or two or three if it went to the
> mefawardsowner... email address) and not brought
> up in the group.
>

I agree with this, too. But I think we shouldn't forget the fact that
there are some people who may not care to get heavily involved with the
awards, may not care how we order the categories or whether we allow
NC17 stories in particular, but is still willing to vote for 5 or 10
stories if we make it easier. And the more of these people we actually
get to sign up and vote, the fairer the awards will be.

> I know it's all for fun, but I really do feel
> that if membership to a mailing list is causing
> people all this hassle, then they need to take a
> chill pill! :-P I'm on 30+ mailing lists with
> this one email address and I get hundreds of
> emails a day some times! But the ones I only
> want to skim, I put on digest or special notice.
> As I said before, it's not a difficult or lengthy
> procedure to join the group and it allows them to
> take part in the post mortem and see the various
> notices of timings etc.
>

I don't have much patience for the people who aren't willing to join
"one more list". If you're already joining Yahoo memberships and are
used to this type of exchange, then it does seem lazy not to join
MEFAwards. The people I'm more concerned about are the people who
aren't active in Yahoo circles. I know a lot of people in this fandom
communicate via LJ and don't even have a Yahoo password, don't know
exactly how to get one and don't have any other reason to do so. They
may not be particularly computer literate, and it's a bit frustrating
to go through the steps involved with setting up a Yahoo account. If
they want to join, it's a much bigger investment for them, and I can
understand why they'd put it off.

Marta

> Message: 2
> Date: Fri, 03 Feb 2006 13:49:59 -0000
> From: "sulriel" <Sulriel@htcomp.net>
> Subject: Re: post-mortem: Yahoo membership requirement to vote.
>
> --- In MEFAwards@yahoogroups.com, "Marta" <melayton@...> wrote:
>> Anyway... I'll need to talk to Anthony, but if we can log IP
>> addresses, then if something's suspicious we can check to see if they
>> have the same IP address. And then we can ask them if they have an
>> explanation for it, and investigate from there.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Marta
>
>
> My personal suggestion would be:
>
> * *strongly encourage* membership at this yahoogroup and require
> membership at the MEFAsite. (if at some point the MEFAsite can
> support forums, these discussions should be moved there.)
>

Membership will always be required at the voting website; if we didn't
there's *really* no way to monitor sock-puppetry. I think everyone
agrees this is a bad idea.

And like I said to Naresha, I would strongly encourage people to join
the Yahoo group. Perhaps to join people would see a page like:

-----

Before you can vote you must request a membership at this website. To
do this, please <link>email the administrators</link>. Include the
following email:

Your email address
The name you are known by in the fandom
Your preferred username and password
Your website (if applicable)
Your Yahoo ID (if applicable)

Members must join the <link>MEFAwards Yahoo group</link> before they
are allowed to nominate stories. Everyone is highly encouraged to join
this group, as it is a great place to discuss the awards, keep
up-to-date on official announcements, and ask questions to the
administrators and other people involved in the awards.

Please note that this website records your IP address to monitor
whether one person is voting under different IDs. If more than one
person will be voting from your computer or from different computers in
the same house please mention this to the administrators.

-----

> * log IPs for the votes.
> notes would have to be added in the rules. remember a dial-up will
> reflect a *range* of IPs rather than the same one all the time. I
> have hit counters and trackers on some of my personal pages, and there
> are a lot of ways - not so much to identify who, but that it's
> probably the same person. - for example, the same ISP service from the
> same physical location and the IP numbers will fall within a fairly
> range.
>

Okay, I wasn't 100% clear about how IP addresses work. I only know that
they are used at HASA to make sure the same person doesn't vote on the
same story in review more than once, and from my understanding they
seem to work reasonably well. But I'm not that up on the admin side of
that website since I started working with the admins, so I'll bow to
those people with more knowledge of this kind of thing.

Sure, there are some problems and it wouldn't work 100% -- but it's
more secure than just requiring a unique Yahoo ID, if that's the main
thing we're worried about.

> It's my personal opinion that the fandom is small enough and close
> enough that a series of new IDs would be noticed and questioned. If
> problems are suspected, they could be dealt with on an individual
> basis.
>

Definitely, especially if they vote. I read all of the votes, and there
were maybe three IDs from people I didn't already know of. And those
people were all voting on different stories, not much overlap, and the
votes weren't so long that they seemed like sockpuppetry to me at all.
So if there is sockpuppetry it goes beyond the MEFAs; people would have
to have dual identities in other places in the fandom as well.

Marta

> Message: 3
> Date: Fri, 03 Feb 2006 14:05:37 -0000
> From: "sulriel" <Sulriel@htcomp.net>
> Subject: Re: post-mortem: Yahoo membership requirement to vote.
>
>
> --- In MEFAwards@yahoogroups.com, Naresha <north_shore_fruitcake@...>
> wrote:
>>> I think that it's really vital for this very
>> thing! You can't have ANY say in what changes
>> are made to the awards in following years without
>> being a member. I really don't see the hassle in
>> being a member - it doesn't take very long to
>> sign up and you can elect to not receive emails
>> if you so wish.
>
>
> this is a point that could be emphasized. That they can sign up here
> and go 'no mail', but they could still get any 'special announcements'
> the moderators or admin need to put out.
>

I do think the Yahoo group is an important tool. But I think it needs
to be emphasised as an end in itself -- a way to talk people, get
information -- rather than just a means to an end.

>>>> I know it's all for fun, but I really do feel
>> that if membership to a mailing list is causing
>> people all this hassle, then they need to take a
>> chill pill! :-P I'm on 30+ mailing lists with
>> this one email address and I get hundreds of
>> emails a day some times! But the ones I only
>> want to skim, I put on digest or special notice.
>> As I said before, it's not a difficult or lengthy
>> procedure to join the group and it allows them to
>> take part in the post mortem and see the various
>> notices of timings etc.>
>
> I have strong opinions on personal responsibility and participation in
> regards to being part of a community - with the balancing thought that
> people should do what they reasonably can. (not stress about trying to
> match what someone else can)
>
> I do think that "joining another group" put some people off, I'm not
> sure how many. I know we want to encourage reading and voting, and in
> part that means keeping it as easy and simple as possible. but I also
> wonder if the people who declined to join here because it was 'too
> much trouble' (my own paraphrase) would have found their way to the
> website and gone through the clicks there to read and vote? That's a
> real question, not rhetorical. I agree about the hoops, I hate the
> jumping through that has to happen sometimes, but I wonder, if this
> case, what's really being lost.
>

I think we need to remember that all of us here are the ones that
didn't have a problem joining a Yahoo group, by the very nature of the
fact that we *are* here. The people who never joined aren't able to
explain why they didn't - they're not here.

From the people I've talked to (and it's been a significant number, but
I'm sure there are lots of people I don't hear from), they are active
in the fandom and want to get involved with the awards, but Yahoo is an
alien world to them. They don't belong to Yahoo groups.

How would most of us feel if we were told we had to get a LJ community
and join a certain community over there, in order to vote? I have an LJ
and am pretty active and for me it would be no big deal -- but I know
Ainae has said she does not knoe much about LJ and I think has only
made one such post, and that an anonymous one. I'm sure other people
here, who are very familiar with Yahoo and feel comfortable with it,
would find signing up for a LJ account and joing a community when you
weren't really confident how to do this, to be a pretty big obstacle to
overcome.

Marta

--- In MEFAwards@yahoogroups.com, "sulriel" <Sulriel@...> wrote:

>
> --- In MEFAwards@yahoogroups.com, "Marta" <melayton@> wrote:
>> Anyway... I'll need to talk to Anthony, but if we can log IP
>> addresses, then if something's suspicious we can check to see if they
>> have the same IP address. And then we can ask them if they have an
>> explanation for it, and investigate from there.

<snip>

> * log IPs for the votes.

IP's aren't stable for those who log in through AOL for example. It
gets generated everytime someone uses it. It can be usefull when your
IP is fixed, but with providers like that... And there are many
authors who have AOL out there...

Rhapsody
(currently more absent because of her little dunedan)

> Message: 4
> Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2006 09:32:07 -0500
> From: rabidsamfan <rabidsamfan@verizon.net>
> Subject: Re: Re: post-mortem: Yahoo membership requirement to vote.
>
> Actually, I strongly feel that this shouldn't be put off -- if for no
> other
> reason than that authors should be able to vote as soon as they have
> an ID
> at the MEFAsite. *That's* what stuck in my craw -- that I had an
> identity
> and a password there and I *still* couldn't get in the gate unless I
> did the
> jellybelly dance.
>

That's a reasonable point. Authors are people who often don't have
previous exposure to the awards, aren't involved but we're going to
them and trying to involve them in one way. If people are uncomfortable
completely separating voting rights from membership at this Yahoo
group, maybe we could consider giving authors automatic rights. It's
sort of a half-way step, and if we *still* have a problem next year we
could reconsider opening it up to everyone, not just authors.

> This is probably a question that should be asked on the LJ comm, and
> pushed
> through middleearthnews as well. If you were nominated as an author
> for the
> MEFAs and you didn't vote, why didn't you? I'm willing to bet that
> some
> folks just couldn't figure out how. Goodness knows *I* didn't scroll
> down
> on the website for far too long, and ended up asking dumb questions,
> and I'm
> a trained professional. *polishes dented librarian badge*.
>

Good idea. I'll make a post to both those places right now.

> If having two identities for authors/voters at the MEFAsite is an
> essential
> for some technical reason, then why not add a clickybox at the
> beginning of
> the story confirmation form saying "I'd like to vote at these awards"?
> Then
> the second ID could be made and sent out to authors fairly easily.
>

I'm not sure what's technically necessary or not. That's something
Anthony will have to clarify for us. If we decide that we want to do
this, I don't see any reason why we couldn't do this, or give all
authors voting privileges automatically. It actually makes some sense
why we'd give voting privileges to authors who don't join the Yahoo
group, but not other people. For one they're not going to be joining in
droves to vote for one particular story. For two, most authors publish
all their stories under their own names, so sockpuppetry would be much
more obvious. And they're already putting a fair amount of effort into
finishing the nomination, so they've spent some time on the MEFAs
without joining the Yahoo account. So giving voting privileges to the
authors is a decision I think I could defend if asked to.

> So, I come down to:
> Nominations and Discussions through the Yahoo group...
> Voting at the MEFA site. Voting privileges to nominated authors who
> have
> completed the confirmation process, nominators (via Yahoogroup) and
> past
> participants automatically...
>

Just to be clear: if you want to nominate a story you have to log in to
the voting website and fill out a form. That privilege only goes to
people who are members of this group, but it's not done by posting to
this group.

> New voters who are not nominators or authors are the most likely
> sockpuppets
> -- but I don't have strong opinions there.

That's true. I'd like to let anyone join the website without having to
join Yahoo because I see the frustration it causes, but I am also
willing to accept giving voting privileges to nom'd authors as a
compromise.

> I don't see that the Yahoogroup
> discourages sockpuppetry all that much, but I don't know how you'd
> handle
> them at the MEFAsite either.

I agree with you on this, but have talked about this at length in
earlier emails..

Marta

> Message: 5
> Date: Fri, 03 Feb 2006 17:06:23 -0000
> From: "sulriel" <Sulriel@htcomp.net>
> Subject: Re: post-mortem: Yahoo membership requirement to vote.
>
> --- In MEFAwards@yahoogroups.com, rabidsamfan <rabidsamfan@...> wrote:
>>
>> Actually, I strongly feel that this shouldn't be put off -- if for
> no other> reason than that authors should be able to vote as soon as
> they have an ID> at the MEFAsite. *That's* what stuck in my craw --
> that I had an identity> and a password there and I *still* couldn't
> get in the gate unless I did the> jellybelly dance.
>
>
> That seems like a valid point. If I understand, you're suggesting
> that authors (basically) be automatically added as voters, and people
> who want to read/vote who are not authors will still have to request
> membership.
>

That's my understanding. And in order to request membership, they'd
have to be members of this group.

>>> This is probably a question that should be asked on the LJ comm,
> and pushed > through middleearthnews as well. If you were nominated
> as an author for the > MEFAs and you didn't vote, why didn't you?
>
> I would support this - as has been said here before, it's difficult
> (if not impossible) to make changes for people who aren't here.
>
> - Marta or Aine will have to answer this, if it needs to be done or
> not, or more discussion.
>

I've already posted to our LJ, and sent along a message to
middleearthnews that should be in tomorrow's edition. Would you guys
like for me to forward the LJ posts to this group, so you all can see
what they're saying? You can also see it by going to the journal,
http://community.livejournal.com/mefawards/ .

>
>>> So, I come down to:
>> Nominations and Discussions through the Yahoo group...
>> Voting at the MEFA site. Voting privileges to nominated authors
> who have> completed the confirmation process, nominators (via
> Yahoogroup) and past > participants automatically...
>
>
> I like the clickbox idea more than adding anyone automatically.
>

I'm fine with either of them, provided it's technically possible to
have the clicky-box. I think the person who is setting up the accounts
could give them voting access when setting up the account manually (at
least that's how I remember last year), and so clicking the box
wouldn't have to do anything more than display to the admin that the
author clicked the box.

Marta

> Message: 6
> Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2006 17:16:53 -0600
> From: "Ainaechoiriel" <mefaadmin@earthlink.net>
> Subject: IPLogging, security, etc. on the MEFA2006 site -- a thought
>
> I'm not jumping on the bandwagon of not requiring membership to this
> group
> yet. Just entertaining a thought on security and sock-puppets, etc. on
> the
> MEFA2006 site.
>
> We wouldn't have to log IPs of every vote, because voting does require
> you
> to login as SOMEONE to the MEFA2006 site. Thus an admin of proper
> security
> level could pull up a list of votes for a particular user. So what
> would
> need to be logged are IP addresses for user accounts.
>
> Would that be harder or easier? Just hypothesize with me. I have a
> cable
> connection, so my IP address stays stable for months. But then it
> suddenly
> changes. It could change during the many-monthed MEFA year. A dial-up
> connection will show more changes. But would that be a problem. It's
> not
> multiple IP addresses that would be a problem, but multiple IDs. So
> would
> it be suspicious to see 2 IDs with created with the same IP address?
>
> Could it be flagged for further investigation, even if the IDs were
> created
> months apart? But then how could you even get a flag if Mary
> Sockpuppet
> decided to join with her real name in May, from a dial-up connection,
> and
> three separate IDs with three separate e-mails in three consequetive
> (spelling? Ah the last vestiges of my aphasic symptoms still creep up
> now
> and then.) months from dial-up? 4 different IP addresses. How could
> we
> spot her?
>

Based on what Sulriel said (and remember, I don't know that much about
IP), IP addresses using the same ISP and the same physical address
might change, but if we logged them every time this person logged in,
we'd find the same numbers repeating. So it wouldn't tell us 100% that
someone was a sockpuppet, but it could be used to validify or discard a
suspicion. Just like if I suspected a sockpuppet, the first thing I'd
do would be to go check when those Yahoo IDs were created. If three
people are voting for the same stories, none off which I've heard of
outside the MEFAs, and all three created their IDs just a day or two
before joining MEFAwards, I'd say that's a circumstance that needs
explaining or at least further investigation.

For this reason, I'd say we need to log IP addresses every time someone
logs in. The more data we have, the more sure we can be that someone is
or isn't a sockpuppet.

Marta

> Message: 7
> Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2006 17:21:56 -0600
> From: "Ainaechoiriel" <mefaadmin@earthlink.net>
> Subject: RE: Re: post-mortem: Yahoo membership requirement to vote.
>
> Just a note on "identities".
>
> I don't think we'd need separate identities, even with the present
> website
> technology. Just different groups. Like there are now. Some had
> Author
> Liaison privileges last year as well as Author and Member. Others had
> Categorizer as well as those other basics. I had all of those as well
> as
> Admin. Actually, just to keep Admin and Voter me's separate, I did
> have two
> different logons for that. But that's a special case.
>
> For each ID, we'd just need groups they could be members of:
> Author (has stories)
> Nominator (may nominate)
> Voter (may vote)
> Etc.
>
> Anthony, do correct me if I'm wrong.
>
>

Actually, I'm not even sure we'd need voter. Maybe just:

Author (has stories)
Nominator (may nominate)

Every member has to belong to one of these two groups. Either group can
vote. You could belong to both groups. Then to be a liaison,
categoriser, etc., you'd have to be either an author or nominator (or
both).

My thinking is, what situation would there be where you wouldn't be a
nominator or author but could still vote? Because you get voting
privileges when you have a story voted (i.e., enter the "author" group)
or when you join the Yahoo group (i.e., enter the nominator group).

Marta

> Message: 8
> Date: Sat, 4 Feb 2006 23:43:49 +1100 (EST)
> From: Naresha <north_shore_fruitcake@yahoo.com.au>
> Subject: Re: Re: post-mortem: Yahoo membership requirement to vote.
>
>> this is a point that could be emphasized.
>> That they can sign up here and go 'no mail',
>> but they could still get any 'special
>> announcements' the moderators or admin need to
>> put out.
>
> As I said, it should take all of two minutes to
> join up!

If you're already comfortable with Yahoo groups. If you're not... well,
it takes significantly longer, as Rabidsamfan has said.

<snip>

>> I have strong opinions on personal
>> responsibility and participation in regards to
>> being part of a community - with the balancing
>> thought that people should do what they
>> reasonably can. (not stress about trying to
>> match what someone else can)
>
> I do agree with this and whilst some people will
> say "but you admit you feel strongly on this
> issue", I don't think it's really all that fair
> on those who do take the time to join the group -
> even if they feel they can't or won't be
> contributing much to discussion such as this. It
> doesn't cost anything, it doesn't take a long
> time and it makes mass mailings a LOT easier for
> the moderators!

Actually, it makes things harder. If people are required to actually
*follow* the group, it would be one thing. But it's not that. The
easiest way to do mailings is to set up a contact in my address book.
One for authors, one for nominators, one for voters, one for staff. I
send off a quick email to that contact, and it goes to everyone on that
list. I had to set it up manually, but once it's set up, it's done. And
it's a lot more trustworthy than expecting people to actually follow
this group. Even if they are members, there's no way to know they're
actually reading.

> The other thing we need to keep
> in mind is that if we drop membership of this
> group from required to recommended, we risk it
> becoming an oligarchy (rule by a few) which can
> upset/anger a lot of people. But as I said in my
> last email, I don't feel it's fair for people who
> don't join up to be able to have a say in how
> it's all run - they don't take the time to join
> one mailing list and become part of the
> community, why should they be able to affect how
> it's run?
>

This claim doesn't have a lot of validity in my eyes. "Rule by the few"
only means something if those who want to get involved in policy-making
can't get involved. If we were closing off membership to
by-invitation-only or something like that, that would be one thing. But
as long as anyone who wants to participate can join, that's no more
oligarchical than democracy is (where everyone can have a say but isn't
forced to vote if they don't want to drive down to the polling place).

>> I do think that "joining another group" put
>> some people off, I'm not sure how many.
>
> Let's not forget that not all that long ago, we
> were trying to CUT the number of nominations!
> Realistically, putting people off should be
> beneficial! (I'm playing devil's advocate here -
> I know we wanted to cut individual nominations so
> more people could nominate!)
>

I agree with you about keeping nominations down. Like I said before, I
hadn't thought about doing nominations one way and voting the other.
But I have no problem saying you have to be a member here to nominate.

>> I know we want to encourage reading and
>> voting, and in part that means keeping it as
>> easy and simple as possible. but I also wonder
>> if the people who declined to join here
>> because it was 'too much trouble' (my own
>> paraphrase) would have found their way to the >
> website and gone through the clicks there to
>> read and vote? That's a real question, not
>> rhetorical.
>
> I totally agree, Sulriel! It is food for thought
> - how enthusiastic are people really if they
> refuse to take the time to join one mailing list?
> Also, the group provides a MUCH easier base for
> newcomers to ask basic questions. It also
> affords the chance for the burden of these
> questions to be spread around several people as
> opposed to only one. If people didn't join this
> group, then in my mind, they would most likely
> email Ainae - given she has MEFA Admin as her
> email address - which would place the burden or
> telling people things directly onto her. It
> would also mean that the same questions would be
> asked more than once, which is always an annoying
> thing when you're the only one doing the
> answering. The advantage of a mailing list is
> that it is PUBLIC - everyone can see everyone
> else's questions. And what one person wanted to
> know on Tuesday, would most likely be the same
> thing that some else wouldn't have been brave
> enough to ask until Thursday - but with a mailing
> list, they see the answer before they ask the
> question. It will cut down on some of the
> repetitiveness - I know there will be some given
> new people join all the time but it will help a
> fair bit.
>

I actually agree with you here (about asking the questions). When a new
question came to me -- I think I got most as I tended to handle the
education end of the awards -- I posted my answer to the Yahoo group.
And I think that people really *should* be encouraged to join the the
Yahoo group. My point is that by *requiring* people to join it's
backwards. People don't see the Yahoo group as a good tool, but as a
way to get on to something else. And it makes the process of setting up
accounts at the website that much more complicated.

<snip>

>> Maybe this is another issue that needs to be
>> left 'as is' for 2006 with a note to discuss
>> again in next years PM.
>
> What I would like to see happen is that we KEEP
> the requirement for this year but poll people who
> decline to join, asking them WHY they don't want
> to and did the requirement of joining a yahoo
> group have anything to do with it? It's all well
> and good talking about what people are thinking,
> but it's not much use making assumptions - we
> have a 50% chance of being wrong (or right) about
> them!

I've posted to the MEFA LJ and made an announcement at middleearthnews,
an LJ newsletter about fandom happenings. Hopefully that will get
people who didn't join to tell us why they didn't join. That's still
going to be anecdotal, of course, but hopefully we'll get real people
who didn't join to speak up. The trouble is, it's not that people start
to join and then decide not to half-way through the process. Based on
the people I've talked to, it's that they hear about the awards, go to
join, see how complicated it will be, and decide against it, or put it
off to later and never get around to it. So we aren't necessarily
hearing from the people who don't join.

> Marta

,snip>

> Does anyone have the statistics on how many nominated authors didn't go
> through the process of joining the Yahoo group to get voting rights?

Both

> the hard number and the percentage, if possible. Data is always the

most

> useful way to settle dustups.
>
> Thank you.
>

I'm sure there's a way to do it, but I don't know it offhand. Someone
could count it up by hand if they're so motivated.

I'm about to leave for a haircut, but I can give you the numbers for
the second fifty authors (alphabetically). I'm doing this on the
second page because the first page contains the "Administrator" ID, a
duplicate name used by Ainae when she had to do administrator stuff
because there's a technical issue with that level have voting
privileges. So these are all the authors between "aranda_nz" and
"camp6311".

13 (26%) = MEFA members but not authors or nominators
2 (4%) = MEFA members and nominators but not authors
13 (26%) = MeFA members and authors but not nominators
3 (6%) = MEFA members, nominators, and authors
8 (16%) = authors but not MEFA members
1 (2%) = author and nominator but not MEFA member (I assume she was a
member at one point and later unsubscribed)
10 (20%) = n/a -- not authors, nominators, or MEFA members (I assume
they were nom'd as authors but didn't complete the nomination

I will say that the "n/a" group is a bit high compared to some of the
other pages. Normally we'd have a few less n/a's, and a few more
non-MEFA member authors.

Oh, one other thing: of the MEFA members, only four (12.90%) voted.
The one non-member who nominated (and who I suspect was a member at
one point) also voted.

HTH,
Marta

Also for curiosity's

The people I'm more concerned about are the people who

> aren't active in Yahoo circles. I know a lot of people in this

fandom > communicate via LJ and don't even have a Yahoo password,
don't know > exactly how to get one and don't have any other reason
to do so. They > may not be particularly computer literate, and it's
a bit frustrating > to go through the steps involved with setting up
a Yahoo account. > they want to join, it's a much bigger investment
for them, and I can> understand why they'd put it off.

> > Marta

I'm that way about LJs. I have an account, but I very seldom use it
any more. The way the threads stack are extrememly difficult for me
to follow. They take 'forever' to load on my dial-up and old
computer, I end up opening in a new window and getting hopelessly
lost. I just don't go to LJ land without a good reason. The yahoo
groups are easy for me because I can get the email or 'expand' all
the messages in a page. I think a lot of it depends on what you're
used to.

...if I *had* to sign up for some new kind of group thing in order to
participate ...? I'm not sure I would.

Sulriel

First of all, I'm already logging IPs, but at the beginning of the
year, it didn't work right, so I don't know if we can use it very well
for 2005.

I'm logging them when someone logs into the system, if they're not a
guest or admin. Not admin is because admins can login as someone else,
and I don't want to log that IP address as a multiple for all those
cases. I'm still not sure it'll work, so I may need to collect the IP
addresses of admins and eliminate them before trying to check for sock
puppets. I've decided to add a date to the IP log. It will increase the
size of the log, because it'll note each time you login, your ID and
IP, where before it just noted that this person logged in from this IP,
but not when. Just making it clear we're logging IPs will deter most
people, and if they're going to go to the trouble to mask that, they'll
probably be careful enough that you'll never even suspect they're
sock-puppeting, in the first place.

Second, it is possible to change the access types, dividing up voting
and nominating. As Ainae mentioned, there are various person-types, and
I can just ask "Is this person an admin?" and base access by the
answer. It wouldn't be too hard to add new types, but I don't think we
need to. MEFAwards member means they can nominate, not a MEFAwards
member means they can vote.

One possibility that I haven't seen discussed is to turn the process
around: Open up the MEFA2006 site's create account function for all,
and ask them if they want an invitation to join the Yahoo group (which
is strongly encouraged, because questions about how the awards work are
always being discussed, and if you're a member, you'll be allowed to
nominate new stories). If you're already a Yahoo member, tell us your
Yahoo ID, and we'll use that in the invitation.

If someone wants to be added to the Yahoo group as a non-Yahoo member,
just let us know and we'll do that, too.

To deal with the fact that not all get MEFAwards emails (and this
happens even now), special notices will be sent to a manual mailing
list of all members via the MEFAsupport@gmail.com email account. This
way, everybody gets them, and they look different from regular posts,
so people are more likely to see them.

Finally, make a policy that all support is handled through the
MEFAwards group, so that all members can read about the problem and
solution. For a non-MEFAwards member, they can send a support request
to MEFAsupport@gmail.com. The question will be answered by copying the
email/pasting into a MEFAwards post, and adding the answer below it.
When the question is answered, an email will be sent to the asker
stating:

Since we want to ensure that all members are aware of any problems and
the resolution of said problems (and ofttimes they help resolve them),
we have responded to your question with a post at the MEFAwards Yahoo!
group. Please go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MEFAwards/messages
to read your answer, and any responses/further clarification that the
MEFAwards members may have added. The post to the group was titled
"NMSR: What does Category mean?". NMSR means Non-Member Support
Request.

So the new member form would look like:

Nickname (your nom-de-plume in the Middle Earth Fan-Fiction universe,
if you have one):
Email Address:
Homepage (include http://):

The MEFAwards Yahoo! Group is a companion group to this awards site.
Membership in the Yahoo! group is not required to participate in the
MEFAs, but it is highly recommended, as that is where questions get
answered, and the community discusses any issues that arise with the
awards. Also, between awards seasons, the group decides how to make the
awards better next time.

Membership in MEFAwards is required, however, to nominate stories for
the awards. This requirement has been decided on by the entire
membership of MEFAwards, and is explained more fully in the
<link>FAQ</link>.

Membership options (please select one):
1) I am already a MEFAwards member, why didn't you already create an
account here for me?!?!?!
2) Please send me an Invitation to Join MEFAwards, I want to nominate
stories and discuss things.
3) Please add me as an email-only member of MEFAwards. I'll handle
getting a Yahoo! ID, if I choose to, at a later time.
4) I have already (or will, as soon as I finish joining here) requested
membership in MEFAwards. Please confirm me soon, so I can nominate some
stories!
5) I do not wish to join MEFAwards at this time. I will read MEFAwards
posts at the Yahoo! Groups website. If I want to join later, so I can
nominate some stories, I will request membership at the MEFAwards
Yahoo! group site.

Note to admins (If you're already a Yahoo! member, let us know your
Yahoo! ID, so we can invite you to the group with that ID. If you're
already a MEFAwards member, let us know your Yahoo! ID or the email
address you've signed up as, if it's different than the nickname/email
above, so we can match you up with your MEFAwards identity. Let us know
anything else we might need to know, besides the price of tea in China,
of course.):
Username:
Password (must be 5 characters or more, and will be visible to the
group admins, so don't use the same one you use for your bank
accounts!):

Later,
Anthony

Responding to my own post. How sad!

I was also thinking that since authors have accounts created for them,
and their usernames and passwords are not what they'll want to keep, I
need to look for username like 'Author%', and send them to the 'edit
user data' page when they first login, so they can change things. On
that page, I'll also ask them the same questions about MEFAwards
membership, with the same explanation.

If these suggestions are accepted, then once the new site is ready, we
can change the 'welcome' message at the Yahoo group to say 'go over to
the MEFA2006 site and create yourself an account. Once the admins
approve your invitation, they'll also set that account as able to
nominate stories'. Or something like that.

For the admins: Would you prefer having people join the MEFA2006 site,
and then always having to invite them to join MEFAwards? That way, you
wouldn't have to search to see if they were MEFAwards members if they
join MEFA2006, or if they are MEFA2006 members if they join MEFAwards.

I can't tell or remember now: Does the MEFAwards group require approval
of new members, or do you just join, and it sends a note to the
owner/moderator that someone joined?

Someone's going to need to keep up with the membership lists and make
sure they're synchronized. I wonder if I can figure out a way to use
the Yahoo! group's Export function, or create a similar MEFA2006
function to make the comparison easier.

A.

>

I'm about to head to bed, but will try to answer this and other posts
tomorrow. But I can handle this one factual question.

> I can't tell or remember now: Does the MEFAwards group require
> approval
> of new members, or do you just join, and it sends a note to the
> owner/moderator that someone joined?
>

The Yahoo group requires an admin approve the membership. I think
elliska's been handling this. But I get one email when someone tries to
join the Yahoo group, and another when their membership is approved.

Are you a moderator for this Yahoo group? Would you like to be? I don't
think you necessarily need to be, and suggest it so you can see how
this works firsthand, if you want to.

By the way, what you're describing in your two posts is actually
exactly what I had in mind. I think it would work a lot smoother than
the system we currently have, which seems backward to me. Do you think
it gives us enough tools to catch sockpuppets?

Thanks,
Marta

> It didn't take me two minutes to join. It
> took twenty minimum, a good deal of which was >

reading through the fine print at Yahoo. I

> didn't need, or want, another e-mail address, >

and not one, but two passwords to add to the

> list. (One for the MEFAsite, which,
> thankfully, I didn't have to make complicated,
> and one for Yahoo which I did.)

For people who have to join Yahoo itself, yes it
does take longer. However, there are a great
many people who are already members and for them
it is much less time. Also, I applaud you for
taking the time to read the fine print at Yahoo -
a lot of people don't bother and as such, for
those less concerned than you, it would take them
less time to join as well.

> Strange as it may seem, there are people out
> here who limit their footprint on the web as
> much as they reasonably can, and who only
> register for the things they really need,
> rather than the things they merely want.

I can understand this, but please let us remember
that we are talking about fanfic, something which
is by it's very nature is a hobby and nothing
more given we cannot profit from it. And as
such, I really do feel that it can only ever be
classified as something that we want, rather than
need. That's all I will say on this point.

> They are usually the same people whose innate >

honesty prevents them from registering under a >
false identity.

Much as I would love to accept that a majority of
people in this world are honest, the truth of the
matter isn't always so and unfortunately, we have
to cater for the few bad apples in order to keep
things running smoothly and not to upset the
majority of people that are honest and only
register once.

> I thought long and hard about whether or not
> to register at Yahoo. Did I want to add
> voting on the MEFAs to my list of
> obligations? Did I want to risk revealing my >

identity to a bunch of people I don't know?

> Only a handful of fans in LotR fandom knew my >

real name, and I was perfectly happy with

> that, as it allowed me to fade from
> uncomfortable discussions with few RL
> complications.

As I said before, a lot of people would not take
the time to think about these issues or to read
through all the fine print. In this society, we
seem to require the full use of every second and
it seems that fine print often falls by the way
side in a quest to save time. Yahoo is well
known and as such, many would accept that that
reputation is justified and has been earnt over
time and as such, would place their trust in them
without taking the time that you did. Also... At
NO stage are you asked to divulge your real name
to the members of the group - only to Yahoo and
that is kept private unless you choose to share
it. At no stage are you *obligated* to vote in
the awards either. I myself nominated several
stories, but did not find the time to vote for
many outside the ones I nominated. It is - and
always will be - an entirely voluntary thing. It
is designed to be a bit of fun, and allows people
to recieve reviews and maybe even an award. I do
not know what uncomfortable discussions you have
found yourself in in the past, nor do I want to
know - it is your business and yours alone. The
worst arguments I have seen have been very severe
but have occurred because the people involved
chose to take their friendships offline and
become RL friends and it ended messily - just as
any "normally" formed friendship can. However,
online you can make the choice on how much you
tell people. Once again, you are not obligated
to share that sort of information with anyone you
meet on MEFAwards.

> (You might note that as soon as I figured out >

how to get the e-mails here to use my nom de

> plume instead of my real name I made the
> switch.)

Many people do this - for the same reason as you.

> Does anyone have the statistics on how many
> nominated authors didn't go through the
> process of joining the Yahoo group to get
> voting rights? Both the hard number and the
> percentage, if possible. Data is always the
> most useful way to settle dustups.

I actually made this point at the end of my last
post - however, I think that we need to measure
that data THIS year so it is more accurate. I do
not know if we have the information or not for
the past year, but I believe that it would be
easier for all concerned to start researching
those numbers this year as opposed to having to
dredge back through names and such for last year.


Naresha

~To forgive calls upon our love, to forget calls upon our strength~

AIM: Naresha21 MSN: candyman_gypsy@hotmail.com Yahoo: fruitcake5m1
Personal LJ: http://www.livejournal.com/users/nareshaninya/
Writing LJ: http://www.livejournal.com/users/writingsofresha/

My Website! Slash Me Happy
http://www.websamba.com/SlashMeHappy

http://quiz.ravenblack.net/blood.pl?biter=Resha



____________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Find a local business fast with Yahoo! Local Search
http://au.local.yahoo.com

> The people I'm more concerned about are the
> people who aren't active in Yahoo circles.

There is one other thing that I can think of that
would settle the discussion to a degree...

What about the creation of a second list?

If say we kept this list as a pure announcements
list for things like timings and mass mail outs -
and keep the requirement to join for the ease of
contacting, and then created one called (eg)
MEFADiscussion where anyone who was interested in
things like the post mortem and the never-ending
NC-17 debate etc could join up and where we could
have free and open debate without the niggling at
the back of our minds about annoying the people
who don't want to be included, but aren't too
good with Yahoo Groups and maybe don't know how
to change their settings.

I know it doesn't NEARLY settle the issue
completely, but it is a possibility. I also
acknowledge that it doesn't rid the requirement
of a membership to yahoo, but it does resolve
some of the issues that have been raised in this
discussion.

Resha

~To forgive calls upon our love, to forget calls upon our strength~

AIM: Naresha21 MSN: candyman_gypsy@hotmail.com Yahoo: fruitcake5m1
Personal LJ: http://www.livejournal.com/users/nareshaninya/
Writing LJ: http://www.livejournal.com/users/writingsofresha/

My Website! Slash Me Happy
http://www.websamba.com/SlashMeHappy

http://quiz.ravenblack.net/blood.pl?biter=Resha



____________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! News: Get the latest news via video today!
http://au.news.yahoo.com/video/

> IP's aren't stable for those who log in
> through AOL for example. It gets generated
> everytime someone uses it. It can be usefull
> when your IP is fixed, but with providers like
> that... And there are many authors who have
> AOL out there...

But would the number of people logging in through
AOL be great enough to not warrant logging them
at all? If there was a way for us to log the IP
address, and have a little alarm sound for the
admins when two similar addresses are logged for
the same story, then we could manually go through
and resolve it. But if the same user gets
different IP addresses, each time, then would it
create an entirely new issue?

~To forgive calls upon our love, to forget calls upon our strength~

AIM: Naresha21 MSN: candyman_gypsy@hotmail.com Yahoo: fruitcake5m1
Personal LJ: http://www.livejournal.com/users/nareshaninya/
Writing LJ: http://www.livejournal.com/users/writingsofresha/

My Website! Slash Me Happy
http://www.websamba.com/SlashMeHappy

http://quiz.ravenblack.net/blood.pl?biter=Resha



____________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Movies: Check out the Latest Trailers, Premiere Photos and full Actor Database.
http://au.movies.yahoo.com

Anthony wrote:

"One possibility that I haven't seen discussed is to turn the process
around: Open up the MEFA2006 site's create account function for all,
and ask them if they want an invitation to join the Yahoo group (which
is strongly encouraged, because questions about how the awards work are
always being discussed, and if you're a member, you'll be allowed to
nominate new stories). If you're already a Yahoo member, tell us your
Yahoo ID, and we'll use that in the invitation.

If someone wants to be added to the Yahoo group as a non-Yahoo member,
just let us know and we'll do that, too. "


Wow, can we do that? I mean, be in the yahoo group without an ID? Because
your two emails make the most sense of anything I've seen suggested, and not
having to go through creating a Yahoo ID would have made me really happy.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> The Yahoo group requires an admin approve the >

membership. I think elliska's been handling

> this. But I get one email when someone tries
> to join the Yahoo group, and another when
> their membership is approved.

It's been a combination of people - all users
listed as owners or moderators get the messages
asking for approval and saying it's been given.
I know I've done a few every so often and I
believe that Ainaie and Sulriel have done it too
- as I said, anyone with moderator or owner
status can.

Naresha

~To forgive calls upon our love, to forget calls upon our strength~

AIM: Naresha21 MSN: candyman_gypsy@hotmail.com Yahoo: fruitcake5m1
Personal LJ: http://www.livejournal.com/users/nareshaninya/
Writing LJ: http://www.livejournal.com/users/writingsofresha/

My Website! Slash Me Happy
http://www.websamba.com/SlashMeHappy

http://quiz.ravenblack.net/blood.pl?biter=Resha



____________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Find a local business fast with Yahoo! Local Search
http://au.local.yahoo.com

On Feb 5, 2006, at 6:51 AM, rabidsamfan wrote:

> Anthony wrote:
>
>
> If someone wants to be added to the Yahoo group as a non-Yahoo member,
> just let us know and we'll do that, too. "
>
>
> Wow, can we do that? I mean, be in the yahoo group without an ID?
> Because
> your two emails make the most sense of anything I've seen suggested,
> and not
> having to go through creating a Yahoo ID would have made me really
> happy.

RSF,

Yes, the Yahoo! group's owner/moderator can just add you to the list,
if she has your email address, as an email-only member. The
owner/moderator can then set your email status to Emails, Digests,
Special Notices, or No Mail. You can, if you desire, attach a Yahoo! ID
to that membership at a later date.

I could add a question about what email type you want for the
email-only members, with Special Notices being the lowest, I think.
Actually, I think we should probably make 'Special Notices' the lowest
email type allowed, and be judicious about the use of Special Notices,
so it doesn't upset folks, but that's another topic for discussion.

Later,
Anthony

--- In MEFAwards@yahoogroups.com, Anthony Holder <aaholder@...> wrote:

> > "If someone wants to be added to the Yahoo group as a non-Yahoo
> > member, just let us know and we'll do that, too."

> > On Feb 5, 2006, at 6:51 AM, rabidsamfan wrote:
> > Wow, can we do that? I mean, be in the yahoo group without an
> > ID? Because your two emails make the most sense of anything I've
> > seen suggested, and not having to go through creating a Yahoo ID
> > would have made me really happy.

> Anthony wrote:
> Yes, the Yahoo! group's owner/moderator can just add you to the
> list, if she has your email address, as an email-only member. The
> owner/moderator can then set your email status to Emails, Digests,
> Special Notices, or No Mail. You can, if you desire, attach a
> Yahoo! ID to that membership at a later date.

I, too, had no idea that an "email-only" Yahoo group membership
option existed. From the name, I assume it means that while you will
receive emails at the selected level, you can't post to the group,
vote in polls, access files or the database, etc? As I imagine most
people don't know about this, I worry that offering it may cause some
confusion…some may request it thinking they will be able to post. If
it's offered, I think it will need to be explained very clearly.

Also, I would not want to see this type of membership given
nominating rights, since as I've noted before, I believe the "hoop"
of going through Yahoo registration serves to help limit the number
of nominations. That this is definitely a concern was just reiterated
in the current discussions over at the MEFA LJ, where at least one
author said that the overwhelming number of stories was one of the
reasons she didn't vote.

Other than that I like your suggestions, Anthony.

Kathy

Kathy wrote:

>
> I, too, had no idea that an "email-only" Yahoo group membership
> option existed. From the name, I assume it means that while you will
> receive emails at the selected level, you can't post to the group,
> vote in polls, access files or the database, etc? As I imagine most
> people don't know about this, I worry that offering it may cause some
> confusion…some may request it thinking they will be able to post. If
> it's offered, I think it will need to be explained very clearly.

AFAIK, you can participate via emails. You just reply, or send emails to the
group email. You can't enter in polls and access features only available
through the group site.

Chris

Chris is right.

This type of member can post via email only. I just checked, and the
only thing they can do via the website is read posts.

As far as requiring a Yahoo ID linked member to nominate, that is for
you all to decide.

Anthony

On Feb 5, 2006, at 3:18 PM, Chris Grzonka wrote:

> Kathy wrote:
>>
>> I, too, had no idea that an "email-only" Yahoo group membership
>> option existed. From the name, I assume it means that while you will
>> receive emails at the selected level, you can't post to the group,
>> vote in polls, access files or the database, etc? As I imagine most
>> people don't know about this, I worry that offering it may cause some
>> confusion&some may request it thinking they will be able to post. If
>> it's offered, I think it will need to be explained very clearly.
>
> AFAIK, you can participate via emails. You just reply, or send emails
> to the
> group email. You can't enter in polls and access features only
> available
> through the group site.
>
> Chris

> Actually, I think we should probably
> make 'Special Notices' the lowest email type
> allowed, and be judicious about the use of
> Special Notices, so it doesn't upset folks,
> but that's another topic for discussion.

I definately think that we need to have everyone
set to special notices or above - otherwise it's
sort of useless! :-)

Resha

~To forgive calls upon our love, to forget calls upon our strength~

AIM: Naresha21 MSN: candyman_gypsy@hotmail.com Yahoo: fruitcake5m1
Personal LJ: http://www.livejournal.com/users/nareshaninya/
Writing LJ: http://www.livejournal.com/users/writingsofresha/

My Website! Slash Me Happy
http://www.websamba.com/SlashMeHappy

http://quiz.ravenblack.net/blood.pl?biter=Resha



____________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Find a local business fast with Yahoo! Local Search
http://au.local.yahoo.com

Frankly, another problem with logging IP addresses as a means of
id'ing sock puppets is false suspicions. Here's my example on that:
two of my assistants at the college where I work love LotR. My beta
is a professor at the same school. We are all MEFA members. We often
are bad employees and look at stuff while at work. (My assistants
only have Internet access at work--they are students/work studies
and neither can afford Internet at home). When we log in to MEFA or
any other site, we are all going to show the college's IP. The
college has 40,000 students--I'd be willing to bet there are other
LotR fans there that use the school's Internet access to surf LotR
sites, including this one (in fact, since I am on the IT team at my
college, I know that there are--I see LotR URLs all the time in the
firewall logs.) So when all of us log in, are we going to look like
sock puppets? Yeap. In fact, I make a point of logging into sites
that I know log IPs only from home because I am worried about things
like that.

My point: tracking sock puppets can't depend on something like
logging IPs alone. You have to have other ways to be able to
investigate suspicions.

Just to weigh in on the major issue of whether membership to this
site should be required: to me the biggest point in this is making
sure that we have a way to communicate with members/let them
communicate with other members and voice their concerns. If we can
have a forum on the voting site, great. If not, I think the awards
will lose connection/validity with its members if there is not an
open, public place to discuss issues.

> I, too, had no idea that an "email-only" Yahoo
> group membership option existed. From the
> name, I assume it means that while you will
> receive emails at the selected level, you
> can't post to the group, vote in polls, access
> files or the database, etc?

What it is is a "mailing list" option - people on
this cannot access the groups features as you
said - so no polls, databases etc. - but I think
they can post messages.

Resha

~To forgive calls upon our love, to forget calls upon our strength~

AIM: Naresha21 MSN: candyman_gypsy@hotmail.com Yahoo: fruitcake5m1
Personal LJ: http://www.livejournal.com/users/nareshaninya/
Writing LJ: http://www.livejournal.com/users/writingsofresha/

My Website! Slash Me Happy
http://www.websamba.com/SlashMeHappy

http://quiz.ravenblack.net/blood.pl?biter=Resha



____________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Take your Mail with you - get Yahoo! Mail on your mobile
http://au.mobile.yahoo.com/mweb/index.html

Hey guys,

Someone at the LJ made a comment that I think has a really good
suggestion:

******
[fantasy_fan]

As far as the Yahoo group is concerned, that dealt far too much with
the inner workings of the awards, which I wasn't competent to comment
on. I still get the e-mails from the Yahoo group, but I delete them
unread. I totally question why someone who just wants to read and
review, or someone whose stories are nominated, has to join a group
that deals with inner workings. Perhaps they could be invited to join
this specific group, if they are interested in making the awards
better, or if they are interested in becoming involved in the
administration of the awards?
******

This is a good point -- if you just want to vote, I imagine this group
can be pretty intimidating. So unless people object, I think we'll
change the focus of this list after we tie up loose ends on this
post-mortem. This list will still be available for people who have
questions, and for the admins to make announcements. And we'll still
post the nominations and the reviews here. But the policy discussions
and so on will move to a separate list. We'll call it mefa-grievances
or something like that. That way people who just want to participate
can, and the people who want to discuss policy can do that, too.

Sound like a plan?

Marta

--- In MEFAwards@yahoogroups.com, Marta Layton <melayton@...> wrote:

>
> Hey guys,
>
> Someone at the LJ made a comment that I think has a really good
> suggestion:
>
> [fantasy_fan]
> As far as the Yahoo group is concerned, that dealt far too much
> with the inner workings of the awards, which I wasn't competent to
> comment on. I still get the e-mails from the Yahoo group, but I
> delete them unread. I totally question why someone who just wants
> to read and review, or someone whose stories are nominated, has to
> join a group that deals with inner workings. Perhaps they could be
> invited to join this specific group, if they are interested in
> making the awards better, or if they are interested in becoming
> involved in the administration of the awards?
> ******
>
> This is a good point -- if you just want to vote, I imagine this
> group can be pretty intimidating. So unless people object, I think
> we'll change the focus of this list after we tie up loose ends on
> this post-mortem. This list will still be available for people who
> have questions, and for the admins to make announcements. And we'll
> still post the nominations and the reviews here. But the policy
> discussions and so on will move to a separate list. We'll call it
> mefa-grievances or something like that. That way people who just
> want to participate can, and the people who want to discuss policy
> can do that, too.
>
> Sound like a plan?

Hi Marta,

That seems fine, although I think I'd call it something less
negative, like MEFA Policy or Post-mortem. But it also seems like a
point worth making to Fantasy Fan, and anyone else who is wondering
why all these wonky discussons are conducted here (as opposed to at
the MEFA Staff Yahoo group, for example) that there's a very
important reason for it: transparency. If policy is not discussed
publicly, then the MEFAs become vulnerable to accusations of being
unfair, cliquish, secretive, etc. So whether all members wish to
follow it or not, the discussion needs to be out here somewhere--
whether at this group, a new group, or the LJ.

BTW, you also mentioned some important uses of this group that I'd
forgotten: it's where nominations and reviews are posted publicly. If
the Yahoo membership becomes optional, as it looks likely to, it
might be good to include these in the list of reasons to join.

Kathy

Hi Kathy,

On 6 Feb 2006, at 23:15, Kathy wrote:

> --- In MEFAwards@yahoogroups.com, Marta Layton <melayton@...> wrote:
> >
> > Hey guys,
> >
> > Someone at the LJ made a comment that I think has a really good
> > suggestion:
> >
> > [fantasy_fan
<snip>
> >
> > This is a good point -- if you just want to vote, I imagine this
> > group can be pretty intimidating. So unless people object, I think
> > we'll change the focus of this list after we tie up loose ends on
> > this post-mortem. This list will still be available for people who
> > have questions, and for the admins to make announcements. And we'll
> > still post the nominations and the reviews here. But the policy
> > discussions and so on will move to a separate list. We'll call it
> > mefa-grievances or something like that. That way people who just
> > want to participate can, and the people who want to discuss policy
> > can do that, too.
> >
> > Sound like a plan?
>
> Hi Marta,
>
> That seems fine, although I think I'd call it something less
> negative, like MEFA Policy or Post-mortem.

Ack, did I really type in "mefa-grievance"? That's a group where I've
been moderating a discussion relating to who gets credit as writing one
of this year's entries. (Long story - *really* don't have time to go
into it tonight, sorry). I meant to type mefa-discussion, but
mefa-policy would probably be better. Something like that.

> But it also seems like a
> point worth making to Fantasy Fan, and anyone else who is wondering
> why all these wonky discussons are conducted here (as opposed to at
> the MEFA Staff Yahoo group, for example) that there's a very
> important reason for it: transparency.  If policy is not discussed
> publicly, then the MEFAs become vulnerable to accusations of being
> unfair, cliquish, secretive, etc. So whether all members wish to
> follow it or not, the discussion needs to be out here somewhere--
> whether at this group, a new group, or the LJ.
>

Yes, I agree. Transparency is definitely a Good Thing, and I don't want
to give that up. But when I read Fantasy Fan's post, it occurred to me
that this list has come to have a lot of different purposes. And the
way it's set up, if you don't want to use all of the things it's
currently set up to do, it can be very overwhelming. Yahoo makes it
harder to ignore certain posts than it would be in a web-based forum
system like LJ where you could just follow certain threads. (You can if
you go to read at the website, but even there Yahoo doesn't sort by
threads by default.

Hence my suggestion for two groups.

> BTW, you also mentioned some important uses of this group that I'd
> forgotten: it's where nominations and reviews are posted publicly. If
> the Yahoo membership becomes optional, as it looks likely to, it
> might be good to include these in the list of reasons to join.
>

If we go this way, we'll do that. And I'm still in favor of not
requiring membership to vote -- but if we do some of the other things
that have been suggested, I'm much more comfortable with keeping the
Yahoo requirement. Basically here are some ideas I think we need to do:

1. Make this group usable to people not interested in intricate policy
discussions. We can do this by setting up a second group.

2. Make it easier to join if you don't have a Yahoo account. The
email-only option should let people do this.

3. Walk people through the process more. Anthony's suggestions about
having people say what kind of membership they wanted when requesting a
password and having the admin invite them seemed like it would do this.

4. Let nominated authors get involved more easily. Giving them voting
(but not nominating) would satisfy me here.

So I think with these measures, I'm comfortable keeping the Yahoo
requirement. We can discuss it next year if it's still an issue.

Marta

Hi Anthony,

> I was also thinking that since authors have accounts created for them,
> and their usernames and passwords are not what they'll want to keep, I
> need to look for username like 'Author%', and send them to the 'edit
> user data' page when they first login, so they can change things. On
> that page, I'll also ask them the same questions about MEFAwards
> membership, with the same explanation.
>

That would be great, if it can be managed. Otherwise maybe it can be
handled informally, through the liaisons.

About those options - I really like them, but it looks like we will be
requiring Yahoo membership in some form, so that option will have to be
edited out. (I think it was #5?) But besides that, they looked really
good.

> If these suggestions are accepted, then once the new site is ready, we
> can change the 'welcome' message at the Yahoo group to say 'go over to
> the MEFA2006 site and create yourself an account. Once the admins
> approve your invitation, they'll also set that account as able to
> nominate stories'. Or something like that.
>

The two-step process did seem to be confusing a lot of people. This
isn't a problem unique to the MEFAs (I know Henneth-Annun.net had a
similar problem when they required membership at a Yahoo account), but
it does seem to be an area that needs a little bit of handholding.
Especially when you consider that these people don't have any great
incentive to get through the process, since they don't have very much
invested in the awards.

> For the admins: Would you prefer having people join the MEFA2006 site,
> and then always having to invite them to join MEFAwards? That way, you
> wouldn't have to search to see if they were MEFAwards members if they
> join MEFA2006, or if they are MEFA2006 members if they join MEFAwards.
>

Yes, that sounds like a good idea. I'd much rather have the chance ot
help someone along than deal with the confusion.

Marta

Hi Naresha,

> > The people I'm more concerned about are the
> > people who aren't active in Yahoo circles.
>
> There is one other thing that I can think of that
> would settle the discussion to a degree...
>
> What about the creation of a second list?
>

I feel a bit red in the face just now. Somehow I forgot about this
email when I suggested the exact same thing a few days ago. I do want
to give you credit for thinking of it first! And I'm sorry if I made
you feel like I was overlooking your suggestion.

Marta

On 5 Feb 2006, at 10:17, Anthony Holder wrote:

>
> On Feb 5, 2006, at 6:51 AM, rabidsamfan wrote:
>
> > Anthony wrote:
> >
> >
> > If someone wants to be added to the Yahoo group as a non-Yahoo
> member,
> > just let us know and we'll do that, too. "
> >
> >
> > Wow, can we do that?  I mean, be in the yahoo group without an ID? 
> > Because
> > your two emails make the most sense of anything I've seen suggested,
> > and not
> > having to go through creating a Yahoo ID would have made me really
> > happy.
>
> RSF,
>
> Yes, the Yahoo! group's owner/moderator can just add you to the list,
> if she has your email address, as an email-only member. The
> owner/moderator can then set your email status to Emails, Digests,
> Special Notices, or No Mail. You can, if you desire, attach a Yahoo!
> ID
> to that membership at a later date.
>

For what it's worth, this was news to me utnil Anthony said it. Very
welcome news, I might add.

> I could add a question about what email type you want for the
> email-only members, with Special Notices being the lowest, I think.
> Actually, I think we should probably make 'Special Notices' the lowest
> email type allowed, and be judicious about the use of Special Notices,
> so it doesn't upset folks, but that's another topic for discussion.
>

I agree with this. I know that some people read at the web site and
actually keep up with it, but I think a lot of other people mean to
keep up and it falls by the wayside. If this group is to be a way to
make official announcements, I need to know that people are getting
those announcements.

Marta

> Sound like a plan?

I actually suggested this myself in one of my
earlier emails. Guess it got missed out! :-)

Naresha

~To forgive calls upon our love, to forget calls upon our strength~

AIM: Naresha21 MSN: candyman_gypsy@hotmail.com Yahoo: fruitcake5m1
Personal LJ: http://www.livejournal.com/users/nareshaninya/
Writing LJ: http://www.livejournal.com/users/writingsofresha/

My Website! Slash Me Happy
http://www.websamba.com/SlashMeHappy

http://quiz.ravenblack.net/blood.pl?biter=Resha



____________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Check out gigs in your area on the comprehensive Yahoo! Music Gig Guide
http://au.music.yahoo.com/gig-guide

> I feel a bit red in the face just now. Somehow
> I forgot about this email when I suggested the
> exact same thing a few days ago. I do want
> to give you credit for thinking of it first!
> And I'm sorry if I made you feel like I was
> overlooking your suggestion.
>
> Marta

*giggles* I forgive you! :-) I'm not really
fussed - didn't help that my back was sort of
imobile from 6 shots of local the other day, but
it's good to know that other people are thinking
up the same things - especially when it's in two
totally different forums - Yahoo and LJ - seems
that we've got a few people on the same
wavelength, which can be a good sign on tricksy
issues such as this one!

And don't worry about overlooking - I'm quite
used to it! My employers are kinda biased. LOL
As I said - All is forgiven! :-D

Resha

~To forgive calls upon our love, to forget calls upon our strength~

AIM: Naresha21 MSN: candyman_gypsy@hotmail.com Yahoo: fruitcake5m1
Personal LJ: http://www.livejournal.com/users/nareshaninya/
Writing LJ: http://www.livejournal.com/users/writingsofresha/

My Website! Slash Me Happy
http://www.websamba.com/SlashMeHappy

http://quiz.ravenblack.net/blood.pl?biter=Resha



____________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! News: Get the latest news via video today!
http://au.news.yahoo.com/video/

> If this group is to be a way to make official >

announcements, I need to know that people are >
getting those announcements.

Definately agree! Although, we will always have
to put up with the odd person bouncing, that's
something we can't do anything about. However, I
think that the suggestion of keeping everyone at
Special Notices or above, is one that we
definately need to implement to make this thing
work - or else we may as well not have a list.
Which would be a bit silly as it seems a majority
of people see the sense in having some sort of
official list. :-)

Resha

~To forgive calls upon our love, to forget calls upon our strength~

AIM: Naresha21 MSN: candyman_gypsy@hotmail.com Yahoo: fruitcake5m1
Personal LJ: http://www.livejournal.com/users/nareshaninya/
Writing LJ: http://www.livejournal.com/users/writingsofresha/

My Website! Slash Me Happy
http://www.websamba.com/SlashMeHappy

http://quiz.ravenblack.net/blood.pl?biter=Resha



____________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Messenger 7.0: Free worldwide PC to PC calls
http://au.messenger.yahoo.com

On 9 Feb 2006, at 06:25, Naresha wrote:

> > If this group is to be a way to make official >
> announcements, I need to know that people are >
> getting those announcements.
>
> Definately agree!  Although, we will always have
> to put up with the odd person bouncing, that's
> something we can't do anything about.  However, I
> think that the suggestion of keeping everyone at
> Special Notices or above, is one that we
> definately need to implement to make this thing
> work - or else we may as well not have a list.
> Which would be a bit silly as it seems a majority
> of people see the sense in having some sort of
> official list. :-)
>
> Resha
>

Can we officially call this issue settled, then? Nominated authors get
voting privileges, everyone else has to join to vote (and everyone,
even authors, has to join to nominate).

I think we can then call this post-mortem officially closed. That was
the last topic I had. I still need to come up with lists of categories,
events, etc. for the nomination form, and I may post those here when
I'm done to let people add something major if I forget it -- but
otherwise, I think it's time we all take a break and start getting
mentally geared up for next year.

If I did forget anything, feel free to let me know.

Thanks,
Marta

--- In MEFAwards@yahoogroups.com, Marta Layton <melayton@...> wrote:

> Can we officially call this issue settled, then? Nominated authors

get > voting privileges, everyone else has to join to vote (and
everyone, > even authors, has to join to nominate).

>
> I think we can then call this post-mortem officially closed. That

was > the last topic I had. I still need to come up with lists of
categories, > events, etc. for the nomination form, and I may post
those here when > I'm done to let people add something major if I
forget it -- but > otherwise, I think it's time we all take a break
and start getting > mentally geared up for next year.

> > If I did forget anything, feel free to let me know.
> > Thanks,> Marta>

Marta, that all sounds good, - the post-mortem seemed like a lot of
work, but I think it's a good sign that people care.


- apologies to Marta and all for disappearing. I've had sick kids
and sick horses - ... stranded yesterday at Wal-mart in a new-tire
fiasco, (the only thing that made it tolerable was the amazing fact
that the 'tire-guy' was kind, courteous and knowledgeable!!!) while
I was there the school called for me to come pick up the youngest
with 101 fever - and we got home to find the mare that I've been
worried about was down and unable to deliver - necrotic foal was mal-
positioned - it will be about a week before we know what long term
effects the mare have from this. ... :(

RL - ugh ...

Becky

--- In MEFAwards@yahoogroups.com, Marta Layton <melayton@...> wrote:

>
> Can we officially call this issue settled, then? Nominated authors
> get voting privileges, everyone else has to join to vote (and
> everyone, even authors, has to join to nominate).
>
> I think we can then call this post-mortem officially closed.

Do we pop the champagne cork now? :D

Kathy (Inkling)

> That was
> the last topic I had. I still need to come up with lists of

categories,

> events, etc. for the nomination form, and I may post those here

when

> I'm done to let people add something major if I forget it -- but
> otherwise, I think it's time we all take a break and start getting
> mentally geared up for next year.
>
> If I did forget anything, feel free to let me know.
>
> Thanks,
> Marta
>

*Wheeee!* *Throws confetti and Mardi Gras beads*

----- Original Message -----
From: "sulriel" <Sulriel@htcomp.net>
To: <MEFAwards@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2006 7:43 AM
Subject: [MEFAwards] Re: Announcements and email - WAS - IP Logging,
security, etc.


> --- In MEFAwards@yahoogroups.com, Marta Layton <melayton@...> wrote:
>> Can we officially call this issue settled, then? Nominated authors
> get > voting privileges, everyone else has to join to vote (and
> everyone, > even authors, has to join to nominate).
>>
>> I think we can then call this post-mortem officially closed. That
> was > the last topic I had. I still need to come up with lists of
> categories, > events, etc. for the nomination form, and I may post
> those here when > I'm done to let people add something major if I
> forget it -- but > otherwise, I think it's time we all take a break
> and start getting > mentally geared up for next year.
>> > If I did forget anything, feel free to let me know.
>> > Thanks,> Marta>
>
>
> Marta, that all sounds good, - the post-mortem seemed like a lot of
> work, but I think it's a good sign that people care.
>
>
> - apologies to Marta and all for disappearing. I've had sick kids
> and sick horses - ... stranded yesterday at Wal-mart in a new-tire
> fiasco, (the only thing that made it tolerable was the amazing fact
> that the 'tire-guy' was kind, courteous and knowledgeable!!!) while
> I was there the school called for me to come pick up the youngest
> with 101 fever - and we got home to find the mare that I've been
> worried about was down and unable to deliver - necrotic foal was mal-
> positioned - it will be about a week before we know what long term
> effects the mare have from this. ... :(
>
> RL - ugh ...
>
> Becky
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

On 9 Feb 2006, at 08:43, sulriel wrote:

> --- In MEFAwards@yahoogroups.com, Marta Layton <melayton@...> wrote:
> > Can we officially call this issue settled, then? Nominated authors
> get > voting privileges, everyone else has to join to vote (and
> everyone, > even authors, has to join to nominate).
> >
> > I think we can then call this post-mortem officially closed. That
> was > the last topic I had. I still need to come up with lists of
> categories, > events, etc. for the nomination form, and I may post
> those here when > I'm done to let people add something major if I
> forget it -- but > otherwise, I think it's time we all take a break
> and start getting > mentally geared up for next year.
> > > If I did forget anything, feel free to let me know.
> > > Thanks,> Marta>
>
>
> Marta, that all sounds good, - the post-mortem seemed like a lot of
> work, but I think it's a good sign that people care. 
>

Agreed on both counts. In many ways I'm glad it's over, but I'm of
course *very* thankful for all the people who participated. I'd name
names here but I'm sure I'd forget someone. Thank you, all of you.

>
> - apologies to Marta and all for disappearing.  I've had sick kids
> and sick horses - ...  stranded yesterday at Wal-mart in a new-tire
> fiasco, (the only thing that made it tolerable was the amazing fact
> that the 'tire-guy' was kind, courteous and knowledgeable!!!)  while
> I was there the school called for me to come pick up the youngest
> with 101 fever - and we got home to find the mare that I've been
> worried about was down and unable to deliver - necrotic foal was mal-
> positioned - it will be about a week before we know what long term
> effects the mare have from this.   ... :(
>

Don't worry about it. These things happen to all of us.

Marta

On 9 Feb 2006, at 12:46, Kathy wrote:

> --- In MEFAwards@yahoogroups.com, Marta Layton <melayton@...> wrote:
> >
> > Can we officially call this issue settled, then? Nominated authors
> > get voting privileges, everyone else has to join to vote (and
> > everyone, even authors, has to join to nominate).
> >
> > I think we can then call this post-mortem officially closed.
>
> Do we pop the champagne cork now? :D
>
> Kathy (Inkling)
>

Yep, something strong and grape-derived is definitely in order... for
everyone who saw this thing through. I'm impressed.

Marta

--- In MEFAwards@yahoogroups.com, Marta Layton <melayton@...> wrote:

>
>
> On 9 Feb 2006, at 12:46, Kathy wrote:
>
> > --- In MEFAwards@yahoogroups.com, Marta Layton <melayton@> wrote:
> > >
>>>> Can we officially call this issue settled, then? Nominated
>>>> authors get voting privileges, everyone else has to join to vote
>>>> (and everyone, even authors, has to join to nominate).
>>>>
>>>> I think we can then call this post-mortem officially closed.
>
>>> Do we pop the champagne cork now? :D
>>
> Yep, something strong and grape-derived is definitely in order...
> for everyone who saw this thing through. I'm impressed.

Good and I can drink alcohol again! What a great timing! When does
nomination season starts? *dives under the table for cover* ;c)

Rhapsody

> When does
> nomination season starts? *dives under the table for cover* ;c)
>

I'm sure you're half-joking, but here's the serious question if
anyone's interested: not before April 1. That's when it started last
year. But I'm not in any rush, and if Anthony needs more time for
programming we may push it back to April 15 or May 1.

Marta

--- In MEFAwards@yahoogroups.com, Marta Layton <melayton@...> wrote:

>
> > When does
> > nomination season starts? *dives under the table for cover* ;c)
> >
>
> I'm sure you're half-joking, but here's the serious question if
> anyone's interested: not before April 1. That's when it started last
> year. But I'm not in any rush, and if Anthony needs more time for
> programming we may push it back to April 15 or May 1.
>
> Marta
>

May is good. April 15 is tax day and so automatically evil.

Dwim

On 11 Feb 2006, at 11:36, dwimmer_laik wrote:

> --- In MEFAwards@yahoogroups.com, Marta Layton <melayton@...> wrote:
> >
> > > When does
> > >  nomination season starts? *dives under the table for cover* ;c)
> > >
> >
> > I'm sure you're half-joking, but here's the serious question if
> > anyone's interested: not before April 1. That's when it started last
> > year. But I'm not in any rush, and if Anthony needs more time for
> > programming we may push it back to April 15 or May 1.
> >
> > Marta
> >
>
> May is good. April 15 is tax day and so automatically evil.
>
> Dwim
>
>

Excellent point about April 15. I'll see what Anthony thinks, and if
getting everything ready by April 1 will be stressful for him and he'd
like more time, we'll make it May 1.

We can always change the exact dates (and lengths, even) of any of the
different seasons. There's nothing to say we have to follow the exact
timeframe we did this year.

Marta

> Excellent point about April 15. I'll see what Anthony thinks, and if
> getting everything ready by April 1 will be stressful for him and he'd
> like more time, we'll make it May 1.

I'm really not sure. I haven't done very much yet, but I have started
somewhat.

If I can be done by April 1, then we'll start it at that time.

Later,
Anthony

On 11 Feb 2006, at 16:03, Anthony Holder wrote:

> > Excellent point about April 15. I'll see what Anthony thinks, and if
> > getting everything ready by April 1 will be stressful for him and
> he'd
> > like more time, we'll make it May 1.
>
> I'm really not sure. I haven't done very much yet, but I have started
> somewhat.
>
> If I can be done by April 1, then we'll start it at that time.
>

Whatever you feel comfortable with. If it can be done by April 1 that
would be great, but I don't think postponing the start of nomination
season will be that great of a hardship.

Thanks,
Marta

Hey guys,

Since the post-mortem is over this group will now be used for
announcements and as a place where members of the voting site can ask
questions on how to do things. More complicated policy discussions will
take place at the group "mefa-discussions". I'll send out invitations
to join to anyone who has participated in this post-mortem, as you have
expressed an interest in this sort of thing. If you do not receive an
invitation and would like to join please feel free to do that.

I'm also going to change all of the members who are set to no-mail to
special-notice. I realise that a lot of people who do not receive
emails do in fact follow the group at the website, but I also suspect
that many set to "no-mail" just don't have the time to follow the
group. I appreciate that in the past this group has been quite busy,
but as an administrator of these awards I need to know that the people
involved are receiving the necessary announcements. Otherwise, I won't
feel comfortable using this list as a good way to make announcements
about the awards.

We'll use these special announcements sparingly. I certainly don't
anticipate sending out more than once a week, and probably there won't
be even that many.

Cheers,
Marta

Hey guys,

In the past this Yahoo group has been used for many purposes. All of
these need to be handled somewhere, but having them all take place
in one group has resulted in more emails than many people can keep up
with.

To address this problem, I have decided to split the functions
this single group has served up until now among two groups. This
group, MEFAwards will be used for official announcements about the
Middle-earth Fanfiction Awards, as well as provide a place for voters,
nominators, and authors to ask questions about how to do things at the
group website. The awards administrators will also post nominations
and votes to this list when they become available. Policy discussion
will be moved to a separate group, mefa-discussion. Anyone who wants
to help us consider possible changes to how the awards are run is very
welcome to join that group.

Part of the reason for this split is to make it easier for the awards
administrators to communicate with everyone involved. If we can be
sure all MEFA story nominators and voters are reading this list, we
can communicate any official announcement by making a post as a
special announcement here. Members are still welcome to read posts at
this group's website (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MEFAwards/) , but
all members must have their email options set to at least "special
notices". This way we will know that every member of this group will
receive any announcements the awards moderators need to make.

To this end, I have changed all of those members who were previously
not receiving any email from this group ("no mail") to "special
notice" status. If this affects you, you may now do one of several things:

1. Change your status to "individual mail". Under this setting, Yahoo
will send you each post made to the group in a separate email.
2. Change your status to "digest". Under this setting, Yahoo will
collect multiple posts into one email, usually once a day.
3. Keep your status at "special notice". You will receive special
notices - which can only be sent by the MEFA administrators - in your
inbox but will need to visit the website to read all other posts.
4. Unsubscribe from the group. Doing so will mean that you will not be
able to vote or nominate in 2006. You will be welcome to rejoin the
group at any time.


I will try to limit the number of special notices I send out to no
more than one a week, and expect I won't even be sending out that
much. I hope this change will help keep all of our members better
informed, and provide an easy place to seek help should anything about
these awards confuse you.

If you have any questions, please feel free to respond to this message
or email the administrators at mefasupport at gmail dot com

Cheers, Marta
(MEFAwards moderator)