Yahoo Forum Archive

[Note: This letter represents the collective position of the MEFA
participants listed below.]

Following on from the letter we posted here at the MEFAwards Yahoo
Groups on 29th June 2012, titled "MEFAwards 2012 Ratings System:
Objections and Alternative Proposals"
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MEFAwards/message/11147> , and from the
MEFAwards Admin response
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MEFAwards/message/11148> , the ensuing
debate involving a wide range of members suggests that there is an
immediate need for a forum in a user-friendly venue to openly discuss
the issues raised about the current ratings policy. The ultimate
objective of this discussion is the agreement on a new, improved policy
and procedure for the MEFA Awards in the 2013 season.

We recognise the pressures that the opening of the current 2012 season
of the awards will place on the MEFA Admin team in the short term, but
we believe it is crucial that the discussion is not delayed until
September, as it has been proposed by the Admin team. A postponement of
this discussion might result in an undesirable reduction of the current
level of engagement by all parties and perhaps cause an erroneous
perception about the matter being settled, implying acceptance of the
2012 policy for subsequent years.

Therefore, we have created a new MEFA Ratings Discussion Community
<http://mefa-ratings.livejournal.com/> on LJ, fully open to posts and
comments by all, so as to encourage wide participation in the debate
from as many MEFA members as possible. After quick consultation, it was
apparent that LJ will improve usability over the current forum based on
the Yahoo Groups platform. Equally, though we appreciate the new post
about the topic in the MEFA LJ community, participants can only comment
on the existing entry, and soon it will prove cumbersome to everyone to
navigate through a large single thread.

We urge the MEFA Admin team to join us in the MEFA Ratings Discussion
Community <http://mefa-ratings.livejournal.com/> where they will be
most welcome at all times, and we look forward to collectively
discussing and agreeing the best option for the implementation of new
and simplified ratings policy and procedure in 2013.

Signed,

Aeärwen
Elfscribe
Elleth
Grey Gazania
Jael
Kimberleighe
Oshun
Pandemonium_213
Russandol
Samtyr
Scarlet10
Spiced Wine
Surgical Steel
The Lauderdale




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

Hello Russandol and all,

As I have previously explained, I'm not able to follow a detailed policy
discussion on the eve of the new awards, especially with my own RL
obligations right now. I did make one post to the [mefas] LJ community that
several people have used to discuss the new content advisory policy. I
actually had asked people not to to debate the policy now, but I haven't
stopped people from doing that in that LJ post.

We need this Yahoo group to focus on the business of running the awards -
new authors and voters will join it to find out how things actually are run
this year, and to get help as they try to find their way around a complex
site. The LJ community also serves a similar purpose for those people more
comfortable with LJ than Yahoo.

If you and the other people interested in how the MEFA handles ratings want
to discuss it among yourself, that's of course your right. Anyone who wants
to should feel free to do that on their own.

Marta

On Sun, Jul 1, 2012 at 7:15 PM, nelyo_russandol <nmrussandol@gmail.com>wrote:

> **
>
>
> [Note: This letter represents the collective position of the MEFA
> participants listed below.]
>
> Following on from the letter we posted here at the MEFAwards Yahoo
> Groups on 29th June 2012, titled "MEFAwards 2012 Ratings System:
> Objections and Alternative Proposals"
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MEFAwards/message/11147> , and from the
> MEFAwards Admin response
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MEFAwards/message/11148> , the ensuing
> debate involving a wide range of members suggests that there is an
> immediate need for a forum in a user-friendly venue to openly discuss
> the issues raised about the current ratings policy. The ultimate
> objective of this discussion is the agreement on a new, improved policy
> and procedure for the MEFA Awards in the 2013 season.
>
> We recognise the pressures that the opening of the current 2012 season
> of the awards will place on the MEFA Admin team in the short term, but
> we believe it is crucial that the discussion is not delayed until
> September, as it has been proposed by the Admin team. A postponement of
> this discussion might result in an undesirable reduction of the current
> level of engagement by all parties and perhaps cause an erroneous
> perception about the matter being settled, implying acceptance of the
> 2012 policy for subsequent years.
>
> Therefore, we have created a new MEFA Ratings Discussion Community
> <http://mefa-ratings.livejournal.com/> on LJ, fully open to posts and
> comments by all, so as to encourage wide participation in the debate
> from as many MEFA members as possible. After quick consultation, it was
> apparent that LJ will improve usability over the current forum based on
> the Yahoo Groups platform. Equally, though we appreciate the new post
> about the topic in the MEFA LJ community, participants can only comment
> on the existing entry, and soon it will prove cumbersome to everyone to
> navigate through a large single thread.
>
> We urge the MEFA Admin team to join us in the MEFA Ratings Discussion
> Community <http://mefa-ratings.livejournal.com/> where they will be
> most welcome at all times, and we look forward to collectively
> discussing and agreeing the best option for the implementation of new
> and simplified ratings policy and procedure in 2013.
>
> Signed,
>
> Aeýrwen
> Elfscribe
> Elleth
> Grey Gazania
> Jael
> Kimberleighe
> Oshun
> Pandemonium_213
> Russandol
> Samtyr
> Scarlet10
> Spiced Wine
> Surgical Steel
> The Lauderdale
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>


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

>
> If you and the other people interested in how the MEFA handles ratings
> want to discuss it among yourself, that's of course your right. Anyone who
> wants to should feel free to do that on their own.
>
>

I accidentally hit "send" instead of the backspace key; my apologies.
*head/desk* I meant to say:

If you and other people interested in how the MEFA handles ratings want to
discuss it among yourself, that's of course your right. Anyone who wants to
should feel free to do so in the group provided or on their own. However, I
won't personally be able to participate.

Marta


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