Yahoo Forum Archive

Hello,
I have been quiet as far as discussions go, but I did want to say that I think, in spite of some minor problems, these awards are some of the best run that I have seen on line. Any mistakes or short-comings are simply things that have gone un-noticed until they become as issue. At that point they are quickly corrected. I thought the system for the voting was 100% better this year than last. I couldn't figure out how to vote last year. LOL This year, while I didn't get in as many votes as I had planned, I did manage what I considered to be a respectable amout.

I think that it makes sense to limit the number of nominations that can be made by any one person. I don't think that should be split up as to X amount of drabbles, X amount of poems, X amount of non-fiction. Some people only read drabbles or only read poems or maybe they only read stories with elves in them. I think that the limit should be total nominations by one person. Let the nominator decide how to use his or her nominations. If you want to nominate your own stories then do so, or if you want to nominate only poetry then do so or mix it up. I think that would be fair.

Also, I don't know how anyone else decided what to read and vote for this year but because there were so many things nominated, I stuck to stories that I thought I would enjoy either because of the subject or the author. I might have branched out more if the number of nominations had not been so over-whelming. I wanted to read as many of the hobbit stories as I could and because there were so many wonderful nominations in that group, I only managed to vote for a few stories outside of the hobbit catagories. At the last I found myself picking up drabbles as they take less time to read and I so admire the skill it takes to write one. I can't do it myself. LOL

Anyway, that's my two cents worth.

GW

MEFAwards@yahoogroups.com wrote:

There are 4 messages in this issue.

Topics in this digest:

1. Re: Re: limiting nominations
From:
2. Re: cliquishness, voting, Dwim, requiring nominator to review, self-nominating
From: Bird Wood
3. Re: regarding post-mortem emails
From: "dwimmer_laik"
4. Re: regarding post-mortem emails
From: "Kathy"


________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 1
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2005 14:03:28 -0600
From:
Subject: Re: Re: limiting nominations

----- Original Message -----
From: "sulriel"
To:
Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2005 11:00 AM
Subject: [MEFAwards] Re: limiting nominations


> --- In MEFAwards@yahoogroups.com, Naresha
> wrote:
>>
>> ...the nominator could nominate up to 9
>> stories, and then have up to six extra
>> nominations for drabbles/poetry for a
>> total of 15...
>>
>> I know you listed the drabble thing as EXTRA to
>> the stories, but I that this division of WHAT you
>> could nominate, would annoy people. Not everyone
>> reads drabbles and poems and not everyone reads
>> long stories. I think it would only serve to
>> aggrevate people and has the potential to create
>> a reputation of the MEFAs being cliquey and
>> exclusionary etc. Not something we want!
>>
>> If we cap the nominations, I think that should be
>> it. It's just a number and people can use it how
>> the wish. If they want to nominate only poems
>> and drabbles, so be it. If they want to nominate
>> only novella length things about dwarves - let
>> them! :-P
>
>
> agree with this. I think a single limit should be enforced for all
> nominations.

Personally, I don't have a problem with a single limit, and think it would
be easier. I only suggested it as a way to address someone else's concern.
Dreamflower
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>




________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 2
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2005 14:04:11 -0800 (PST)
From: Bird Wood
Subject: Re: cliquishness, voting, Dwim, requiring nominator to review, self-nominating

Hello,

I just wanted to say that I agree with this person...*looks at name*...Lin. First, I was a terrible person for these Awards, mostly because I had some traumatic RL problems, which drew me away from all the action.

Lin makes a lot of good points regarding time issues, and I think that often, because the online world is so fast paced, that people often forget just how time consuming this can all be, reading the stories and reviewing. To be honest, I am not nearly as good as she is, when it comes to reading, reviewing and voting. Because of time constraints, I often only read the genre's I like, new stories by author's I already know, and a few "extra" stories just to see what they are like, by new authors and yada yada.

I don't know if that is really cliquish, but I feel the same. I have been told that I don't "review" enough on other groups and sites. The problem is, NOT enough time to read it all, and I might start to read something, find out it is not my thing, and then stop reading--I usually give an author two or three tries. Do people really want reviews of something I don't like? No. If it is a story I do like, and I have a few suggestions--then yes i will review it.

Self-nominating...no comment. I don't do it, but, hey, some people do... no comment on that.

The "charity reviews"...I don't know. I would hope that everyone is striving for improvement, and as long as the review was helpful and the reviewer said WHY they had problems with it, why the hell not? Isn't the purpose of writing and getting reviews to get help? Really, what is the worse that could happen (as long as everyone stays calm and polite)? The author gets some help and accepts it, or they say Thanks, but No Thanks...

Meh.

Bird

BLJean@aol.com wrote:
Don't even know if subject of this email is spelled right. Doesn't matter.

If discussion of this email was suspended, I apologise for opening it again,
but Dwim made a couple good points.

With no pre-screening (I am not advocating pre-screening.) there will likely
be stories entered that make one (or many a) reader roll the eyes, especially
when you allow self-nominating. I know that I wrote a review in a genre I
don't read, for a story I would not have reviewed otherwise, and not because I was
absolutely over-the-moon about that story. But the author showed some promise
in writing in general terms, whether or not having a grasp of Tolkien's work.

If people are self-nominating, that sort of defeats the "nominator write a
review of the story" suggestion.

People might self-nominate because they would like feedback. They might be
relatively new and unheard-of. Heck, I don't know where I'm going with this.
Certainly there are stories in styles or genres that make me shudder, plenty of
them floating out there. I don't know how many were entered in the MEFAs,
frankly, because I didn't have time to read everything. I sort of stuck to gen and
het Hobbits for the most part, and tried in addition to review every drabble
in every category and thus have an introduction to authors and genres I
normally don't brush elbows with.

Is it cliquish, when your time for reading is limited, to read the type of
story you enjoy? Perhaps I am, if you want to call it that, because I tend to
read stories about Hobbits. If an occasional Man or Elf or Dwarf strays into the
story, that's ok with me. But I'm not likely to seek out stories about, say,
the Rohirrim, even though I have read several excellent "takes" on that
culture. And mention of "the Twins" in a story summary makes me shudder, I don't
know just why but it does. There are just not enough hours in the week. If I have
time to read five chapters a week, I'm probably going to spend it on Hobbits.

Is it cliquish to prefer stories that reflect a certain respect for "canon"?
I suppose I might be accused of elitism, but really, as I'm playing in
Tolkien's sandbox, a part of my delight is in just that... the world he created, the
parameters he set, the historical and sociological implications of the world
he lived in. I take no pleasure in setting Middle-earth characters, say, in an
apartment in modern-day New York. But for others who delight in this sort of
exploration, are there not enough kindred spirits to provide them reviews?

It might be perceived as "cliquish" to write feedback giving preference to
those authors you know or whose works you've enjoyed. I made it a point to write
reviews for authors who were new to me. (Bless the drabble category for
introducing me to new stories within the constraints of time!)

But I don't think that the MEFAs deliberately leave anyone out.

I'm not sure that "charity reviews" are the answer. If some painful-to-read
story were submitted by a hopeful author, that author might not welcome a
review that threw them a bone and offered a few suggestions for improvement.

I'm not sure that eliminating "self-nomination" is the answer, either. What
are the pros and cons?

Lin



In a message dated 11/2/2005 8:31:04 AM Pacific Standard Time,
MEFAwards@yahoogroups.com writes:
To put it in blunt, personal terms, I read a lot of stories this time
around--not all, but many. And while I enjoyed many, even most, of
them, I didn't vote--and I *wouldn't* vote--for every single one that
I read. It'd be dishonest if I did.

"And they painted sex scenes on the walls of Pompeii, Because it wouldn't do to forget how to have sex, And having a huge colorful reminder all over the walls of the house makes it pretty easy to remember."

---- Boomer Bible, Book of Romans, Chapter 8:8-10

---------------------------------
Yahoo! FareChase - Search multiple travel sites in one click.

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



________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 3
Date: Wed, 02 Nov 2005 22:20:12 -0000
From: "dwimmer_laik"
Subject: Re: regarding post-mortem emails

--- In MEFAwards@yahoogroups.com, "Kathy" wrote:
>
> Hi Marta,
>
> You were getting snippy and flustered?? If so, then even in that
> state you are nicer than I am at my best! ;)
>
> Yes, go away and forget about us for a while...but when you get back,
> I have two questions for you:
>
> Someone (and I apologize that I've forgotten who) said that they
> received a flame review. Is that allowed?

I must've missed the e-mail that said the author had been flamed, but
if that actually happened (and I don't remember anything flamey
showing up, and I read an embarrasing number of reviews), let's get
proof positive--direct us to the review in question, since it's
already public. I just don't want to go into a hypothetical discussion
on this topic. The scoring system is set up so as to heavily
discourage comments on pieces you personally don't think merit
comment, or that you think only merit negative comments or detailed
constructive criticism. I'm not sure what else one could do
officially--I'm assuming if it's evident that negative comments are
counterproductive, it's obvious that flaming is just right out.


> You mentioned Ainae, and I've been wondering about her too.
> Specifically, I know that she's been involved in this type of awards
> in other fandoms, and I just wonder how they handle problems like too
> many stories there?

I can answer a little about that, since Ainae's probably at work
still. The MEFAs are modelled on awards run at a Star Trek group she's
been a part of for many years. Because their site is the main clearing
house for new fics, they have a built-in pool: anything posted during
the past year is eligible for the awards. So effectively, every piece
you write and post is a self-nomination, be it ever so humble.

We don't have a central fic clearing house that makes our pool for us,
so the model in that sense doesn't fit ours very neatly. While we
could limit the pool to fics published within a particular year, à la
Mithrils and the Star Trek awards, I think the idea of a stories per
nominator limit PLUS the open field of fics published at any time will
actually help reduce nominations in a given year: so long as
nominators know that they could nominate a fic in the next year,
there's less pressure to nominate as many fics as possible for fear
that they'll never get a chance to compete if you don't nominate it
immediately.

Combine that with, as Isabeau and others have noted, the natural fall
off in fic production, now that the movie wave has subsided somewhat,
and I think, assuming these awards continue for several years, that
this year will look like an anomaly.

Anyhow, Ainae can correct anything I've misstated when she gets a
chance to look at her e-mail, but that's how she's explained things to
me when we've talked about the inspiration for this kind of awards
format.

Dwim





________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 4
Date: Thu, 03 Nov 2005 00:05:30 -0000
From: "Kathy"
Subject: Re: regarding post-mortem emails

> --- In MEFAwards@yahoogroups.com, "dwimmer_laik"
> wrote:
>
> --- In MEFAwards@yahoogroups.com, "Kathy" wrote:
> >
> >
> > Someone (and I apologize that I've forgotten who) said that they
> > received a flame review. Is that allowed?
>
> I must've missed the e-mail that said the author had been flamed,
> but
> if that actually happened (and I don't remember anything flamey
> showing up, and I read an embarrasing number of reviews), let's get
> proof positive--direct us to the review in question, since it's
> already public. I just don't want to go into a hypothetical
> discussion
> on this topic. The scoring system is set up so as to heavily
> discourage comments on pieces you personally don't think merit
> comment, or that you think only merit negative comments or detailed
> constructive criticism. I'm not sure what else one could do
> officially--I'm assuming if it's evident that negative comments are
> counterproductive, it's obvious that flaming is just right out.
>

Wish I could remember who it was--Naresha, was it you?--but I believe
she said she received a one-point flame review.







________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________



------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links




------------------------------------------------------------------------





---------------------------------
Yahoo! FareChase - Search multiple travel sites in one click.

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

<snip>

> I think that it makes sense to limit the number of nominations that

can be made by any one person. I don't think that should be split up
as to X amount of drabbles, X amount of poems, X amount of
non-fiction. Some people only read drabbles or only read poems or
maybe they only read stories with elves in them. I think that the
limit should be total nominations by one person. Let the nominator
decide how to use his or her nominations. If you want to nominate
your own stories then do so, or if you want to nominate only poetry
then do so or mix it up. I think that would be fair.

Just to say, I'd also be willing to go with this very open schema. And
I refer again to my bet, that a combination of cap on nominations per
person plus a completely open field (no limitations based on when a
story was published) will make people less anxious about nominating
and hopefully encourage them to nominate a mix of kinds of stories and
poetry.

> Also, I don't know how anyone else decided what to read and vote for

this year but because there were so many things nominated, I stuck to
stories that I thought I would enjoy either because of the subject or
the author.

Mine was pretty simple:

Order the categories according to size. Start with the largest
category and go one page at a time, straight down the page, and read
everything I could, making exceptions for extremely large stories.
(Then I'd look at the summary and maybe the first chapter if the
summary intrigued me before deciding).

When done, move to the next largest category.

I kept that up until I had read all categories with more than one
hundred stories. Then I took some smaller categories for the sense of
accomplishment (cross that one off my list!), and then I started going
by interest.

I'll probably do something similar next year, but I must say, I found
it helpful that Post-Ring War was the biggest category. It featured a
mix of stories concerning all different races, places, and characters,
so while I didn't read "Hobbits" as a category, I read a heck of a lot
of hobbits because a genre category is less restrictive than a
species-specific category.

I'd highly recommend that to others--pick a good-sized genre category
and review there first. That'll expose you to authors who write in all
sectors of fandom and give you a sense of whose stories you'd like to
read more of even if they are outside your usual interest areas.

Dwim

Hi GW,

On 2 Nov 2005, at 22:48, GW wrote:

> Hello,
> I have been quiet as far as discussions go, but I did want to say
> that I think, in spite of some minor problems, these awards are some
> of the best run that I have seen on line. 

Thanks! Ego-stroking is always appreciated. ;-) I'm generally wary to
say we're the best (or even some o the best) because it usually dares
someone to contradict, but I'm really glad you like us that much.

> Any mistakes or short-comings are simply things that have gone
> un-noticed until they become as issue. At that point they are quickly
> corrected. 

Thanks again. I think one of the real strengths of the MEFAs is the
ability to be flexible like that, and I think that's because of the
volunteers. So many people were willing to do what was best in the
long-term even if it wasn't the quickest or easiest. It's definitely
been a joy to work with them.

> I thought the system for the voting was 100% better this year than
> last.  I couldn't figure out how to vote last year.  LOL 

Although I'm sorry the ifirst year was confusing, I'm glad you like the
new way better. So do I! The website allows me to chip away at the
nomination list bit by bit and get more and more done. While Ainae
always told us to vote early, actually being able to do that and get
entire categories done in June or July has helped me out loads.

If there's anything you still don't understand, *please* let me know.
It may be that I can add an FAQ, or we can look at how to simplify the
process. Most of us volunteers have been doing this for at least a
year, so often i you don't ask we don't know it's a problem.

> This year, while I didn't get in as many votes as I had planned, I did
> manage what I considered to be a respectable amout.
>

Oh yes! I thought you did a good amount, judging by how oten I saw your
name on the list of votes. Well done.

> I think that it makes sense to limit the number of nominations that
> can be made by any one person.  I don't think that should be split up
> as to X amount of drabbles, X amount of poems, X amount of
> non-fiction.  Some people only read drabbles or only read poems or
> maybe they only read stories with elves in them.  I think that the
> limit should be total nominations by one person.  Let the nominator
> decide how to use his or her nominations.  If you want to nominate
> your own stories then do so, or if you want to nominate only poetry
> then do so or mix it up.  I think that would be fair.
>

That makes a good amount of sense. While I voted for separate
categories, I think I'd be happy with either. I can see good sides to
both ways of doing the limit.

Make sure you voted in the poll if you haven't already.

> Also, I don't know how anyone else decided what to read and vote for
> this year but because there were so many things nominated, I stuck to
> stories that I thought I would enjoy either because of the subject or
> the author.  I might have branched out more if the number of
> nominations had not been so over-whelming.  I wanted to read as many
> of the hobbit stories as I could and because there were so many
> wonderful nominations in that group, I only managed to vote for a few
> stories outside of the hobbit catagories. 

Let me ask you to think about this: would it have made your reading
easier if all of the hobbit stories were in one place? I'm thinking
that now a lot of hobbit-centric stories were in The Lord of the Rings
or in Drama, and probably other genre- or source-centric categories.

Our next topic of discussion after we nail down nomination limits, will
be categories and subcategories. Since we have less nominations I think
we're going to need less categories or we're going to have more pieces
in their second- and third-choice categories. We may need to reconsider
whether we want to organise based on source *and* genre *and* race, or
whether we want to pick one (or two) of those and try to make
subcategories out of the third.

Anyway,, that's what's coming up. Don't comment on it yet, please, but
do start thinking about it.

> At the last I found myself picking up drabbles as they take less time
> to read and I so admire the skill it takes to write one.  I can't do
> it myself.  LOL
>

I think a lot of people did that. Drabbles are a good way for a lot of
people to get a lot of votes in quickly.It's not for everyone, of
course, but I've really enjoyed doing that.

Cheers,
Marta


*****
Preach the Gospel at all times. If necessary, use words. - St. Francis
of Assisi