Yahoo Forum Archive

This is an archive of the MEFA Yahoo Group, which was shut down by Yahoo in 2019. The archive can be sorted by month and by topic ID. You can use your browser to search by keyword within the month or topic you have open.

JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec
2004---18210426558925263362316285
20051895610753834744697276194358565136
200623166277611713912756676615979
200720257-297299143318583103
2008561335424014127477516090106
2009283-39194101722722153624
201067-14103138129321316330
20111-172625906132758
201230---812276-----
2013------------
2014---------1-2
2015------------
2016------------
2017------------
2018------------
2019---------1--

Msg# 6003

Summaries Posted by BLJean@aol.com November 04, 2005 - 19:48:11 Topic ID# 6003
And as an over-busy, not to mention lazy, author, I often glanced over the
nominator's summary and said, 'That looks good' and didn't even notice a problem
with one summary until I saw it being discussed... "Should we be kind to the
author and correct this?" (I think the upshot was "No." Serves me right for
not being a more careful reader.

Lin

In a message dated 11/4/2005 5:21:47 PM Pacific Standard Time,
MEFAwards@yahoogroups.com writes:
I can see where you're coming from but well, what on earth do you
expect. This year as a liaison we got clear instructions: it is the
author's responsibility and the author has the final say. If they
didn't liked the summary of the nominator, then the author told the
liaison and it got changed. If the didn't like the rating... it got
changed. Warnings not to their liking? It got... you get the idea. It
all comes back at what the author wants.


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

Msg# 6065

Re: Summaries Posted by Marta Layton November 06, 2005 - 10:43:34 Topic ID# 6003
Hi Lin,

On 4 Nov 2005, at 20:47, BLJean@aol.com wrote:

> And as an over-busy, not to mention lazy, author, I often glanced over
> the
> nominator's summary and said, 'That looks good' and didn't even
> notice a problem
> with one summary until I saw it being discussed... "Should we be kind
> to the
> author and correct this?" (I think the upshot was "No." Serves me
> right for
> not being a more careful reader.
>
> Lin
>

This is a reason why I think it's so important for the author to
provide a lot of the information and not the nominator. Some authors
are lazy, like you said. (I'd call it energy-efficient. ;-P ) Some are
overwhelmed by the nomination and don't want to correct someone kind
enough to review them. Some are new to the awards and assume the
nominator knows the system better. In any event, I think we'll get
better information if it's from the authors to begin with, rather than
requiring that authors correct what someone else provided.

Cheers,
Marta

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

(Nelson Mandela)