Yahoo Forum Archive

Hopefully this is the last topic and we'll be able to hand the
changes over the Anthony and start looking forward to this year's
competition. Marta asked me to moderate this last topic, so 'here
goes'.


Initially, (as I understand it) membership in the yahoogroup was
required because the votes were posted to this list, and because it
gave us some basis for keeping up with people in an attempt to keep
people from 'sock-puppeting', that is vote for themselves under a
different ID, or adding up votes for their friends under a couple of
different IDs.

It's also a great advantage to have the list available for questions
and discussion.

It's been suggested the yahoogroup membership requirement be dropped.

* it's believed that potential members are put off by the requirement
* many people unsubscribe from the list


Thoughts / comments ??

Sulriel

Hi Sulriel,

You're just talking about voting, right? Membership would still be
required to nominate stories, I assume...

Kathy

--- In MEFAwards@yahoogroups.com, "sulriel" <Sulriel@h...> wrote:
>
> Hopefully this is the last topic and we'll be able to hand the
> changes over the Anthony and start looking forward to this year's
> competition. Marta asked me to moderate this last topic, so 'here
> goes'.
>
>
> Initially, (as I understand it) membership in the yahoogroup was
> required because the votes were posted to this list, and because it
> gave us some basis for keeping up with people in an attempt to keep
> people from 'sock-puppeting', that is vote for themselves under a
> different ID, or adding up votes for their friends under a couple
of
> different IDs.
>
> It's also a great advantage to have the list available for
questions
> and discussion.
>
> It's been suggested the yahoogroup membership requirement be
dropped.
>
> * it's believed that potential members are put off by the
requirement
> * many people unsubscribe from the list
>
>
> Thoughts / comments ??
>
> Sulriel
>

Why would it be needed? If people could get a password for the main site,
there could be a webform for nominations.

Joining the Yahoo group, for all that I have spent a lot of time answering
e-mails here, felt like an extra hoop to jump throught. I very seldom look
at the group page, and if it weren't for cookies remembering yet another
password, I'd never be signed in there. I know my reaction to "you have to
join the Yahoo Group" was "Do I really want to do this that much?"

It's probably more vital for the post-mortem discussion, though...

On 1/31/06, Kathy <inkling-tcbs@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
> Hi Sulriel,
>
> You're just talking about voting, right? Membership would still be
> required to nominate stories, I assume...
>
> Kathy
>
> --- In MEFAwards@yahoogroups.com, "sulriel" <Sulriel@h...> wrote:
> >
> > Hopefully this is the last topic and we'll be able to hand the
> > changes over the Anthony and start looking forward to this year's
> > competition. Marta asked me to moderate this last topic, so 'here
> > goes'.
> >
> >
> > Initially, (as I understand it) membership in the yahoogroup was
> > required because the votes were posted to this list, and because it
> > gave us some basis for keeping up with people in an attempt to keep
> > people from 'sock-puppeting', that is vote for themselves under a
> > different ID, or adding up votes for their friends under a couple
> of
> > different IDs.
> >
> > It's also a great advantage to have the list available for
> questions
> > and discussion.
> >
> > It's been suggested the yahoogroup membership requirement be
> dropped.
> >
> > * it's believed that potential members are put off by the
> requirement
> > * many people unsubscribe from the list
> >
> >
> > Thoughts / comments ??
> >
> > 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]

Inkling: Yes, this discussion is only in regards to this list.
Membership will still be required to nominate/vote at the database.

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

--- In MEFAwards@yahoogroups.com, rabidsamfan <rabidsamfan@v...>

> wrote:
>
> Why would it be needed? If people could get a password for the
> main site, there could be a webform for nominations.

I guess I'm seeing Yahoo group membership as a way to help keep the
overall number of nominations manageable.

As for the group being a hoop to jump through, it's never felt that
way to me because after joining I just bookmarked the site, so I've
never had to use my password to sign in since. In fact, I have no
idea what my password is!

Kathy (Inkling)

>
> Joining the Yahoo group, for all that I have spent a lot of time

answering

> e-mails here, felt like an extra hoop to jump throught. I very

seldom look

> at the group page, and if it weren't for cookies remembering yet

another

> password, I'd never be signed in there. I know my reaction

to "you have to

> join the Yahoo Group" was "Do I really want to do this that much?"
>
> It's probably more vital for the post-mortem discussion, though...
>
>
> On 1/31/06, Kathy <inkling-tcbs@s...> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Sulriel,
> >
> > You're just talking about voting, right? Membership would still

be

> > required to nominate stories, I assume...
> >
> > Kathy
> >
> > --- In MEFAwards@yahoogroups.com, "sulriel" <Sulriel@h...> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hopefully this is the last topic and we'll be able to hand the
> > > changes over the Anthony and start looking forward to this

year's

> > > competition. Marta asked me to moderate this last topic,

so 'here

> > > goes'.
> > >
> > >
> > > Initially, (as I understand it) membership in the yahoogroup was
> > > required because the votes were posted to this list, and

because it

> > > gave us some basis for keeping up with people in an attempt to

keep

> > > people from 'sock-puppeting', that is vote for themselves under

a

> > > different ID, or adding up votes for their friends under a

couple

> > of
> > > different IDs.
> > >
> > > It's also a great advantage to have the list available for
> > questions
> > > and discussion.
> > >
> > > It's been suggested the yahoogroup membership requirement be
> > dropped.
> > >
> > > * it's believed that potential members are put off by the
> > requirement
> > > * many people unsubscribe from the list
> > >
> > >
> > > Thoughts / comments ??
> > >
> > > 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, "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
>

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.

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@sbcglobal.net> 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, "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.
>
> 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

Advantages (as I see them)

1) At least some ability to limit sockpuppetting.
2) How else can we communicate with voters during any of the seasons
if they aren't members here? We can't send a mass e-mail from the
website. We don't actually have e-mail capabilities there.
3) There's something to be said about those who invest in the group
(if by nothing else than joining) being the voters, rather than just
anybody who stops by on their way through the internet.
4) Detractors could cause major problems without it. We can remove
flamers, spammers, trolls, etc., from this group and thus membership
to the MEFA2005 (2006?) site easily. People who don't like what we're
doing here might be tempted to try to ruin it for everyone by
votestacking on particularly bad stories (could be even nominated by
one who joined for this purpose) or some other nefarious means. How
would we stop them? And how would we stop them from voting with all
nine of their e-mail addresses each (Hey, I've got at least nine
myself) or from different computers (I've got 7, though yes they do
all show as the same IP address, but still I have two at work as well,
and there are always internet cafes)?

(At ASC, to show some precedent, they get suspicious when they see a
new voter pop out of the woodwork. They don't automatically
disqualify that vote, but they start investigating. Why? Vote
stacking. Getting your friends to come over and vote. If you haven't
posted to the newsgroup before--there's no membership in a
newsgroup--they're likely to be suspicious. And yes, voting does
happen on the web there, too.)

--Ainaechoiriel

--- 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

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: 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

> 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

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

> 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/