Annual SGW Awards

[S T I]

I have just been told about what ensued (yet again).

I may have a solution so all the hard work that was put in is not wasted, this can be applied to the last two years so people who have done so much in the game can be recognized for said achievements.

(1) Take the final group from each cat (ignore the votes) if they are in the group they deserve it.

(2) Elect a group of people, mods if you like, but they must be open/fair minded people, ie like me , if they deserve to be awarded so be it, a way of sourcing these people is to look at lists people do of who should get what.

If the list is balanced ie, people from all alliances this is a good start.

I can think of a few straight of but the main one i would have heading it would be Wolf 359, also seeing he was involved in this years awards (so i believe) he would be a good & fair judge.

These people then decide final outcome.

I think this would be a fair way & if 2 or more are equal in a section then say so & award so it is shown.

The community needs these awards to move forward & something for people to look forward to.

if this has been put forward before, my apologies

Jeff (S T I)

[Lore]

i think 1 or 2 from each of the first page alliances could be used for the voting pool

[Legendary Apophis]

I don't get it...
It's just about the hall of fame right?

[Mordack]

I don't think the last set of awards really turned out so terribly. They worked well overall.

[Mathlord]

No matter what, it will turn into a popularity contest. Noone can be completely unbiased, no matter what they say, as everyone sees people's actions in the game differently. I agree with Mordack as well, the last awards did seem to work out well.

[blahh]

didnt we just get the awards?

[Juliette]

Nice proposal. I wonder what relevance it has, seeing how the latest awards went quite well, but it's a good proposal otherwise.

[S T I]

sorry i must have misinformed as to what went on

what did happen as i can't find them anywhere ????

[SVaRuN]

This is partially true and such is life that this things are often a popularity thing...


But if you think about it:

Hall of fame..., warmonger...etc. Ppl who were nominated were in majority really the ones who deserve it or ppl thought they do...


Then who wins is a battle of who has more fans...but thats not totally true also...


If we look at the names and the titles we actually at least from my point of view get a good picture...not ideal but a good one.


Think about real life...political parties...aint it the same...they say what they are for and then majority of ppl always go with the flow and who they LIKE better not who will do a better job...but ppl mostly do know which parties are the capable one so they vote for them...Also here those top players are indeed the top then who of them will win variates and will depend on XYZ factors in the end...


And in the end no matter who you put as a judge it will always be subjectively since judge knows some ppl more and other less and I do think having community to judge is the best...

For the most important titles at least this year I think having grupies wasnt enough but reather you had to actually be in the top to come out on the top




Blue

[semper]

voting in a poll for things like this is and always will be a popularity and who knows who vote. It cannot be avoided.
Even with STI idea the same principles will once again come into play. There will never be an unbiased way to do these things unless you get a council of people who dont play/have never played or people who hate everyone (such as myself) to decide.

The sooner everyone gets that in their skulls the better. Even if you dont intend to be biased you would be.

Taking a council of two people from each of the first page alliances...what a dreadful idea. Arguments not to mention it would be rife with biased opinions caused by tension.

Its because everyone is so personal. Everyone knows everyone else, and the situation created by the whole idea of a war game means strict bonds and alliances are formed. Our perceptions and opinions are affected and well yes...it just will never be a fair poll.

Oh yes, im forgetting most of the forum are complete and utter morons so would ignore the fact that say TL would be alliance of the year (not saying I believe they are..) because they massed them and go ahead and vote for a different alliance out of spite.

whatever way you want to try....its royally FUALL'ed

[Wolf359]

Er - what did 'ensue' exactly? And what is meant by 'again'?

Certainly nothing was as it was the year before. There was no evidence of multi-voting - nor was there last year for that matter - and there was definately no mod interference - unlike the year before.

I find it amusing that people seem to tell tales and spread stories now, almost 3 months on, yet they didn't have the courtesy, brains or confidence to bring it up with me at the time.

This isn't aimed at you, Jeff, although I would like to talk to you about it - both about what has been said to you, and also about what actually did happen during last years awards.

Oh, and thanks for your vote of confidence in your post - it's appreciated!

Think about real life...political parties...aint it the same...they say what they are for and then majority of ppl always go with the flow and who they LIKE better not who will do a better job

Yep - and that's exactly how Tony Blair got in with the Labour Party in the UK - there was a survey done after labour came to power, that tried to establish what clinched it - and it appears that the fact that Tony Blair appealed to all the houswives as a 'nice man' was the deciding factor!