StarGateWars Forums

Are these underway yet? I was just wondering if I need to re-join voters group or not this time around or if it is already underway and I just cant see that section of the forum? Should be interesting to see some of the categories for this round

Caprila wrote:

Ra wrote:

Mordack wrote:Add me to the fall of fame. I'm not usually one for self-aggrandisement, but some of the people there at the moment were complete losers. Loony bipolar Teal'auc, Tweetygirl the jezebel and WTH even remembers who Genlucky was nowadays. If those idiots are up there, I really do think I should be considered.

Honestly what did you do those three didn't? I mean, did they take your milk money?

The difficulty of 'SGW Community' Awards, is many of it's players don't step foot outside their alliance skype/forums. So while you may see someone put his time in every day, to teach others, to run the alliance logistics and events.. part of what makes this game great... no one outside his alliance will ever see that.

Likewise on the other side of the coin, many of the truly horrific things done in the name of this game, both in Real Life and ingame, also remain locked up in various HC closets. It's never 'cool', to air dirty laundry on the forums, but it provides a new way of looking at some of the forum warriors that call themselves 'Villians' these days.

Being in the Hall of Fame doesn't make them make them 'Legendary', or that they had the biggest impact on the game. Just at that time, they were "popular" on the main forums and/or managed to persuade/threaten other players into replying to a forum thread for them.

The forum awards are just that, a bit of fun for the portion of the SGW community that enjoys trolling posting on the forums. Most of the replies to this thread follow this culture & trying to make 'serious' sounding awards about the biggest impact on this game will fall flat when your voters biggest concerns regard who can post the best troll memes.

Honestly, I was just being a bit facetious in order to prove a wider point. In her defence Tweetygirl did do a few players I never did so perhaps her place there is warranted. Caprila makes a few other good points, although I would argue that some 'quieter' players did make it into the Hall of Game. Although I was sarcastic about GenLucky, he was an 'under the radar' player who was nonetheless competent and did a good job of running the Dirty Dozen.

I think, and have always thought, that the awards are over-policed. It created more work for the moderators, for a start. Every year it required more and more work because the organizers created more and more rules. I volunteered one year and I spent more time on the awards than in General.

Just as in real life, I think you deserve whatever you vote for. Had the admin not created so much bureaucracy then for good or ill then the results would have reflected the community they strove for rpresent for better or for worse.

Just give the man a HoF spot already.

An easy way to end all this award crap,

1 award for who got the most ME.
its a war game that should be the only award.

No one has more experience running the awards then I.

If we don't police them, then people cheat. It's happened every time, not most of the time, not some of the time - EVERY TIME. When they tried to relax the rules a few years back (2011/2012?) it quickly became an abused debacle. 2006 was another year I remember there being a significant dialogue regarding cheating. If we police them, then people complain they're policed, but far less people.

YES, they may be policed but at the same time it's the best we can do to make sure the awards are as fair as possible and i'd rather have a fairer awards and less complaints, then have to manage a crap-storm of cheating and 50 page threads of finger pointing and arguments.

The results are always the will of the community. If we police them then it's a slightly restrained will of the community, if we don't place some control on them, then every single player from every hudge alliance ever suddenly appears to single-mindedly vote for their empire, their friends alone and their alliance alone and then it just ends up who has the most loyal, active members wins. Hardly the will of the community if you ask me, but as they're in the community we can't deny the fact that it is partly the will of a part of the community.

It's all just bitter complaining if you ask me. Alliances can't just vote their own guys in anymore and now have to actually consider the rest of the game so every year people have a cry. It's not changing this year, but this is probably going to be my last year so go ahead and kill the rules next year and someother volunteer can deal with the cheating, back stabbing, finger pointing and circular debates and arguments from the kids.

Semper wrote:No one has more experience running the awards then I.

If we don't police them, then people cheat. It's happened every time, not most of the time, not some of the time - EVERY TIME. When they tried to relax the rules a few years back (2011/2012?) it quickly became an abused debacle. 2006 was another year I remember there being a significant dialogue regarding cheating. If we police them, then people complain they're policed, but far less people.

YES, they may be policed but at the same time it's the best we can do to make sure the awards are as fair as possible and i'd rather have a fairer awards and less complaints, then have to manage a crap-storm of cheating and 50 page threads of finger pointing and arguments.

The results are always the will of the community. If we police them then it's a slightly restrained will of the community, if we don't place some control on them, then every single player from every hudge alliance ever suddenly appears to single-mindedly vote for their empire, their friends alone and their alliance alone and then it just ends up who has the most loyal, active members wins. Hardly the will of the community if you ask me, but as they're in the community we can't deny the fact that it is partly the will of a part of the community.

It's all just bitter complaining if you ask me. Alliances can't just vote their own guys in anymore and now have to actually consider the rest of the game so every year people have a cry. It's not changing this year, but this is probably going to be my last year so go ahead and kill the rules next year and someother volunteer can deal with the cheating, back stabbing, finger pointing and circular debates and arguments from the kids.

If one really needs to go to such lengths simply to restraint the community's own instincts, and to prevent it being as thick as mud and as petty as a toddler, then is it really worth it? To what extent can you stop people being themselves?

I'd say the lengths gone to have worked as best any could. Turnout is down but I don't feel that's due to the rules, but rather a symptom of a significantly decresed player base. I don't feel the lengths are that excessive either. Ultimately it's just three topics you can't vote for your own alliance in and 115 posts before your vote counts. :p Oh, and ofc you have to post to vote.

So explain this to me Semper, why is there only three alliances to choose from on the alliance of the decade?

Read the topic.

oh hey, I'm apparently a couch.