You probably remember that last year there was a good deal of discussion of what to do about the same people getting nominating and winning year after year.

I think <Mark Finan's> point has some merit on these grounds, and he's not alone, going by last year's discussion.

I think last year's posts on this topic are still here in the <Caissar forum> if you just scroll back a few dozen pages.

Your idea of someone with a terrific memory (also not me) providing a general list is interesting- but I'm not sure anyone would want to put in such time and effort?

Part of the fun of these awards for me is trying to think and remember who I thought were standouts in various categories.

You have been very active this year on a wide variety of pages- I think this qualifies you as much as anyone to come up with good new suggestions?

2. Best Username
<->

3. Most Helpful
<Phony BenOni>

4. Best Post
<->

5. Funniest Poster
<Thefocus>

6. Most Constructive
<Csmath> (see point 8)

7. Best Profile
<->

8. Best Analysis
<Csmath> he provided very interesting analysis on several top games.

9. Best Game Collection
<->

10. Most Informed
<->

11. Best Historian
<->

12. Best/Worst Pun of the Year
<Game of thrones> is front runner in both categories

13. Player of the Year
<Magnus Carlsen> winning the title should be worth something.

Runner up: <Wei Yi>.

Other notables: <Borislav Ivanov>. Like it or not, he was a really talked about a lot this year.

14. Game of the Year

Carlsen vs Anand, 2013

I nominate Game Collection: 1970 Buenos Aires for Best Games Collection.

Here are my reasons:

First, this is an example of diligent and valuable research to compile the games in this important historic tournament.

Second, the introduction tells the story of the tournament in exciting detail- the narrative of events unfolds and adorns our experience of playing through the games.

Third, this collection is a good representative "sample" collection that has since been promoted to an official tournament page- Buenos Aires (1970).

The collection now sits in good company in Cg.com's Tournament Index.

Finally, this collection is also a good representative sample of the voluminous array of historical games collections researched and compiled by User: TheFocus-

There are 30 (!) pages of such collections in <TheFocus'> Profile:

Best Analyst:

1. Jimfromprovidence

2. notyetagm

3. ajile

Most Knowledgeable:

1. Domdaniel

2. FSR

3. Kinghunt

Best Avatar:

1. russsshurig (too cute for words!)

2. GingerGM (raybans never go out of style).

I second <notyetagm> for Best Analyst.

2. Best Username
<John barleycorn>

3. Most Helpful
<hms123>

4. Best Post
<John barleycorn for the "facial paralysis" comment somewhere on Thefocus's forum>

5. Funniest Poster
<john barleycorn>

6. Most Constructive
<offramp> What? I pay attention! Like being back at school here, lol 💤

7. Best Profile
<MarkFinan> ?? It's a *blackadder scene* Need I say more? Don't answer that, lol.

8. Best Analysis
<hugin> You don't think I pay attention to that kinda stuff, do you? Well I do..

9. Best Game Collection
:Forget his name but I'll be back.

10. Most Informed
<Karpova> So what if im on ignore! I'm voting with honesty and humour. Some people should try it out.

11. Best Historian
<Karpova> same reasons as above.

12. Best/Worst Pun of the Year
<All of them are terrible.. I abstain from this category>

13. Player of the Year
<Magnus Carlsen> If he doesn't win something's very wrong. He's been destined for the title of WCC since he was a small boy and this year he achieved it. Go Carlsen! (Can't believe im now on record as saying that, lol)

<SoUnwiseTheKnight B4> you have nominated 4 games for game of the year. Please pick just 3. I may go to the lengths of recording your first 3 choices and discarding just the fourth, but the admins are under no obligation to do so; they would be entirely within their rights to disregard the entire category, or even your entire post. Since therefore I might be doing you a disservice by trying to make sense of your post, I won't count it either. Repost within the rules please.

So I have misunderstood the rules.

Combination of nomination and seconding must be maximum of 3 per category-

So in the category BEST HISTORIAN, when I seconded <Karpova> and then nominated <tabanus>, <whiteshark> and <thomastonk> that totaled 4. One over the limit of 3.

I got it now. I will compile my own tally for the other categories and save it to a word file so as to avoid error during the rest of the nomination process.

I remember now... <Thefocus> ;)

3. Most helpful:

<hms123>

4. Best post:

<Dec-06-13 Premium Chessgames Member OhioChessFan: They could have the Florida Fischer annotate a game over loudspeakers.>

5. Funniest kibitzer:

<LIFE Master AJ> - it just hurts too much to laugh

8. Best Analysis

<Stockini>

11. Best Historian:

<Karpova>

14. Game of the Year:

Having more carefully read your post to <SoUnwiseTheKnight>, I'd like to rescind my seconding of <Karpova> for BEST HISTORIAN, because <Mark Finan> has just nominated/seconded her right? So she still has 2 nominations without mine.

In which case here is my official one and only post meant to be counted for nominations in BEST HISTORIAN category:

<tabanus>, <whiteshark> and <thomastonk>.

I meant <harrylime> for best avatar.

Well I don't really read 'profiles'. They are the bio's right?

Well I would have said <Thefocus> but one minute there's information a plenty, the next there's Nada! Lol.

Okay. Seriousness. <LIFE Master AJ> for best profile. Well he does try to teach bless him.

If only we could restrict him to profiles?? ;)

Thanks <Mark>, that's much better. ;)

Yes, the profiles mean the member bios. And you can nominate in several different posts, as long as you don't overstep your allotted choice numbers.

<john barleycorn: <

8. Best Analysis

<Stockini>>>

It is too difficult to decide whether this is disqualified under "All categories for members must be for actual members." or under "<Best Analysis> Computer analysis does NOT count." (The Caissars chessforum)

Can you see this Tipsy star?? Me! Moi! Most informed!!!

Btw, I can't possibly think why no one voted for you, "hehehe" 👌

Well firstly I'd like to thank <john barleycorn> for this award. He's one of the finest human minds our race has ever known. Secondly, I'd like to thank AJ for inspiring me in everything I do... (excuse me one second?) "whaddaya mean Russell Crowe and Wacko Jacko once did this and now everyone thinks they're moroooooooooooooooooons"

**dragged from the stage by Daniel Freeman and AJ Goldsby, mid flow, whilst still speaking as music and <tpstar>'s seal clapping drown out my voice**

Here is from the Profile:

<From January 2-8 we receive nominations for all categories. You may not nominate more than 3 users (games, etc.) for any single category.

All nominations must be "seconded" by at least one other member to qualify for voting. <<<You may second any number of nominations.>>>>

Doesn't this mean we can only make 3 nominations per category, but we can second any number of nominations? This would mean that seconding is not limited.

So I seconded <Karpova> for Best Historian, but I only nominated 3 people for Best Historian- <tabanus, whiteshark, thomastonk>.

I never nominated <Karpova> for Best Historian, so I'm still within the 3 nominations per category limit?

1. Best Avatar
<Tabanus>

2. Best Username
<RandomVisitor>

3. Most Helpful
<hms123>

4. Best Post
<->

5. Funniest Poster
<OhioChessFan>

6. Most Constructive
<WinKing>

7. Best Profile
<Domdaniel>

8. Best Analysis
<YouRang>

9. Best Game Collection
<->

10. Most Informed
<kwid>

11. Best Historian
<cro777>

12. Best/Worst Pun of the Year
<->

13. Player of the Year
<Magnus Carlsen>

14. Game of the Year

In this case I think the rules could have been stated more clearly by not using two different terms- "nominating" and "seconding."

Here would be a clearer version: