|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 45 OF 89 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Jan-14-14
 | | jessicafischerqueen:
I vote <Domdaniel> for Best Profile. I vote <Eyal> for Best Analysis. |
|
Jan-14-14
| | jessicafischerqueen: <john barleycorn>
<I would like to suggest a <LIFE Caissar> awarded for LIFE time achievements in outstanding analysis to you know who.> It would be refreshing if you could let up baiting this man for even one day, but you can't, can you? At any rate your comment is totally inappropriate in this forum, and totally against the spirit of this event. |
|
| Jan-14-14 | | SugarDom: I vote <jessicafisherqueen> for best profile. I vote <ajile> for best analysis. |
|
| Jan-14-14 | | TheFocus: I vote for <Eyal> as Best Analyst. |
|
| Jan-14-14 | | wordfunph: I vote <parisattack> for best profile and
<Eyal> for best analysis. |
|
| Jan-14-14 | | hms123: Best Profile: <jessicafischerqueen> Best Analyst: <ajile> |
|
Jan-14-14
 | | Annie K.: I vote for:
<Domdaniel> for Best Profile <Eyal> for Best Analyst. |
|
| Jan-14-14 | | MarkFinan: For best profile I vote Domdaniel.. I've not read it, but I like him and hey! That's why we vote. For people we like! So far I've been right in all but 1 category, and I made my predictions before nominations. |
|
Jan-14-14
 | | HeMateMe: Voting <Jimfromprovidence> best analyst. Voting <Parisattack> best profile. After looking at this stuff for years, one gets a sense that there are a handful of *Superior* analysts on this site, and a handful of extremely well put together profile pages. But, any awards should be about recognition for being good as well as picking the absolute best. Otherwise, what's the point--just pick the same three people every year? A sportswriter once said "If we voted on talent alone, Mickey Mantle would have won the MVP 15 straight years." That's why I try to move around a bit, with nominations and voting. |
|
| Jan-14-14 | | Nina Myers: I vote for Best Profile: <User: Domdaniel> |
|
Jan-14-14
 | | Jimfromprovidence: "Well my name is Pedro and I don't have to much to say, but if you vote for me, all of your wildest dreams will come true." |
|
| Jan-14-14 | | Abdel Irada: <MarkFinan: For best profile I vote Domdaniel.. I've not read it, but I like him and hey! That's why we vote. For people we like!> Here we differ.
If we're voting for "Most Likeable," if it's a forthright popularity contest, then we should indeed vote for people we like. But the Caissars, like many other awards, are about categories of effort and achievement. This should be a relatively objective judgment. You don't have to like someone for him to be the best analyst, have the best avatar or even be the most constructive user. Some of you may have noticed I'm not active in this year's Caissars. This is partly because I've been less engaged with the site this year, and don't feel as well qualified as I might to choose nominees. But it's also because it became plain to me very early on that people are doing exactly what <Mark> referred to: nominating members of their social circle, while other and possibly more deserving candidates are ignored. If the Caissars are about recognizing superior contributions and attainments, I will see a point in holding the contest. If, on the other hand, it's to be about handing encomia to the most popular members, I think there are better ways to do that. ∞ |
|
| Jan-14-14 | | MarkFinan: Abdel.. I was being sarcastic mate. I voted for Domdaniel because he's going to win. Just like last year! I think? I've tried to be neutral in the nomination process by nominating someone who has me on ignore! They're only kidding themselves so I stopped protesting and started playing the game after the first day of nominations when a perfectly reasonable post of mine was ignored. I know, and knew who would win nearly every category, it doesn't take Nostradamus to see, does it? |
|
| Jan-14-14 | | Abdel Irada: Yes, I should have known you were being ironic.
But something has gone wrong when participants sense that their votes can/should hinge on popularity or a sense of inevitability. The worst of it is that I have absolutely no idea how to remedy this situation. I only know that it has made the Caissars uninviting to me, and I suspect to many other members as well. ∞ |
|
Jan-14-14
 | | Penguincw: One vote:
I vote <User: jessicafischerqueen> for <best profile>. |
|
| Jan-14-14 | | MarkFinan: <Abdel Irada: Yes, I should have known you were being ironic.
But something has gone wrong when participants sense that their votes can/should hinge on popularity or a sense of inevitability. The worst of it is that I have absolutely no idea how to remedy this situation. I only know that it has made the Caissars uninviting to me, and I suspect to many other members as well.> I know what you mean. I actually like some of the winners, I mean nominees, but I think that these "awards" should be only open to either a) those that have been here over 5 year, meaning we know full well who will win. Or b) those that have been here under 5 year, meaning we've no idea who'll win... no inbetween! I've said it about 50 times before nominations started but I'll say it again.. It's cronyism, and it's transparent cronyism. The people that "win" know they've only "won" because they're friends voted for them. I hope 😃 |
|
Jan-14-14
 | | Domdaniel: Votes:
Best Analyst: <kwid> ... for his 'human' analysis, as the engine stuff doesn't count.Best profile: <MarkFinan> ... this is not a *you scratch my back* thing ... I think Mark is very funny. So there. |
|
| Jan-14-14 | | Colonel Mortimer: <Abdel Irada> <But it's also because it became plain to me very early on that people are doing exactly what <Mark> referred to: nominating members of their social circle, while other and possibly more deserving candidates are ignored.> Yep, Caissars = craven cronyism. |
|
| Jan-14-14 | | hms123: <Abdel Irada>
You can contribute by nominating and voting for good candidates. <Mark>
I did a quick count and found that 48 different people were nominated across all the categories. You, in fact, were nominated twice. <john barleycorn> won despite only having been on the site for a few months. Without going back and looking it seems to me that there were some first time winners: <john barleycorn> and <notyetagm> among them. This is the first year that the admins have run the contest. Give it time to get wider attention across the site. |
|
Jan-14-14
 | | SwitchingQuylthulg: I vote <Eyal> for Best Analysis. |
|
Jan-14-14
 | | WannaBe: <hms123> This is the second year that CG.com have run it. =) |
|
| Jan-14-14 | | hms123: <Wannabe> How time flies when you're having fun. Thanks. |
|
| Jan-14-14 | | MarkFinan: <This is the first year that the admins have run the contest. Give it time to get wider attention across the site.> Howard, I'm not blaming the admins for cronyism! I'm just being honest mate, I know some people won't, and don't, like me for it, but I'm only pointing out what must be obvious.. if I can see it, lol.
Some categories are well deserved. You for example have helped me probably more than anyone else here, so I voted for you for most helpful.. I couldn't even bring myself to participate in voting for funniest! I've succumbed to it myself by voting for Dom because I like him. I don't hardly read people's bio's anyway, but I played the game and voted for my favourite *person* in that category.. But I did say in one quite lengthy post at Annie's and Thefocus's forums exactly what would happen.. I think if you want to make it fair just don't let previous winners get nominated. I like the idea of having these awards because people spend a lot of time here, and it's a community.. but the people who have been in the community longest always win. And I thought you knew JB had been here for years but under a different name? And even he'd admit winning "best post" was ridiculous, because it was something he'd copied and pasted! And the other noms in that category *will*(if they already haven't?) win in the other categories they were nominated. Anyway, you only need read Abdel and colonel mortimers posts here to see that everyone can see it and it discourages people from getting involved. Third are deserved winners, third are sympathy votes, and the other third are ridiculous. But I guess nothing's gonna be perfect. Now this ^^ should have won best post 😉 |
|
Jan-14-14
| | Domdaniel: <Mark> Bookmarked for 'best post' -- next year! |
|
Jan-14-14
 | | OhioChessFan: The discussion is valid, but misplaced. Maybe the Kibitzer's Cafe? |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 45 OF 89 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
