At 3/2/05 05:03 PM, Micol_Rankin_Games wrote:
1. Have less to choose from. People are lazy......most people....so chances are they REALLY WON'T TRULY view/play through 150 pieces. Either make it less pieces or make a longer time period to view the 150.
How are they going to cut down on the nominations, though? Use only the top 2 from each day instead of the top 5? What about on some days of the week when there's FOUR great movies and another days there's only ONE great movie.
That means that the 2nd place on that second day (which is just a GOOD but not great movie) will get to be nominated for the monthly vote... but that the 3rd and 4th place GREAT movies from the first day do not get to be in the vote.
That would kinda suck, no?
ALSO, I must point this out:
It was kinda a surprise THIS time, but for the March vote on April 1st, it's going to be a lot easier to prepare. Why?
BECAUSE YOU CAN GET STARTED RIGHT NOW.
Wake up, people. The Daily Top 5 on the frontpage of NG is going to be in the next vote. All 31 of them from March. So you can START to get ready for the next vote by trying to watch ALL of the daily top 5 each day (or week, or whatever). By doing so, you'll be prepared for the vote. You could also try watching the top 20 weekly list, if there's any variance there with the daily top 5s (7*5 = 35 per week).
And finally, to catch any other nominees, you'll have to watch all the flash on the frontpage as well. Well, all the NEW flash. Numa Numa Dance obviously doesn't count. #;-}>
2. Categorize the games and the movies seperate. Lets just take a look at the number of games to movies in this competition, not to mention the top 50 slots, and not to mention the number of game submissions to movie submissions. Maybe an award for games and an award for movies seperate. This would give both sides more direct competition, and also level the playing field for those whom submit games (myself included)
I wouldn't mind the game/movie separation, actually. I will be voting for at least one game this time (and one next time, too--Orbox), but... hm. Do you mean there'd be 5 game awards AND 5 movie awards? That's gonna be 2500 bucks. Not sure if Tom wants to spend that much per month + the 100 to a depositor for a total of 2600 in prize money every month. There ARE limits to Tom's generosity, as well there should be. #;-}>
3. Even MORE SELECTIVE group of voters. I know the goal is to include the newgrounds public, however the 2,000 tops may still be a little high of a number for judges. This one not so much as the other two suggestions but still kinda.
That may change, yes. I'll wager that Tom set it to top 2000 active to find out how many of those top 2000 will actually vote (some may be alts, for one thing, and some may have been active in Feb but are not active right now and don't know this is
At 3/2/05 09:39 AM, Bezman wrote:
At 3/2/05 02:16 AM, gfoxcook wrote:
A partially informed vote on this matter is much better than not casting your ballot at all. There are PLENTY of voters, and any ignorance you have of some great work will be more than made up for by the voters who have seen those flashes that you missed.I suppose I agree that a partially informed vote is better than none at all, but I would strongly urge folk to watch as many as they can.
Tom doesn't expect perfection from us, but yes, obviously watching as many as you can is advised. Still, many people voted as soon as they could, and how many of them do you think had seen all 150 movies? We're only human, man. Not robots.
If folk rely on others to vote for those they may have missed, then we'd end up with a basically skewed 'popularity vote' rather than a genuinely well informed vote of quality as I think the panel was meant to generate.
I don't think that's necessarily true. Some of the movies I had already seen before this vote were NOT the most popular of the movies on the list. I hadn't seen either of the two IllWillPress movies, for instance, but I had seen Destination Mouth, which I doubt is anywhere near as popular as either of those two. I WILL be watching both IllWills in the next day or so, but I doubt either one will be on my list, whereas Destination Mouth is DEFINITELY on it. #;-}>
I was going to suggest again that the voting time be lengthened to 7 days but I suppose if the voting possible winners are known beforehand, as they will be this month, folk will be able to watch them in their own time beforehand anyway.
EXACTLY my point to the other guy. Yar.
Maybe that could be turned into a secret or something for easier reference than looking up the bot's various posts and the frontpage archive? Have a link to see 'the shortlist thus far' or something like that.
Great idea. E-mail it to Tom in case he doesn't see your post.
(snip the rest, but one more thing:)
As for expanding the scope/range of movies nominated/possible to vote on... you could always allow for a "write-in" feature where people put in an "extra 6th vote" with the ID# of the movie from February they want to vote for.