*The awards committee is on crack part 2

[Vorshayla]

What a great answer

What's the point in continuing clearly he thinks its personal lol so my answer requires as little effort as he put in. And when you have scorp simply quoting nothing trying to act important then I already know theres no point

[ScorpXCracker]

What's the point in continuing clearly he thinks its personal lol so my answer requires as little effort as he put in.  And when you have scorp simply quoting nothing trying to act important then I already know theres no point

[Murtsi]

What's the point in continuing clearly he thinks its personal lol so my answer requires as little effort as he put in.  And when you have scorp simply quoting nothing trying to act important then I already know theres no point

You say you dont want to put in your own time on this issue, that is fair but still feel ok to moan about it but dont give any constructive ideas that the people could use and implement to make stuff better in the future?

[AdamS]

All right kids. Daddy Adam is here.


Yes, controversial decisions were made. For example, the GMs who voted for Portland ought to have a good explanation why.

But let's not be unfair here. The idea that the powers that be aren't doing anything to improve things and don't care to isn't really a proper assessment when we're discussing the literal first season of a brand new awards system that got voted in and required essentially coming up with a system on the fly while a new one could be developed (a position I've just applied for for transparency's sake). There is clearly and undeniably effort and care about improving this.

That's on top of having to build two expansion setups, managing the greatest recruitment class in history, dealing with a league altering vote (and backlash when it didn't go the way some people wanted), and also you know the normal parts of end of season stuff.

No it's not perfect. And yes errors were made. As Infinite pointed out however, the egregious inclusion of Portland was actually more of an anomaly that is somewhat different from the original complaint. The votes are still sort of questionable but they're also not even the fault of the group that was given responsibility in this post. That being the committee itself. Also it wasn't the fault of the second group being given responsibility, that being HO.

@Vorshayla I think you need to take a deep breath here and realize that your issues and what actually happened here don't quite align.

[Vorshayla]

All right kids. Daddy Adam is here.


Yes, controversial decisions were made. For example, the GMs who voted for Portland ought to have a good explanation why.

But let's not be unfair here. The idea that the powers that be aren't doing anything to improve things and don't care to isn't really a proper assessment when we're discussing the literal first season of a brand new awards system that got voted in and required essentially coming up with a system on the fly while a new one could be developed (a position I've just applied for for transparency's sake). There is clearly and undeniably effort and care about improving this.

That's on top of having to build two expansion setups, managing the greatest recruitment class in history, dealing with a league altering vote (and backlash when it didn't go the way some people wanted), and also you know the normal parts of end of season stuff.

No it's not perfect. And yes errors were made. As Infinite pointed out however, the egregious inclusion of Portland was actually more of an anomaly that is somewhat different from the original complaint. The votes are still sort of questionable but they're also not even the fault of the group that was given responsibility in this post. That being the committee itself. Also it wasn't the fault of the second group being given responsibility, that being HO. 

@Vorshayla I think you need to take a deep breath here and realize that your issues and what actually happened here don't quite align.

That's a fair assessment and I will take it under advisement. I realize that may come off as ingenious as I'm typing this but I said what I needed to say

[infinitempg]

You realize anyone watching the stream for the first time, did not equate the tiny writing that said "soandso also got votes" to them being nominated right?  We saw 3 names that stood out, any reasonable person would think those werre the nominees and only the nominees.  It's like that for EVERY award show ever.

Hi yes this is a valid criticism. The reason this is that way is because I have the process automated in Photoshop and Google Sheets - and it is simply harder and less pleasant looking to have more than 3 listed as the original nominees. If you look back at some past awards shows you'll see that it gets very cluttered and difficult to read in the bottom bar when there are more than 3.

What I have noticed in the seasons since that change is a large amount of, let's say disdain over people's names not being listed - and I do think that there is validity to it. In S18's Award Show, there was a lot of vitriol over IsaStarcrossed not being listed as a nominee for Most Dedicated Member, and so I added in the "Also received votes" section.

There's been other situations (not just this one) where that compromise has caused confusion and upset users - so it's become quite clear to me that I either need to go back to manually setting up each slide in the awards show or figuring out a way to professionally list up to 5 nominees for each award that can remain automated. It may require a complete overhaul of the way I have the awards shows set up, but hopefully it will be worth the time put in. I already have some ideas as to how to do it - though of course implementation doesn't always match visualization.

I will put in those hours during the in-between of the past awards show and the next one and hopefully the resulting product will be better for all viewers.

[RotticusScott]

Lamar Odom, who was on CRACK!!!!!