General PEELies Discussion

[Reply #40 on:]

I feel like if PEELers want to honor Jicannon then maybe there should be a separate award for him. Of course those who actually knew him miss him and those who don't miss him out of respect, so maybe there should be a special award just for him. That way other Missed PEELers can be nominated in a fair way while everyone pays respect o Jicannon.

[Reply #41 on:]

A few of us talked about it and agreed that it was well... tacky. For one, it's dragging up months old pain, and for two, we've already honoured his memory on the wiki. It doesn't need to be dredged up again and again. Yes, people were hurt by his passing, but that doesn't mean that we need to keep doing things because of it.

It's a nice thought, but not one that I'll be backing up. The other council members may feel differently, but I'm not for it.

[Reply #42 on:]

I suggested it because I agree with what you were saying in the other thread. A lot of PEELers nominating him didn't even know him, outside of PEEL or from PEEL, and I think that's tacky. I understand that those who don't know him are trying to be respectful because Jicannon used to be a valued member here but to me I feel like it's jumping on the bandwagon too, like how you put it. So I figure if he's gonna be brought up again why not honor his passing because obviously he will be missed, but not in the same way other PEELers are missed. I feel like it's just cheating that particular category, obviously you'd nominate the person who unfortunately died. I remember talking with Jicannon on PEEL and on the chatroom years ago and as sad as I am to hear that he and his wife died, I didn't know him. I know that's really harsh sounding but it's how I feel.

[Reply #43 on:]

Announcement to all and sundry: Please stop spamming up the nominations threads with things that belong in here. My deleting finger is tired.

Spacedal, that stuff's actually been the subject of council discussions. I considered Jic a friend, and was personally very saddened by his untimely death. However, the council did not feel that it was appropriate or respectful to call attention to his passing in this manner whilst the grieving process is still ongoing for many who knew him.

All and sundry, again: To give somebody who, as much as he was a great guy, was almost certainly not going to come back to the board (having drifted away like so many others) an award that overall means nothing and makes no difference is a hollow gesture, and so would have left a bad taste in the mouth for those of us on the council who knew Jicannon. If you want to honour his memory, I suggest that you leave a message on the wikiPEELia memorial.

"Most Missed" will be awarded to the PEELer whose absence is genuinely felt the hardest and most keenly by the PEEL community as a whole, and should this turn out to be somebody other than Jicannon it would be tacky, distasteful and hypocritical to award him with the trophy simply because he is no longer with us.

As a PEELer who did interact with Jic beyond PEEL, I certainly do feel his loss, and I'm sure a small number of others on the board do as well. However, not many people who were around at the same time as Jic are still left. Most of them have drifted away, as he did. Therefore, nominations for Jicannon from anybody who joined after his last post will not be counted.

If Jicannon seems to genuinely be the person who PEEL as a whole is poorer for the absence of, it will be a very bittersweet pleasure to be able to award it to him. For now, please continue to make nominations for this award based on who you actually miss, not based on the fact that somebody you didn't really know died, and you'd like to cover up the fact that you're not really bothered by voting for them in a popularity poll that has no overall effect on anything other than the movement of electrons.

Hopefully this doesn't seem too cold-hearted. We now return you to your regularly-scheduled PEELing.

[Reply #44 on:]

You pretty much summed up my feelings on the matter but explained it a lot better.

[Reply #45 on:]

Yes, I fully concur with this discussion and the general results generated as a result of it.

[Reply #46 on:]

Didn't realize this discussion was happening here. As I said in the other thread, didn't people who didn't know him write on his Memorial?

Anyways, I miss him. I am not nominating anyone else for that category. He may not have been a regular poster in the last few years, but when I linked him to threads, he posted. But I digress. I miss other peelers who don't post as much anymore obviously, like my friends bart182, tzlk, and drippy_taco, but it is obviously not the same. I don't see the point in imposing rules like "PEELer X nominate PEELer Y for said category, but PEELer Y only made 10 posts after their join date, sooo I'm not going to count that nomination." If that's how the rules are gonna work, then we're gonna have to do a lot more research here with the nominations. As in, "PEELer X only made this many posts in forum Y, I'm not going to count their nomination for best fan artist or fiction writer." Just seems like it could get out of hand.

Otis nominated Ilovebender (or was it benderrules) for some award, who was clearly a spammer, so we don't count that too right? They are nominations. You said so yourself it doesn't depend on the number we submit, it is just to give you a rough estimate of what the PEELers are thinking. Why come out on the defense and say, "We are not counting PEELer X's nomination for this one"? You don't want to look at who they nominated for a specific category, okay, you are a council. But don't come out and say you won't be counted. Seems so pointless, really.

[Reply #47 on:]

I actually disagree with you there futurefreak.  However, it's a very fine line to be tread, and I would only use it where it was a glaring distinction.  As an example, if somebody nominated an individual for best fanartist when they had never posted any fanart, should that nomination be considered?  No.  The same would go with nominating for peelers that don't even exist, as another example.

As for the quality point that started this discussion in the first place, a peeler nominated Ji for "Most Missed" and then explained that they had never met Jicannon and that they were before their time.  How much can an individual miss someone they've never met?  Furthermore, having Jicannon be an option for that award, there's far more emotional attachment to give him such an award because of the nature of his status.  I'm not suggesting here that we shouldn't remember Jicannon or even that he doesn't meet the requirements for such an award; instead I'm suggesting that I don't want to cheapen his memory, and that if he were to be given such an award it be on the merits and spirit that the award portrays.

This isn't a very easy subject to deal with since we've now brought it up, and it's probably something that walks that fine line more than most else.  This has been as everyone who has spoken before me has brought up.

I believe the initial point in having this conversation was to steer the nominations made by peelers in a way such as to reflect how the awards are intended to be perceived.  Ie, Most Missed should be someone that you miss.  This is part of the reason I believe totalnerduk requested that people give reasoning for their nominations.  I think a few of the awards could have been clarified to a small degree when nominations started, although with this particular award (Most Missed), it really seems like it would have only been brought up in hindsight.

[Reply #48 on:]

I am going to do some praying on the matter and calm down. Sorry I got too worked up over this, as you can imagine it is a sensitive issue for me. Just ignore what I wrote and carry on. I can't force others to agree with me, I just wanted others to see my side. If no one brings this up again, I would really appreciate it, as a fellow PEELer and friend to some here for many years, thank you. I am sorry this disagreement lead to this.

Show spoiler

PEEL is about keeping us together, not blowing us apart!

[Reply #49 on:]

I don't see the point in imposing rules like "PEELer X nominate PEELer Y for said category, but PEELer Y only made 10 posts after their join date, sooo I'm not going to count that nomination." If that's how the rules are gonna work, then we're gonna have to do a lot more research here with the nominations. As in, "PEELer X only made this many posts in forum Y, I'm not going to count their nomination for best fan artist or fiction writer." Just seems like it could get out of hand.

Otis nominated Ilovebender (or was it benderrules) for some award, who was clearly a spammer, so we don't count that too right? They are nominations. You said so yourself it doesn't depend on the number we submit, it is just to give you a rough estimate of what the PEELers are thinking. Why come out on the defense and say, "We are not counting PEELer X's nomination for this one"? You don't want to look at who they nominated for a specific category, okay, you are a council. But don't come out and say you won't be counted. Seems so pointless, really.

In response to this, I really only have one point to make: the council will be applying common sense and their own expert judgement to the matter. Where they feel somebody should not be included on a poll despite having a bajillion nominations (for example, awarding anything to notorious spammers or trolls could be considered as rewarding negative behaviour) it will be deliberated and perhaps hotly debated. So far, the council members who have been convening on IRC have discussed a few issues together and managed to reach consensus. Nothing is happening at the moment that hasn't been agreed upon, and nothing will happen without first making all reasonable efforts to ensure that the council are in agreement on it.

The council is composed of those PEELers who have volunteered their time and expertise to make sure that the PEELies are done well, and I think that we can all have supreme confidence that any group consensus they reach will be worthy of our support and respect. With that said, not all council members have been as available for IRC discussion as I would have liked. So, I'll be sending a message to the council members later today outlining a greater level of participation and a stronger presence in discussions. It's unfortunate that I'm having to reauire them to do more work when I essentially promised this would be an easy year to administrate, but it looks as though events have conspired to make it a necessity.

I'll be online tonight from around 8PM GMT, so if anybody would like to pop into the chatroom (#futuramachat) and talk about being part of the council's discussions (perhaps even getting to present an award), then they're more than welcome to do so. If I'm not there, speak to Nutmeg or booze, who can both be found floating around on IRC most of the time. Don't do what Josh did, and join the council room without an invitation. You'll be kicked once you're noticed, if you do that.

Now I have to get off. I've a full day of labs, so I probably won't be able to glance at PEEL again until 8 tonight.

[Reply #50 on:]

I've read the posts regarding people's feelings on the issues brought up, some very good points have been made on all sides. Most of what's been said I accept, however...

To give somebody who, as much as he was a great guy, was almost certainly not going to come back to the board (having drifted away like so many others) an award that overall means nothing and makes no difference is a hollow gesture, and so would have left a bad taste in the mouth for those of us on the council who knew Jicannon.

Of my three nominations for this award, it was Jicannon who actually posted most recently. In fact of my three noms he's the only person to have posted this year. I'm not sure if I'm getting this wrong here, but I was under the impression that one of the main qualifying criteria for this award was that the people you nominated didn't post much anymore, or haven't done so for a very long time, hence why they're missed. However, what I'm getting from that statement is that people who've drifted away don't really qualify. Seeing as my other two noms haven't even posted this year, do they not qualify? I really do miss them a lot, their presence on Peel is missed by me hence why I nominated them...

The other thing I want establish is that just because someone hasn't posted in a long time, it's not almost certain that they'll never come back. ghoulishmoose came back after a very long absence to post quite a bit last year, admittedly not for very long, but several Peeler's had already made comments writing her off before she came back, and she could very well come back again. DannyJC13 was absent for a very long time, in fact before he become an established Peeler, but he came back to become a regular. FYP was gone for a very long time, I mean who thought he'd come back to be a regular? meisterPOOP was gone for 7 whole years, yet they came back this year and have stayed around. My point is with most Peeler's I don't think it's almost certain they'll never come back, sure a lot don't, but Peel is still open, you never know, and those were just a few examples...

[Reply #51 on:]

The point was, that many people have had absolutely no interaction with certain PEELers, and that many PEELers have in fact drifted away from the board for good. People generally leave and don't come back due to having accquired a life that keeps them busy.

People qualify for your nomination if you miss them. That is, if you interacted with somebody and they interacted with you, and you're sad that this doesn't happen anymore.

The more I clarify, the more it seems I need to clarify further. Use some of that ever-precious commodity, common sense to determine what criteria might qualify somebody for your personal nomination.

I'd like to think that most PEELers are smart enough that most of what has been said so far should have been obvious, and I'd like to apologise to any who feel like I might be beating a dead horse. The fact is though, that this particular dead horse just won't stop moving!

[Reply #52 on:]

I was just looking for a bit more clarification with what was raised, you've clarified things now, so hopefully the horse won't bother you anymore...

[Reply #53 on:]

Just to make it an easy list and not a longpost:

Nominations yes:

• User is gone for a while, not just a day or a week, should be at least a few month
• You actually know the user by having interacted with him back when he was active

Nomination no:

• User still posts once or twice a week just not as regularly
• You never heard of said user before and just see other mentioning him

Wow, that's surprisingly short lists.

[Reply #54 on:]

I agree that PEELers who didn't know him shouldn't nominate Jicannon. I kind of assumed we'd name the award after him, in perpetuity.  If that seems tacky or wrong, I apologize.  

[Reply #55 on:]

I think it's too tacky, naming an award after someone implies that they represent what the award is.
Like if we named it "The [-mArc-] Award for Biggest Nerd" it kinda implies that [-mArc-] is the biggest nerd in our view and that whoever wins the award is just one step below that.

[Reply #56 on:]

Don't do what Josh did, and join the council room without an invitation. You'll be kicked once you're noticed, if you do that.

Would have been nice to know that beforehand. I easily guessed the chat name and came into the chat to ask politely if I could be involved in some way, not to force myself in. I wasn't disrupting any discussion that was going on in there at the time or anything. Not once was I told by the people in there at the time that I shouldn't be there (until you came in and scolded and banned me).

Yes, I ended up having a discussion with Bend-err and Nutmeg about the PEELies, but it was a friendly discussion and they didn't seem to have any problem with it. I wasn't trying to force how I thought things should be done upon them, rather just present an alternate opinion. I even openly said that whatever they chose to do was fine since obviously I wasn't on the council, I wasn't being a dick about it or anything. There's no rule that says I'm not allowed to share my opinion unless I'm already on the council.

If anybody had said something to the effect that I shouldn't come into the chatroom until I've been specifically told I can be involved, I would have approached the situation differently. At the time I honestly didn't think it was a big deal whatsoever.

[Reply #57 on:]

3. Most Predictable PEELer-DannyJC13-Sorry man, I love Clone High, too, but... Whatever.

Wut...?

[Reply #58 on:]

For some reason I feel like being nominated for "Biggest Shipper" is synonymous with being nominated for, like, "Most Lovelorn."

(I'm not disagreeing with either designation--but I'm just sayin'.)

[Reply #59 on:]

Awww, I didn't mean it that way. Also, don't you have Tedward?

I'm ridiculously flattered that Tachy nominated me for "Smartest PEELer". It's not deserved, but it's flattering!

[Reply #60 on:]

For some reason I feel like being nominated for "Biggest Shipper" is synonymous with being nominated for, like, "Most Lovelorn."

I do not necessarily equate the two, certainly not in this particular case.  You do have a strong shippy side and I think it's great!

[Reply #61 on:]

I've just been comparing them, and I think that this year's award trophy beats the shit out of last year's.

Show spoiler

I really wish there was a way to get one or two of these actually made up, as 3D models. I'd totally put one of these on my bookshelf if I had one. I'd make sure the plaque said "most awesome internet person ever" or something though.

[Reply #62 on:]

Awww, I didn't mean it that way.

Oh, I didn't take it offensively; I'm quite proud of my status as a rabid shipper (and thank you for validating me in that respect, Tachy). I was just wondering if I exude some kind of, I don't know, sad-and-pathetic-girly-girl vibe by going so gaga over the relationships of fictional characters.

Also, don't you have Tedward?

Yes, and I ship the two of us just as rabidly.

[Reply #63 on:]

While some rabidly ship Gorky and Tedward, others less rabidly proclaim it's just a mere friend-ship.

[Reply #64 on:]

Our legions of fans must just be confused by the haphazard and careless way in which our relationship has been portrayed by the writers.

[Reply #65 on:]

Do you mind if I ask why some staple categories of the previous years have been culled? Were they getting boring? There were a whole bunch of new PEELers that I’d have liked to nominate for Best New (coffeebot, Tachyon, spira), and I don’t know any of them well enough to judge if they’d fit the rest of the categories. 

12. Most Collectable PEELer - Ralph. Because he's cool, I don't know. What does this mean?

Was also wondering why Best New got cut. Ah well.

I should probably clarify. The "most collectable" PEELer is the PEELer you'd like to "collect" (ie: meet and hang out with) on wikiPEELia. I thought it was kinda obvious. But obviously it wasn't obvious, since so many people have been saying "WTF?".

Anyhow, a bunch of awards did get cut from previous years, yes. But there are also some that didn't, that have already been decided upon. Now stop asking "Why isn't this award included for nominations?" and "WTF is Most Collectable?" in the nominations threads and get your nominations made.

Questions go here, not there. Good grief, do your mothers have to wipe your backsides for you?

[Reply #66 on:]

Announcement:

Nominations will close on or just after the 24th November. After that point, the nominations threads will be locked, and nominations tallied. The polls will be up as soon as possible after that, and will open on the first of December. Whilst I'm getting the polls up, there will be a period during which any and all posts in the poll thread will be deleted. Once they're up and finalised, you'll be able to go nuts. But until the last poll has been set up, none of the poll threads will be "fair game" for posting in. Once nominations have closed, I'll merge this into the general discussion thread. If you have comments, put them in there. If you have genuine questions about the closure of nominations, ask them here. I and the rest of the council will do our best to explain the concept to your poor, feeble minds.

[Reply #67 on:]

8 days remaining until nominations close. If you've been obsessing over your choices and not posted yet, now would be a good time. If there's anything you've not made a nomination for so far, now would be a good time. The countening has begun, and once the nomination threads close, the final makeup of the polls will be decided. So if you haven't done any nominating so far, you're running out of time. Do it whilst you still can.

[Reply #68 on:]

6 days remaining until the close of nominations. That's less than a week. If you have any to make, make 'em now.

[Reply #69 on:]

nostalgia. You will enjoy it.

[Reply #70 on:]

The results from 2009 are still up, despite tnuk's concern at the time.

[Reply #71 on:]

So, nominations close tomorrow. I thought it was today, but it'll be tomorrow. Probably when I get home after my lab classes. So you all have just under 24 hours to make any final nominations. If you have any nomineering left undone after that point, then that's just tough.

This thread will then be merged with the general discussion thread, and the council will begin deliberating over the final makeup of the polls.

[Reply #72 on:]

Nominations are now closed. The council will be voting on the final makeup of the polls later on today, and probably through to Saturday and Sunday as well.

Feel free to speculate on who'll make it into the polls for what award, who might end up winning, and pretty much everything else.

A few threads have been merged and/or locked so that the subforum doesn't become overrun with seperate discussions before the polls are up.

[Reply #73 on:]

Fuck it I thought of a nomination on the bus this morning and I knew the polls were closing!

But on the plus side, I've kind of forgot what I was going to nominate them for... Oh well.

[Reply #74 on:]

The poll choices for the on-topic awards have been finalised. Polls for on-topic awards will go up on or around the first of December. Until then, there's a poll that you can use to register your excitement and enthusiasm. Go have fun, kids.

[Reply #75 on:]

Holy crap I was nominated 19 times! Most of them by Otis.

[Reply #76 on:]

The polls have been finalised. There have been some changes made for various good reasons, but overall there should be no major surprises with what's been decided.

I'll put the polls up on the first, and I'll open them for voting at some point after that. Perhaps a day or two, just to give people chance to review their choices and try to convince others to vote for their preferred candidate.

It's a technique pioneered by Weiner for the Madness, so I will refer to it as the Weiner-Madness Technique.

[Reply #77 on:]

Speculate away, PEELbabies, speculate!

Also tell us how amazing we are, constantly.

Gifts wouldn't hurt either.

[Reply #78 on:]

The first? That is so much time to wait.

* spira whines unintelligibly

You're pretty amazing, Nutty. :3

[Reply #79 on:]

Only Nutty? I see how it is