PEELie discussion thread

[on:]

Want to debate your noms or the noms of others?  Go for it right here, and not the Test Thread!

(Jic, feel free to close if you don't like)

[Reply #1 on:]

Nah, good idea Nix

Yes please, don't fill up the Test Thread with PEELie talk. Let's make use of this forum!

[Reply #2 on:]

I don't like the idea of having polls. They always turn into a two-horse race, and I'm afraid if it comes down to Faze and a non-Irish person, certain anti-Irish PEELers (*cough* Nixorbo) would make sure Faze doesn't win.   

[Reply #3 on:]

True, but if it was decided by some sort of email-in ballot, I know I wouldn't bother. The winners would be decided by old people from Florida.

Perhaps some sort of external anonymous polling? This is web 2.0, people. I'm sure such a thing exists.

[Reply #4 on:]

you mean a poll where the result isn't shown?

[Reply #5 on:]

You know... I love Fazeshift as much as the next person, and I'd love him to win every award that was ever given to or by another human being.....

But I'm pretty sure he never did fanfiction, and spamming him to win everything, means other more deserving people won't even have a chance.  The joke is/was funny, but can't we be semi-serious.... even about an internet awards ceremony? 

p.s. This doesn't just apply to Fazeshift, anyone that would like to take this seriously though, I'd suggest nominating people who you think honestly deserve the <insert whatever>.   

[Reply #6 on:]

 

Originally posted by Bend-err:
you mean a poll where the result isn't shown?

Not until you vote, no.

[Reply #7 on:]

I think the fact that he didn't write a fanfiction makes him a winner, no?
And there are only a couple of times I nominated him for an award where he isn't eligible. Everything else: why not him? There are only a handful of PEELers that I like anyway. Let me have my voice, dammit!

[Reply #8 on:]

It wouldn't be a big deal to set up an off-site polling place. Making a system that wasn't trivial to tamper with is a differet matter.

The simplest system would be to have the poll use the honor system, and if someone tries to vote and finds someone else already voted for them they'd have to post here, and an administrator would remove their votes so they could vote again. But that could be a pain in the ass, so meh...

[Reply #9 on:]

Check out my amazing Paint skills:





We're going after the Republican vote.

[Reply #10 on:]

I'm up for a system a little bit more diverse than POTM.

[Reply #11 on:]

A possibility: wiki-based voting? If something doesn't already exist, I could probably put together a custom special page for voting by next monday. I'm sure spiff would install it.

It could hide the current results but expose the list of people who have voted. Bogus voters could have their votes removed automatically by removing their name from the list.

[Reply #12 on:]

Re: the pic of the year voting:

 

This is about whatever
you, PEEL's voting public, decide is the most fun to look at.

Whatever, not whomever.  Make better clarifications!

[Reply #13 on:]

We were, by our use of the article "whatever," allowing HJS to be nominated 

[Reply #14 on:]

 

Originally posted by Gopher:
A possibility: wiki-based voting? If something doesn't already exist, I could probably put together a custom special page for voting by next monday. I'm sure spiff would install it.

It could hide the current results but expose the list of people who have voted. Bogus voters could have their votes removed automatically by removing their name from the list.

An excellent idea Gopher, anyone else think this is capital?

[Reply #15 on:]

Yes...Gopher, send me an email at thepeelies[at]gmail.com

[Reply #16 on:]

I like the idea of polls, but agree that they shold be external. If wikiPEELia can be used to host them, then great, but if not, then perhaps there's another website that specialises in polls?

[Reply #17 on:]

I agree that a POTM voting style may cause ballot stuffing. An external voting system would be nice. I somewhat understand how WikiPEELia would work, and I would be happy to help in whatever way needed, though I bet Gopher could help more than I could with that.

[Reply #18 on:]

I think there ought to be real-life prizes for the winners of certain awards... PEELer of the Year, Lifetime Achievement, etc... what do you think?

Also, the winner of the Fantasy Mod Award should be made an actual mod... we can lose either Drippy_Taco or bart182.

[Reply #19 on:]

 

Originally posted by Mr.MastodonFarm:
Also, the winner of the Fantasy Mod Award should be made an actual mod... we can lose either Drippy_Taco or bart182.

Your ideas intrigue me, sirrah

[Reply #20 on:]

I say we lose Nixorbo.
Does it still intrigue you, guy?

[Reply #21 on:]

 

Originally posted by BirthdayClown:
I say we lose NixorboBirthdayClown.
Does it still intrigue you, guy?

Fixed.

[Reply #22 on:]

Sycophant.

[Reply #23 on:]

Australian.

[Reply #24 on:]

I can't help, but I think there is a category missing...and no, it's not "Best sleeping white tiger of PEEL".   

Perhaps there should be a category for the non-exceptional, "just average" PEELer.

[Reply #25 on:]

what about, best user icon? Theres a handful of people who's icons catch my eye, I think it's noteworthy.
biggest spammer?

perhaps one involving the peel-agi-alia, like most different in person or something along those lines with a better ring?

The Peeler who should post more
or
the most missed peeler

just some ideas... seems like there should be some more catagories

[Reply #26 on:]

Gocad: Looking for second place, eh? I get it! 
 

BirthdayClown they're great! 
But I hope you're not making it look like you're my fake account with your fanaticism!
Speaking of which, did you bomb those embassies I commanded you to?

[Reply #27 on:]

In the past we've had something along the lines of most missed peeler before Show.  We decided against biggest spammer a long time ago..... we wouldn't like to feed the trolls.

[Reply #28 on:]

aaah, didn't we have biggest spammer in the peelies that really mattered?

[Reply #29 on:]

What happened to cutest PEEL couple and most missed PEELer?

[Reply #30 on:]

we don't miss any peelers 

and cute couples?... have you seen these guys? 

[Reply #31 on:]

We don't have any new couples really, so it would be just a recount of last year. And as for Avatars...again...same as last year. That's why we changed from "Best Username" to "Best NEW Username"

If airbagfailure was PEEL's favorite username last year what would stop her from getting it again this year? Nothing changed except the new PEELers, and so we just concentrated on them.

[Reply #32 on:]

Self-noms should be discounted.

Self-voting should be disallowed if possible as well.

I've already seen two self-noms, and that's two too many to my mind.

[Reply #33 on:]

Aw. you post this simultaneously with me self-noming myself for best fanfictionist. Ordinarily I wouldn't, but since I got robbed in New PEELer on a technicality, and I stand no chance of winning a fanfic category with my decidedly non-shippy scripts, and others had been doing it as tnuk points out, I decided what the hell.

[Reply #34 on:]

I disagree with tnuk's non-self-nom policy proposal, especially the no voting for yourself clause.

[Reply #35 on:]

Yeah, considering I nominated myself too, I have to agree.  This isn't the POTMs and in the past we've had people voting for themselves, it makes no odds, in my opinion.  I feel it should be allowed.  If anyone believes they've made a good enough contribution to garner a nomination, why not shout about it.

[Reply #36 on:]

 

Originally posted by Bend-err:
we don't miss any peelers   

True, but still it's a great category.

And yes, I'm biased. 

[Reply #37 on:]

-sigh-

Self-nominating is not condoned in POTM, why should it be condoned here? If a person needs to resort to self-nomination in the nominating thread, rather than letting their fanfics/other contributions speak for them, then there's a good chance that they've been forgettable enough to ignore completely in that category, or are egotistical enough to think that their particular perfomance level deserves some form of reward when everybody else can see those who seem to deserve it more.

Nominating yourself is a cheap way to raise your profile within a nominations thread and when you do this, you are sure to get at least one nomination because somebody else has already seen your name in there, they don't hate you, and they need a third nomination. Rather than scratch their heads, they look up the list. If they see your name on its own, they may well be inspired to give a pity-nomination. For this reason alone, you should not have self-nominations counted (although they should count towards your limit of three) because they generate other nominations.

Self-voting is doubly bad. Not only do you take the vote that you gave yourself away from somebody else, you also skew the perception of the poll, because people think that you are more popular due to the larger number of votes. Sheep mentality plays a large part in polls - many will vote for the most popular option if they see no outright "best", or if their own favourite is trailing.

Therefore, both practices are most certainly in poor taste. I normally approve of whatever Nixorbo or Gopher do on general principle that both Nixorbo and Gopher are both awesome, but here I believe that they are treading a very fine line. A very fine line indeed. So fine that the leading edge is a fractal, diminishing evermore towards an infinitely sharp point.

There may even be cats involved - which should automatically convince Faze that self-noms and self-votes are bad, because he hates cats, and by extension everything that cats are involved with.

I urge the council to throw out self-noms and self-votes. I urge them with all the fiber of my being, and all the water in my bladder.

   

Originally posted by Melllvar:
If anyone believes they've made a good enough contribution to garner a nomination, why not shout about it.

Oh why not indeed? Shouting about your own acheivments can be done without nominating yourself though. In fact, doing so without nominating yourself could lead to even more nominations from those who respect your integrity. I'm not going to not nominate people who have self-nominated or change my nominations to reflect my disapproval, but I am going to be less likely to cast my vote their way when it's poll time.

As PEEL's Corrupt Despot I believe that although my vote only carries as much weight as any other, it carries 10% more honour and 15% more non-outcome-influencing worth.
 
Edit: Look at the length of this post. Everybody who has self-nominated already, see what you made me do! The Captain is angry. Angry. Angry!

[Reply #38 on:]

tnuk: Your logic is not so good. "Not only do you take the vote that you gave yourself away from somebody else"... Why does your vote belong to someone else? This reasoning is wrong, and no system of government on the planet prohibits self-voting because this reasoning is wrong.

Self-nomination, well, I admit it might influence other people's noms since the nom process is public, but no moreso than a nom from anyone else I think.


A thought I had in planning the off-site voting system. There's no reason the 10-candidate limit must be imposed in this system. More than 10 candidates is probably not the best idea, though, so I have a suggestion: Insert a third round. First are nominations, like now; anyone who gets at least two noms makes a new preliminary round. The top 3 or 4 from the preliminary round go to the final vote. The preliminary process eliminates the "split party" effect, where two similar candidates divide a group of voters allowing a third, weaker candidate to have more total votes. With an automated polling system, the extra round would not be much work.
Thoughts?

[Reply #39 on:]

I like the idea of a preliminary round of voting, mainly because it allows the focus to shift, and therefore allows greater flexibility: what might seem to be a two horse race or a race already run is suddenly open to additional variables. Which makes everything more exciting.

As far as "Not only do you take the vote that you gave yourself away from somebody else" goes, the idea is that you give your vote to somebody else, because in theory, they might give their vote to you and it is only sporting to do the same in return.

If the poll does not allow you to vote for yourself, then you are forced to decide which of the other candidates you would like to win - this is a little more of an honest reflection of your opinion, once you are eliminated (from your own perspective, and temporarily) as a candidate.