Diary of the Month Rule Discusion

[mistaken]

iMac & Comradebot propose a rule change to a minimum of 4 shows to qualify for diary of the month.

 

Eh, well I guess I won. Congrats to me. But... I really think dse81 should spilt it with me.

 

I only really posted at the beginning and end of the month, whereas dse was updating regularly with good stuff. I only really sneaked into the vote as I had just posted a PPV ,which I can only assume went down well since I won this vote.

 

So yeah, make it happen please mistaken.

 

 

Other points I want to get across... I think the two shows thing needs to be looked at. 2 shows? That's one show every 2 weeks. That's all it takes to qualify for get a nomination? Not right IMO. If we're going to have a true "Diary of the Month" then it should (and needs to be) a diary that produces good shows on a consistent basis (such as dse81's).

 

Another point, I'd just like to say I'm pleased that it was such a tight race compared to the blowouts in the other nominations. That's good news for the RW scene on this forum IMO.

 

Saying that though... we need more writes to step up. We can't rely on the big three every month. If Nevermore, tristram and keefmoon aren't going to be as active (come back soon guys ) then it's up to the rest to pick up the slack.

 

 

Sebsy is planning something it seems (that After the Bash one was good, so more of the same more often please), Boomking has plans for a return (more backstage goodness please), tizzyt is looking good with his wwe one (focus all your talent on one diary and make it epic please), if wildfire stays active then he'll be nominated (I need to read the other part of his diary). Hopefully they'll all produce good stuff and we'll have another good race next time. If I forgot anybody or haven't mentioned anybody, apologies.

 

Anyway, long winded post over, I wasn't around enough last month to make noms and such but I'll defo be active this month and I'll get in 3 RW noms (if that's even allowed) and hopefully others will too nominate some RW diaries too.

 

Later days, and cheers for the votes!

 

I would like to have some feed back on this point, as well as an open discussion about the rules in general. so just some talking point feel free to bring up what ever you want.

 

1) minimum number of shows to qualify, for DOTM

2) how are the new Rookie rules working (based on time up vs shows posted)

3) any thing I can do to make the nomination or voting process smoother? do I leave either open to long? to short?

4) what ever else is on you mind

[FlameSnoopy]

1) I think 3-4. As iMac said, it needs to be consistent to win the DOTM, and that's why it needs to have 3-4 shows.

2) I like time more.

3) I think it's good.

4) None.

[mad5226]

I think the rules are fine. I mean I see Imac's point but the way I see it is if the voter feels that the diary was SO good that after only posting 2 shows it should win then so be it. It should be up to the voter. I however, would hope that as a voter you take it seriously and don't just vote for someone because they voted for you or if you don't truely believe it's the best. Just my 2 cents

[mirorFR]

3 Shows seems good = 1 by week and you can have a week for the real life

[CQI13]

1) minimum number of shows to qualify, for DOTM

2) how are the new Rookie rules working (based on time up vs shows posted)

3) any thing I can do to make the nomination or voting process smoother? do I leave either open to long? to short?

4) what ever else is on you mind

 

1)I would say FOUR to average out to 1 per week.

2)I would prefer shows posted. Not sure what the cut off would be. But it would stand to reason that you get better the more you write. And we can only really go by what's posted.

3)You do a great job with running the nomination/voting thread. I don't see any complaints on that.

4)I'm hungry.

[Eisen-verse]

1) minimum number of shows to qualify, for DOTM

2) how are the new Rookie rules working (based on time up vs shows posted)

3) any thing I can do to make the nomination or voting process smoother? do I leave either open to long? to short?

 

1) I agree that it's probably best to move the DOTM qualifications up to 3 to 4 posts a month. I would say 4 posts a month as a minimum, however, some may find it hard to post that many shows based upon life in general.

2) I think the rules in place are good!

3) You're doing well with the whole voting process. Can't think of anything that could be done differently. Keep up the good work!

[dse81]

1) minimum number of shows to qualify, for DOTM

- How about instead of a minimum number of shows, we have a minimum number of weeks covered in 'game time'? Say two weeks? Bigger companies like the WWE would require 6 shows, where as smaller promotions like TNA would require fewer. Just an idea.

 

2) how are the new Rookie rules working (based on time up vs shows posted)

- I think the current rules are good.

 

3) any thing I can do to make the nomination or voting process smoother? do I leave either open to long? to short?

- Can't think of anything to improve it.

 

4) what ever else is on you mind

- Nothing... lol

[FlameSnoopy]

1) minimum number of shows to qualify, for DOTM

- How about instead of a minimum number of shows, we have a minimum number of weeks covered in 'game time'? Say two weeks? Bigger companies like the WWE would require 6 shows, where as smaller promotions like TNA would require fewer. Just an idea.

 

No offense, but that is just insane. Running Raw, ECW, Smackdown and Superstars means 8 shows in a month. I think that is way too much: Smaller companies who run one show a month wouldn't have to run a show at all. Personally, I dislike that idea.

[foolinc]

I would very much like to change the word show to meaningful post. That way if someone is writing a diary focused more on the backstage segments they wouldn't get screwed. Though I guess making three the minimum wouldn't be too bad.

[The Final Countdown]

1) 4 seems like a good number to me. One show a week seems like a reasonable average.

 

2) Time Up probably makes more sense.

 

3) Seems fine to me. I like that there's plenty of time so that even people who may not visit regularly still have a good chance of making their voice heard if they so choose.

 

No offense, but that is just insane. Running Raw, ECW, Smackdown and Superstars means 8 shows in a month. I think that is way too much: Smaller companies who run one show a month wouldn't have to run a show at all. Personally, I dislike that idea.

I get what you're saying, but that could be seen as coming with the territory of playing as a company that has so many freaking shows. This doesn't matter to me one way or the other though; I have no problem with 4 shows being set as the minimum.

[Comradebot]

1) minimum number of shows to qualify, for DOTM

2) how are the new Rookie rules working (based on time up vs shows posted)

3) any thing I can do to make the nomination or voting process smoother? do I leave either open to long? to short?

4) what ever else is on you mind

 

1. I almost want to say bumb this up to three first and see how we do with that, and then see if we want to move to four. But as someone who himself has recieved nominations for just two shows, it doesn't seem right. Of course I don't think I've ever actually made it to the poll for DOTM (save Rookie!), but two is atleast one too few. And as someone else suggested, a "show" should also just be a significant backstage segment for those who use them heavily.

 

2. Time up sounds good to me.

 

3. I find the nominating and voting process to be just fine. I wouldn't mind if we could somehow keep track and list which diaries are currently eligible.

 

4. Are we allowed to do random diary pimpages in here?

[mistaken]

random diary pimpage is always encouraged!

 

Thank you all for your feed back. I am even more split on this than I was before. I think I will way in tomorrow, either weigh I will go with the group.

[Phantom Stranger]

I would very much like to change the word show to meaningful post. That way if someone is writing a diary focused more on the backstage segments they wouldn't get screwed. Though I guess making three the minimum wouldn't be too bad.

 

This.

 

Someone like Tigerkinney does a notable state-of-the-world update after each month, show, multiple shows, or no show.

 

They're as much a part of the diary, often, as the shows, though less fun.

[Stennick]

I think the word meaningful post might be too tough to really nail down what exactly that would encompass. I do a ton of little backstage tidbits in my diary as does Tiger, as does James, Bigpappa, etc.

 

The reason I think we're doing this is so even though guys like Nevermore and others are great and have established a name and a following like few others around here. I think it also clouds our judgment and our voting abilities when some of the other guys may put out for shows and Nevermore or Tristam, or whoever may come in at the end of the voting period, drop a show or two and walk off with the DOTM award. I think the only way to stay true to what DOTM is supposed to be is to keep it at shows and to bump it to three or four shows a month.

 

Again like others I love reading the heavyweights and if their able to drop three shows in a month and then take home the DOTM award then I got no problems with that, I just think the only thing nobody can dispute is what a show is. Meaningful post can be disputed and argued, what makes it meaningful, how meaningful does it have to be. Each writer and promotion it may be a different thing. The only constant we have in this whole process is shows and I think at the end of the day thats what we should be voted on.

[G-Prime]

3-4 meaningful posts might be a better idea, but that's just my opinion.

[crayon]

Personally I think 3 shows. As it allows leway for people who might choose to follow a 1 show per week format but haven't started their diary on the first week of the month.

 

I like the idea of meaningful posts as opposed to shows, but it is highly subjective.. Perhaps that can just be on a case by case basis.

[Stennick]

Yeah thats what I was saying is meaningful post is such a subjectable term. It'd have to be a heck of a meaningful post.

[GatorBait19]

See that's is tough what to we consider meaningful, BoomKing didn't really put out that many shows but to me his were always meaningful

 

I didn't like how Nevy got nominated, not because he isn't a great mind or writer but because he only did what 2 shows and I believed there were others who deserved it

 

So if we do 3-4 meaningful post we need to specify what is meaningful

[GatorBait19]

Personally I think 3 shows. As it allows leway for people who might choose to follow a 1 show per week format but haven't started their diary on the first week of the month.

 

I like the idea of meaningful posts as opposed to shows, but it is highly subjective.. Perhaps that can just be on a case by case basis.

 

agree with the 3 shows, but why not just make it 4 shows in a month, I know that might be hard but that means four shows altogether

 

Or you could say something like 4 shows, but maybe only 3 have to be meaningful i.e you do Raw, Smackdown, ECW, and then do a quick write up of Superstar like Gardner did with his diary

[Bigpapa42]

I am curious on exactly what would constitute a "show"? Some diaries - such as mine and James Casey's - offer shorter recap style reports for certain shows and full write-ups for others. Its easy to say that the shorter recap shows shouldn't count, but they can be nearly as long and detailed as what would constitute a full show in some diaries. I'm just curious...

[GatorBait19]

I am curious on exactly what would constitute a "show"? Some diaries - such as mine and James Casey's - offer shorter recap style reports for certain shows and full write-ups for others. Its easy to say that the shorter recap shows shouldn't count, but they can be nearly as long and detailed as what would constitute a full show in some diaries. I'm just curious...

 

see that is what I am wondering, which I think also falls under meaningful post

[praguepride]

1) I like 3 shows a month. Either you've been posting fairly consistently throughout the month or you squeezed in a couple updates in a row.

 

2) No comment? I don't really know the rookie shows.

 

3) Another board I'm a part of has a similar thing in the "best post of the month" where you nominate a great post during teh month. Different board, similar scenario.

 

HOWEVER they way they do it is slightly different. First of all let's say the month in question is January. On Feb 1st, begins nominations for Post Of The Month (POTM) and this lasts all of Feb. On March 1st, you vote for the nominations and on March 31st the winner is declared. And it works on a sliding scale so each month a winner is announced, you're nominating and voting.

 

Not saying this should be brought over as is, but just bringing up an alternative take on things. It would also give some context to each diary.

 

Sure we wouldn't really be voting on what you did in just one month, but then again that might be for the best. A diary that starts out strong but quickly fizzles might not get the vote because no on remembers that 2-show diary from 2 months ago. Maybe two of your shows in a row weren't very strong because they were leading up to a huge mega-epic-twist that just happened to fall outside of that month.

 

Anyway, I'm not advocating this too strongly, just bringing up an alternative view of things.

[James Casey]

Speaking as someone who updates his diary almost daily, I can certainly make a case for needing a high multiple posts to qualify for DOTM - it'll allow me to win more because of fewer competitors

 

In all seriousness, I would say that some diaries sort of transcend the notion of monthly popularity - especially once you get to the point of several hundred posts. There's twenty diaries just in the '08 section that have over 300 posts, and if some of them are continued from '07 (or '05) then that doesn't lessen their popularity. I would certainly suggest that my last DOTM win was based more on overall recognition than having been top of the hill during February.

 

It's the nature of the game - good diaries will always go unrecognised, while popular ones in a weak spell will get by on accumulated goodwill.

 

In a sense, this isn't that different from the previous debate about recognition for real world diaries - I would guess that most people here want to read a well done WWE diary, might take a chance on TNA, but if someone starts up an ROH or CHIKARA diary, it's going to have to be outstanding to carry the vote just because it won't automatically get as many readers. Whereas a CZCW diary automatically garners interest - could it be the new Coastal Zone? USPW - the new J Silver?

 

Even I've benefitted from recognition for MAW - my first efforts were inspired by shipshirt's diaries, and when I started 10SR, I was one of four MAW diaries that started within a couple of weeks of each other. Was I better than the other three? I would certainly say that at least two of the others had better presentation and content, show wise, in those early posts. I've endured, though, which gets me some goodwill.

 

Recognition is an odd thing. My version of Hugh de Aske was a total rip-off of Jack Sparrow, and I don't feel that I did anything special with him, but he got voted most popular wrestler in the year end awards. Why him and not, for example, NoNeck's Valiant, or Tigerkinney's Ultimate Phoenix - or keefmoon's Shawn Michaels?

 

And as an aside to the 'meaningful' post thing... When the story between myself and Rip got resolved in my diary, I spread that across four posts or so, for pacing, tension and so on. Would those count as a single 'meaningful' post, or four? I would think that as a bare minimum, a meaningful post would have to be something that moves the storyline of the diary forward. In some cases, that should be a show, in some cases it'll be a backstage segment... A list of results from other company's shows probably wouldn't count.

 

I think I can agree that active diaries merit consideration ahead of intermittently active ones simply because of the application and effort required to maintain an active diary (especially if you put huge effort into presentation). It's agreeing the level of activity that will always be difficult - and any limit could exclude someone posting the best show ever written, if it's their only post of the month...

 

/end ramble

[Phantom Stranger]

Speaking as someone who updates his diary almost daily, I can certainly make a case for needing a high multiple posts to qualify for DOTM - it'll allow me to win more because of fewer competitors

 

Here actually is the big problem, as I see it.

 

There's been a lot of talk of late about needing to strengthen and deepen the field in the DOTM, particularly in the Real World. If Nevermore's 2 shows hadn't made him eligible, it'd have dropped to two nominated shows - which, correct me if I'm wrong, means that voting would've been suspended this month.

 

So at the same time we're talking about the need to get more diaries nominated, we're discussing putting harder restrictions on nomination?

 

Note - I put out, on average, two shows a week. Pretty much any limit isn't going to bug me for me. But at the same time, I think it needs to be decided what we want; more faces other than the 'regulars' or a more restrictive nomination ruling.

[praguepride]

I think that meaningful post shouldn't really be open to interpretation, it needs to be cut and dry to avoid potential whining and resentment.

 

I think if we say, for example, 2 shows + 1 meaningful post (which could be either backstory, behind-the-scenes, or another show) that's fine.

 

If someone tries to "game the system" and just throw up a garbage post to bump them over the limit...fine! People will read that and probably realize "hey, this guy's just doing this to get an award" and probably won't reward him.

 

Maybe another thing to do is post the # of show's/updates posted for that month. Puts more pressure on the DOTM organizers but it does provide a bit more context for the "casual" voter.

 

So you could put up: Diary Name - Author - # of shows/# of misc. updates

 

So it would be very apparent that person A, who's posted 4 shows and 10 updates is far more active then person B, who posted 2 shows and no updates..