Diary of the Month Rule Discusion

[lazorbeak]

God, what a horrible, horrible, absolutely terrible idea. Four shows a month? Should we just flat out disqualify those of us with full time employment, let alone those of us (me) working in addition to being a full time student? To me, this is just a flat out terrible idea. Some of the best diaries in the history of this board posted no more than two shows a month, because they were writing incredibly good stories in addition to the fact that they had other things to do with their lives.

 

This proposed change will seriously shorten the field of diary of the month, making certain categories one horse races while potentially creating situations where ZERO diaries qualify in a specific category.

 

I'm not sure where anyone can think this is a good idea. To me, it seems to be encouraging quantity over quality, and at least personally, that is the complete opposite out of what I want out of "awards" on a recreational website.

 

Let me make the decision whether I prefer two well-written shows with excellent stories and developed characters, or 6 shows and 4 web site updates of one sentence match reports and no characterization.

 

This is such a bad idea it shouldn't even be considered.

[CQI13]

"Shouldn't even be considered" is a bit strong I think. It's a simple point of discussion. Whether it gets implemented or not, is entirely separate. Not sure that it encourages quantity over quality. JamesCasey made a good point as to what a meaningful post is (moving the story along). Besides, remember that the readers nominate diaries, correct? You don't have to nominate someone because of quantity.

 

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...

 

That right there I think summarizes things.

[Self]

I can certainly see lazerbeak's point. I plan to do my diary in chapters, 5-week runs of 5 episodes, and I'd hate to be disqualified from any DOTM awards just because, for example, I did 3 episodes in April and 2 in May.

 

Not that I'm saying I'm that good yet, it's just... I can totally see where he's coming from.

[lazorbeak]

"Shouldn't even be considered" is a bit strong I think. It's a simple point of discussion. Whether it gets implemented or not, is entirely separate. Not sure that it encourages quantity over quality. JamesCasey made a good point as to what a meaningful post is (moving the story along). Besides, remember that the readers nominate diaries, correct? You don't have to nominate someone because of quantity.

 

 

I say "shouldn't be considered" because inexplicably the majority is so unbelievably wrong. I don't see any net positive to forcing posters to put up 4 shows a month.

 

But how can you even argue that it doesn't put quantity over quality? It flat out disregards anything with "only" two shows a month.

 

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...

 

See this post that "sums it up" classifies a diary that only runs two shows as "intermittently active," which is just an arbitrary and meaningless definition. There are plenty of shows for which two shows a month, plus at least two previews/non-shows, can be considered active, including several diaries of the year and diaries of the month. The second you say "three posts is hard work, two posts is intermittent," you're making a value judgment rewarding low quality, high output diaries, which historically don't win awards just because of high outputs.

 

Seriously, a move like this is one that just alienates these awards to the point that it would completely exclude newcomers from the process entirely. Which is fine, if the goal of the gds diary awards is a bunch of members' only jackets that read DOTM on them. But you can bet I will not even bother looking at DOTM threads as a member too lazy to do anything more than "intermittent" postings.

[CQI13]

Perhaps 4 "SHOWS" may be too exclusive as you put it, and I guess it depends on the type of diary you're running (character based or fed based). I would be ok with your definition of Active, being 2 shows and 2 previews/non-shows. It's a matter of taste, really. I guess it'll really be up to the person doing the nominating to decide what criteria they want to use (2 shows? 4 shows? whatever other option?) Aside from some recognition on this section of the board, a chance for your work to get more views/replies, thanks to nominations, I wasn't aware winners received anything from this. It's friendly competition. And this all started because this month's winner felt that the runner up did a deserving job AND was more active. If he hadn't made that comment, this conversation wouldn't be happening.

 

One thing I should point out, and not to get into an argument, simply as an observation: You say I'm making a value judgement on high output/low quality. Never said anything like that. That presupposes that if you are able to write a lot (quantity) you're doing shoddy work (quality). That's a pretty big (and sometimes erroneous assumption).

 

Perhaps the people making the call for 3-4 shows have less going on in their lives. And I would agree that it would be wrong to impose one will over another. But the topic was brought forth, and opinions were asked. I may have missed the post at the top saying that whatever option on the poll won would be implemented. What if I had a group of people together (substantial) to vote for the "Only if you're keeping up with the WWE" option as a joke, and that won in a landslide. Yes, it won. But it probably wouldn't be feasible to implement, so it wouldn't be. Maybe there will be a happy medium, or maybe people will simply nominate more active/high quality diaries.

 

-EDIT-

 

And while in my response I said 4, the option in the poll was 3-4 shows. Three would be fine. Something that moves the story along I guess.

[foolinc]

The more I think about it, the more I am and sure of my orginal stance of keeping it at two. We should be rewarding quality not quantity and by upping it to four (or even three) people like Trekkie, who have an insane level of skill and put everything into his shows, get scrwed. And I would like to remind you I am the author of the NEO diary, which is as basic as you can pretty much get. In comparision, he makes a wedding cake and I makes a cup cake which each of my shows. Sure the cup cake I make is delicious and looks great, but at the end of the day it's still a cup cake.

 

By the way, that cup cake goes back to a daily posts tomorrow.

[lazorbeak]

One thing I should point out, and not to get into an argument, simply as an observation: You say I'm making a value judgement on high output/low quality. Never said anything like that. That presupposes that if you are able to write a lot (quantity) you're doing shoddy work (quality). That's a pretty big (and sometimes erroneous assumption).

 

It's disqualifying a range because they don't meet quantity standards. A range that has often included diaries by guys like NoNeck, Monkeypox, j-silver and others.

 

I think the analogy to member's only jackets is pretty apt: if anybody wants these awards to just go to the same five guys from now until forever, that's fine. Let's restrict the voting in addition to the nominations.

[foolinc]

Side Note: I think we need a show of the month poll.

[Stennick]

I see nothing wrong with asking for three QUALITY shows out of someone to get nominated. Just because someone drops five, six shows in a month doesn't mean their good and doesn't mean they'll get nominated. I think three shows is very doable. Thats like a show every ten days.

[praguepride]

Then again, on the flipside, the goal of dairy writing SHOULDN'T be to do it just to win an OTM.

 

OTM's are meant to recognize the writers who have put in more effort then the rest. As is, I am perfectly comfortable with setting a higher requirement even if I don't meet it because that means that there is no doubt in anyone's mind that the people nominated for that month have put in a tremendous amount of effort.

 

lazorbeak did bring up a concern that it would disqualify those of us with "real" lives, but is that necessarily a bad thing? I subscribe to the philosophy that one way to determine your stance is to make things as simple as possible:

 

Would you rather have:

 

A) Everyone quailfy for an OTM of the month and the deciding factor would be people voting. You would run the risk of momentum votes where people just vote for their favorite without checking how active it is.

B) Very few people qualifying because few people have the time to invest in a diary.

 

Personally, given the choice, I would pick 'B.' If you have a slow but high-quality diary, chances are you'll get feedback about it. Monkeypox's DaVE dairy is a great example. Look at how many "WOW, this is a great diary!" posts there are. Heck, there's far more comments about the diary then actual diary updates.

 

Now, in my mind, an OTM should be to recognize somebody who has put tremendous effort, above and beyond. Effort that isn't based upon their writing or booking ability necessarily, but upon their commitment to their diary. James Casey is a great example of that. He has updates regular as clockwork, nearly every other day he has thrown something up there. He deserves an OTM for that commitment alone. Nevermind the quality of his posts, that gets voted upon when you actually vote for the best, but to even qualify should be a high bar for newcomers to strive for and for repeated winners to truly be proud of.

 

So I fully support 3-4 shows knowing damn well that it'll be hard for me to make it. But it WILL give me something to work towards. It WILL mean that when you see someone who qualifies time after time, they are truly deserving of recognition.

 

 

tl;dr: Commitment > Quality in my book. Commitment gets you nominated, quality gets you the win though. OTM should be about recognizing effort and determination, not just booking or writing ability.

[foolinc]

How are Commitment and Quality two different things?

[praguepride]

How are Commitment and Quality two different things?

 

Maybe I should change it to effort? Determination? Commitment to implied online obligations that if you post a diary you are planning to keep posting to it?

 

I guess what I am saying is that I given the choice between a competent writer who updates nearly everyday vs. a phenomenal writer who updates only a couple times a month, I'd rather give recognition to #1 (competent but committed). Chances are a phenomenal story will get feedback and recognition on its own. Chances are that a solid and consistent diary might not get as much recognition, and I think that dedication is award-worthy.

[FlameSnoopy]

Yeah. Why is it a MUST to get DOTM? It's a price for your efforts. Something where you're better than the rest. You can't cry if it changes to three shows a month: that's a reasonable amount IMHO. If you can't put on three shows, you shouldn't win the DOTM, again, IMHO. You need to be active, though I am sure this is being taken on the account at the moment, when people vote.

[foolinc]

Yeah. Why is it a MUST to get DOTM? It's a price for your efforts. Something where you're better than the rest. You can't cry if it changes to three shows a month: that's a reasonable amount IMHO. If you can't put on three shows, you shouldn't win the DOTM, again, IMHO. You need to be active, though I am sure this is being taken on the account at the moment, when people vote.

 

The same can be said for the people that wished the change to be made in the first place.

[Phantom Stranger]

Frankly, as stated upthread, I see the issue as being much simpler.

 

Some months a particular DoTM poll doesn't run due to lack of candidates ANYWAY.

 

Reduce eligible candidates and this becomes a commonplace.

[lazorbeak]

Frankly, as stated upthread, I see the issue as being much simpler.

 

Some months a particular DoTM poll doesn't run due to lack of candidates ANYWAY.

 

Reduce eligible candidates and this becomes a commonplace.

 

When this happens I will nominate the worst TNA diary I find that updates constantly. As a reward for the poster's dedication.

[CQI13]

If that's the case, why don't we NOT run it monthly, agree on some number for every 6 weeks or 2 months? Sure, people would probably complain about that number too, but whatever.

[James Casey]

Or just ditch DOTM and stick to DOTY?

 

Honestly, people are getting worked up about it, but it's an arbritary award - an indicator (and only an indicator) of your current standing among other diary writers.

 

I would have no problem in making the diaries all inclusive... But I'm glad that we have a Rookie category as it's easy to start out hot, and not follow it up.

 

We've always recognised that there are different approaches to putting your diary together. My shows take about five minutes to format, because they're almost always plain text. BP42 has commented that his shows can take over an hour - that's commitment, even if his update rate is less than mine.

 

Ultimately, I'd say open it up as wide as possible - talent should be recognised and encouraged, and if someone comes up with an amazing show, way ahead of anything anyone else manages, but they've taken all month to prepare it, well, I would have no problem with them winning DOTM.

[praguepride]

I envy your formatting. That's what drags me down. I just timed myself: 48 minutes to spellcheck and format everything... ugh, why do I make things so complicated

[lazorbeak]

Ultimately, I'd say open it up as wide as possible - talent should be recognised and encouraged, and if someone comes up with an amazing show, way ahead of anything anyone else manages, but they've taken all month to prepare it, well, I would have no problem with them winning DOTM.

 

Exactly. You shouldn't be punished for writing only two shows, if that took the writer 6 hours per show and resulted in something excellent.

[Stennick]

I think Casey has convinced me that there should be no show limit. The fact is he's right, some people it takes them an hour to put up a show, other people it takes a copy and paste. Some people put on shows that are eight pages (in word) long. Others put up a paragraph. At the end of the day its the voters that need to be more cautious on who they vote for. Parity won't come from knocking the heavyweights out of the running. If anything don't you want to BEAT the best? I like the DOTM Awards it gives everyone a chance to recognize those three diaries that are off the charts that month and that shouldn't go away.

 

If someone wants to put up one show and if they get voted on due to their name then thats the way it is. The fact is if there are this many people complaining about someone getting the nod due to name value then vote and don't vote on name value vote on diary quality.

 

We're four pages deep on people saying there needs to be a change, maybe the change shouldn't be in the format but with the readers and voters. If there is this much of an uprising over someone winning it with one show being posted or two or whatever then maybe all that needs to happen is people need to take their vote more seriously.

[Phantom Stranger]

If that's the case, why don't we NOT run it monthly, agree on some number for every 6 weeks or 2 months? Sure, people would probably complain about that number too, but whatever.

 

If we're just gonna get complaints either way, why not stick with what we know?

 

It has the advantage that there's the possibility of people not among the usual winners squeaking one in - I would suggest that Bigpapa might not have got his deserved win this month if James Casey hadn't been ineligible for victory, Tigerkinney hadn't put his weight behind BigP for the new blood factor, AND infinitywpi not been unable to update of late.

 

Expand the timeframe any more and it seems guaranteed that the current established top tier will remain the only ones picking up the wins.

 

Just look at the Hall of Records. Add this month's winners onto the top.

 

Now, sure, the Rookie awards are different every month (duh). But if we go back to the release of TEW08, you know what we find?

 

The C-Verse has only three one-shot winners as of this month (McShamrock, who, to judge by his DOTY wins wouldn't have been one-shot had he lasted, and NoNeck and Bigpapa, who both score wins in months just after James Casey takes himself out of the running by having won).

 

There's a better selection in the Real World, though one of those one-time winners (Tristram) is still using TEW05 last I heard and one (keefmoon) last I heard isn't using the game at all.)

 

It may or may not mean anything, but apart from BoomKing's one win, EVERY Real World winner since the release of TEW08 has been posting their diary - or in Wildfire's case, a direct prequel - for much longer than the current version of the game is out.

 

Nothing that's started in the last three-quarters of a year bar BoomKing has gotten in.

 

So do we want to continue to shore up a top-tier of writers, or do we want the DOTM awards to recognise other people?

 

If the latter, changes clearly need to be made, but I've no clue what changes.

[CQI13]

Give the Top Tier a separate category? And to not make multiple threads, keep Rookies & Established (combining CVerse & Real World). A good established Diary is a good established Diary. Same goes with Rookie. At the DOTY part, you could end up combining the past winners of the monthly categories to battle it out (or keep them separate as Rookie DOTY & Established DOTY). Just a suggestion, if as you say, you'd like to see NEW people.

[Phantom Stranger]

Give the Top Tier a separate category?

 

This smacks way too much of elitism for my liking. I'd be hoping for more writers to develop followings and be able to rise to the same level, not for the installation of a glass ceiling.

 

At the DOTY part, you could end up combining the past winners of the monthly categories to battle it out (or keep them separate as Rookie DOTY & Established DOTY). Just a suggestion, if as you say, you'd like to see NEW people.

 

Combining the past winners... Err. You know the DoTY has a bunch of awards that aren't allocated on a monthly basis, right?

 

I'd love to see NEW people recognised. But installing a glass ceiling won't do that, nor will locking the DOTY off from those who didn't score monthly awards. (DOTY strikes me as where the consistency awards should top out over exceptional months.)

 

Honestly, the point I was trying to make is that imposing limits on the categories more stringent than we have means even fewer diaries will get recognition.

 

To expand horizons, we'd need to see about encouraging more people to nominate and to nominate more widely. We'd need to think about how we present the voting choices so that, as James suggests, they don't vote for one diary out of inertia.

 

But any further restriction on nominations strikes me as a bad idea.

[Stennick]

At this point I almost wish we could do a new poll. I think we should have all discussed this first and then voted, this is AMERICA dammit, we talk for months before we decide on ****. Ok so before hitting submit I realize not all of you may follow the American format of talking for months and then doing something.....however you should look how great of shape we're in