Implemented The Removal of the "Worst Categories/Nominations" from KHV Awards

A few members and I noticed that the "Worst Categories" threads were not posted along with the "Best Categories". Then some staff members informed us that there won't be any such categories included in this year's KHV Awards. The main purpose of this thread is to answer the question "Why?" and perhaps get this traditional category back into the Awards!

Now here are a list of reasons, compiled by some members and I, why this light-hearted category should be brought back into this year's Awards:

1. Members who sent in nominations spent a lot of time thinking of good-quality members to fit into each category (and c'mon, you know those lists were huge too) and their efforts should be rewarded.
2. Cycle 3 is named "Best and Worst Nominations" for a reason, yes? The standards should live up to the name, because it's very deceiving if not.
3. There was no announcement, no warning or indication, that this wasn't going to be included. That's not fair to the members, who have a right to know, especially when the "Worst Nominations" are a favorite of some members!

I hope everyone here will discuss this matter peacefully and respectively. So please, debate to your heart's content, but please please please do it kindly.

 

I'll say what I said earlier, there's no reason to have the best if we're not having the worst.

if say, you're not having the worse because people could feel less about themselves, or bullying occur whatever, the same could be said for the best polls.

Best member could cause inflated egos, making people feel better than others, and thus losers feel less than the winner, this isn't what will DEFINITELY happen, and because it's all light hearted, worst polls should come back aswell.

Vivi's 2 pence.

 

The categories were removed because we had a few people come forward saying that being nominated hurt their feelings, in the past and for this year's. As the awards are an official, staff-run project, we did not want them to be any sort of mode of bullying. It was suggested that we could just message all those nominated and ask if they'd want to be in the polls, but that too would let them know they had been nominated. That was why we pulled them this year; we are open to having them return next year, and have been brainstorming ways to fix the problem, one being to allow people to nominate themselves (and only themselves).

We realize the categories are all in good fun and I was of similar opinion until only a few weeks ago--it was very much a last minute decision on my part to pull the categories. Unfortunately, once something hurts someone's feelings, it stops being "in good fun."

 

I was part of the discussion of this and I'll just say one thing basically: If we were told about this beforehand, it would have been alright. But it is just wrong for there to have been no mention of this at all, even as the Cycle 3 itself is going up. And Cycle 3 had always been called "Best/Worst Nominations," even when cycle 1 was going up. While I can sorta understand why it was removed, not that I agree with it, I just really dislike how we were kept in the dark about this for the entire time. It would have probably gone unmentioned as well, if Vivi hadn't asked me about it earlier. That's not how things should be handled.

 

I do apologize for that, as I said it was a last minute decision and, with Cycle 3 being just after the move, I was putting the polls up a bit hastily and didn't think to mention it.

 

What was it that affected this last minute decision?

Either way, I think you should have just gone with things as planned and possibly leave out the "worst" categories for next year, if people truly are getting hurt by them. It's a bit of a tease to cut it just before the categories go up, when people have nominated for them and everything.

 

Concerns about it weren't brought up until after nominations had been opened, the decision went back and forth for a while until ultimately landing here.

 

It must have been something very major for you to make such a last minute change, could we get an official statement on what exactly happened? I just don't see why you would make this type of last minute change though. I do see where you're coming from, but this was planned and it was announced that these categories would have been part of this year. It really should have just been planned for next year to drop the "worst" categories. There are legitimate reasons to drop them, but it was just far too late to do such a thing.

 

But you didn't change it for that past years, so clearly something must have been different this year.

 

Yeah, I'd never received complaints about (or been told about) others being hurt by the nomination.

 

I find that a bit hard to believe, considering how some members left shortly after recieving awards like "Worst Speller."

Oh well, I don't think we'll get anywhere with this, so I'll just drop it.

 

Nobody really came forward about it, though. And I'd really have no way of knowing if their leaving correlated with being nominated for/winning these categories.

 

Everything should be taken with a grain of salt, most of them are jokes. They're within the Fun and Games section. If you can make that pretty much be a rule for The Spam Zone, why is it so different? People get butthurt from being insulted in the Spam Zone but you never shut it down.

I don't care that much, but in fairness and in logic, it doesn't make that much sense.

 

It doesn't matter to me at all. I don't really think we should have them as they serve no purpose other than to encourage negativity. Sure there were some funny ones in the past like worst admin and Spdude winning in a landside, but other than that, I see no benefit to it. Very rarely is there a worst award in an award give-away. It's not like there was something blatantly missing from the awards this year. I didn't even notice it.

 

I understand completely.

 

I haven't done the nominations before at all, and knowing that this was taken out puts a damper in my heart.

 

I only have a problem with a handful of people complaining causing everyone else's fun to be ruined. I know for a fact A LOT of people here don't like me and I accept, I am sensitive, but that is no reason to ruin everyone else's fun. You could easily call the Spam Zone the same thing. I've been insulted there PLENTY of times and so have many others. Yet you don't shut it down. THERE is where comments escalate to the point where they are meant to hurt. In the KHV awards, it's all for fun and not meant to hurt anyone.

Call me crazy, but that seems awfully backwards.

 

To the first part about effort. I'm not going to say no effort was placed in it, but more effort is placed into actually making the event go smoothly. So not to downplay their efforts, but everything else around the site---Premium, Pins and what have you? Site events, Anniversary gifts. Those are all to reward members. One year of not having 'Worst' categories is hardly worth the fuzz or a whole suggestion thread to have them back.

Will they come back next year? Yes, if everything goes well. I can however understand the questioning and doubt as Chris and you have expressed? But I think that was just an oversight and was not actually intentional.

The second part...I don't know what to answer to that? It being 'deceiving' seems like a stretch when the Worst categories have just been yanked. It's not like Misty said 'oh well, I'll remove it and keep it Best and Worst categories to deceive members! Woo!' but rather that she forgot that minor detail?

And to the third part I agree. But as I said, I don't think...in fact I'm almost certain it was an oversight. It happens.

Shutting down the Spam Zone? That wouldn't solve anything and in-fact most people would leave. But comparing the Spam Zone to the awards is apples to oranges. Staff do try to keep the Spamzone free of offense but that's not always possible because we are not mind-readers. Nor are we able to prevent everything, sadly.

I realize the complaint against offensive comments, but even so much as to clarify and simplify the overall conduct on the site received massive backlash. So there's plenty of mixed signals here and there. The Spamzone is a completely different monster than the awards.

You're not crazy, don't say that :c

And I agree to this mostly. Except the Spamzone thing. And I think that right now the last thing the site needs is negativity over the awards, which is one of the highlights of summer. Specially recently where everything is gushing cynicism and negativity.

So I think the attempt was more to just make things ease into each other nicely, rather than have more negativity spilling over everything.

Annnd to those who are tripping Misty on her own words. Give her a break, she's only human. And I find it extremely unfair to give her that much of a hard time over something which she personally took the time to set-up, organize and make happen for years now. I don't think most people would care, specially after being treated like crap. Note that this is not the same as expressing concern about something (like some have done respectfully here). So kindly, stop.

This discussion can be good and productive, but not with confrontational or mocking attitudes ;c

 

[DOUBLEPOST=1345483018][/DOUBLEPOST]The claim is that it was removed because people have complained about them being nominated for worst member.But how did certain members know that they were nominated to be offended between the nominations this year and their posting? Staff do not tell people that they have been nominated unless they need examples of their work. On top of this Misty has already nicely clarified this hasn't happened in the past, so how can it be claimed that people have complained in order to justify their removal?


If the Worsts will be there next year, then who complained this year in that time slot? Did people go around telling others they nominated them for Worst?

Did the complainers include staff members, yes or no? Since it seems that only the staff would actually know.