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

You could have made an announcement appear like you do for other things saying that if people who don't want to be apart of the worse nominations should either pm a certain staff member or post in a thread the staff made before a certain time.

 

If you read what I said without jumping at it, you'd realize that I didn't really say that and you're actually jumping way ahead.

Within the realm of reason there's a certain discomfort--I'm not refuting or negating that, actually. However, my comment was actually an opinion. Should have said "I think" or something.

The most basic response I can muster is what Misty said about members actually being hurt that their peers think they're worst at something? And what I said about the negative atmosphere lately.

If we were all on the same mind-set or at least a similar one, then this wouldn't be happening. If we can all come together without the negativity involved, then we could have awards set-up nicely, more events and so on.

More importantly, the reason why I say next year is because I think people can actually get along and be nice to each other in time for next year.

Misty said it was a last-minute call on her, yanking them out. Emphasis on last minute. Do I think it should be done last minute? or do I agree with everything that happened? No. I am, however, explaining that I don't think she intentionally left it out to trick people.

Actually, that's just your assumption and a blanket statement in the first part. And of course it's bound to drive people away? It's impossible to please everyone, you know. We don't just do things for laughs and people leaving is actually something we usually try to take into consideration.

It's different because of the part about shutting it down that Hero of Time mentioned to compare it. The reactions would be...more aggressive. And that was the point I was trying to portray.

But you can find fundamental differences and similarities. In his case, he mentioned how both could get you offended/hurt. I mentioned how the medium was different and how the reaction to shutting it down would also be different.

Is there any other point you're trying to get to hit home? I think we already established that was an oversight. No one is actually covering up for it or saying it was right.

As for more specifics, which I think you still seem to have questions, you'll actually have to ask Misty because my involvement with the Awards was minimal and basic.

Actually, no. The problem is not pointing out a contradiction, or thinking a person is. It's how you do it with sarcasm as if that somehow constitutes a proper discussion on a serious matter within suggestions and feedback.

If your purpose was to exercise your wit through sarcasm, then stop right there. If your purpose was to call-out Misty for lying by using sarcasm, then stop too. Neither will fly. And neither actually help the actual discussion like the thread creator or anyone wanted.

 

Also, you missed this stuff,

 

[19/08/2012 23:13:33] Crimson Azoth: what
[19/08/2012 23:13:37] Crimson Azoth: are you ****ing serious?
[19/08/2012 23:13:40] Crimson Azoth: no worst member?
[19/08/2012 23:12:17] ✖Saxima: When will the worsties staaaaaaart
[19/08/2012 22:35:54] Christer Thorsen: Worst member categories will be interesting
[19/08/2012 23:46:24] Elly: Did they seriously take out the Worst polls?
[19/08/2012 23:46:26] Elly: Or what?
[19/08/2012 23:46:37] Squall Leonheart : They better not have...
[00:23:46] Crimson Azoth: so chris
[00:23:52] Crimson Azoth: did the worsts really get removed
[00:23:55] Crimson Azoth: cause...
[00:23:55] Crimson Azoth: not up
[00:25:23] Mish: The worst categories were taken out
[00:25:25] Crimson Azoth: without judging a worst.
[00:25:26] Jayn: Mhm.
[00:25:31] Christer Thorsen: ... really? Why? .-.
[00:25:34] Squall Leonhart: WHAT WHY?
[00:25:35] seeu: Yay~
[00:25:42] Crimson Azoth: Seriously?
[00:25:45] Crimson Azoth: what a ****ing cop out.
[00:25:45] Squall Leonhart: I WILL NOT STAND FOR THIS
[00:25:50] Christer Thorsen: This actually makes me sad
[00:25:52] Crimson Azoth: ruined the spirit of the polls.
[00:25:57] Crimson Azoth: we've always had worsts
[00:26:00] Squall Leonhart: Yep
[00:26:05] Squall Leonhart: Squall Leonhart is upset
[00:26:15] Reno the Turk: ^
[00:26:36 | Edited 00:27:32] Jayn: Let's see what Plums says.
[00:26:40] Jayn: He has been typing for a while, lol
[00:26:43] Alex: i'm disappointed because i was on worst staff and WANTED IT ;___;
[00:26:55] emilee: that is kinda really stupid
[00:27:06] Crimson Azoth: Thats a really dumb reason
[00:27:15] Squall Leonhart: That is a terrible excuse
[00:27:28] Crimson Azoth: Can we like...put it to a vote or something?
[00:27:35] Crimson Azoth: because that seems kinda cheap
[00:27:36] Squall Leonhart: Please?
[00:27:38] Elly: WWOOOOOOW
[00:27:43] Elly: Worst categories taken out
[00:27:45] Elly: WOOOOOOW
[00:27:46] Mish: We decided it a while back when there was a lot of dramu
[00:27:52] Squall Leonhart: I want to win worst member
[00:27:59] Crimson Azoth: Why weren't we told/
[00:27:59] ✖Saxima: . . . the worst categories were taken out?
[00:28:01] ✖Saxima: What the ****.
[00:28:05] Christer Thorsen: Why wasn't there a post made about this?
[00:28:14] Squall Leonhart: What Chris said
[00:28:15] Elly: Someone needs to make a thread about this.
[00:28:17] Crimson Azoth: We had a right to know I'd say.
[00:28:33] Jayn: Everything causes drama lately.
[00:28:34] Squall Leonhart: Yeah
[00:28:35] ✖Saxima: People complaining about it would cause drama.
[00:28:37] Christer Thorsen: I wouldn't have minded that much if we had known, but it's a bit silly to do this now
[00:28:38] seeu: I do... ;-;
[00:28:39] Crimson Azoth: which is exactly why we should have them
[00:28:40] Jayn: Everything.
[00:28:46] Elly: well the forum itself isn't taken seriously muff
[00:28:52] Squall Leonhart: ^
[00:28:53] seeu: I figure everyone else does to.
[00:28:53] ✖Saxima: I mean, we already nominated people.
[00:28:57] Elly: But the Awards are a fun event for people
[00:29:00] Crimson Azoth: we did
[00:29:06] Squall Leonhart: Yeah what they say
[00:29:07] emilee: but why have them for the past years, and not this year? like there's been drama all the time
[00:29:10] Crimson Azoth: we deserve to see the fruits of our labour.
[00:29:10] Squall Leonhart: >.>
[00:29:10] Elly: We spent a lot of time nominating
[00:29:27] Crimson Azoth: did you see those ****ing nomination sheets? long as ****.
[00:29:31] Jayn: Yes they were.
[00:29:33] Jayn: Mods nominated too.
[00:29:45] seeu: Oh goodness, everyone stop complaining please. At least not here.
[00:29:50] seeu: Make a suggestion post or something.
[00:29:55] Elly: Well this is the best place.
[00:29:59] Jayn: We didn't really have a discussion about it, they were just taken out.
[00:30:04] Elly: That's BS.
[00:30:21] Christer Thorsen: Wasn't Cycle 3 also called "Best/Worst" very recently?
[00:30:23] Elly: Someone make a poll about it in Spam
[00:30:26] Elly: Yes it was
[00:30:39] Elly: that was what they called it in Nominations
[00:30:50] seeu: Spam will make it worse Makaze. Might as well put it in Suggestions where it'll be taken seriously.
[00:30:55] Cloud Strife: hello
[00:30:56] Elly: Okay yeah
[00:30:58] seeu: Well, has a much greater chance of being taken seriously.
[00:31:00] Elly: good call there
[00:31:09] Elly: but the poll needs to be put up
[00:31:28 | Edited 00:31:57] Jayn: I highly suggest that if someone suggests it, they try to present it as maturely and non-heatedly as possible.
[00:32:15] Squall Leonhart: It sucks
[00:32:26] Squall Leonhart: I love worst nominations
[00:33:15] Mish: ngl, I like the worst categories as much as most.
[00:34:08] Christer Thorsen: I just don't like how we weren't informed of this. Otherwise it might have been alright
[00:34:24] ✖Saxima: [00:34] Christer Thorsen:<<< I just don't like how we weren't informed of this.>>>Pretty much this.


And I'm bored of scrolling through the chat now.







ALSO:~!~!~!~!

[00:27:46] Mish: We decided it a while back when there was a lot of dramu

It was already decided so all this bullshit about "it was a last minute decision" is a lie, or she was lying. Which is it?

 

Mish is not lying, but it was a last minute decision. Let me give you a general idea of the time frame. If I recall correctly, it happened in the middle of Cycle 2 or so, noting the "while back", but at the same time was a last minute decision under votes taken and the fact that people had already submitted nominations for the category.

 

that's like if a murderer has a knife to your head, but he's apologizing for killing you. It doesn't make it okay form him to steal your stuff. Why apologize when they can still fix their wrong?

hm. Fair enough then.

 

...Okay, let's go over this again. So I say people may have made effort in nominations and you imply that somehow means I said 'no-one' made effort?

Not invalidating the possible effort made by nominators means I'm invalidating them? That's not how it works.

Actually, no. Stop pushing your implications on me, and we can get somewhere. I already told you it was an opinion and should have been stated as so? Beyond that no, I will not have it placed your connotations thank you. I'd rather it'd have my own.

And this is part of the contradiction you're trying to point out. And quite frankly if you want to, that's none of my business. Take it to Misty if you want because that is not the point I was getting at.

I have no comments on your subjective view on the matter, because that's you. However, it strikes me as odd that you can somehow try to dissect my comment as an attack towards members because NOWHERE in the quote does it refer to a specific group or to specific members.

Actually not justifying it? If you actually didn't just take what convened you from what I wrote you'd see that my opinion on the matter is quite different. Specifically:

If what you mean that I justify the taking of the awards? No. I have no involvement in the awards and I quoted a post and expressed agreement with others.

Actually, maybe I think there are better solutions to fixing issues than closing out a whole section where the backlash would be insufferable?

Yes, but you asked me why they were different? I explained why I said they could be. Anything else is you adding extra stuff.

Actually, I never said that I agreed to it, AND I quoted a post which was shared similar opinions to mine. If I want to outright post a concrete opinion about what Misty posted then I'll post it.

It's very easy to accuse me of avoiding things when you miss the point of my posts and then start twisting my words. Calling people out in a sarcastic and rude manner is not a 'style', it's simply wrong here. Regardless of what you think Misty may/may not be doing. Which is the point you seem to miss in favor of implying I'm just avoiding things.

You said you'd speak to Misty, so any more discussing here is moot. However, you need to keep negative attitudes out of it.

 

Am I the only in thinking that using Skype talks as evidence of people's dislikes on the matter is a little.... confined?

I mean if the people in that chat had such a problem with it, why not post here, otherwise how are we to judge if this is a minority or a majority who agree or disagree, if the talk is happening elsewhere?

 

We had found out the news of the Worst categories being removed in Skype, it's only natural that we talked about it there - we also decided that it wasn't a good idea to come rampaging onto the forum about it, so really, we saved some trouble. After contemplation THEN we posted the thread here.

 

That's good. It's just I meant that the use of it as evidence for member's opinions on the subject seemed a little confined, in that it didn't reflect the attitude of people on site that were in that chat since they had yet to have post anything in this thread.

 

Well, it's not like Risk typed up that log, and honestly, I don't think anyone would go to the trouble of forging something like that unless they were desperate - but then people would debunk it, and no one seems to have yet.

What are we going to do, force the participants of the chat to post their opinions in the thread? They voiced their opinions in the chat, and if they felt that it was good enough for them, and that they didn't want to go to the trouble of posting in here, then they're fine.

EDIT: Also, six people from the chat posted in here, which was a good majority of the people talking at the time, so I'm not sure where you're getting this 'people from the chat haven't posted their opinions.'

 

My wording might have been a little fuzzy last night and I do apologize for any confusion, but here is what I meant:
Since I took over the awards, I had not received any word that people were directly hurt by the "worst" categories (except for one occurrence last year, in which the offending category was pulled) until this year. This year I was informed that certain people were hurt last year (and year(s) before) by being nominated, staff and otherwise. Upon receipt of those complaints, we wavered back and forth a bit on whether or not to pull the categories; as was said earlier, around the middle of cycle 2 I think it was, we eventually decided to pull them.

Knowing that they were popular categories and all the justifications for having them, we wished to find a method of adding them back in the years to come. For example, as I said, allowing people to nominate themselves (and only themselves) for the "worst" categories. Since this was around the middle of the awards, however, we decided that they simply would not be appearing this year.

I do apologize if you guys put thought into your nominations for said categories and if you were looking forward to them, but there are plenty of other categories that I hope you'll enjoy, and we are trying to find a way to bring these back. For this year, though, I do apologize that nothing was announced in advance but it was just a matter of timing & everything else that's going on right now. It was not our intention to pull a fast one on you guys, or to hope you wouldn't notice. That's not how we work. Be that as it may, you're welcome to believe what you like about our intentions.

Again, I am sorry if you were looking forward to them this year but that's the explanation.

If anyone has any further ideas or suggestions on how to bring back the "worst" categories without it resulting in any kind of hurt for those involved, please feel free to post here. Otherwise, I think we can move on from this back and forth. If you need some clarifications on my explanation, you can message me.

 

We could perhaps add an opt in for the worst categories. So members could PM/post somewhere that they are willing to be included in order for nominations on them to be valid. Though if we use that kind of system in later years, we should probably compile the opt in list first and make it public so people don't waste nominations on invalid members.

 

What!? Who would want this back? It's very hurtful and offensive, it's basically saying that your posts suck. It's like saying the biggest loser award.

 

Eh, i can see why some people would find it hurtful. Like i'm sure i said in the skype chat (not sure why that isn't there btw) i know that if i were to put a lot of effort into making good posts and was nominated for worst member, i'd feel as though i'd failed or let myself down somehow. Those people that can take it as a joke and say it's purely for the fun of it, i applaud you and congratulate you on your viewpoint. But people like myself that ALREADY think negatively of themself do NOT need other people nominating us for worst categories.

Kindly read my post, and take a moment to think before you start telling me i'm overreacting.

 

Yeah I don't see why people were making a big deal about the removal. Hell for all we know that competition could be the reason of a suicide act.