Scene.org Awards discontinued
category: general [glöplog]
The Magic Countdown starts at zero ;-)
Quote:
Hinterseer Hansi alias Hansi Hinterseer
FUUUCK, i never saw that coming! they were the same person all along?!
:( Shame, but not unexpected. I had fun doing jury duty, but it's hardly an ideal pastime.
Gargaj :D
A "best newcomer prod" pouet vote could be cool actually.
"Original concept" too.
The rest, I'm not sure. And thumbs & filters do a quite good job already :
pouet awards 2012 - best 4k
pouet awards 2012 - best 64k
pouet awards 2012 - best demo
...
(somehow related, extensive prod reviews by guys-who-have-a-clue-like-ex-scene.org-jury-members would be really cool. A bit like TMDC jury does. I miss that a lot, but yeah this takes energy & time :/)
"Original concept" too.
The rest, I'm not sure. And thumbs & filters do a quite good job already :
pouet awards 2012 - best 4k
pouet awards 2012 - best 64k
pouet awards 2012 - best demo
...
(somehow related, extensive prod reviews by guys-who-have-a-clue-like-ex-scene.org-jury-members would be really cool. A bit like TMDC jury does. I miss that a lot, but yeah this takes energy & time :/)
there's a difference between voting on prods you saw and then picking the best among those.
Quote:
A "best newcomer prod" pouet vote could be cool actually.
If you're into hypothermia, yes.
Quote:
extensive prod reviews by guys-who-have-a-clue-like-ex-scene.org-jury-members would be really cool. A bit like TMDC jury does
Wait, what?
wullon: You'd miss out if you only go by thumbs, sometimes a demo didn't fit the party mood, or we flock around the top three and miss the number four which just has that somethingsomething.
Kudos to the scene.org awards crew for what they did over the years.
[The past two days have been rather full for me so I just saw this thread]
Folks are talking about categories, about popular or juried votes, but maybe another thing worth considering when thinking about the form of the scene.org awards succesor is what format would best serve the continued growth and development of the scene. After all, awards mean different things in different contexts.
Are they a stamp of approval, and if so, whose, and why? An effort to bring something or someone(s) whose notable efforts are not being recognized? An encouragement to new creators? Do they help with outreach, or raise the visibility of a specific style or genre? Do they bring the community together for something a lot of people pay attention to? Encourage folks to read or watch or otherwise engage with some art form more fully? What makes people pay attention to awards, and take them seriously, enough to get angry and argue about them? Are people more frustrated by not feeling they have a voice, or if they are motivated by awards perhaps as much as recognition at an individual party or the positive words of their colleagues, why do those particular awards motivate them?
yeah, it's a big pile of questions, but it is worth considering.
Over in science fiction, two examples of awards with different structures but similar goals are the Hugos and the Nebulas. Any work in the given categories released or published anywhere in the world in the previous year can be nominated or win, and anyone who joins the World Science Fiction Association for that year can nominate and vote, so it's an open public choice thing. There are also awards given on a country by country level, and one of those is the Nebulas, which are given for works published in the States in the previous year (including works in translation, I believe) and are voted on by the Science Fiction Writers of America, a professional writers' association, and voting is only open to SFWA members, who are all published writers; the minimum qualification is the sale of one novel or dramatic script, or three short stories, to venues with certain minimum circulations or pay rates.
Sometimes the same work wins both a Hugo and Nebula.
Voting methods are worth considering as well. People tend to vote differently anonymously online on work by people they do not know, especially if random folks with no particular stake in things wander in to troll as can happen online. At a party, one votes differently, especially if one is carefully considering work within the oeuvre (sorry, I cannot think of a less pretentious word, Iḿ tired) of someone you know and have watched develop.
So maybe we need a jury, and maybe not. Maybe we need the pomp and circumstance of an in person ceremony and trophy, maybe not. Maybe the new award for the scene should travel from party to party, as Worldcon (back to sf examples) travels from place to place every year, so far just within the States, Europe, and to Japan and Australia.
The thing to consider is what will benefit the scene, and what are the goals that establishing an award will further.
And a Pouetters award sounds like a nice idea, but I do think this is worth thinking over.
I'm sure folks already are, and even were as long ago as last year this time.
[The past two days have been rather full for me so I just saw this thread]
Folks are talking about categories, about popular or juried votes, but maybe another thing worth considering when thinking about the form of the scene.org awards succesor is what format would best serve the continued growth and development of the scene. After all, awards mean different things in different contexts.
Are they a stamp of approval, and if so, whose, and why? An effort to bring something or someone(s) whose notable efforts are not being recognized? An encouragement to new creators? Do they help with outreach, or raise the visibility of a specific style or genre? Do they bring the community together for something a lot of people pay attention to? Encourage folks to read or watch or otherwise engage with some art form more fully? What makes people pay attention to awards, and take them seriously, enough to get angry and argue about them? Are people more frustrated by not feeling they have a voice, or if they are motivated by awards perhaps as much as recognition at an individual party or the positive words of their colleagues, why do those particular awards motivate them?
yeah, it's a big pile of questions, but it is worth considering.
Over in science fiction, two examples of awards with different structures but similar goals are the Hugos and the Nebulas. Any work in the given categories released or published anywhere in the world in the previous year can be nominated or win, and anyone who joins the World Science Fiction Association for that year can nominate and vote, so it's an open public choice thing. There are also awards given on a country by country level, and one of those is the Nebulas, which are given for works published in the States in the previous year (including works in translation, I believe) and are voted on by the Science Fiction Writers of America, a professional writers' association, and voting is only open to SFWA members, who are all published writers; the minimum qualification is the sale of one novel or dramatic script, or three short stories, to venues with certain minimum circulations or pay rates.
Sometimes the same work wins both a Hugo and Nebula.
Voting methods are worth considering as well. People tend to vote differently anonymously online on work by people they do not know, especially if random folks with no particular stake in things wander in to troll as can happen online. At a party, one votes differently, especially if one is carefully considering work within the oeuvre (sorry, I cannot think of a less pretentious word, Iḿ tired) of someone you know and have watched develop.
So maybe we need a jury, and maybe not. Maybe we need the pomp and circumstance of an in person ceremony and trophy, maybe not. Maybe the new award for the scene should travel from party to party, as Worldcon (back to sf examples) travels from place to place every year, so far just within the States, Europe, and to Japan and Australia.
The thing to consider is what will benefit the scene, and what are the goals that establishing an award will further.
And a Pouetters award sounds like a nice idea, but I do think this is worth thinking over.
I'm sure folks already are, and even were as long ago as last year this time.
Oh yeah, and with awards . . . .
One of the annoying things about awards is when works from big gorillas (e.g. giant publishing or movie companies, or stuff by A-list authors) tend to dominate award thingies because people Have Heard Of Them.
The solution to this, and which seems to be making some headway for the Hugos, is to have suggestion lists.
A variety of different sf clubs and advocacy organizations make lists to help folks find out about work they should consider reading or watching and nominating by folks who don't have the name recognition or marketing reach of the big gorrillas.
So maybe a new demoscene award should come with something that I know at least two dormant projects tried to solve: curation, an effort to help folks sort through the giant amount of releases out there, drawing out new creators, creators from underrepresented regions, creators who do novel things but aren't well-known, works released at tiny parties or not released at a party at all.
We may have the internet, but I get the sense we lost something the disk-swapping culture had, something we need to get back; the human connection of passing something on and saying why you passed it on; the same feeling that brings many of us back and back and back to the scene.
Ok, that was two posts long enough. :)
One of the annoying things about awards is when works from big gorillas (e.g. giant publishing or movie companies, or stuff by A-list authors) tend to dominate award thingies because people Have Heard Of Them.
The solution to this, and which seems to be making some headway for the Hugos, is to have suggestion lists.
A variety of different sf clubs and advocacy organizations make lists to help folks find out about work they should consider reading or watching and nominating by folks who don't have the name recognition or marketing reach of the big gorrillas.
So maybe a new demoscene award should come with something that I know at least two dormant projects tried to solve: curation, an effort to help folks sort through the giant amount of releases out there, drawing out new creators, creators from underrepresented regions, creators who do novel things but aren't well-known, works released at tiny parties or not released at a party at all.
We may have the internet, but I get the sense we lost something the disk-swapping culture had, something we need to get back; the human connection of passing something on and saying why you passed it on; the same feeling that brings many of us back and back and back to the scene.
Ok, that was two posts long enough. :)
the country by country idea is cool! (speaking selfishly as someone in the USA haha - hmm then again ryg and iq are here nowadays... i'm screwed!)
@navis: maybe. but only because lack of competition :-)
Regarding new "award", I would suggest the following:
1. I would not call it "scene" or "pouet"-awards, because it should be jury decisions (stating obvious most voted releases of the year is plain boring).
2. I would ask for people to be on the jury and optimize the voting process to make it less painful (not all jury-members should be required to watch everything). The jury-selection could be a semi-automated process (apply/suggest; suggested people commit; all committed people vote the creditability of each other; the top 6-8 form the jury).
3. The voting should be done as some form of internal wiki (similar to doodle or party-meister) and the decisions of the jury-members should become public with the announcement. This might prevent too obvious self voting.
4. The ceremony should be a major demo-scene party. Probably revision. Not sure how to get something decent without too much work for the organizers.
5. There should be physical prices (maybe 3d-printing?)
6. It probably would require making the awards-section for pouet.net-productions more flexible (allowing for multiple awards similar to IMDB).
Regarding new "award", I would suggest the following:
1. I would not call it "scene" or "pouet"-awards, because it should be jury decisions (stating obvious most voted releases of the year is plain boring).
2. I would ask for people to be on the jury and optimize the voting process to make it less painful (not all jury-members should be required to watch everything). The jury-selection could be a semi-automated process (apply/suggest; suggested people commit; all committed people vote the creditability of each other; the top 6-8 form the jury).
3. The voting should be done as some form of internal wiki (similar to doodle or party-meister) and the decisions of the jury-members should become public with the announcement. This might prevent too obvious self voting.
4. The ceremony should be a major demo-scene party. Probably revision. Not sure how to get something decent without too much work for the organizers.
5. There should be physical prices (maybe 3d-printing?)
6. It probably would require making the awards-section for pouet.net-productions more flexible (allowing for multiple awards similar to IMDB).
I wish anyone who wants to pick up the tradition and run with it to create something new the best of luck. I'm ambivalent to the end of the Scene.org Awards, but rest assured: it's not as easy to do as people seem to think, neither the judging nor the shows. So, good luck, whoever decides to make their own spin-off.
Pixtur: self-voting was always overseen during the Scene.org Awards voting process, and summarily shut down and punished with a hard rod. If you contributed to a prod, you were not allowed to vote for it, which of course became a problem as jurors started dropping their duties, and only a few active ones remained -- seeing as the active ones were also active in making demos. This, plus the inherit problem with condorcet voting from a small voting body, has lead to a few "odd choices" over the years. IMHO.
Pixtur: self-voting was always overseen during the Scene.org Awards voting process, and summarily shut down and punished with a hard rod. If you contributed to a prod, you were not allowed to vote for it, which of course became a problem as jurors started dropping their duties, and only a few active ones remained -- seeing as the active ones were also active in making demos. This, plus the inherit problem with condorcet voting from a small voting body, has lead to a few "odd choices" over the years. IMHO.
Since I've been a quite vocal critique of Scene.org Awards, I'd like to offer some insights to how I think a successor should be pulled off:
1. Keep it simple. Keep the categories down to a minimum at first. Perhaps go so far as only having a "Best Demo" and "Best Intro" category to begin with? This has the advantage that you don't have to tackle the obvious disease of "everyone wants to vote for their favorite productions no matter what category they are in the jury for" that scene.org awards was obviously infected with.
2. Transparency. Ideally have the public nominate and elect the jury. Let everyone know in advance who the jury are. Make the demos considered for each award as well as each jurors votes public. Re-elect the jury the next year.
3. Jury burden. Separate the process of nominating (a relatively small) amount of demos in each category from the process of picking the winning demo. Give the jury the burden of picking the final winner, do not put the pressure of enumerating all possible candidates on them.
4. Nomination. Find a way to crowdsource this one. Perhaps have the jury pick some trusted "nominationeers", that can dictate the final list of nominations, based on public input on a web-forum? Such a group probably doesn't need to be elected, as long as the jurors that picked them are.
5. Award show. Consider not doing one. It's not strictly necessary, and it's a lot of work. It's something that can come after time if the demand is big enough.
As a final note, I would like to say that I find it sad that the old awards ceased to exist. Even though I had a lot of criticism against it, I tend to think it's better to fix what you have than to replace it with something new. And it's no doubt a difficult job, so I don't envy anyone the task :)
1. Keep it simple. Keep the categories down to a minimum at first. Perhaps go so far as only having a "Best Demo" and "Best Intro" category to begin with? This has the advantage that you don't have to tackle the obvious disease of "everyone wants to vote for their favorite productions no matter what category they are in the jury for" that scene.org awards was obviously infected with.
2. Transparency. Ideally have the public nominate and elect the jury. Let everyone know in advance who the jury are. Make the demos considered for each award as well as each jurors votes public. Re-elect the jury the next year.
3. Jury burden. Separate the process of nominating (a relatively small) amount of demos in each category from the process of picking the winning demo. Give the jury the burden of picking the final winner, do not put the pressure of enumerating all possible candidates on them.
4. Nomination. Find a way to crowdsource this one. Perhaps have the jury pick some trusted "nominationeers", that can dictate the final list of nominations, based on public input on a web-forum? Such a group probably doesn't need to be elected, as long as the jurors that picked them are.
5. Award show. Consider not doing one. It's not strictly necessary, and it's a lot of work. It's something that can come after time if the demand is big enough.
As a final note, I would like to say that I find it sad that the old awards ceased to exist. Even though I had a lot of criticism against it, I tend to think it's better to fix what you have than to replace it with something new. And it's no doubt a difficult job, so I don't envy anyone the task :)
On the one hand it is sad, that the awards are cancelled, because I always found them to be entertaining. But on the other hand I never really cared for the outcome, because I dont care much for jury based awards in general - these kind of awards represent the subjective taste of a very small group of people. I only care for awards that are given away in a more democratic fashioned process (nomination + award giving). The "Oscars" come to mind, where the members of the AMPAS nominate and vote for the award winners.
I once suggested that demoscene party goers over the timespan of a year also get a scene.org vote key with their ticket. In January of the following year they can nominate a production with their key on scene.org and in February vote for the award winners of the top 5 nominated productions of a category. In March the winners are set and announced during a ceremony much like the old one.
I once suggested that demoscene party goers over the timespan of a year also get a scene.org vote key with their ticket. In January of the following year they can nominate a production with their key on scene.org and in February vote for the award winners of the top 5 nominated productions of a category. In March the winners are set and announced during a ceremony much like the old one.
A small group of different individuals helps preventing a rather "crow pleasing only" outcome (which is more tha plauside considering the scene).
Quote:
there's a difference between voting on prods you saw and then picking the best among those.
indeed
Quote:
wullon: You'd miss out if you only go by thumbs, sometimes a demo didn't fit the party mood, or we flock around the top three and miss the number four which just has that somethingsomething.
Yes. I'm not sure any voting process will solve that though.
Quote:
Wait, what?
= I'd like to read the jury comments on each prod
Quote:
5. Award show. Consider not doing one. It's not strictly necessary, and it's a lot of work. It's something that can come after time if the demand is big enough.
Word.
Quote:
Perhaps go so far as only having a "Best Demo" and "Best Intro" category to begin with?
As a former long-time jury member I might be biased, but this is exactly what I think that any potential awards should not be about. These are the kind of categories that could be decided with sorting demos by year per thumb on Pouet. What always appealed to me in the awards were the "lesser" categories such as Breakthrough Performance or Most Original Concept that allowed a bit more unobvious but still great productions to be noticed and shine.
Quote:
Oh, it most certainly does not.A small group of different individuals helps preventing a rather "crow pleasing only" outcome
Quote:
These are the kind of categories that could be decided with sorting demos by year per thumb on Pouet. What always appealed to me in the awards were the "lesser" categories such as Breakthrough Performance or Most Original Concept that allowed a bit more unobvious but still great productions to be noticed and shine.
exactly. also categories like technical achievement.
imo it takes an expert jury to be able to spot a demo that's ugly, dull, probably disappeared in the party rankings, but has something genius technically that's never been done before and really deserves to be rewarded. it probably takes people who actually are demo coders to spot something like that.
I personally would be very happy to see charts or awards presented on Revision 2013 by last 5-years winners of Scene Awards (those who wants of course). This could be very attractive to newcomers.
I feel that we need a solid and reliable award given by scene elite to attract (some) people to release at the demoscene.
I feel that we need a solid and reliable award given by scene elite to attract (some) people to release at the demoscene.
(what I mean is not that they would actually present but that they *choose* the winners. results could be even readed from a paper sheet by a randomly selected (not very much drunk:) scener.
Quote:
results could be even readed from a paper sheet by a randomly selected (not very much drunk:) scener.
WHAT'S THIS SUPPOSED TO MEAN HM????
Preacher: Yes, but that also makes them less representative of the scene. My rationale was that there are obvious problems with these categories, as seen by Scene.org Awards. Solve easy problems first, then try to tackle the tricky ones.
smash: I completely agree, but I think it's insane to go right for the already-proven-difficult problems; make sure you get the easy ones right first.