154 réponses à ce sujet

[jmlzemaggo]

In my time, I voted and nominated for AME members, and non-AME members as well. I voted for builders.
Because that was my duty, as an AME member... to simply vote for the best one.
In my opinion.

Opinion being the key word here.

Now, if you would excuse me, I gotta go to the market.
Buy some flowers.

[Tybae]

Oh, for the love of all that's holy, let it die. Nothing is changing no matter what anyone says. If you don't like it, that's your opinion.

[Shia Luck]

Estelindis wrote...

WebShaman wrote...

I am beginning to get the uncomfortable feeling that this has less to do with the actual AME, and more to do with previous...discussions about other things, that suprisingly enough involved pretty much the same folks! As I recall, those discussions (if you wish to call them that) never did get resolved, due to Bioware shutting them down.

I sincerely hope not.  Those were some of the least pleasant exchanges I've seen at any time in the community's history, and I have no desire (not just an absence of desire, but a negative quantity of desire, if that is even possible!) to return to them.

*Agreeing wholeheartedly with Este*.. and I think it is good you mentioned that Web.

Estelindis wrote...
Ultimately, if no agreement on the topic of member eligibility can be reached, I think it's best to simply thank everyone for the feedback.  The process of listening and discussing has been at least somewhat valuable, regardless of whether or not it has led to any given party taking actions that others suggest.  Personally, I am happy to leave things there.

AndarianTD wrote...
So as much as the philosopher in me wants to fisk these issues in minute detail, I'm going to resist the temptation ...

I'd
be happy to discuss, and while I can't give AME, or anything else, much of my time these days, I respect it,
just as I respect Funky's huge contributions to the community. But as I impiied in my previous post, I think there is less discussing and more dissing going on. I don't enjoy or even see the point of it.

One thing I know from being in the Reviewers Guild tho, is that, just like in other forums, people are people. [insert huge list of adjectives used for describing people's attitudes] And self interest is not as obvious as it may sound imho.

To begin to show a concept such as the "Economic human"/purely self interested human means a philosophical quagmire, with lots of studies showing much more altruism and sense of fairness than could be possible by that model, and it therefore seems to fly in the face of current evolutionary thought. Game theory among others .. *shutting up cos it's irrelevent*  *grin* ... but I don;t think you can assume it as something that needs to be defended against, Funky. You need to show it happens in the AME, no?

But all Funky's first assertion needs is that the simplistic model is what is perceived, no? It's a logical point.

But one cannot control what is perceived, no? *tempted to witter about "Death of the author" *grin*

Therefore, all the AME can do is make sure that flaw is covered to the best of it's ability.

Which brings me back to the Reviewers Guild point. I know most RG members would argue (cos I have seen them do it), against any sort of fixing of the scores. And they would do so, arguably, in accordance with the concept of econmics.It is in their own self interest to do so ...  It would increase their standing in the guild to be seen by the other guild members to be acting so, and economics can use any measure, no?  Doesn't have to be monetary, does it? Respect is a coin universally valued. It is the flip side of a member voluntarily recusing themselves from participation in a certain year.


...but if we are going to discuss... then discuss and read charitably... try and find the best interpretation of someone's view, no? There is unproductive testsoterone on both sides methinks.

Bannor Bloodfist wrote...

ANY argument from a NON-AME
member is worthless since that argument is presented from a person that
could not be bothered to join the AME.

Therefore this
thread and it's stated purpose is merely a PR activity with no real
meaning or integrity and mine and Web's and  [insert other non AME members names] thoughts don't count?

I know/hope you don't really mean that Bannor (please correct
me if I am wrong!! *grin* ), but better to have a peace pipe and a talk
around the embers than pour petrol on them no?

...Personally, it's not a question of being bothered or not, it is time. I
find it very hard to believe you can;t recognise that as one the main
reasons for lack of membership in all NWN activities. Also the reason I have never played on HG.

[Bannor Bloodfist]

Shia Luck wrote...
<snipped>

Bannor Bloodfist wrote...

ANY argument from a NON-AME
member is worthless since that argument is presented from a person that
could not be bothered to join the AME.

Therefore this
thread and it's stated purpose is merely a PR activity with no real
meaning or integrity and mine and Web's and [insert other non AME members names] thoughts don't count?

I know/hope you don't really mean that Bannor (please correct
me if I am wrong!! *grin* ), but better to have a peace pipe and a talk
around the embers than pour petrol on them no?

...Personally, it's not a question of being bothered or not, it is time. I
find it very hard to believe you can;t recognise that as one the main
reasons for lack of membership in all NWN activities. Also the reason I have never played on HG.

Actually, what I was referring to is someone taking a stance that the AME has favored some member with awards, with absolutely no proof, and that same person is claiming that he can't be bothered to read the rules that the AME follows before making such an outlandish claim.

As to the so-called "requested feedback" bit about this whole thread, the feedback actually looked for was additional nominees.

Not some off the cuff remark about the integrity of the AME guild. As evidenced by the sole post requesting such feedback which was widely mis-quoted so I will repost it here:

AndarianTD wrote...

Wow -- tough crowd. {smilie} No one has any thoughts or feedback? Suggestions for new nominees or thoughts on new categories, perhaps?

We've tried to come up with some new one-time "Special Recognition" categories that open up the field of nominations to works published in previous as well as recent years. After our finalists for Best Tileset are posted (coming soon), We'll share some of those categories with you. In the meantime we'd be interested in hearing suggestions for such categories from the rest of the community. What would YOU like to see as a new "Special Recognition" category for NWN1?

That was not actually a request on how the finalists are chosen, the process etc, but a request for nominees AND for more members to help alleviate any possible conflicts by having more members, AND having more content/categories etc to choose from.

Funky's first response was a direct attack on who won, base on a badly mistaken belief that the vote was loaded due to having members elligable for winning an award. My first response was to point out just how any conflict of interest is handled within the AME as is now stands.

The whole thread went downhill from there simply beccause I chose to use the words "Beyond Reproach" for the AME membership. I know they are, because I HAVE read the rules, AND I HAVE been involved in the past. Neither of which has Funky done. So his statements are particularly grating, since by his own statments, he can't be bothered to even read up on things, to see how possible conflicts of interest are handled. He is basically demanding that the AME RE-STATE how they do things, wihen it is all publicly available if you bother to read their website.

There are public forums there to raise issues, there are private forums there to prevent egregious reactions to opinions on why a particular candidate may not deserve a winning vote.

Everything else is just grandstanding on the belief that all humans are dishonest and unreliable.

In the case of the AME: No need to fix what isn't broken.

The AME always takes notice of folks that submit possible candidates for a given award, those candidates are investigated, and compared against OTHER contestants for the same award. There can be only one true winner, yet, even being a finalist is an award in and of itself. And the Finalist listing is NOT a listing of all the candidates for a given award, it is simply the top few out of however many candidates there are.


Shia Luck , I FULLY understand not having the time to join another endeavor, that is fine, we all have lives to live, things to do, people to see etc. But just because someone is busy does NOT give them the right to attack someone else's work on a badly mistaken belief that the system is weighted against anyone but the AME. AME members have lost to others, AME members have won against others, both of which are as it SHOULD be.

The AME was setup as a group of peers, for peer review above and beyond the fanboy type voting system found elsewhere. Skilled folks, players, builders, cc creators, writers, scripters, any of whome may have their own content in one fashion or another that CAN qualify for an award. The AME believes that those folks that have given of their own time to help the AME should NOT be penalized/excluded from a possible win just because they are a member. To help alleviate any possible Conflict of Interest though, those folks can NOT participate in testing/reviewin OR Voting on the category that their content may have been nominated for.

The entire rest of this hate thread is just stupid grandstanding.

As I stated earlier, the Sun may explode tomorrow, do you have your Space-Ark built yet? There are all sorts of POSSIBLE things that can happen at any given point in time or space, should we be hiding from the possiblity of a falling apple in the winter? No apples in the tree? That is Funkie's assertation to this point in time. He claimed he wants to help, yet can't be bothered to even read to see HOW things are done before casting aspersions. That is what caused this whole flame war. Back it up with facts, or shut the heck up. Comparisons to econmic theory and law have absolutely no bearing here. No laws were broken, and there is absolutely no proof that the AME has ever awarded a member in favor ABOVE anyone else with the same quality of work. Why? Becasue they are honest and have striven above and beyond what most folks would consider reasonable, to make sure that no such aspersions can be cast at them based on facts...

To continue to argue an INVALID point in spite of every evidence against such point, is just grandstanding. Choosing to flame for no reason. It truly does not matter how nicely worded a threat is, a threat is a threat, an attack is an attack. If you can't be bothered to even investigate before casting aspersions, you have no business being here.

Edit: Note that the "You" in all of the above is not aimed at any specific individual, but the collective "you" as in all of us.

[Tybae]

I'd just like to say how much I agree with Bannor Bloodfist's post.

[WebShaman]

Funky's argument is that he BELIEVES there is a POTENTIAL for someone to nominate, and award themselves.

This is incorrect.

Funky pointed out the potential for bias in the system, and a perceived lack of checks for it. He never stated that he "believes" that there is a potential for someone to just nomiate and award themselves, rather, he based his words on sound theory - self-interest and how that can lead to appearances of misconduct (which do not even have to be present)! He used such as an example of what could happen, as well as others influencing each other, either conciously or INCONSCIOUSLY!

Also, he pointed out the potential for those outside to perceive such bias, real or imagined, and how that can reflect on the worth of an award that is based on such. Also based on sound theory.

It is not a question of belief here. Instead, it is more about basing a premis on a tried and proven theory and how it applies to a particular issue, with examples providing the support.

I could go on about this, but it is not necessary. As I have pointed out in the above, the rest of the post was based on faulty premises.

I will comment on the part that Shia took issue with - and just point to it.

[Bannor Bloodfist]

If your perception or anyone else's perception is that bad, I would suggest that they get a pair of glasses and READ how the AME handles things PRIOR to making unfounded accusations.

[NWVaultQSW]

Dallo wrote...



You're right, QSW. See, even I'm posting here and I haven't had anything to say for quite awhile. Come to think of it, still haven't really since my passion with NwN has long since cooled. Funky's argument is a valid one, no doubt about
it, but I also have no doubt whatsoever about the integrity of the AME group.

It's a hard one really. I was invited to be part of AME when it was initially established, but declined since I felt that the community, despite the obvious flaws of the Vault voting system, usually muddled through and got it right. Not always, but usually. There is also the point that many modders vote on others' modules, or have in the past, so there's always been 'professional' critique to some extent in the Vault system and I saw no real need for something like the
AME.

Since then though I've changed my mind, mostly because 'professional' critique has dried up on the Vault and the relevance of AME, from my perspective, grew as the overall activity declined. Now it is undoubtedly a key ingredient in the process of mod/CC recognition and whilst i don't play Nwn any more I'm glad it exists for those who do.

Cheers to all of you! As always there is no Truth, only truths.

You should never tell QSW she is right, it is hard enough to keep the old bag under control as it is Dallo, without having to suffer her dragonish smug grins and blowing of talons
Dallo, it is always the greatest of pleasure to see you around and your thoughts on any given subject, whether for or against, have the ability to ground me and bring a great big smile to my face.

_Six Wrote:

But recieving them doesn't mean as much to me as just getting thoughtful forum posts and suggestions. From how little the community seems to care about the AME I'd hazard to say I'm not the only one. Hell, even as an ex member I don't
pay them any attention.

ROFL! Oh thank you Six! I know I may sound err, weird, but having an ex AME member as well as one of the top talents in CC of NWN1 say this, reinforces my belief that it is the imperfections (subjectively perceived of course!) that
endear the NWN1 community to me.

Estelindis wrote:

A review will give a deep, well-thought-out perspective on a module. The module does not have to be compared to others (though, due to the Guild's scoring system, reviewed modules can easily be compared to each other); each one
generally stands or falls on its own merits. There is no particular guarantee that the reviewing process will result in a conveniently-viewable "cream of the crop," however. While the Reviewers' Award is given to modules that
achieve high scores, I don't get the impression that reviewers try to single out the very best of what is available (QSW can correct me if I'm wrong). Each year of reviews might yield higher or lower scores, depending on what reviewers
felt like playing and writing about (though I gather that there's a list of modules requested for review, which must influence matters somewhat).

That is a good evaluation of what the Reviewer's Guild do Est. 99% of the reviews written are on modules where authors have requested the review. In order to try and keep reviewer's interest, we introduced the 'Reviewer Module Requests' forum, which enables a reviewer to ask if they can review a module not on our current pending list. Admin make the request of the author and only allow it if permission is given. As we all know, not every module genre will be to a player's taste, and we won't allow such bias to enter a review as it is to no one’s benefit. This additional function enables us to add variety to our reviews as well as keeping reviewer's motivated (to a certain extent)

I firmly believe it is an organizations ability to review, change or accommodate (as much as it can without compromising its own values) that defines the organization itself.

Like you, when the possibility of the Reviewer's Guild being eligible for the Community Contribution Award came up, I asked that we not be considered as I was an AME member. I did speak to the members of the Review Guild at the time, because that is only fair, as recognition of their hard work over the years was at stake. I explained my postion to them, as an AME member and they agreed at the time that it was fine not to be included in the awards of that year.

I acually have no recalection if it was agreed upon if that would be the case for following years or not, as I don't belive we discussed it in the forums, instead it was via YIM. Perhaps shia or VPJ or one of the other reviewers at that time would recall. My own stance on the matter is the same, but obviously as I have stated earlier in this thread, it is not a stance I hold for, or expect of other AME members. Should the review Guild ever again be considered (something highly unlikely I might add) I would still be of the same mind, but I'd also be willing to step down from my AME membership in order that my own personal preferences did not unduly or adversely affect a group of people who I
have the highest love and regard for.

In the end, I honestly believe we each of us try to do the very best for our community as a whole, regardless of our own personal preferences at the time.

PS: Sorry that this is not the account I normally post with. I can't remember what my other account PW is, and so the laptop account for me is different. *Grins* I don't actually remember what the PW for the laptop one is either...see what happens when you ask a computer to remember everything for you?!

Modifié par NWVaultQSW, 01 septembre 2011 - 05:07 .

[Tybae]

WebShaman wrote...

This is incorrect.

Funky pointed out the potential for bias in the system, and a perceived lack of checks for it. He never stated that he "believes" that there is a potential for someone to just nomiate and award themselves, rather, he based his words on sound theory - self-interest and how that can lead to appearances of misconduct (which do not even have to be present)! He used such as an example of what could happen, as well as others influencing each other, either conciously or INCONSCIOUSLY!

Just because there is potential for something doesn't mean it's happening.  You may have a set of car keys and that means there is potential for you to drive drunk.  You have money and that means that there is potential for you to spend that money on drugs. 

We have offered several times for anyone who is doubtful to check our forums.  All of our rules are posted there in writing.  If anyone violates those core values, then they will be expelled from the AME.  Thankfully we haven't had to do that.  I don't care what conclusions people draw.  There is nothing that is going to change those values and there is more than one person who enforces those rules.  If I were to violate any of those rules, I would expect to be expelled from the AME. 

Either way, I can talk until I'm blue in the face and I won't change minds.  The same can be said for people who doubt.  We have offered several times to the people who doubt to put their money where their mouth is and they have declined each and every time.  Put up or shut up.  I'm done defending myself and the AME against a few paranoid doubters that feel they want to pee in my cereal just because.  I will not give in to uninformed accusations just because someone thinks they are right.  We all know what opinions are like.  I, for one, am not going to change anything, nor am I going to suggest any changing.  I think the AME is fine how it is.  It is completely and utterly unfair to the member to not have their work nominated.  If their work is the best out there, then they deserve an award, whether they are a member or not.  Oh, and for the record, I have voted against a members work because I thought someone else's work was better.  

All in all, I really don't care what others think.  I'm done here.  Threads like this are why I don't come here often anymore.  How fun is it to have to defend yourself all the time against the same people over and over and over and over?  How fun is it to have debates when people with differing opinions are met with rudeness and name calling?  It's sad really.  After all, this is just a game. 

[WebShaman]

Just because there is potential for something doesn't mean it's happening.

Nobody has stated that it is happening. That is what is sooo off here. Some are reacting as if they are under attack, and they are not.

What is being stated is that under the current system, the impression that something could happen, is important, because the checks and balances do not correspond. And often, this impression is one that outsiders hold (which pretty much totally derails what Bannor posted) to be true.

Appearances, and all that.

An examination of human history shows us that groups that police themselves are prone to such errors - as such, checks and balances need to be imposed to prevent it. It is the ol' "who watches the watchmen" question...and yes, when it comes to awards (being selected as having acheived something by some group, etc), appearances are very, very importance to the worth of said award.

Take the Oscar, for example. If the whole system was totally corrupt (not saying it is, or is not, but let us for a moment suggest that it was) and known, then the award itself would lose on importance and worth.

If public opinion was so that it was corrupt, regardless of whether or not it truly was, then the same thing would also occur - the award would lose on importance and worth.

So there really is more than one side to be considered here, as has been pointed out.

@Bannor - I know that the AME has a website. I know that everything about the AME is spelled out about it on that website. But I am not everyone, obviously. And I seriously doubt that most go to the AME website, and thus, most likely have very little idea of what it is all about, etc.

Much then lies within the realm of so-called "public opinion", as much normally does. People for one reason or another (using that term, "reason", lightly here) tend not to invest time and effort to inform themselves, when they can "fall back" on public opinion. It is just...easier, I guess. Or perhaps conform, I don't know.

[Tybae]

WebShaman wrote...
What is being stated is that under the current system, the impression that something could happen, is important, because the checks and balances do not correspond. And often, this impression is one that outsiders hold (which pretty much totally derails what Bannor posted) to be true.

There ARE checks and balances in place.  The checks and balances exist past the public eye.  Just because you can't see them, doesn't mean they aren't there. Not only are they there, but there is more than 1 person enforcing such rules.  This is because we don't want any 1 person wielding the stick, so to speak.  We aren't going to make everything public just because of the views of a few people.  To be blunt, that's not going to happen.  That will be a problem for some people, but any organization is going to have to deal with doubters.  That is a fact of life and is no different in NWN than it is in real life.  CEP, CTP, PQ, etc. all have their doubters, trollers, etc. but changing their ways because of the views of a few is not only not realistic, it sets a very bad precedent.  If you change for a few, then where do you draw the line next time? 

[Bannor Bloodfist]

Heh...

Checks and balances don't correspond? Why not? How? They are in place to specifically address any possible loading of votes. Is the system perfect? No such perfection exists anywhere.

As an example of the responses here, I will make this statement:

I "perceive" that you have Pink Elephants on your underpants. Because of that, and association with anyone from the Higher Ground pw, I will assume that all of you are pinkos.

What? No facts to back it up? So what... I perceive it that way.

Now, just how ridiculous does that sound? Pretty darn bad I think. (And not necessarily what I believe, just a statement of possibilities)

The entire rest of the arguments from that side of the fence are based on facts not in evidence, and any perception otherwise is ludicrous.

The issue has been fully addressed by the AME from it's initial conception. Anyone that bothered to actually follow them over the years would have seen that evidence many times.

The AME is a group of PEERS, meaning folks that create custom content for/from NWN and have also already gained recognition of their efforts by the community at large prior to joining the AME. At least that was how it started, the AME lowered some of the requirements for membership to allow folks that do NOT create CC to help judge things, but those folks have still proven their worth in other ways.

The AME was distinctly setup to prevent voting by the general public at large and was setup in such a way as to alleviate any possible conflicts of interest voting. Those facts are there for anyone that cares about it. Stating that your opinion doesn't agree with that, is Superficially plausible, but actually wrong: "a specious argument"

Wait, I perceive that you are changing your underpants to Green Dinosaurs now... but I still believe you to be a pinko. Ridiculous.

[Tybae]

Bannor Bloodfist wrote...


The AME is a group of PEERS, meaning folks that create custom content for/from NWN and have also already gained recognition of their efforts by the community at large prior to joining the AME. At least that was how it started, the AME lowered some of the requirements for membership to allow folks that do NOT create CC to help judge things, but those folks have still proven their worth in other ways.

For the record, I was one of the first accepted to the AME who was not a builder or a CC creator.  I still am not a builder or CC creator mostly because I don't have the time.  

[Arkalezth]

Same here, I'm just a player.

[AndarianTD]

Bannor Bloodfist wrote...

The AME is a group of PEERS, meaning folks that create custom content for/from NWN and have also already gained recognition of their efforts by the community at large prior to joining the AME. At least that was how it started, the AME lowered some of the requirements for membership to allow folks that do NOT create CC to help judge things, but those folks have still proven their worth in other ways.

Just for the record, the AME was always intended to be organized around the idea of having a combination of builders, reviewers, and players in its membership. We were a bit heavier on builders and reviewers in our first cycle (the one Bannor was involved in) because AME grew out of the Reviewer's Guild and most of the early volunteers who stuck with it during the first year came from those communities. That's shifted over the years as we recruited more active and serious players -- folks like Tybae, Laisee, and Arkalezth, just to name a few -- to help fill out our membership. AME needs all three types of members, because it needs all three perspectives on modding to do justice to evaluating works for the GDAs.

Modifié par AndarianTD, 02 septembre 2011 - 09:14 .

[Dallo]

NWVaultQSW wrote...

You should never tell QSW she is right, it is hard enough to keep the old bag under control as it is Dallo, without having to suffer her dragonish smug grins and blowing of talons
Dallo, it is always the greatest of pleasure to see you around and your thoughts on any given subject, whether for or against, have the ability to ground me and bring a great big smile to my face.

*bows deeply*

My sword is yours, Silver One!!

[FunkySwerve]

Bannor Bloodfist wrote...

Heh...

Checks and balances don't correspond? Why not? How? They are in place to specifically address any possible loading of votes. Is the system perfect? No such perfection exists anywhere.

As an example of the responses here, I will make this statement:

I "perceive" that you have Pink Elephants on your underpants. Because of that, and association with anyone from the Higher Ground pw, I will assume that all of you are pinkos.

What? No facts to back it up? So what... I perceive it that way.

Now, just how ridiculous does that sound? Pretty darn bad I think. (And not necessarily what I believe, just a statement of possibilities)

Your counterexample above is inane. You're not basing anything on proven theory, just stringing together a bunch of made-up and unrelated facts. More technically put, you aren't advancing a sound argument with true premises, while the person you're criticizing (me) was. This is not simply a matter of perception, it's a case of extremely poor rule-making, but I can see that you're dead-set against any attempt to understand the problem.

As for Web, he isn't from HG, and has no affiliation with it. He simply possesses the capacity to reason - a rarity in this thread, it would seem.

The entire rest of the arguments from that side of the fence are based on facts not in evidence, and any perception otherwise is ludicrous.

Actually, no, they're entirely based on facts in evidence - what you yourself have said about your nomination process - specifically that you consider your own members for awards. Or are you now denying that?

The issue has been fully addressed by the AME from it's initial conception. Anyone that bothered to actually follow them over the years would have seen that evidence many times.

Really? Where is all this copious evidence? Why haven't you produced it instead of blanket denials? You can't, of course, because, as I've already pointed out, this is not a thing that would leave behind physical evidence one way or another save in cases of extreme stuidity (though I'm less inclined to rule that possibility out than out the outset).

The AME is a group of PEERS, meaning folks that create custom content for/from NWN and have also already gained recognition of their efforts by the community at large prior to joining the AME. At least that was how it started, the AME lowered some of the requirements for membership to allow folks that do NOT create CC to help judge things, but those folks have still proven their worth in other ways.

Ah, I now understand your group's reticence in talking about the way it perceives itself. In fact, it's members do NOT have to be custom content creators of any stripe - meaning you don't really differ from the Vault's voting makeup in your membership requirements, only in your process. A process which has provided demonstrably skewed results thus far, completely omitting NWNX authors for some inexplicable reason. You don't require any actual expertise...I can see where that runs into an image problem for a group professing to offer a more expert opinion, though I can understand the need to lower the bar so as to garner more participation.

The AME was distinctly setup to prevent voting by the general public at large and was setup in such a way as to alleviate any possible conflicts of interest voting. Those facts are there for anyone that cares about it. Stating that your opinion doesn't agree with that, is Superficially plausible, but actually wrong: "a specious argument"

Simply saying it doesn't make it true. Your setup has a glaring conflict of interest, as has been pointed out ad nauseam.

Wait, I perceive that you are changing your underpants to Green Dinosaurs now... but I still believe you to be a pinko. Ridiculous.

 This isn't a critique based on perception, but on sound theory. I can see you have no interest in addressing the problems with your voting/nomination system, but I will continue to correct you so long as you persist in mischaracterizing my critique, which is, as Web noted, on solid ground. If I were you I would just drop it - it's making you look rediculous.

Funky

[WebShaman]

I somehow doubt that Bannor cares how he looks on the internet, Funky. Especially in light of many of the discussions that we have all had before, on various topics.

I mean, he slammed into Bioware recently, if you remember, which got Chris pretty upset.

I don't think he particularly cares how he comes across. I think he gets passionate and posts, damn the torpedoes and all that.

At least, that is how it looks to me.

[Estelindis]

FunkySwerve wrote...

Bannor Bloodfist wrote...
The AME is a group of PEERS, meaning folks that create custom content for/from NWN and have also already gained recognition of their efforts by the community at large prior to joining the AME. At least that was how it started, the AME lowered some of the requirements for membership to allow folks that do NOT create CC to help judge things, but those folks have still proven their worth in other ways.

Ah, I now understand your group's reticence in talking about the way it perceives itself. In fact, it's members do NOT have to be custom content creators of any stripe - meaning you don't really differ from the Vault's voting makeup in your membership requirements, only in your process. A process which has provided demonstrably skewed results thus far, completely omitting NWNX authors for some inexplicable reason. You don't require any actual expertise...I can see where that runs into an image problem for a group professing to offer a more expert opinion, though I can understand the need to lower the bar so as to garner more participation.

If I may raise a point: there are many categories of Golden Dragon Awards, of which custom content actually represents a minority.  As such, there's no reason why only custom content makers should be AME members.  To get a proper balance of expertise, the judging group should consist of players, builders, scripters, and CC makers.  As it happens, it does have people with lots of experience in these areas.  This represents a significant difference with the Vault, since, although anyone (including experts in their fields) certainly can vote there, there's no NWN knowledge requirement for voting.

A further discinction that I would like to draw between the GDAs and Vault scoring is that, in general, most people do not vote for a Vault entry by comparing it to anything else.  The general tendency is to give an entry a ten if it is any good in itself, regardless of whether it's better or worse than something else from the same category of content that has also received a ten.  By contrast, there are a finite number of GDAs that can only be given to so many modules / CC packages / what-have-you.  Accordingly, they must be compared with each other.  This helps to achieve a result that AME members intend to showcase as a cream of the crop.  Of course, it's subjective (that's inevitable), but every attempt at objectivity (in the best sense of the word) is made and judgements are based on criteria can be understood by anyone.

I don't ask anyone to agree with me, as everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but these factors just mentioned make it clear to me, at least, that there's  worth in what the AME attempts to do.

[WebShaman]

I don't ask anyone to agree with me, as everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but these factors just mentioned make it clear to me, at least, that there's worth in what the AME attempts to do.

Sure, and I certainly agree here. In fact, I don't think anyone is actually disagreeing with this.

[Estelindis]

WebShaman wrote...
I don't think anyone is actually disagreeing with this.

Really?  Well, good.  Differing opinions are welcome, but that doesn't mean it isn't nice when people agree.  

[Bannor Bloodfist]

In direct response to Funky's allegations:

1) Andarian was nominated for Debut Author of 2006, made the finals, and lost the award to Fester Pot. <<proof that AME CoI works very well. Counter proof of Funky's baseless allegations.

2) Ragnarok_mr4 was nominated for Best CC for his Alternate Combat Animations, made the finals, and won the award. Does anyone think that he should have NOT won that award? He did not nominate himself by the way.

3) Six voted COI (conflict of interest, or a non-vote) for Best Tileset of 2007 due to having done some work fixing up ValynDyral's Arcadia City Tileset. It made the finals but did not win the award.

4) CTP was nominated for ComCon in 2008. It did not make the finals, but it took out three AME members (Este, Tybae, and Hellfire) from further participating in the nominations phase for the entire category. <<-- Proof that the CoI rules are in place, and likely but not necessarily proof against Funky's baseless allegations.

5) Tybae was knocked out of Best Tileset and Community Contribution last year for his participation as a CTP tester, due to CTP's nomination in both categories. CTP did not make the finals in ComCon, but Babylon did make the finals in Best Tileset. Neither won the award. <<-- Proof against an AME member winning when they should not.

6) Estelindis' KOTOR Heads was nominated for Best CC last year, made the finalis, and lost to Ben Harrison's Wizard Arcana Placeables. Este wasn't an active member at the time, but she was well known to all of us and still had voting access to the boards through the entire time when she was a nominee. <<-- Again, proof that AME membership doesn't guarantee winning anything. In other words, Proof AGAINST Funky's allegations.

7) Andarian has been nominated and made the finals for Veteran Author of 2010. The winner is yet to be determined. He can NOT participate in any of the voting in the Veteran Author award category due to CoI rules implemented by the AME so his vote is "lost" even if it would have been for someone else.

Now Funky, provide proof that the AME has done anything wrong here? You can't, because it does not happen, and because in the few instances where it MIGHT, POTENTIALLY happen, there are Conflict of Interest rules in place to prevent your allegations from taking place. Provide proof dude, Put up or SHUT UP!

You have yet to provide any POSSIBLE solution other than removing an AME member from consideration, which has been explained to you that the AME feels that would be unfair for anyone to be excluded.

Now, as to your repeated comments regarding the NWNX team... So far, NO PW MEMBER has ever joined the AME despite repeated requests for PW members to join up. NO AWARDS have been given for tools for PW's, since the AME has no PW folks involved. No way to compare things, nothing to judge them against... Not the fault of the AME, since they have repeatedly asked for PW folks to join. Sorry you feel you have been personally slighted, so obviously, you are JEALOUS that folks have won awards but have nothing to contribute to the community other than flames?

CTP has been nominated at least twice for various things, we never won. Despite me personally, being a prior member of the AME, CTP lost.

As one who has been convinced by this entire thread to rejoin a team of folks that are giving their own time to help the community. I have to publicly state that I have rejoined the AME to help them do their work. My time is limited like many folks out there, but I can give of that time as much as I wish.

Modifié par Bannor Bloodfist, 11 septembre 2011 - 05:43 .

[WebShaman]

NWNX can also be used for SP games...

I personally asked for this, and Virusman got it done.

As for the issue you raise with jealousy..huh? I mean...HUH??!! You have not only gone out on a limb, but left it and you are now approaching the limits of known space...

Are you even rational?

[AndarianTD]

I've already commented on the AME's COI history, for example here. The rest of it was summarized in Bannor's last post, from information we compiled this morning. I hope that information is helpful to anyone genuinely and respectfully curious about the AME and its activities.

Also and for the record, I completely agree with Este's recent post, which I think summed up the facts about AME membership quite accurately.

I would like to add one additional point regarding Funky's comments about NWNX, though. As I understand it, NWNX is a server-side tool designed for online play, primarily for PWs. Although we do have a category for multiplayer modules, the AME primarily covers work in NWN's single-player community. Partly that has to do with the focus of our awards, and the design differences between SP mods, MP mods, and PWs. But mostly it's because in practice, we have had almost no support from NWN's Multiplayer and PW communities, despite repeated efforts to reach out to and solicit members from those communities in the past. As a consequence, even the AME's one MP category has now gone unawarded for several years in a row.

To take myself as an example: as a strictly SP author who doesn't play MP at all, I didn't even become aware of the existence of NWNX until earlier this year. From what I can see it looks like a fantastic contribution to the PW community. But as someone who builds and plays work for the SP community only, I have never had occasion or reason to learn about or to use it. That it has not been recognized is not surprising to me, given our lack of members from the MP and PW communities with the requisite focus and experience to nominate and champion it.

So yes, Community Contributions with an MP / PW focus may well have ended up being overlooked by the AME in the past. And yes, if anyone wants to "criticize" our awards for having a mainly SP-centric focus, I think that's a legitimate observation. But not to put too fine a point on it, that's less by our choice than it is by the choice of the members of NWN's MP player and builder communities. Anyone who would like to see that change can help out by signing up, but armchair quarterbacking or criticizing from the sidelines is neither fair nor helpful.

The AME has always wanted to expand its coverage of the NWN and NWN2 multiplayer communities, and we've had a number of long discussions about what we could do to help bring that about. Former Chairmen have repeatedly reached out to the MP community, and I'll be happy to reiterate that call here. But in the end, we can't conscript anyone to help us make that happen. Most of our volunteers historically have come from the SP community, and only the community's MP and PW players and builders can help us change that.

Modifié par AndarianTD, 11 septembre 2011 - 11:45 .

[ffbj]

I can vouch for the PW part as I was once a considering joining the AME, as someone who has had some xp with PW's. They were gracious to me, but after I read through all the work required I simply bowed out, and with no reticence from the AME. In fact they were very understanding concerning my trepidation. I am basically lazy and being an AME member looked to me like a heck of a lot of work.
Anyway to reiterate. I think they are great and do a wonderful job, with no remuneration for their efforts.