2008 Viewers' Choice Awards [OVER!]

[godix]

Know what the difference between a hell 4 type of MEP and a two person collab is? Hell 4 can have up to 62 people voting for themselves while the other thing has at most two people voting for themselves. In the finals I doubt that's much of an issue but in the initial stages I suspect there's few enough votes all told that this can really make a difference. I do remember several years ago when four of the five dance finalists were MEPs.

Of course there's also the visibility issue. A MEP like hell 4 or ayumix gets almost daily exposure on the forums for months on end while it's being put together and has most members pimping it when it's released. So it's just a lot more likely that forumites have heard of a large MEP than a two man collab even if the two man thing is better. I suspect forumites make up most of the initial stage of voting and I know for a fact being suggested in the VCA forum, even multiple times, doesn't lead to people watching a video. So that seems to also give a bias towards large scale MEPs and another reason to separate large meps from smaller projects.

So I entirely disagree with TJ's idea of abolishing the MEP category altogether and I can see the value of separating large MEPs from small collabs. As an alternative we could just make it so a person can't vote for themselves which would largely negate part of this. I honestly don't know why people can vote for themselves anyway, I know of no other serious contest where that's acceptable practice. Well, besides the US Presidential elections but those are a joke anyway.

[jasper-isis]

I understand the reasons for wanting a separate category and I understand the distinctions between the two, but the problem remains that we don't have a foolproof way of implementing this within the database right now. Unless somebody thinks of a clever way of translating these intentions into code, the only way of doing this right now would be for TJ and I to watch ALL of the qualifying collabs and manually separate the MEPs from the group projects. Given the amount of time that we're already putting into the contest this year, I really don't think this is something we can also take on. (Not to mention that it would pretty much go against the purpose of the VCA.)

Unless accompanied by a solid way of executing it, an idea is just an idea. We don't want to be like "Nope, not gonna happen, move along" as AtomX/Brad put it. We want to help out the site and its members as best as we can, so we'll think about the ideas critically and post our own opinions and argue with you guys all day long about the merits of the idea, sure. But at this point in time, with the nominations round starting in three days, what you need to do is bring us is a workable plan, not just an idea by itself.

[Brad]

I completely understand your guys' viewpoint and pretty much figured that thats how it'd end up, because as I said, I know that defining a collab as simply x number of editors IS a rather crude and informal way of doing it, but I was mainly suggesting it as a starting point. I think the only fullproof way to do it would be to add another category checkbox for video profiles called "Multi-Editor Project" that would be defined for the bigger MEPs. There could easily be some kind of floating tool-tip for the checkbox to actually give people some insight as to what loosely defines what an MEP is (ie; how it differs from a video that simply has more than one editor as a collaborator, as we've stated is typically quite a different type of video).

Obviously, what I'm suggesting is pretty late in the game to be implemented for these awards, but it's something I'd like to see maybe for next year. It'd make it easier for new members of the site to find different MEPs that they may have never heard of before.

And TJ, as far as the number of collabs this year go, I don't know the exact number either, but I bet if that 2-4 filter was put in place, we'd be able to see quite a decent number.. Or a miniscule number, who knows

[dwchang]

I hate to stir up the controversy over this, but wouldn't the two categories suggested by Ileia be pandering a little bit too much to the .org's "inner circle"?

Not to be too cynical, but I think both those categories actually mean something to a fairly narrow group of people, and against the background of people whining about cliques and all - perhaps it would be better to stick to the more general categories for now. To the average AMV viewer and even editor, I somehow don't think those two categories will appeal very much and will probably raise some of the old whining on the social dynamics of the .org again.

On the other hand, one nice thing about possibly having these categories is that it possibly might actually encourage people to collaborate more. Which in my view, would be a good thing. But somehow I don't think the wider community is ready for that sort of subtle hint yet and might take it the wrong way...

Said it far better than I could've so I'll just quote you...

[ssgwnbtd]

As the co-founder of the greatest MEP in the history of video, I have something to say. I agree that the participants in an MEP should not be allowed to vote for their MEP. I also think that short duration video collaborations made by 2 or 3 people should not be allowed in the MEP category of the VCAs. They are not in the spirit of multi-editor, which to me is "let's get a lot of people together and make something huge". This naturally leads me to the idea of removing short duration videos (less than 7 minutes) with less than 4 editors from the MEP category. I do not think there needs to be a category for short collaborations. I also think that there doesn't need to be an MEP category as much as a Best Video in an MEP category. The logistics of that are too difficult however, with the current database not linking video sources to songs to editors within a large video project.

[mexicanjunior]

As the co-founder of the greatest MEP in the history of video

LOL....

[Kionon]

I do not think there needs to be a category for short collaborations.

I vehemently disagree. If you're going to kick them out of MEPs, I'm all for that, but a skill set is required for two or more editors to sit down together and produce a coherent whole. The thought process is different than a one editor production. The execution is different. I think it is unfair to group one editor productions and multi-editor one track productions together.

[Greggus1]

I think the solution to this whole discussion would be have all 2-4 people collaborations be eligible for all awards. I know this isn't as good as having their own category, but it'd be a start.

Also, MEPs being eligible for Video Of The Year would be nice.

Fixed, sorry. I'm tired.

I'm a moron. Could a mod just delete my first 2 posts please?

[Knowname]

Even though there are no category suggestions this year, I'm going to suggest one that I think is a good idea anyway:

Best Studio of the Year

The requirements, of course, are that there are more than one member. It's pretty self-explanatory, I mean, there are certainly some studios that produced a huge amount of awesome videos (think of all the videos that will be nominated in the VCAs this year from VNS :O) and I think they deserve some recognition!

There are a few studios where there might be one member who kind of overshadows the others, but not many.

Also:

Best Duo

There are some people who collaborated on a video, but there were only two collaborators, so this doesn't really count as a single effort, or as a mulit-editor project.

brilliant lol, something else I can boycot. oh wait, I don't like best anything so... btw making this donator only would just be HORRENDOUS. Since the whole purpose of VCAs is for the public to vote. JCAs should be donator only then at least it will have a purpose. Just post the results... and if so before the VCAs, I just feel that'd be more usefull. Or of coarse we can all make our lists of suggestions.

[Knowname]

The other thing that I have to stress is that we can't promise certain things because we're not the ones who have to potentially work our butts off to program these changes. It might be easy or difficult, but either way I can't just say "sure thing, let's do this" and then turn around and hand everything off to the programmer, especially at this point in the schedule.

goody! we have all year to think about it!! I vote no.