JCA - Organisation and Judge Nomination

This forum is for the announcement and discussion of anime music video contests.

Re: JCA - Organisation and Judge Nomination

Postby Infinity Squared » Mon Jan 11, 2010 6:49 pm

godix wrote:*EDIT* It occurs to me that some might want to vote for people who weren't involved before. I'm not saying previous involvement should disqualify someone or not, it's your choice when you select someone to vote for. For those who might care last year I ran the JCA and the judges were Douggie, Fall_Child42, Ingow, Niotex, Otohiko, and Zarxrax. The previous year Koop ran things and the judges were AtomX, -Gfn-, Vlad, an unknown judge, and me.


Unknown judge was me ;)

Anyway, question, what's with the category nominations? Isn't this causing extra work if you're not using the same categories as the VCA? As I recall, previous JCAs worked with using the semifinalists from the VCAs (with a voting in process for the videos that weren't included but probably should have). How will you determine what video will be included in what category if there wasn't an exact correlation between this and VCA?
Image
User avatar
Infinity Squared
Mr. Poopy Pants
 
Joined: 11 Aug 2004
Location: Australia
Status: Shutting Down

Re: JCA - Organisation and Judge Nomination

Postby Scintilla » Mon Jan 11, 2010 7:05 pm

Kionon wrote:
I wrote:The only qualification is that the person must have edited at least one complete video within 2009.

Crap. Uh, in that case can I change my nomination to GloryQuestor?
ImageImage
:pizza: :pizza: Image :pizza: :pizza:
User avatar
Scintilla
(for EXTREME)
 
Joined: 31 Mar 2003
Location: New Jersey
Status: Quo

Re: JCA - Organisation and Judge Nomination

Postby Athena » Mon Jan 11, 2010 11:51 pm

nikolakis wrote:My vote also goes to Koopiskeva...

And i don't believe its fair, disqualifying someone so active and productive for so many years just because he decided ( or had ) to take a small break for a year...


Fair is subjective, but my reasoning on this is pretty simple: this is a series of awards based on work done ONLY within one single year. Thus it makes sense that judges should be pulled from ONLY that same year. If you made one of the videos that qualify to be voted on, you also qualify to serve as a judge. If this was JCAs Decade Edition where we nominated videos from the last ten years, your complaint would be valid. As we are limiting ourselves to 2009 products, we should limit ourselves to 2009 producers.
Image
User avatar
Athena
I ♥ the 80's
 
Joined: 02 Mar 2001
Location: Japan
Status: Sad Girl on Mac

Re: JCA - Organisation and Judge Nomination

Postby Ileia » Tue Jan 12, 2010 12:39 am

Kionon wrote:This is a series of awards based on work done ONLY within one single year. Thus it makes sense that judges should be pulled from ONLY that same year.


Just because something is based on products from one year doesn't mean it can only be judged by people from that year. That would certainly make the Academy Awards more interesting. I see no reasoning behind it, it's just an arbitrary rule. If this were an Editor's Choice Awards, then maybe, but this isn't even really necessary.

That being said, my vote is for Aggressor, I think the judges need some diversity, some representation from other communities.
User avatar
Ileia
CornDog Whisperer
 
Joined: 09 Aug 2004
Location: On teh Z-drive, CornDog
Status: ....to completion

Re: JCA - Organisation and Judge Nomination

Postby Kitsuner » Tue Jan 12, 2010 12:47 am

Since Ashyukun's out, I'll support Code for this.
OtakuGray wrote:Sometimes anime can branch out to a younger audience and this is one of those times where you wish children would just go die.
Stirspeare wrote:<Stirspeare> Lopez: Vanquish my virginity and flood me with kit. ["Ladies..."]
User avatar
Kitsuner
Maximum Hotness
 
Joined: 16 Feb 2003
Location: Chicago, IL
Status: Top Breeder

Re: JCA - Organisation and Judge Nomination

Postby Athena » Tue Jan 12, 2010 3:31 am

We need to nip the drama about my rules in the bud right here, right now.

I waited to take over until I was reasonably sure that no one else was going to run this. In fact, I asked around, read several posts on the forum, and came to the conclusion that the JCAs were just not going to happen. As far as I am aware, no one else was waiting in the wings to organise and administrate this. There were also no immediate objections like, "Hey, Kionon, you can't do this, X was gonna do it." If someone feels like I "stole" the JCAs from someone else who was reasonably going to organise and administrate it this year, I don't know what to say to them. Find me that person so I can hand it over to them? I'd be happy to.

Ileia wrote:Just because something is based on products from one year doesn't mean it can only be judged by people from that year. That would certainly make the Academy Awards more interesting. I see no reasoning behind it, it's just an arbitrary rule.


I thought very hard about how I would organise it in a way that best represented the reasoning that I felt the JCAs were valuable. I did not just randomly or arbitrarily create rules. I looked at existing systems and came up with one that made the most sense to me. As I said, fair is subjective, but I am doing the best I can, and the only one I am creating more work for is myself. I even explained where I got my ideas from and what systems I pulled from. You might disagree with the fairness of the rules, but they are not arbitrary at all.

Ileia wrote:If this were an Editor's Choice Awards, then maybe, but this isn't even really necessary.


I thought I was quite clear in the original organisation post that is exactly what it was:

Each editor on the org may nominate one editor, AND ONLY ONE EDITOR, as their choice for the JCAs.


The panel is made up of editors active in the year of production. This is a feature of many systems. You don't get to vote inside a party unless you vote inside that year's primary first. Being part of the party in previous years doesn't mean you get to be a delegate at the conventions in the future (we won't talk about superdelegates, they're stupid, and have been eliminated from my hybrid system). Or look at AWA Pro. I can't not send a video to 2010, but insist I should get to vote because I submitted in 2006 and 2008. The point here is that the VCAs are for Viewers. The JCAs are for Editors. Again, you may not agree to the fairness of my system, but the logic is there, and it is based on precedent. It's not arbitrary.

Anyway, question, what's with the category nominations? Isn't this causing extra work if you're not using the same categories as the VCA? As I recall, previous JCAs worked with using the semifinalists from the VCAs (with a voting in process for the videos that weren't included but probably should have). How will you determine what video will be included in what category if there wasn't an exact correlation between this and VCA?


I suppose it is causing more work. More work for the person tallying and organising. That is to say, more work for me. I didn't want to follow the exact rules of previous JCAs, and I said so up front. It also does require participation from editors in the threads. I've asked for a temporary forum addition for video nominations inside of categories. If it is not accepted, then I will probably use the forums on orange-road.net to keep track. Editors will nominate videos inside of categories after Category Noms and Category Cull are completed. This should sufficiently shrink down the number of videos that the judges have to choose from:

Only one video nomination per category per editor. Videos who share the highest amount of highest garnered nomination votes and under shall be dropped from contention prior to Judges Choice. Any video with only one nomination is automatically dropped.


Now, I am not sure I follow the issue with Aggressor. I never stated a judge had to be an Org denizen. Merely that a judge had to be an editor who edited in 2009. Are you telling me Aggressor did not edit in 2009? At all? Nothing published? I have no idea who Aggressor is, so merely using his name is not helping me here. When it comes to editors from different communities, I am relying on the honor system not to be lied to when it comes to qualifications. By all means, I welcome the nomination and election of judges from other communities. It would be refreshing to see what a Russian, French, or Japanese editor had to say.
Image
User avatar
Athena
I ♥ the 80's
 
Joined: 02 Mar 2001
Location: Japan
Status: Sad Girl on Mac

information leaks, reverse psychology, and nobody reads subj

Postby trythil » Tue Jan 12, 2010 4:19 am

Koopiskeva wrote:*PS - VOTE4ME


Please don't do this. The last thing I want is a bunch of crappy AMVs clogging up my Rock Band 2 session time.
This is a block of text that can be added to posts you make. There is a 512 character limit.
trythil
is
 
Joined: 23 Jul 2002
Location: Llanfairpwllgwyngyllgogerychwyrndrobwllllantysiliogogogoch

Re: JCA - Organisation and Judge Nomination

Postby Ileia » Tue Jan 12, 2010 6:24 am

Kionon wrote:We need to nip the drama about my rules in the bud right here, right now.



You need to stop imagining drama where there is none. I haven't seen anyone question you taking over the JCAs. My vote for Aggressor isn't aimed at your system, I'm not just name-dropping here, I'm only placing my vote and explaining why. Don't be so sensitive. If you want it to be only editors who've edited a stand-alone video can judge then it is effectively an Editor's Choice Awards like I said and not a Judge's Choice Awards. Maybe you should change the name if you're going to restrict it to just editors, it does make quite a difference from past JCAs. You can say the rule is based on many systems in place, and I can say there are systems in place that have knowledgeable judges with past history in the craft, but didn't necessarily participate that year. The Academy Awards, like I said, the Olympics, American Idol, etc. All I'm asking is for you to explain why one and not the other? I'm not questioning your right to run the JCAs or causing drama, it's a question.
User avatar
Ileia
CornDog Whisperer
 
Joined: 09 Aug 2004
Location: On teh Z-drive, CornDog
Status: ....to completion

Re: JCA - Organisation and Judge Nomination

Postby Kyssifur » Tue Jan 12, 2010 6:41 am

Kionon wrote:I have no idea who Aggressor is...


Seriously? :|
we are awesome
User avatar
Kyssifur
 
Joined: 22 Jul 2005
Location: Budapest, Hungary
Status: I can Ntertain

Re: information leaks, reverse psychology, and nobody reads subj

Postby Koopiskeva » Tue Jan 12, 2010 10:15 am

trythil wrote:
Koopiskeva wrote:*PS - VOTE4ME


Please don't do this. The last thing I want is a bunch of crappy AMVs clogging up my Rock Band 2 session time.


It's fine.. I'll watch them at work. |:
Hi.
User avatar
Koopiskeva
|:
 
Joined: 17 Mar 2002
Location: Out There Occupation: Fondling Private Areas ..of the Nation.
Status: O:

Re: JCA - Organisation and Judge Nomination

Postby Kosmit » Tue Jan 12, 2010 2:25 pm

Kionon wrote:
Only one video nomination per category per editor. Videos who share the highest amount of highest garnered nomination votes and under shall be dropped from contention prior to Judges Choice. Any video with only one nomination is automatically dropped.


Now, I am not sure I follow the issue with Aggressor. I never stated a judge had to be an Org denizen. Merely that a judge had to be an editor who edited in 2009. Are you telling me Aggressor did not edit in 2009? At all? Nothing published? I have no idea who Aggressor is, so merely using his name is not helping me here.

Since nobody really bothered to explain, I'll do it. Aggressor is an editor from Ukraine (a good one at that, some of his more famous AMV are Code:Ecchi, De:Light and Bakadance!), well known on amvnews.ru, one of the few russian speakers that are fairly active on the org and fluent in english.
User avatar
Kosmit
Slippery Pole
 
Joined: 10 Jun 2008
Location: Pole land
Status: Punching your salad

Re: JCA - Organisation and Judge Nomination

Postby Kyssifur » Tue Jan 12, 2010 3:41 pm

Kosmit wrote:Since nobody really bothered to explain, I'll do it. Aggressor is an editor from Ukraine (a good one at that, some of his more famous AMV are Code:Ecchi, De:Light and Bakadance!), well known on amvnews.ru, one of the few russian speakers that are fairly active on the org and fluent in english.


Just say he's awesome :mrgreen:
we are awesome
User avatar
Kyssifur
 
Joined: 22 Jul 2005
Location: Budapest, Hungary
Status: I can Ntertain

Re: JCA - Organisation and Judge Nomination

Postby Athena » Tue Jan 12, 2010 5:27 pm

Ileia wrote:You need to stop imagining drama where there is none. I haven't seen anyone question you taking over the JCAs.


I saw the potential for drama, and I wanted to slow us down before we got there. Face it, we're good at it, and I know that, but I'd rather keep the meta discussion down (not that I am practicing what I preach here, and for that, I am sorry).

My vote for Aggressor isn't aimed at your system, I'm not just name-dropping here, I'm only placing my vote and explaining why.


That was actually directed at the Kyssifur who said he didn't care about "policy." This implied that Agressor's nomination was against policy. And I was trying to clarify why that should be the case. By all accounts he has made several videos in 2009 and is eligible. I went in reverse order: first you, then Infinity Squared, then Kyssifur.

If you want it to be only editors who've edited a stand-alone video can judge then it is effectively an Editor's Choice Awards like I said and not a Judge's Choice Awards. Maybe you should change the name if you're going to restrict it to just editors, it does make quite a difference from past JCAs... All I'm asking is for you to explain why one and not the other? I'm not questioning your right to run the JCAs or causing drama, it's a question.


I thought I answered it by explaining how I view the JCAs and where the systems came from. I always understood the JCAs to be Editorcentric, where the VCS are (obviously) Viewercentric. Editors should be judged by their peers. As for in a given year, this also makes sense, as someone who ceases editing during the year of production is a viewer that year. The VCAs themselves have year by year restrictions. It just doesn't seem fair to me, being that fair is understandably subjective, to allow someone who has not edited in the production year to have a vote. The systems you bring up are either sufficiently different from my understanding, or a system I personally disagree with.

The Olympics are a different animal entirely, and each sport has its own rules for judges and scoring. The only sport I know a bit about, of course, is my own: figure skating. And in 2006 they changed the rules in a way I found patently absurd. And I still do. However, the issue relevant to this discussion is that sports occur in front of the judges as the performance is being created, and judging criteria are marked off as they occur. This is a very different process from what we have here, since judges are not watching videos as they are created, but rather looking only at the final product without giving marks based on process criteria.

I simply don't like the Academy Awards. I think they are very much the exact opposite of the system that should decide awards within a craft. A small group of people having nothing to do with the movies under review get to choose the best amongst them? That's not peer reviewed at all! It also tends to follow what the public wants to increase viewership for ratings. It's utterly predictable. And it doesn't seem like the actors, producers, screenwriters, techies, etc would actually follow the Academy if they were free to dissent.

A much better system, in my opinion, is the Screen Actors Guild Awards where actors are given awards by the very people they work with every day. It's peer driven. That's what I always thought the JCA were created to do: allow editors to be judged by their peers, as opposed to viewers who often (with notable exceptions, such as quadir) look at videos completely differently. I would take the SAG over the Academy any day of the week, and twice on Sundays.
Image
User avatar
Athena
I ♥ the 80's
 
Joined: 02 Mar 2001
Location: Japan
Status: Sad Girl on Mac

Re: JCA - Organisation and Judge Nomination

Postby mirkosp » Tue Jan 12, 2010 6:43 pm

Kionon wrote:with notable exceptions, such as quadir

It's for such notable exceptions that you should allow people that didn't edit in 2009 in the ballot, too. Eventually, we're going to vote who we think is worth as a judge, and hardly some random non-editor without technical knowledge would end up winning. There are non-editors (or at least, not this year, or not in AMVs) that have a lot of up-to-date knowledge (think of Brad), and a lot of amv editors that made vids in 2009 but still lack technical knowledge or wouldn't be suited for the judge role altogether. I say, instead of filter yourself in this phase, let the users filter in the final voting phase by themselves. In the end, if someone gets voted on to become a judge, it means there were enough people in the community that believe in his/her judging abilities, which is what really matters in a JUDGES choice awards. Judges aren't even supposed to be on the same level, but could (or even should) be at a higher level to be able to judge everyone else on a fair ground and equally.
That's my point of view on the matter. |:> Basically, I'm with Ileia's point this time around.
Image
User avatar
mirkosp
MODkip
 
Joined: 24 Apr 2006
Location: Gallarate (VA), Italy
Status: (」・ワ・)」(⊃・ワ・)⊃

Re: JCA - Organisation and Judge Nomination

Postby Kyssifur » Tue Jan 12, 2010 6:46 pm

My nominaton was not against the policy. When I said "I don't care about the policy" I was meaning I'm not like people "general" here at .org. Respect to the exceptions! But do not worry about it, it was just some sarcastic words from me ;)

Otherwise the reason why I chose him is very simple; I love his videos, he has great videos, more than great, I trust his judgment and like Ileia said, just transleted into my own words/language: AMV is not equal to a-m-v.org ;) JCA should be open to other communities also.
we are awesome
User avatar
Kyssifur
 
Joined: 22 Jul 2005
Location: Budapest, Hungary
Status: I can Ntertain

PreviousNext

Return to AMV Contests

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Shiver and 2 guests