
therefore less stress for them.
It's called "the thrill of seeing your video played on the big screen and witnessing the reaction of a crowd of thousands of fans". You may have heard of it.xstylus wrote:You sound as if you disagree with that highly accurate assessment.anneke wrote:Makes the 'creators' sound like a bunch of glory hounds.
This is true, but the only way to actually make the AMV contest equivalent to these examples would be if the winners were decided by judges beforehand or as they played live.The Wired Knight wrote:How do you think olympiads would feel if medals were mailed to them two weeks after closign ceremonies? Or a large portion of college students would feel if instead of a ceremony they just mailed out diplomas with a "congratulations" letter a week or so later since they want more time to tabulate GPA?
Did you not read Wired Knight's post at all?anneke wrote:I love hearing the crowd's reaction. but I can live without hearing about the awards until after the event, if that means the judging will be the most fair.
And using that it will be to much work to ship out prizes afterwards is a cop out. The convention is huge and rakes in tons of money so it's not the 'shipping' cost, it's again them not wanting to spend the time to do things right.
Then how many times have they waited until the last minute to test the videos and thus have had to re-do the Dvd at the last minute.
-Anneke
Y'know, I think you miss the spirit of the whole thing by whining so much about fairness and whatnot. Yeah, fairness is good, but making an AMV isn't about winning. I'll gladly take a roaring crowd over hyper-precise accuracy in judging. So, allow me to lecture you in what I think is truly unfair.anneke wrote:I love hearing the crowd's reaction. but I can live without hearing about the awards until after the event, if that means the judging will be the most fair.