JCAs 2012 - Results are OUT! [on page 9~]

[l33tmeatwad]

Rank voting like the kind used here does allow for some interesting voting strategies. You essentially have degrees of up-votes and down-votes or kill votes to take others out of the running with.

True story...

[Nya-chan Production]

Rank voting like the kind used here does allow for some interesting voting strategies. You essentially have degrees of up-votes and down-votes or kill votes to take others out of the running with.

I am open to better ideas~ ^^

I haven't read much about voting strategies, I am afraid, so any idea that's reasonable and would help to make this... interesting, or "more fair" (however you feel that term should be taken wwww) is welcome~
I have already separated the voting sheets because of fear that looking at other's sheets, even unconsciously, can alter your decisions a bit. We're only human after all ^^;;

[TritioAFB]

There's variety which is something appreciated.

But for example, if you ask me, my judging methods are not based in how popular a video is, neither if it has effects or not. I based them in terms of creatives components, and review ability, which is very important, because I found several videos that were good technically, but that lack review ability.

To the rest of judges:

I was curious also about that difference between the rankings, perhaps we need to talk which parameters you used for judging

[BasharOfTheAges]

Rank voting like the kind used here does allow for some interesting voting strategies. You essentially have degrees of up-votes and down-votes or kill votes to take others out of the running with.

I am open to better ideas~ ^^

I haven't read much about voting strategies, I am afraid, so any idea that's reasonable and would help to make this... interesting, or "more fair" (however you feel that term should be taken wwww) is welcome~
I have already separated the voting sheets because of fear that looking at other's sheets, even unconsciously, can alter your decisions a bit. We're only human after all ^^;;

it isn't bad perse, so long, of course, as those voting with such a system have the primary motive of participation in an exercise and not one to game the system so that their views are the ones expressed in the end. All boils down to trust in the people judging.

[Nya-chan Production]

Rank voting like the kind used here does allow for some interesting voting strategies. You essentially have degrees of up-votes and down-votes or kill votes to take others out of the running with.

I am open to better ideas~ ^^

I haven't read much about voting strategies, I am afraid, so any idea that's reasonable and would help to make this... interesting, or "more fair" (however you feel that term should be taken wwww) is welcome~
I have already separated the voting sheets because of fear that looking at other's sheets, even unconsciously, can alter your decisions a bit. We're only human after all ^^;;

it isn't bad perse, so long, of course, as those voting with such a system have the primary motive of participation in an exercise and not one to game the system so that their views are the ones expressed in the end. All boils down to trust in the people judging.

Yeah, I am afraid most of the systems are ^^;;

I, as a judge, for example admit that I was totally unphased by PencilHead - it bored me to no end at most parts - and as such it got maybe lower scores at places than it should've gotten. But well, it didn't stop it anyway, which I guess is fine~

[BasharOfTheAges]

it isn't bad perse, so long, of course, as those voting with such a system have the primary motive of participation in an exercise and not one to game the system so that their views are the ones expressed in the end. All boils down to trust in the people judging.

Yeah, I am afraid most of the systems are ^^;;

I, as a judge, for example admit that I was totally unphased by PencilHead - it bored me to no end at most parts - and as such it got maybe lower scores at places than it should've gotten. But well, it didn't stop it anyway, which I guess is fine~

Totally. Which is why I just say it's interesting, and not flawed. The other common alternative to ranking, scoring, has all the same draw-backs (people could simply choose to do ranking voting in a scoring system) and more (because everyone sets up their scoring rubric differently, some people have more of a say in the final results than others) and the only advantage it gives (in an open vote system like this) is you can see evidence of gaming more easily (the participants can't have a clear "I had to rank some things that low" cop-out if confronted - if they '10' one thing and '1' everything else, they're obviously too biased to be a good judge). Most alterations to scoring systems (like the one the site uses with top 10%) work only with a large sample sets. Olympic scoring for things like gymnastics, skating, diving, etc. (i.e. dropping a set number of highs, and lows, and either summing or averaging based on how you feel) is more in line with a small group of judges.

[Vlad G Pohnert]

Well, the only one award I'd be kind of careful in dishing out would be the "Lifetime Achievement award" to only give it out once means it needs to be defined what lifetime really is.

Generally IMO it means someone who has spent a considerable time establishing themselves and has a profound influence in his career. IMO the only persons that are eligible for example would be editors like Godix and Roll the Stampede or possibly editors that where here a long time and pretty much retired. To give to someone still very active and not quite finished when they might even peak a lot more and only given once just does not define the award for me at all..

Hence good choice on Godix (I don’t disagree there), but I would suggest a much more finer stricter evaluation and guidelines for it if you’re going to go with this award.

Vlad

[Nya-chan Production]

Well, the only one award I'd be kind of careful in dishing out would be the "Lifetime Achievement award" to only give it out once means it needs to be defined what lifetime really is.

Generally IMO it means someone who has spent a considerable time establishing themselves and has a profound influence in his career. IMO the only persons that are eligible for example would be editors like Godix and Roll the Stampede or possibly editors that where here a long time and pretty much retired. To give to someone still very active and not quite finished when they might even peak a lot more and only given once just does not define the award for me at all..

Hence good choice on Godix (I don’t disagree there), but I would suggest a much more finer stricter evaluation and guidelines for it if you’re going to go with this award.

Vlad

The judges were actually told more info on that topic. I was just dead tired by the time I got to writing down the results of that award ^^;;

[TritioAFB]

Well, the only one award I'd be kind of careful in dishing out would be the "Lifetime Achievement award" to only give it out once means it needs to be defined what lifetime really is.

Generally IMO it means someone who has spent a considerable time establishing themselves and has a profound influence in his career. IMO the only persons that are eligible for example would be editors like Godix and Roll the Stampede or possibly editors that where here a long time and pretty much retired. To give to someone still very active and not quite finished when they might even peak a lot more and only given once just does not define the award for me at all..

Hence good choice on Godix (I don’t disagree there), but I would suggest a much more finer stricter evaluation and guidelines for it if you’re going to go with this award.

Vlad

Completely agreed here. I was also thinking about someone that has done extraordinary labors in sake of the amv world

[kiarrens]

Came in last in both my categories, but I'm just glad to have made the finals.

Congratulations to everyone, all these videos are so amazing!