Always nice to see you, Spirit, and you have a great Christmas and New Year too :) Gosh seems like it JUST turned 2002.. can't believe in less than 10 days, it's gonna be a brand new year. Time sure does fly.

Enough of the niceness already! Get back to the fighting ;-)

To all members, I have been out of town since friday evening, so that is why I am responding late. The AOY was all my fault. Our process for the AOY is for admins and mods to vote on the AOMs of the year. This is how we did it last year and was suppose to do it this year. I told one of our new admin incorrectly and did not realize it until friday - 2 days after the voting had started. This is no other admins fault except for mine. I will make no excuses other than to give an apology.

Last year it was open to member vote. Trevor was winning, then there was some sort of discrepancy about the voting. The votes were redistributed. But it was voted for on the members.

Yes, that is correct. Once we found the decrepancy, we changed the process to mods and admins voting for the AOY to decrease any tampering of the process. I messed it up. tammy

You missed posting on thread 5 there.

Thanks. I posted. tammy

Is your statement the end of the matter tammymc? There is hiatus in your posting that must necessarily be filled with answers to the many questions raised in the threads relating to this matter. Perhaps you could start an open debate, in a new thread, on how the membership could be involved in a more meaningful way with the polling for competitions, contests etc. There are only so many doors that can be closed to the membership before everyone is completely shut out of the community. With respect. Brendan.

We have yet to come up with a perfect system for AOM and AOY. The members vote for AOM and therefore do have the overall input in who makes it to the AOY. We have tried different methods over the last 2 years and this current one seems to be the most fair that we have found. We are always interested in how we could make it a better, fair system. If you have input on the process, I would be interested in sharing it with the team. thanks tammy

Well my input is this, if we arent responsible or worthy of voting on AOY, why let us vote on AOM? Hell why bother even having this silly popularity contest now that we know the outcome is tainted? Do you expect us to believe that the staff will objectivly pick AOY? Not likely. At the time the poll was pulled Toxic was winning and Legume was coming on strong. Does Legume have an equal chance winning now that staff is doing the picking? LMAO yeah right.How about Gevidal? He works with Bryce, not a big money maker here so..... Now would Toxic make a great AOY? Yes he would his work is amazing. But whoever wins now it will look bad. Period. And that is too bad, all of the AOM'S were terrific. When I VOTED, it was a tough decision.

Spiritbro77, I've read that comment "Do you expect us to believe that the staff will objectivly pick AOY? Not likely" or similar in a couple of other threads, and I have to say that I for one find it to be rather offensive. Probably about as offensive as you obviously find the current situation. The impression you give is that you think we're all just looking at the balance sheet or thinking about who pissed us off this year. You are very wrong if you think that's how it is. What has happened is unfortunate, I agree, but Tammy has had the balls to step up and admit she made a mistake. But that counts for very little doesn't it? After all, if the apology were to be accepted there would be one less thing left to fight over wouldn't there? As to your "worthiness to vote" issue, let's be brutally frank shall we? Of all the members here, the VAST majority are honest and wouldn't dream of trying to rig a vote. But there is a small minority of members here who take every opportunity to try to derail things and spend a lot of time bitching about this or that aspect of how the site is run. It is ultimately they, not the site administration, who caused the change of policy. For what it's worth, I'd like AOY to be a popular vote, but since it was fiddled with last year it was changed. Rather than trying to turn this into a members v. staff issue why not throw the crap in the direction of the minority who caused this change in the first place? Kevin.

There has been a new link created to move past the "bitching" stage of this situation and to work on creative and fair solutions to this situation as Tammy has suggested. Jack

Attached Link: http://www.renderosity.com/messages.ez?ForumID=12356&Form.ShowMessage=1016109

damn these threads are long....

Well,Kbennit I don't mean to offend you or anyone else.Im pissed that my vote was nullified. I don't know about any rigging of contests or anything like that. The thing is, in the past AOY was voted on by the membership, nothing was posted that I ever saw changing that. When the post came up I took the time to vote. Then it was pulled. If it was truly a mistake then it is too bad it happened. As for the staff being fair and unbiased well some may be, but if you look through these threads you will see that some clearly arent.Suspending X2000 for bringing up a past mistake in the handling of contests isn't to even handed when far worse things are said on this site everyday.No offense to you or any of the staff personally, I just have some major problems with some of the DECISIONS the staff has been making and as a member of this site I feel I should be able to address those concerns. Cool?

Oh and one other thing,a while ago admin went to a committee format to decide the nominations for AOM for whatever reason.Now I am informed that there is no committee anymore, one guy is making these decisions. Is this true?

Yeah, cool ;) Last I heard AOM was still done by committee, I'll check though.

Attached Link: Proposed Changes to AOY voting

Perhaps discussing how the voting can be changed to make it more equitable and palatable in the future would prove somewhat beneficial? There seems to be many sides still discussing the issue, yet very few participating in offering up a potential solution. If we, as members, cannot decide how this year's AOY will be chosen, we can at least make a constructive change to the system to ensure this does not happen again. R'osity's ability to work with the members on a solution, after requesting input, will clearly show their true intentions.

"But there is a small minority of members here who take every opportunity to try to derail things and spend a lot of time bitching about this or that aspect of how the site is run. It is ultimately they, not the site administration, who caused the change of policy." And who would you be referring to, exactly? Would one of them be among the contestants for AOY, by any chance? You can't say, on the one hand, that the policy change was not about trying to exclude people who pissed off the admins, and then in the same breath say it was. Oh, wait--you just did.

Try reading what I said again Mosca. And try reading it carefully. And then try to comment on it without twisting it to say what you want it to say.

I think I got it about right, kbennett. You might try addressing the customers in a less hostile and patronizing tone. You might also try answering my two questions--who are you referring to when you talk about a "a small minority of members here who take every opportunity to try to derail things and spend a lot of time bitching about this or that aspect of how the site is run"? Is it your feeling that Legume is one of those people, or isn't it? If so, what you're saying is that Legume is responsible for the rule change--i.e., the rule was changed because of him. If not, then the answer is to address the voting issue--make it cheat proof and start over. There's no reason not to let the members vote if cheating isn't an issue. As part of the management team, you're sending a very mixed message--was the voting yanked because of last year's voting irregularities, or was it yanked because the bitchers and derailers appeared to be winning?

"You might try addressing the customers in a less hostile and patronizing tone." I usually do. I only tend to get sharp when somebody twists what I say. "You might also try answering my two questions--who are you referring to when you talk about a ..." I'm referring to those folks who take every opportunity take a mistake we make (and yes, of course we do, you and I both know that from past experience) and turn it into some sort of conspiracy theory or crusade. "Is it your feeling that Legume is one of those people, or isn't it? " No, it isn't. I don't see Legume as a troublemaker. He sometimes raises issues that are difficult, sure, but I reckon he does it to make people think, not to cause trouble. "There's no reason not to let the members vote if cheating isn't an issue." Well we agree on one thing at least ;) If a reliable method can be found I'm sure the admin team would be happy for an open vote. At least I'd hope that that was the case. If I seem to be sending a mixed message, I'm sorry. As Tammy has already stated, the voting method for AOY was changed becaused of last year's voting irregularities.

"I'm referring to those folks who take every opportunity take a mistake we make (and yes, of course we do, you and I both know that from past experience) and turn it into some sort of conspiracy theory or crusade." So... I'M responsible for the AOY poll being pulled? Somehow the admins read my mind and KNEW I was going to question their decision before it even happened and THAT's why it was pulled? God, now I'm really confused. "Well we agree on one thing at least ;) If a reliable method can be found I'm sure the admin team would be happy for an open vote. At least I'd hope that that was the case." See the "fixing the process" thread, above. Seems like a fairly simple thing to do--I mean, you guys already have a method for weeding out clone votes, right? Not as simple as setting up the poll, encouraging people to vote, then yanking the poll midway, I guess, but still--not brain surgery, either. "If I seem to be sending a mixed message, I'm sorry. As Tammy has already stated, the voting method for AOY was changed becaused of last year's voting irregularities." I love the euphemism: "the voting method for AOY was changed." It wasn't changed, it was eliminated. There's no "voting process" if management pick the winner. And no one has addressed the apparent disconnect with the AOM voting process--if it's ok for members to vote for (but not to nominate, anymore) AOM, why can't they vote for AOY? Makes no sense, kbennett. If management doesn't want people to bitch, maybe they should try a little harder to avoid the appearance that they're discriminating against particular members.

"So... I'M responsible for the AOY poll being pulled?..." Did I say that? No, I didn't. I've been reading the thread with ideas on how to fix things. There have been some good suggestions there, but as has been pointed out by others they all have problems. Weeding out clones isn't as straightforward as just matching IP addresses. If it was, you can bet it would have been done already, and we wouldn't be in this pickle. I don't know how it works in the US, but over here in the UK it would be a simple matter for me to sign up with 10 or 20 dialup ISP's. That would get me 20 different IP addresses right off, and if you assume that they're using dynamic addressing that's potentially 20 clones PER DAY that I could create and vote with. Not to mention the 200+ machines I manage at work, each with their own static IP. So maybe it's not brain surgery to come up with an answer, but it's a hell of a lot harder than just adding a few lines of code. On to euphemisms. Management aren't simply picking a winner and telling us who it is. There is still a vote going on, though lamentably it's not open to the whole membership at the moment. Each admin and mod has one vote, and the nominee with the greatest number of votes will be the winner. This is what I was referring to when I originally said "The impression you give is that you think we're all just looking at the balance sheet or thinking about who pissed us off this year. You are very wrong if you think that's how it is." Meaning that we place a vote based on the work of the artist, not on how much money they brought in to the MP or who they annoyed in the past. And it's also not about not wanting people to bitch. But I don't think it's unreasonable to expect that after an explanation and an apology that people should stop trying to make a situation worse by trying to read more into it than there really is.

"And yet here we are." Unfortunately, yes. I don't expect people not to bitch Doc, I really do understand how pissed of people are that the vote they took the time to place or expected to place disappeared on them, and I don't think anyone wants to stifle what needs to be said. This whole situation has the potential to turn into an almighty shit-fest, and is heading that way already. I'm just trying to do a little explaining, trying to correct some of the misinformation and conspiracy theorising that's happening. As much as I can anyway being 'apparently' a mod. I honestly don't think politics has anything to do with the poll being removed.

In other words: There's nothing worse than working your butt off for little or no pay. To do somethng nice for a bunch of people you don't even know. Only to have them use it against you later on. Humans.......Blech#!@.......who needs em'

You reading my mind Scott? ;)

I was attempting to Kb. I'm studying to be a Jedi. And this is my homework. ;-)

"... after an explanation and an apology ..." That's part of the problem- an apology not acompanied by a change in behavior is worthless. To just say "oops sorry" then not change anything is worthless. It's like me bumping you into a wall 9 times a day- saying oops sorry every time. Does that make it better? no- would saying oops sorry , then taking care to not bump into you again make it better? yes. "There's nothing worse than working your butt off for little or no pay." If one is getting no pay then it's a hobby. If one is getting little pay, then either one is ok with the wages they are receiving or it is time to move on. That was the choice that was made.

STILL no response to the AOM/AOY disparity--why can members be trusted to vote for (but not nominate, post-Legume) AOM, but not AOY? Why should clone voting be less an issue for AOM than AOY? And call me naive, but I can't imagine anyone paying for 20 ISP accounts just so they can vote for Legume. AND, you haven't addressed the idea of closing AOY voting to brand-new members--how many lines of code would that require?

Jeez, Mosca, I'm a mod, not an admin. I can't answer everything. :( I don't have an answer about the AOM/AOY disparity. I wish I did. As for 20 ISP accounts, over here most charge for calls by the minute at a fairly similar rate, so it wouldn't actually cost anything to run 20 different accounts. And as far as closing the voting to members who join after the poll opens, please give us a while to go over the ideas that are coming up. If we give a knee-jerk reaction we're going to look even worse in your eyes.

Thanks. Tell the admins they'd do well to keep the customer-members involved in the process. Am I being confrontational? I thought I was just being direct. People are so easily threatened...

Quick question KB - is the AOM Committee still in place and running?

Attached Link: http://www.renderosity.com/index.ez?viewLink=391

Yo 'Bear. Nope, the nominations come from the mod team. See da link.

Attached Link: Special committee to not let you nominate AOM

Interesting. When was that one changed? And where was the announcement made, Kb? Mano... I'm not giving **you** a hard time in particular, I hope you understand... you just happen to be the mod here actually responding to posts. [Bad habit boy - I trained ya better than that. Ya get's nuffin but grief - grief ah say. ;)] This is why whenever something like this pops up, IMO, ya'll catch so much grief: you set up a process/policy in the midst of much controversy, and then you change it without notice, post no announcements on the changes, disband proceedures.... And then invariably someone drops in a quote here or there that "they're listening to members input". ;] Ditto on this business here, kiddo. It may have "been decided 11 months ago" to follow a new format on AOY... so ummm... it was announced where? Posted where? Right next to the announcements on dropping the AOM comittee proceedure, maybe? ;] And then you *seriously* wonder why Mosca or a few other people ask questions in a controversial tone, bud? Heh - as Mosca said, sometiems seems those are the only questions that actually get a response, even if it's just from one of the firefighters like you [and like I used to be here] trying to put out the flame war. Glad it's you in that position, kb, and not me any more. And wish it wasn't either of us.

gimace Nope, I don't wonder at all. I just wish that, for once, members and staff could have a civil debate about what's wrong and try to fix it. There's fault on both sides of the fence here of course. Conspiracy theories and speculation don't help get things resolved, and neither does silence from the staff. (That'll probably earn me a stern word or two but it bears saying.)

Hey! I wuz ceevil Senor Beennet. ;] Hell, you know as well as I do it wouldn't cut out all of the rants, but when there is a major change in how a site fixture is done, running a front page article and FN&TC contact thread on it couldn't possibly hurt. That way people aren't blindsided, you have something you can point to and say "It's not new, it was announced here and here six months ago and we all argued about it", and people like me can't dig out links and go "Noooo.... that's not what you guys said here". ;] Ok... belay that last. You'll still get people like me saying that - but then you can safely tell us to piss off. ;]

You sure wuz ;) Here's a thought. And it is only a thought, but I'll put it to the admin team: what if there was an 'Announcements' forum that all could read but only staff could post to? That way there'd be a permanent record for all to see, and if there needed to be any debate on an announcement it could be done here in FNTC.

Might work. 'Course, you'll still lose the "if it's not posted in Poser forum it doesn't exist because Poser forum is the Center of the Known Universe" people, but Wah. They'll live. ;] Just not the Tavern. Admin's running in and out hammering up announcements ruins one's drinking.

God, no. They might look in the cash register ;)

Naaaahhhh... you're safe on that one. I took it with me when I left. ;] Oh wait - you got a NEW one? You foolish child. Never ring up drinks. That's what the chalk board was for. ;]

Have I been less than civil? If so, mea culpa, gentlemen. Not my aim to start a flamewar--and truth be told, I don't think I've espoused any conspiracy theories; though I have remarked at length on appearances, and what seem to be inconsistancies in the official explanation. Anyway, nothing personal--I guess it's just in my nature to ask difficult questions.

Im upset that the AOM nomination process was changed again! No announcement was made about it either. I wasn't happy the nomination process was taken away from members in the first place and now its changed again? How many people are nominating AOM now? As IB says this just looks bad. Conspiracy? I don't know about that but it LOOKS BAD! It looks as if you guys change the rules as you go along and that's not good.

Noooo... Mosca, I've read damned near every post, and I wouldn't call you uncivil in any of them. shrug Heated in a couple, but "heated" is NOT a bad thing in all discussions, no matter how many people would like to paint it as such.

Exactly IB if we werent heated it would mean we didnt give a shit. I wish the PTB would see it like that.

Yeah, at least ya'll. I'm afraid I no longer give a damn. I'm just watching the "one more time round the block, same shit, different day" show.

Attached Link: Proposed Changes to AOY voting

kbennett, You and I seem to get along well in the H/T forum; hopefully that carries some weight. A simple request: Have someone on the "inside" post to the suggestion thread and help to lead us to a mutually satisfactory solution. People tend to "whine about the whiners" yet when there is an attempt to change that behavior no one appears to pay attention. As "outsiders", we can only speculate on what can be done from our perspective. Only a two-way civil discussion is ever going to achieve anything. And, yes, I understand that this progression is detered somewhat by the Holiday Season; which is one reason I have not P&M'd about no "official posts" in the thread yet. The members were asked about helping R'osity and it would be nice if a two-way converstaion was initiated. With all of us putting our heads together, (and I do not mean in the same orifice) ;0), a suitable resolution could be made. There are members from many walks-of-life and I am sure that - collectively - we could come to a compromise.

Yeah I hear ya IB Im getting there myself. SSDD seems to be the order of the day around here. I still have a little hope but its going fast!

usted tienen gusto de algunos chalupas con su mierda del toro, Spirit? Heh heh. ;]

There goes IB and his "chalupas" again. ;0) Usted come en Taco Bell, oso del hierro?

I try and avoid Taco Hell, Cyber - but I love the commercials with that damned smart ass chihuahua. ;]