SFN user of the year?

[herpguy]

Do you think that there should be an SFN user of the year award?

This is what I was thinking...

There could be an award given to an SFN user for a great post made, or some sort of great contribution to SFN. First, nominees will be picked by everyone who wants to pick someone. Next, there could be a pole to determine the winner. The user who wins will be awarded in a simple way. What do you think of this idea?

[AzurePhoenix]

As long as people remain civil and don't turn it into a "this person sucks" match of mudslinging, it should be fine. I'm not sure I can trust such a thing not to happen, but I'm trying out optimism for once.

[Dave]

I have to say that I quite like the idea. I think the staff discussed something similar a while back, but it didn't come to fruition.

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

I think it's a great idea, as long as I get the award.

[ecoli]

I think it's a great idea, as long as I get the award.

 

damn, you took the words right out of my mouth!!

 

I wan't to know who would get to decide? Should it be staff nominated and user-elected, or user nominated and staff-elected, or some other combination? As much as I would like it to be put to a user vote, I can't feeling that such a vote would be tainted.

[zyncod]

I wan't to know who would get to decide? Should it be staff nominated and user-elected, or user nominated and staff-elected, or some other combination? As much as I would like it to be put to a user vote, I can't feeling that such a vote would be tainted.

 

Why? 95% of people here are very civil - I think a simple vote would work just fine. Some sort of nomination process would not be a bad idea, though.

 

On that note, I'd like to nominate Pangloss for retaining civility in the category where it is most difficult to do so. (so if anyone agrees with me, they say 'second' or nominate their own candidate. I know I'm kind of putting the cart ahead of the horse here).

[Martin]

member of the year is apt to be a kind of saccharin popularity contest

for who is the nicest person or the one everybody likes----this is OK, it just doesnt seem all that interesting

 

 

if I was doing it, I think I might ask people to think of CATEGORIES first

and if they nominate someone, ask them to nominate them for some definite category.

 

 

Like "best peacemaker of 2006"

 

"funniest arguer of the year"

 

"encyclopedia of the year"

 

"goofiest ideas"

 

"most inflammatory"

 

"most tactful moderator"

 

"most likely to know what he or she's talking about"

 

"who I'd most like to go out with"

 

I would like that because then I could make several nominations, in various different categories

 

Like, I might nominate IMM as who I'd most like to go for coffee with, (I wont mention who I think was the most inflammatory) and Swansont or Severian as most likely to know what he's talking about, and......maybe Insane Alien as the funniest.

No it's not Insane Alien, I can't remember the guy's name, he is the guy whose avatar that looks like the head of a melted cat. he is extremely funny in a thoughtful sort of way, don't know if you noticed. Silkworm! that's who it is. I'd nominate silkworm for funniest, if we got to use categories.

[herpguy]

I would also like to have categories, but maybe different ones or at least more. Like maybe a user from each science category we have in the forums.

[silkworm]

Oh, God. This sounds like it's turning into another award show.

 

Anyway, I'd like to denominate Pangloss and nominate myself. Is that legal?

 

And also, as a suggestion for Martin's post, instead of "Who I'd most like to go out with" I think a more appropriate category would be "Who would most like to go out with me."

[YT2095]

I`ve tagged "No Opinion", but if PUSHED it would have to be Blike, for coming up with this site and idea in the 1`st place.

 

and no, Im not voting this way as the "easy option" I already have a good idea what others think of others anyway, and what they think of me is imaterial as long as I`m doing my job correctly and keeping the place as it should be, Im happy

[Martin]

I would also like to have categories, but maybe different ones or at least more. Like maybe a user from each science category we have in the forums.

 

hi herpetology guy, as I picture it it would be up to you, when you make a nomination, to think up a category or designate the category

 

so you could make nominations in various science categories as much as you wished, you dont have to wait for permission:-)

 

finally it is up to the mods to sift the nominations and sort out the suggested categories and to prepare a sensible ballot out of it.

 

if they dont like any of the categories, after nominations are over, they can totally remove all the categories----they have final discretionary powers.

 

but if you like the idea, why dont you go ahead and nominate some people?

 

they dont have to run a poll if they dont want to

 

I will nominate you for LIZARD SPECIALIST OF 2006

(just kidding)

[AzurePhoenix]

I will nominate you for LIZARD SPECIALIST OF 2006

(just kidding)

Somewhere Mokele cries in the night

[Martin]

I see that silkworm is here.

 

I would like to nominate silkworm for MOST HANDSOME AVATAR OF 2006 (male)

 

I would nominate IMM for the female avatar category if she still had that one that was a photo---not a cartoon. Now she has something like animé teenager----thumbs down.

 

I think Yourdadonapogostick was the MOST RAMBUNCTIOUS POSTER OF 2005, but he as recently gotten much more sedate.

[Dave]

I think that if we were to run it, then the best way would be to have general nominations, and then the staff can whittle it down to the appropriate amount (no more than 10). Don't know whether it's worth doing individual categories or not.

[AzurePhoenix]

Aye, it kinda defeats the purpose if everyone gets one for any trait or ability they might happen to have. Competition is about winning and knowing that you crushed the spirits of those who failed

[5614]

Maybe you should have a few basic categories, otherwise people will think "well this person is always very funny and nice to talk to, whereas this person has informative posts and this person is great at a specific subject whereas this person is very good at e.g. physics" and different people will vote on different things e.g. one votes for favourite person and one votes for best poster kind of thing.

[YT2095]

indiv catagories would prolly require a whole subset forum of this idea, with a poll in each thread contained therein.

sounds like a lot of work for you admin guys!

 

unless a SINGLE (well worded) thread could be made that each must cut/paste from the OP, and then answer each catagory with a name/nomination?

 

that`s the only 2 ways I can currently figure that will work.

[ecoli]

Why don't the mods come up with a few catagories, and the users nominate people to fill them. Then we can vote...

 

That seems like it would be the least messy way to do things. That way everybody on thesite woun't get nominated under a different catagory. We can keep things more general and open.

[YT2095]

we are watching this thread (as well as others), it`ll not be ignored. and after a little time and some in-house discussion, a descision will be made about this

 

keep Posting though!

[5614]

Why don't you just put 2 or 3 polls (1 per category) up in GD or Poll section and not bother with a whole new forum. You could put them sticky in the Polls forum if you wanted.

[Royston]

That seems sensible, I think four categories would suffice...specialist in their field (whatever field that may be) best single post, best thread and best all-rounder (someone who covers many topics, and is good to talk to.)

 

It would have to be strictly what the mods choose as nominations - 10 for each category maybe, so there's no...oh but what about this post and, this person should of got a mention et.c

 

What would be nice is if the winner gets the title under their name until the next time - SFN Best Post Award or something along those lines. Of course with regards to SFN, the 'all-rounder' would be deemed the most prestigious.

[gcol]

There are topics, Science based, where a serious question is asked, and a knowledgeable answer sought. That should be one category.

There are other topics, e.g. Politics and religion, where no matter what the question, there is only opinion and debate. Here is my problem. A good debate requires two basic types of input:

1. Informed, well crafted and researched input. This does not, however necessarily lead to an energetic, lively, attention-grabbing and lengthy thread. Desirable, yes?

2. Spicey, combative, and yes, inflamatory contributions. These, I find, are more likely to force me to reconsider my own position.....The true purpose of debate.

 

Humour: Much is contrived and, well, sorry, "childish". I prefer mine a little more subtle, the type that often goes unnoticed and is thus unlkely to gain much recognition.

 

So I suggest, for maximum simplicity, three categories. One in the hard sciences, and two in other subjects.

[silkworm]

How about we have a Best Post of 2006. Like the best post of any thread. It's admiring the art and not the artists, seeing actors on TV ruins movies for me, know what I mean?

 

Best Thread of 2006 would work well too.

 

And how about, Best Scientist in Real Life. That could be used a recruiting tool to get more working scientists to the board.

 

Thanks for the nomination Martin.

[Martin]

How about we have a Best Post of 2006. Like the best post of any thread. It's admiring the art and not the artists' date=' seeing actors on TV ruins movies for me, know what I mean?

 

Best Thread of 2006 would work well too.

 

And how about, Best Scientist in Real Life. That could be used a recruiting tool to get more working scientists to the board.

 

Thanks for the nomination Martin.[/quote']

 

best thread is an extremely good idea

(the aim of a thread is to bring in other people's ideas and energy---good thread creation is the most essential art to the nourishment of SFN. it is exactly what one wants to recognize and think about

 

the idea of focusing on the art and not the artist is topnotch, good general principle)

 

 

I dont agree with Best Real-life Scientist because I dont think it would attract more working scientists. Scientists have their own peckingorder reputation process in their real-life world, they do so much ranking of each other already. If I were a working scientist (instead of a retired mathematician) I would want to GET AWAY from that in an anonymous SFN ambience.

 

I agree with the GOAL of attracting more working science people and I would be in favor of HONORING ALL THE ONES WE GOT. but I dont feel like having to pick between Swansont, Severian, and the advanced grad student Atheist. that is just my private view.

 

BTW Matt Grime is a working mathematician and is now publishing papers. I saw a couple of his posted on arxiv.org in the mathematics section.

 

So I personally dont like Best Scientist, but you previous idea of Best Thread is awesome.

 

You are welcome for the nomination. With an avatar like that, we should elect you God. What is it a picture of?

[YT2095]

in addition to the above, does anyone think it would be a good idea to have SFN Staff as potential candidates? I personaly don`t think so (and have posted to this effect in the Staff area).

 

however this thread/idea is left entirely to the userbase and descisions made (within reason and practicable) will more than likely be the basis for something Official taking place along these lines