[Feedback] AnimeSuki Choice Awards

[Haak]

Originally Posted by Guardian Enzo

I confess I'm a bit confused by the "unambiguous gender clause" though. Is this addressing a specific issue? Are you saying the physical appearance takes precedence - i.e. if a girl spends the bulk of the series dressed as a boy, she would qualify under "best male character"?

Don't worry about it. It's just a rule for obvious cases. For example, nominating Shirayuki in Best Male Lead would be deemed explicitly ineligible whereas before it would've been counted all the same (the rationale being that it would take trolling on a mass level for something like that to succeed so there's no point doing anything). Now there's an explicit rule for it. It's only for obvious cases. It has no bearing on actual ambiguous cases and sets no precedence either.

[felix]

Originally Posted by relentlessflame

I would like to contribute that I think it would be helpful to separate the project into two aspects: the "Academy Awards" aspect, and a new "People's Choice Award" aspect.

Just to share my two cents here, and for this post I'm not speaking as one of the organizers.

Before I go into my personal gripes with this, I would just like to say thank you for the very well written post.
This issue of a judges panel has been brought up before (albeit not too often) but yours is definitely the most well written argument on it to date. But anyway...

I have two issue with the "Academy Awards" idea as it generally crops up year after year.

First is I believe most people who suggest it are giving the title of "Judge" way too easily, almost as if it's as simple wearing the words "Judge" on the arm. I understand other places have done it in this superficial way, but no matter how many did it this way, it doesn't make it right. The academy awards is always brought up as a comparison but to have an equivalent, the "Judges" would have to be people like anime directors, writers, and so on. Only then do you have a perspective that's qualified for the position of judging. If you played no part in the industry, how are you qualified to judge? what are you judging based on? A judge that's just a fan in the end can only really express their own acquired taste and little else, no matter how many series they've watched. Consuming something doesn't make you an "expert" in that field by itself.

My second problem is with the very popularized (in particular by people who fit the description) idea that if you're some kind of encyclopedia or jack of all trades in a field (such as play all games, watch all anime, etc) you're somehow qualified to speak for everyone. Critics in particular like this, since it's shameless way for them to elevate their status and rise on a pedestal when giving "advice". Personally, I disagree. People who like different things are quite different even if one or two might intersect. I've had periods where I've diversified, and periods where I've had very focused tastes. Just because you "touched" the same thing as a group doesn't mean you've experienced it the same as that focused group has. You could for example force yourself to watch all the romance, horror, drama, action, etc, it won't make you "smart," in fact you'll probably miss most of the emotional core of all of them entirely. Quantity doesn't make any qualitative difference to your opinion. In fact the moment something is even a bit niche in the genre in question you may very well completely drop the ball due to your taste and vision being too generic, or the opposite, you may unjustly praise it to high heaven just because it's different even if it's terrible (or simply average) for the genre in question. Unique things are suddenly more appealing after all if you consume everything the same way and are unaffected or blind to the more subtle aspects of a genre/style.

If it really came down to it, that we had to pick judges from random people on the internet, then people who have an agenda (critics, bloggers, etc) along with people who have extremely generic tastes or an almost watch-all-as-homework way of doing things are absolutely least qualified to act as judges! While people who are very focused and dedicated to a only one or two genres and have stuck with them for years and years with out any other incentive then that they like them are the most qualified; and of course I mean that in the sense that they would only judge the one or two categories they're qualified in.

[SeijiSensei]

I think having a parallel set of awards would just distract from the ones we have and become even more of a popularity contest than the current Choice Awards are now. If there really are "hundreds" of people commenting about anime here, then having only 61 voters is as much a problem with communication and awareness as with any supposed "complexity."

[Darthtabby]

I don't like the idea of the Animesuki awards becoming the domain of special judges. We're a web forum, not a professional review site or anime blog. The awards should reflect our forum members. Perhaps we can do more to encourage participation in the voting stage but I'd rather the awards reflect only the members who chose to vote than become something decided by some sort of elevated elite.

[Marcus H.]

We're already having a tough time getting people to vote, and making an "Academy Awards" version of the Choice Awards is not gonna solve anything. Hell, it opens a whole nother can of worms on the logistics side. I also don't have a tux when the awards night comes.

[Liddo-kun]

Originally Posted by SeijiSensei

I think having a parallel set of awards would just distract from the ones we have and become even more of a popularity contest than the current Choice Awards are now. If there really are "hundreds" of people commenting about anime here, then having only 61 voters is as much a problem with communication and awareness as with any supposed "complexity."

I think that the only thing we're missing is more advertising.
Next year, I'll try to help. During nominations.

[Archon_Wing]

While I do respect many of the posters around this part, I really can't imagine who would be a fair and just judge (including myself) In fact, I'm imaging some of my friends in such a spot, and am just laughing.

Honestly, such an election would be more controversial than the anime themselves.

[Reckoner]

There's no point for a forum community to do that. Several blogs and review sites, including the one I'm affiliated with already make their yearly lists of the best titles with justifications provided in writing.

Really, the choice awards stand no chance of gaining popularity on this forum when the visibility is too low and the moderators have chosen to not help endorse our efforts.

[Obelisk ze Tormentor]

Originally Posted by felix

If it really came down to it, that we had to pick judges from random people on the internet, then people who have an agenda (critics, bloggers, etc) along with people who have extremely generic tastes or an almost watch-all-as-homework way of doing things are absolutely least qualified to act as judges! While people who are very focused and dedicated to a only one or two genres and have stuck with them for years and years with out any other incentive then that they like them are the most qualified; and of course I mean that in the sense that they would only judge the one or two categories they're qualified in.

Originally Posted by Archon_Wing

While I do respect many of the posters around this part, I really can't imagine who would be a fair and just judge (including myself) In fact, I'm imaging some of my friends in such a spot, and am just laughing.

Honestly, such an election would be more controversial than the anime themselves.

I’ve been following mecha & sci-fi series since the 90s and have watched some stuffs from the 80s, 70s and even 60s. I’m still doing all those in my leisure time out of sheer passion. Do you think I can be a judge for mecha & sci-fi genres? I myself don’t know if I can fit the role .

But yeah, IMO the last thing we need is to turn Asuki Awards into Academy-like awards which is filled with agendas from time to time. To this day, I’m still shaking my head when I think of underwhelming films like Crash winning the best picture in 2006 Oscar which is suggested to have benefited from the anti-gay discomfort of the Academy members at the time. They did a re-polling in 2015 between members and the result was Brokeback Mountain winning. Even the writer & director of Crash, Paul Haggis, said it himself in the same year that his film didn’t deserve to win that Best-Film Oscar. And that is only an example of one of the most obvious cases. So, back to Asuki Awards, I'd rather have my nominees to lose votes in a popularity contest rather than losing against lower-quality nominees in a supposedly quality-based contest due to some people’s agendas.

[Guardian Enzo]

Let's set the record straight about Crash, since it was brought up. What Haggis did was issue a general "modest disclaimer" - when was the last time you heard a nominee say "Damn right I was the best!"? He elaborated on that statement:

“I am very proud of Crash, and am honored to have been chosen as one of the best films of that year — especially in a year where there were so many terrific and daring films that explored real and pressing issues. It is unfair and rather ridiculous to ask a director if his film is 'the best' — being a Canadian I am never going to be one who stands up and announces 'Yes, my film absolutely deserved to win over all those amazing films.' It’s not going to happen — and my answers have always been consistent."

There were a lot of politics involved that year - inevitable, I suppose, as Crash was grounded in racial issues and Brokeback Mountain centered on a homosexual relationship (though it always amuses me to hear people talk about it like it was the pioneer of its type, as if Midnight Cowboy never existed). But most of it came in the form of backlash against Crash after it won, as if it could only have done so because of some sinister anti-gay agenda and not - as many in the industry believed at the time - because "Brokeback" was an overrated piece of work.

[Obelisk ze Tormentor]

Originally Posted by Guardian Enzo

Let's set the record straight about Crash, since it was brought up. What Haggis did was issue a general "modest disclaimer" - when was the last time you heard a nominee say "Damn right I was the best!"? He elaborated on that statement:

It seems unfair quoting the elaboration and leaving the actual statement:

Originally Posted by Hitfix from Haggis

“Was it the best film of the year? I don’t think so,” he said. “There were great films that year. Good Night, and Good Luck – amazing film. Capote – terrific film. Ang Lee’s Brokeback Mountain, great film. And Spielberg’s Munich. I mean please, what a year. Crash, for some reason, affected people, it touched people. And you can’t judge these films like that. I’m very glad to have those Oscars. They’re lovely things. But you shouldn’t ask me what the best film of the year was because I wouldn’t be voting for Crash, only because I saw the artistry that was in the other films."

Take that as you will.

Originally Posted by Guardian Enzo

But most of it came in the form of backlash against Crash after it won, as if it could only have done so because of some sinister anti-gay agenda and not - as many in the industry believed at the time - because "Brokeback" was an overrated piece of work.

I wouldn't know about that since I didn't champion Brokeback Mountain myself. I actually like Capote the most from all the nominees which is a really good film compared to Crash which I think is the sloppiest out of all the nominees. In fact, if the Aca-members at the time wanted to go for the safest and easiest "not-Brokeback"-choice at the time, they could've easily pick Capote and I doubt people were going to make as much fuss about it as what actually happened. But I guess somebody slipped and picked Crash out of all the better choices. Not that it was anything new for them.

But enough of this tangent. My point is, I don't want Asuki Awards to turn into Academy Awards and adopt its flaws like the above.

[Guardian Enzo]

Yes it is a tangent, but since you mentioned it I wanted to weigh in with a different perspective. My best friend happens to be a publicist and Academy member, and as it happens he worked on one of the five B.P. nominees that year. He's not one of those Academy members who literally just "mails it in" - he attends more screenings than 95% of the members, and sees everything he votes on.

I remember him telling me that even though the press was giving Brokeback the award in advance, he was hearing from a lot of members that they didn't think the film was actually all that great. I asked him what he was hearing might sneak in and he said "Crash" without hesitation. As you said, if the members had wanted to make a statement there were less controversial films on the ballot they could have done it with - the point is, they voted for Crash because they thought it was the best film that year. I know it's fashionable to piss all over that film now, but a lot of people simply don't get what Haggis was trying to do with Crash.

But again - tangent. The irony of all this is, the Academy Awards are actually more similar in setup to the existing ASF Choice awards than any proposed "panel" system - pretty much every film is eligible in every category it qualifies for as long as it meets basic requirements. The only major difference is that other than Best Picture, the different branches of the Academy vote for the nominees in their own field.

[Obelisk ze Tormentor]

Originally Posted by Guardian Enzo

I know it's fashionable to piss all over that film now, but a lot of people simply don't get what Haggis was trying to do with Crash.

Fashionable? Not for me. I watched Crash before the Academy Awards of that year was held, and at that point, I already thought that the movie was not that good when compared to the rest of the nominees. I like it the least of the bunch which is funny considering I’m always easily won over by films about racism as long as it’s done right, but somehow not in this case. When I heard that Crash won the B.F., I literally facepalmed, and looking at the reaction of the masses (and even top critics) for it, I'm relieved to know I wasn’t alone. And I'm talking about the "smarter"-masses here, not the "Bayformers"-masses. I guess I can give Haggis A+ for effort but the result is not good enough for me. Looks like the claim that the Aca-members at the time being out of touch with the general audience/masses was true to some degree (and probably still is). And I don’t want that to happen to Asuki Awards especially after the Crunchyroll Awards debacle which is an extreme case in the other direction.

[relentlessflame]

Originally Posted by felix

My second problem is with the very popularized (in particular by people who fit the description) idea that if you're some kind of encyclopedia or jack of all trades in a field (such as play all games, watch all anime, etc) you're somehow qualified to speak for everyone. Critics in particular like this, since it's shameless way for them to elevate their status and rise on a pedestal when giving "advice". Personally, I disagree. People who like different things are quite different even if one or two might intersect. I've had periods where I've diversified, and periods where I've had very focused tastes. Just because you "touched" the same thing as a group doesn't mean you've experienced it the same as that focused group has. You could for example force yourself to watch all the romance, horror, drama, action, etc, it won't make you "smart," in fact you'll probably miss most of the emotional core of all of them entirely. Quantity doesn't make any qualitative difference to your opinion. In fact the moment something is even a bit niche in the genre in question you may very well completely drop the ball due to your taste and vision being too generic, or the opposite, you may unjustly praise it to high heaven just because it's different even if it's terrible (or simply average) for the genre in question. Unique things are suddenly more appealing after all if you consume everything the same way and are unaffected or blind to the more subtle aspects of a genre/style.

If it really came down to it, that we had to pick judges from random people on the internet, then people who have an agenda (critics, bloggers, etc) along with people who have extremely generic tastes or an almost watch-all-as-homework way of doing things are absolutely least qualified to act as judges! While people who are very focused and dedicated to a only one or two genres and have stuck with them for years and years with out any other incentive then that they like them are the most qualified; and of course I mean that in the sense that they would only judge the one or two categories they're qualified in.

If you've followed my opinions on the forum over the years, you'll know already how I feel about this issue in general. But, in my personal opinion, the way the contest is currently presented is very biased towards that sort of audience (to the extent that I assumed it was a hidden design intention). If the intention of the contest is to solicit feedback from people who are genre experts more than broad-based medium fans, then I would think about the presentation and strategy. But I can only speak for myself here.

Originally Posted by Reckoner

Really, the choice awards stand no chance of gaining popularity on this forum when the visibility is too low and the moderators have chosen to not help endorse our efforts.

Obviously you'll believe I'm biased, but I truly don't believe that's the case. Lots of things gain popularity on the forum without staff intervention due entirely to word-of-mouth hype. I think the assumption that you need staff endorsement can become a crutch that prevents people from seeing out-of-the-box solutions and alternatives, or from looking more closely at other factors/shortcomings that could be addressed.

But if you do truly believe that is the case, then it's pointless to continue on the current path bearing this cross. The most important thing to do would be to rethink the strategy. I think I explained pretty clearly the rationale for the staff's decision and the criteria that were used to arrive at that decision. You don't have to agree with the decision, but if you're going to offer a counterproposal, you need an argument that takes that perspective into account, addresses the concerns, and provides a way forward. Obviously if you come back with the same proposal/logic/argument as before, the answer isn't likely to change. But I wouldn't just keep on walking down the same path if you've already decided it's doomed; that alone is going to doom it more than anything else.

[Ulin]

In my opinion, if there's a category a bit... extra is the ongoing series one. In the end those series could be nominated and win the next year, so that spot could be replaced with best VA for example, and I mean not just the VA, but the role he/she is nominated for (although we could need to enforce Rem Rule here, so not to have the same VA nominated for 3 different roles... it is more difficult that it seems sometimes )

[Marcus H.]

Obviously you'll believe I'm biased, but I truly don't believe that's the case. Lots of things gain popularity on the forum without staff intervention due entirely to word-of-mouth hype. I think the assumption that you need staff endorsement can become a crutch that prevents people from seeing out-of-the-box solutions and alternatives, or from looking more closely at other factors/shortcomings that could be addressed.

That's not why we want you in the Choice Awards. We want you here because the community wants a confirmation that the moderator team, like the rest of the ones participating in this site, are actually watching anime. It's not any more complicated than that.

[sona-nyl]

I think the awards could use a category for best short anime series since there seem to be more of them every year.

[-Antares-]

Originally Posted by sona-nyl

I think the awards could use a category for best short anime series since there seem to be more of them every year.

I'm in agreement with this as well. The best I can do is vote for them in their genres and whatever, but they don't stand a chance there.

Originally Posted by Marcus H.

That's not why we want you in the Choice Awards. We want you here because the community wants a confirmation that the moderator team, like the rest of the ones participating in this site, are actually watching anime. It's not any more complicated than that.

Why not just change the name to Animesuki Community Awards? It makes it clear that it's based on the consensus of the Animesuki community, which the mods and admits are a part of. This doesn't need to be overly complicated.

[Guardian Enzo]

Originally Posted by Ulin

In my opinion, if there's a category a bit... extra is the ongoing series one. In the end those series could be nominated and win the next year, so that spot could be replaced with best VA for example, and I mean not just the VA, but the role he/she is nominated for (although we could need to enforce Rem Rule here, so not to have the same VA nominated for 3 different roles... it is more difficult that it seems sometimes )

I'm on-board with this - that cat is pretty vestigial. The multi-cour anime is largely a dinosaur at this point - to call this year's pickings slim would be a massive understatement. I'd be fine with adding a "Best Cast" and getting rid of this one.

[SeijiSensei]

Originally Posted by relentlessflame

Obviously you'll believe I'm biased, but I truly don't believe that's the case. Lots of things gain popularity on the forum without staff intervention due entirely to word-of-mouth hype.

All I've ever wanted is a top-of-page banner announcing the nomination phase and one announcing the voting phase. I've never understood the resistance to such a simple request. I know that your position is that the Awards are "unofficial," but frankly something that has persisted for a decade now is functionally official whether you think so or not.

I won't bring this subject up again as I have made my views clear in both this and earlier years.