2021 MMA Tycoon Award Committee

[Rambo]

 

19 minutes ago, Alfred said:

Last year's committee was a shit show and the worst yearly awards ceremony I've ever witnessed. It wasn't interactive at all. Just a bunch of managers half assing their choices without even looking into things properly. It took me freaking ages to go through each unlinked nomination and I would take a guess that most didn't even bother. They just looked at the list and picked their favourite. One didn't even bother full stop.

Just go back to the voting system with the same rules we've always had and enjoyed. Any obvious multi accounts created just to vote will stick out like a sore thumb. It's not like we're talking about hundreds of thousands of votes here.

The old way was interactive for everyone who enjoys the game and made things just a little bit more interesting for a few weeks. We tried something new last year and it was a fail. No need to repeat it

went to committee because of how bad it was before, so... again. something's gotta give.

 

personally i think there's way too many participation trophies. so nobody really gives and who wants to sift through 2 pages of content to find what awards they wanna vote for. the main ones people pay attention to are fighter of the year, manager of the year, alliance of the year, org of the year. probably in that order.

[clydebankblitz]

I think it's a little bit more complicated than it needs to be. Discuss as a committee which awards you want included, open nomination threads like usual, and then decide as a committee who wins from the nominations.

 

EDIT: I also want to add in that I think the site is in a different place than it was a few years back. I know I hated the nomination process cause even with a top 5 org I'd not get nominated for CEO of the year because none of the guys in Highland Games were popular on the site at the time. It was definitely a forum/chatroom club back then where everyone joins their mates' orgs and then nominates their mates for awards, probably linked to alliances too. I don't think that would be the case anymore as I do think of any orgs that have had a good run, there's a decent spread of top managers having fighters throughout all of them. A lot of lower orgs seem to be quite active and talkative compared to before so if there's any recognition owed to like the #12 org or whatever, I think we'll see that now compared to back then. Should be fun. More we talk about the planning of it though, the less fun it'll be.

[Gator001]

10 hours ago, HareRumpler said:

Unfortunately I wouldn't feel qualified.  Much like Callum stated, I too am way too much in my own little bubble with my own fighters, who aren't well distributed across the higher end orgs, and with the running of my own org.  I wouldn't be able to honestly and knowledgeably vote well. 

the best people to have on a committee are those that dont want it, just like nearly any leadership role

[Mentor]

11 hours ago, Icon73 said:

Because the award should be Merritt not an opinion piece or popularity contest. Its the reason fans don't get to vote on year end awards in real life. Conor would end up winning fighter of the year.

So why are members voting then? Of course it is a popularity contest. If this was based on merit, then the criteria would be based on stats and member voting would not be part of the equation at all. The committee could decide on the "candidates" for each award, which deletes any irregular nominations the public puts ahead, but once you have the top 5 nominations, the public votes.  No org / alliance has the power to win an award by itself, no group is anywhere close to being that big, so all these restrictions do not make any sense.

[Mentor]

Also, the CEO of the year award needs to be returned, it was removed last year and i have zero understanding why. The Org of the year, rates the org, it is more to do with the org's performance (ranking during the year, super fight wins etc). The org of the year can also have multiple org owners during the year. 

The CEO of the year can be won by org owners who are not in the top 3-5, based on their work in running the org. This could be things like activity, posters, write ups etc. Org performance is less important. 

[Icon73]

8 minutes ago, Mentor said:

So why are members voting then? Of course it is a popularity contest. If this was based on merit, then the criteria would be based on stats and member voting would not be part of the equation at all.  

That was my whole point in it not being a vote and being by committee. Like real life awards. Merit isn't strictly math based. Hence why sports MVP awards are not just stat based.

[Icon73]

6 minutes ago, Mentor said:

Also, the CEO of the year award needs to be returned, it was removed last year and i have zero understanding why. The Org of the year, rates the org, it is more to do with the org's performance (ranking during the year, super fight wins etc). The org of the year can also have multiple org owners during the year. 

The CEO of the year can be won by org owners who are not in the top 3-5, based on their work in running the org. This could be things like activity, posters, write ups etc. Org performance is less important. 

*wins award 4 consecutive years cause he's the leader of the largest alliance in the game*

 

"Why did they get rid of this perfectly balanced award that anyone can win by just working hard..."

 

Lmao

[Mentor]

8 minutes ago, Icon73 said:

That was my whole point in it not being a vote and being by committee. Like real life awards. Merit isn't strictly math based. Hence why sports MVP awards are not just stat based.

So why not have 2 awards, a committee award and community award? In the English Premier league, there is a "Players Player of Year award" and a a "Player of the year award".  The committee can easily be corrupt as well, in fact there is a much bigger chance of that happening because there is fewer people in it.

[Mentor]

3 minutes ago, Icon73 said:

"Why did they get rid of this perfectly balanced award that anyone can win by just working hard..."

Even if you call it "The award given to the guy who worked the hardest"....................................a pretty good award to have in the books. We have awards for much more dumber things. 

[MasterLeader]

I don’t think this should be a popularity contest - those that deserve awards should win them so I’m all for a committee.

[Icon73]

4 hours ago, Mentor said:

Even if you call it "The award given to the guy who worked the hardest"....................................a pretty good award to have in the books. We have awards for much more dumber things. 

Wow you completely missed the point huh? Has nothing to do with the name dude lmao. You're telling me for 4 straight years you were the hardest working org owner? Or do you have the biggest alliance by far and therefore can garner the most votes.

 

You want the system to go back yo the way it was so you can manipulate it again.

[clydebankblitz]

I don't exactly think getting his alliance to vote is "manipulating". It's a public vote and he's directing the public that interact with him and his companies to vote for said companies. If you did a public vote today there's a good chance I'd sent out a mail in Highland and say "Hey everyone! Make sure to check out the yearly awards and vote for Highland if you thought we've done well".

But that's what I never liked about the popularity awards. If I joined an alliance of some popular guys, I'm now suddenly more likely to win an award despite doing nothing different from my usual org running. "A committee can be corrupt", I think we're going a little bit conspiracy theory there.

[bjornmma1]

Nomination by everyone, voting by a committee. That takes out most opportunities of 'buying' an award.

Maybe check the list of the members of the committee from last year, see who is still around and if anyone 'gone' names should be replaced. As long as the committee remains a balanced affair, it should be fine. 

Also, anyone can try and make it a shitshow 'Camara-style' as usual during and after nominations, but mods can help there by cleaning things up and keeping it clean. In the end, no matter what yearly clown then pops up, the committee will have a balanced and fair final vote.
 

[Lefty]

1 hour ago, clydebankblitz said:

I don't exactly think getting his alliance to vote is "manipulating". It's a public vote and he's directing the public that interact with him and his companies to vote for said companies. If you did a public vote today there's a good chance I'd sent out a mail in Highland and say "Hey everyone! Make sure to check out the yearly awards and vote for Highland if you thought we've done well".

But that's what I never liked about the popularity awards. If I joined an alliance of some popular guys, I'm now suddenly more likely to win an award despite doing nothing different from my usual org running. "A committee can be corrupt", I think we're going a little bit conspiracy theory there.

Fake news!

[clydebankblitz]

3 minutes ago, Lefty said:

Fake news!

You need a name change to Righty.

[Rambo]

6 hours ago, clydebankblitz said:

You need a name change to Righty.

get this libtarded shit outta here

[clydebankblitz]

1 hour ago, Rambo said:

get this libtarded shit outta here

Haha even trump fans can appreciate a pun surely.

[Bleakardor]

I would join the committee for this year.  Not like I'm eligible for any awards this year anyways.  lol 

But for real, I'm down if you'd have me.

[Bleakardor]

And honestly... I don't think the committee was "corrupt."  I mean, Camara told me point blank I'd never win any awards on a committee he was on pretty much and I managed to earn an award last year.  Just needs to be the right people though.  Get managers on the committee that can be unbias and cast a vote based on merit.  Easy enough.

[Alfred]

54 minutes ago, Bleakardor said:

And honestly... I don't think the committee was "corrupt."  I mean, Camara told me point blank I'd never win any awards on a committee he was on pretty much and I managed to earn an award last year.  Just needs to be the right people though.  Get managers on the committee that can be unbias and cast a vote based on merit.  Easy enough.

Camara was the manager I alluded to earlier that didn't actually bother to vote at all in the end.

The committee wasn't corrupt. It was just half assed and a pain to do.

[TJMitchell]

On 11/12/2021 at 6:18 AM, Alfred said:

Last year's committee was a shit show and the worst yearly awards ceremony I've ever witnessed. It wasn't interactive at all. Just a bunch of managers half assing their choices without even looking into things properly. It took me freaking ages to go through each unlinked nomination and I would take a guess that most didn't even bother. They just looked at the list and picked their favourite. One didn't even bother full stop.

Just go back to the voting system with the same rules we've always had and enjoyed. Any obvious multi accounts created just to vote will stick out like a sore thumb. It's not like we're talking about hundreds of thousands of votes here.

The old way was interactive for everyone who enjoys the game and made things just a little bit more interesting for a few weeks. We tried something new last year and it was a fail. No need to repeat it

Last years committee was the bees knees and was run by the most handsome manager in the game so you can go and get stuffed you jerk face

[Bleakardor]

Doesn't seem like any particular method of doing the awards will be 100% agreed upon by everyone.  And to be honest, I really don't care if involved or not, but I want to see the awards actually mean something and go to managers who earn them.  So if there is a committee, I'd be willing to join.  But in the end, as long as the awards are handed out this year, it's a win in the end.

[TJMitchell]

No Jude, no humors, so any way you do the awards they're bound to run smoother than recent years lol

 

[TJMitchell]

22 hours ago, Mentor said:

Also, the CEO of the year award needs to be returned, it was removed last year and i have zero understanding why. The Org of the year, rates the org, it is more to do with the org's performance (ranking during the year, super fight wins etc). The org of the year can also have multiple org owners during the year. 

The CEO of the year can be won by org owners who are not in the top 3-5, based on their work in running the org. This could be things like activity, posters, write ups etc. Org performance is less important. 

We had a CEO of the Year award last year. You just didn't win it.

[ArtieBanks]

The awards have always been a shit show. IIRC the award committee got put out because it became LOD vs the rest of the game. The committee aspect while flawed is a whole lot better than undeserved winners getting awards. Yes some people don't put much time into it but some of the awards were just a clusterfuck. 

Fight of the Year, KO of the year, Sub of the year while in the real world is cool but unless it is a big fight in tycoon most of them just fly under the radar. Most people don't take the time to look through the fights. 

The 2020 awards at least was watered down. I can't see any there that are just plain shitty. 

I remember the first time this happened and someone didn't know who Jeremy Tonal was - despite being the fighter of the year by some margin. As long as you keep people like that out then it should be pretty cut and dry. 

I can only imagine the battle that will occur for org of the year - I mean personally I could never vote for an org that cheated its way to victory.