Re: Ribbons: 2 for me, none for you.

**Mordona** · 11-21-2008, 10:45 PM

Originally Posted by Crux

Well to be fair Eroak, class 1 rarely gets shot down, depending on the ribbon. Class 2 often gets shot down, especially depending on the ribbon. Combat Action, Distinguished Defense or whatever it is called - those ones don't pass easy even at the level 1. Or at least they haven't traditionally.

They haven't for one reason, the nature of the award. People keep sending in these nominations for 4-8 people at a time in one nomination. Thats Valorous Unit, Not a distinguished person. Every nomination needs to be for a single person or 2 tops. If its a group, they need to be split into different nominations with different reasons what that person should receive the award. There are expections, but these are the rare cases and why it seems they are rare to pass.

**Catman1975** · 11-21-2008, 10:52 PM

since we play as a team, why wouldn't the distinguished defense ribbon go to an entire team that spent the round working together doing an amazing job defending one or two flags against overwhelming odds?

We may believe our squad was deserving of distinguished defense ribbons, but not the glorious Valorous Ribbon, which in and of itself is listed as a well beyond extraordinary measures ribbon.

I know I nominated a team for that ribbon and if it got switched to a Valorous ribbon, that's not what I wrote the nomination for and therefor would be definitely shot down... Now if people continuously write nominations in this fashion and they are not told, there is a problem in the perception of that ribbon.

**Mordona** · 11-22-2008, 01:21 AM

Ok let me make this strait then.

The rules,

Every BF admin and the BF officer has the right to vote on any BF platform nomination.
Anyone for any reason can submit a nomination for any award.
Awards are voted upon over the course of a week.
Awards in BF require a minimum of 8 votes to close the nominaion and pass to approval of the holder of ribbons.
Global awards do not have a minimum required votes.
Any TG admin, officer, or site admin may vote upon a global award.
To be granted, a nomination must receive a majority vote.
Abstain votes do not count towards majority, but do count towards the 8 required to pass for approval.
Site admins may revoke adwards if necessary.
Guidelines are agreed upon by a consensus of admins and a given final approval by the holder of ribbons.

There are no required rules on how to vote, only the nature of the award is a guideline to how the voting is conducted. This means its the duty of the admins to forum opinions and debates on how to process each nomination based upon the feedback of the nominator. (This also means any award can be approved or denied upon many different reasons. Just because you think it might not be processed, doesn't me we wont see it differently. For instance, we have approved mass defense and combat action in the past. It was deemed worth and they usally have a very indepth AAR of the entire round.

What we use to base our votes,

First hand knowledge of the nominee, nominator and their qualifications (or lack thereof).
The nomination itself. (most influential)
Discussion in the nomination thread.

What does this all mean? It means that if the admin board feels a award is justified, we'll vote yes. If we have no clue of what the player can do, the nomination is weak of over generalized or just not following suit of the award, we'll lean to no on it. Since it involves the BF2 admins, this process relies heavly on the person writing the nomination and the report in itself. Yes, a nomination from someone whos been here for 2 years vs someone who joined a month ago will carry more weight to the process. We know this player ins't likely to submit us a nomination unless they felt it was necessary. This still shouldn't discourage anyone, we can use the nominee's play history also to process the award. Do our bf2142 admins know the player and can also advocate that player's skill? We can use only 1 or all 3 guidelines to forming a vote. It's up to the admin himself to deem which data is relevant or importent to that case.

Yes, to some this might seem barbaric, unorganized, or arbitrary. There are reasons to a system like this. Once rules and guidelines are tightened down or added, it imposes more restraint on what we can do or how we vote. This system allows a vast flexabiliy and more importantly, open forum for admins to advocate a case for a nominee or the nature of the award in itself. It allows us to be stay different minded as admins and present cases for every side of the fence. This is how TG evolves.

lastly,

Have you processed a nomination and not seen anything in 2 weeks? You may PM an admin and inquire what went wrong. If you do this, you must and are required to remember that this is a group decision. Not the decision of the admin you PMed. The admins are not required to give you their opinion on the nature of the vote. They will give you advice on writing better nominations if it's needed. They will also help you define what the natrue of an award is if your's was submitted for the wrong category. Never think that your nomination isn't importent to us, sometimes it just needs some importent data of the round of judge of character to be added and resubmitted.

**Crux** · 11-22-2008, 08:38 AM

Originally Posted by Eroak

They haven't for one reason, the nature of the award. People keep sending in these nominations for 4-8 people at a time in one nomination. Thats Valorous Unit, Not a distinguished person. Every nomination needs to be for a single person or 2 tops. If its a group, they need to be split into different nominations with different reasons what that person should receive the award. There are expections, but these are the rare cases and why it seems they are rare to pass.

Eroak, I'm not talking about incorrect nominations. I'm talking about the standards some nominations are held to.

**Uranium - 235** · 11-22-2008, 01:25 PM

Frankly I think the presence of favoritism has ruined the merit of ribbons to the point of 'who cares'? Looking through any spread of ribbon-winners, why is it that outside of long-time players (which is fair) the majority of ribbons are concentrated into the same tiny group? Why keep nominations anonymous? If knowing that people are going to look down on them for nominating the same clowns over and over in really dramatic half-true writeups is going to stop them from doing that, why is that bad?

**Mordona** · 11-22-2008, 01:57 PM

Originally Posted by Uranium - 235

Frankly I think the presence of favoritism has ruined the merit of ribbons to the point of 'who cares'? Looking through any spread of ribbon-winners, why is it that outside of long-time players (which is fair) the majority of ribbons are concentrated into the same tiny group? Why keep nominations anonymous? If knowing that people are going to look down on them for nominating the same clowns over and over in really dramatic half-true writeups is going to stop them from doing that, why is that bad?

What evidence are you basing this off of? How would you know Player_X keeps nominating Player_Y over and over? And so what if you nominate a friend. Doesn't mean it's going to pass. Thats up to the admins to decide which include BF2 admins, So there is no possibality of favortism there.

Theres a sticky post in the public awards forum about why they are anonymous. If they are half-true, thats why we require ARRs for awards that mean something. We dont vote yes jsut because we want to. We read into this and decuss the terms and people involved.

I'm sorry, but your really over asuming how this system works and its a very negitive view on it. Why not suggest improvments rather the make up reasons on how its flawed. Help improve TG or why bother?

**Bomber** · 11-22-2008, 02:42 PM

Originally Posted by Eroak

Have you processed a nomination and not seen anything in 2 weeks? You may PM an admin and inquire what went wrong. If you do this, you must and are required to remember that this is a group decision. Not the decision of the admin you PMed. The admins are not required to give you their opinion on the nature of the vote. They will give you advice on writing better nominations if it's needed. They will also help you define what the natrue of an award is if your's was submitted for the wrong category. Never think that your nomination isn't importent to us, sometimes it just needs some importent data of the round of judge of character to be added and resubmitted.

If you(admins) read the nomination and take the time to vote on it, it will help the community to just send a five second pm outlying why it didn't pass. I don't believe suggesting members should search for answers themselves will lead to a better, more productive system because it does not solve the actual problem, it just circumvents it in individual cases.

**Unload** · 11-22-2008, 02:50 PM

Originally Posted by Uranium - 235

the majority of ribbons are concentrated into the same tiny group?

I have never ever seen a 'tiny' group in BF2142 receiving all the awards. What are you basing your assumptions on? There have not been many awards handed out to begin with. Overall there has been a huge spread of awards given to many different people. Even if there seems to be this award grubbing circle of BF2142 players that don't want to share, someone obviously thinks they deserve them outside their little circle. (Admins have to pass them, etc.) There are a lot of hard working people here at TG that consistently play above a level that is expected, or volunteer their time and effort to make TG a better place, and they deserve the ribbons they are nominated for.

**Mordona** · 11-22-2008, 03:45 PM

Originally Posted by Bomber

If you(admins) read the nomination and take the time to vote on it, it will help the community to just send a five second pm outlying why it didn't pass. I don't believe suggesting members should search for answers themselves will lead to a better, more productive system because it does not solve the actual problem, it just circumvents it in individual cases.

Ok, I'm growing tired of the hijack of this thread. This thread is about submitting nominations because there are few that get submitted and it always the same people.

I'm here trying to premote awareness, not bicker about it problems. I have no control nor does any 2142 admin have control on the process and SOPs. This is a site system goverened by the site admins and the director of ribbons. Since there is nothing we can do other then vote, and you have an issue about ribbons, you need to use the contact TG admins forum or PM hte Ribbon director himself.

Now, back to promoting awareness and generating nominations of merit.

**Grimmfist** · 11-22-2008, 04:59 PM

Eroak, thanks for the heads up. I think the majority of TG 2142 community members believed the admins for 2142 voted on ribbon nominations and could make adjustments to how those nominations are handled once they are turned in. Now we all know that site admins and director of ribbons has final say over a person receiving a ribbon and not 2142 admins. Any concerns we as a community have should not be sent to 2142 admins but to the TG site admins or director of ribbons. I have learned more about the process of the ribbon nomination system from this thread than anywhere else in the year I have been involved with TG. For those who have had their nominations accepted a hearty well done for understaning the bureaucracy and red tape that is the ribbon nomination system.

**Ribbons** · 11-22-2008, 06:14 PM

Going forward, Ribbons will make every effort to give feedback to nomination writers on whether a nomination looks like those that the admins have passed in the past. Ribbons will try and help you to make sure your nomination has the best chance. Furthermore, Ribbons will attempt to provide feedback when the voting is complete, but that feedback will be posted in the nomination thread you the users post in the nomination forum.

As far as voting feedback, there is no need for feedback when a ribbon succeeds as it is evident in the awards forum. When a vote does not pass, all Ribbons can do is tell you that it was Declined. Some nominations do not pass for lack of votes and "not enough information". In these cases you will have to take that matter up with the admins in the Contact an Admin forum for the appropriate game.

Please keep in mind that a nomination can take as long as 3 weeks to be decided. Also, nominations are only posted to the admins once per week. For now, that day is Sunday which means that if you make a nomination on Monday, the clock does not start running until the next Sunday. You will always know when a nomination has been processed because your thread in the nomination forum will then be locked. That should be sufficient indication that your nomination has been processed. Also, any questions Ribbons has concerning your nomination is posted in the nomination's thread. Until that nomination is processed (locked), please check back from time to time in case Ribbons has need of additional information.

The Ribbons coordinator has limited control over the ribbons process. Ribbons is a facilitator in presenting nominations, tallying votes, and presenting the awards. As well as answering questions about awards received or errors in the presentations. From time to time as admins come and go Ribbons will suggest changes to the voting tally, but even that is ultimately up to the combined will of the game admins, officers, and administration of TG.

Please do not hesitate to PM Ribbons. Ribbons will do what it can to make the process better for everyone.

**DaBrit** · 11-22-2008, 09:26 PM

Ribbons reminds me of Damonte...

But thanks for making an effort to get feedback back to nominators!

**MarthaHyer** · 11-22-2008, 11:49 PM

Originally Posted by DaBrit

Ribbons reminds me of Damonte...

Nope.

( Ribbons real name is Santa Claus ... shhh ! )

**jazy2** · 11-23-2008, 12:04 AM

<3 ribbbons.....both of you!

**Uranium - 235** · 11-23-2008, 01:37 AM

Originally Posted by Eroak

What evidence are you basing this off of? How would you know Player_X keeps nominating Player_Y over and over?

I don't, and I admit I should have said perceived favoritism. I do get the impression that the same people are getting awards frequently. Whenever a new ribbon announcement comes up, it inevitably says "A congrats to X for winning Y again!" Which is why I also asked why keep it all anonymous. How do I know that, say (just picking randomly) Draeh is nominating his buddies in the 9th, and well Lorax is an admin, so he's not saying 'Oh yeah he's a great guy, sure! He has my vote!' That's at least one insincere vote, and there may be more.

I'm not accusing anyone of anything here, but I *AM* a big fan of questioning authority. If you want to know why I think the whole ribbon system is a sham, here it is:

1) The system is run entirely behind closed doors from the first step to the last. The nominations are secret, the votes are secret, the outcome is secret, and only an elite cadre, chosen not by us, but by themselves is the authority on this. All we see out of the blue is 'Hey, Player X just won the same award for the 4th time!' Big whoop says I.

2) There's no checks or balances built external to the system.

3) Trust hinges entirely on blind faith. Why should I care to trust ANY of these people that NONE of us had a single say in?

Didn't we have a big nuclear brew-hah-hah in the 50's-70's with a country that thought such an awesome method of leadership was the greatest thing since sliced bread?

If you want suggestions, start by making the entire system transparent. We don't let senators elect each other, pass laws in secret, and vote anonymously for a reason. I want to see who is nominating whom, which admins are voting for and against, and their reasons why. Since I know hell is going to freeze over before we have a public choice in admin staff, I figure this is the best we can hope for. Until then, you could give me the TG Medal of Honor and it wouldn't mean a thing with any admin simply saying 'just trust us' with a shark's smile.

You know, this really goes for everything. Why do the admins feel that they're above us mere players in every matter? I launched that big discussion on vehicle ramming, and at least three times the admins stated in perhaps nicer terms that it didn't matter one whit what we said in that thread, that I should have instead submitted a private inquiry to the admin team, who then would've held a private discussion, and I'd have to simply hope to be told of the private outcome. There's a reason I didn't do that.

Ultimately I just feel the inevitable reply 'This isn't a Democracy it's run by us and blah blah blah' coming on, and that's fine. But that will also answer any questions as to where I put my trust. I assure you it's nothing personal.

Thread Tools

Display