*The qWestionable Show Episode 13

[qWest]

I completely agree with you on the GM voting. The goal of an awards voter should be objectivity. A Gm’s goal is to do what's in the best interest of their own team. Those two responsibilities are incompatible. There should be a voting body of experienced users whose sole responsibility is objective voting. The biggest problem with gm voting is the lack of accountability. A gm will only get a slap on the wrist from ho for bias voting and there is no way to formally punish a team for bias voting. If this was separated out from a gms responsibility you’d be able to hold them to a certain standard. It was prolly necessary when there were not enough active users, but now the committee is so large that there is no reason for a gms responsibilities to include voting.

In regards to the statistics that make the awards sheet, those are in no way meant to encompass all the relevant data. The reps on the committee are encouraged to look at everything. We actually linked your spreadsheet in the discord. I hope Gms also look at it when doing their voting.

As far as the awards committee being toxic, there have definitely been times where it can get pretty heated, but we and Arkz are quick to address any personal attacks. It is a tough gig for the reps, but generally, I think things work will really well with each team having an equal voice in the process.

The most important part of the committee is equal representation. No team can claim there is bias against their team or their player making the ballot. Everyone has their say and no one has the power to unilaterally put someone on the ballot. Is it the best system? Prolly not. The committee was made with the intention of adding just a lil oversight on awards and I think it has accomplished that well. Especially considering they have to limit it to 5. That is a small number for how many similar seasons there are in the ISFL.

Another thing I’ll agree with you on is one of the downsides of the committee is the lack of consistency. There is essentially a new committee every season that can value things differently from season to season., but it isn’t without some downsides.

I would be all for the writers SMWG to get voting privileges and add more accountability to the process as an official voting body. Really appreciate you putting this together and I am excited to see the All-pro rosters this season. Great work on this.

Thanks for taking the time to listen and respond! A few response on your thoughts.

Re: the stats. Good to know the stats sheet was able to help as intended. I think, like you said in your first point and I said in the episode, the onus lies more on the individuals that don't go and look for additional statistics or a greater perspective on the data. I know for myself in the AP voting it was helpful to get the data on all of the nominees together and take a screenshot of that and put it into the channel. But again, that's on voters for not usually looking any more than the surface level.

Re: committee toxicity. Toxic here was a bad word. I think I mean more that the awards committee can feel very combative. While I think there's a level of importance to balance, I think there's something about the idea that I think people get that they're there to fight for their teammates can lead to an overall aggressive feeling to the process. The committee heads typically do a good job of stepping in and stopping it from going too far, but I know there are people that are discouraged by the process because it doesn't feel like people are necessarily in it with good intentions, just to fight for the team the most.

All-Pro should be out tomorrow, just in time to try and crash on the awards