Subject:
|
Re: Rebirth of Cool LEGO Site of the Week
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.suggestions
|
Date:
|
Thu, 4 Jul 2002 19:32:38 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2440 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.admin.suggestions, Jeremy Scott writes:
See my comments throughout.
> First, I must say, hooray!
Agreed :)
> I was deep in my dark ages when I first came across Lugnet. I did some
> coming back every now and then to see the new CLSOTW. 18 months later I
> come back, fully out of my dark ages and see my favorite thing I remembered
> from my passive renaissance, the CLSOTW, gone! So now, I am happy again!
The same goes for me, CLSotW was one of the things that brought me to LUGNET
and back to LEGO.
> My thoughts:
>
> <ranting on>
> First off, why should you limit this to members only?
If LUGNET is giving out an award to web sites, it only seems right that
LUGNET members should be behind it.
> Many people, like me,
> can't drop the money for a membership, or aren't allowed by their parents
> (both are me).
I really don't think that $10 is out of anyone's price range. As for
permission from your parents, I don't see why they wouldn't allow you to
become a member. The only reason I could think of is privacy related, and
your membership wouldn't reveal anything more than what is already revealed
in your postings.
> Why should you stop us, the wanna-be members who one day
> will become members, from participating in this? Lugnet only has
> approximately. 1500 members, but many, many more non-members visit while
> lurking or posting. I don't know what the true stats are, but lots of people
> must come here from links, searches and word of mouth. I could foresee more
> that 3000 people per day, and about 350 of those are daily visitors, 2000
> weekly. Why do you exclude people from what is already becoming a central
> activity in the online Lego fan world? Would Todd want it like that? CLSOTW
> was here before Lugnet, so why should only Lugnet Members control it now?
> <venting done, ranting off>
I don't see it as about stopping the "wanna-be members" from participating.
In my opinion, anyone could nominate a site, but only members should be able
to vote. (I kind of see it like citizenship. If someone wants to
participate in, say, the US political system, they need to be a citizen. Of
course, non-citizens can still make campaign contributions [nominating a
site]) Maybe it's not the best analogy, but I think it fits.
>
> Here is how I suggest to make both parties happy:
.. snipped out lengthy nomination process ..
I really think that a simple nomination form would be better than a
discussion group.
> -Must be of Lego Orientation
Of course.
> -The site or folder is at least three months old
I don't think that there needs to be an age requirement. Plenty of new
sites would be worthy of CLSotW, regardless of whether they were 1 week or 6
months old.
> -Site or folder hasn't been awarded the CLSOTW this past year
Agreed.
> -Site or folder hasn't been nominated in the past month
I have mixed feelings on this. I think limiting the frequency of
renominating sites makes sense, but maybe it should be every other week.
> -If it has won or been nominated before, it must have recent updates since then.
Agreed.
> -It must have a Lugnet link or Logo on the site*
I don't see why this should be the case. If the purpose of the award is to
promote LUGNET, the award graphic on the nominated site would be sufficient.
> -Can Handle Massive Bandwidth**
There is really no way for us to judge the amount of bandwidth a nominated
site could handle. Rather than make limitations in this regard, a simple
page off of the nomination page could inform a site owner that heavy traffic
may result and suggestions could be provided for dealing with the heavy traffic.
> -Doesn't Sell Stuff, i.e.: GOB(tm) Web Site.***
I really don't see any reason behind this. If a site is "cool" it's "cool."
The primary function of the official LEGO site is to promote and sell it's
products; that doesn't mean it doesn't provide lots of great information,
ideas, etc. to LEGO fans.
.. another big snip ..
> Other thoughts...
>
> Ballot Stuffing:
> It is an unstoppable evil. Make a limit, 1 vote per unique IP, and hope for
> people to be honest and not vote every time they change their IP.
Rather than hoping for honesty, limiting voting to members eliminates this
problem.
> ----New Name for CLSOTW:
I agree that a new name would be nice.
> Yes please, things have changed, and CLSOTW as a name is no longer as fitting.
>
> Lego Users Weekly Community Choice Award
> Lugnet Weekly Community Choice Award
> Lugnet Community Site of the Week
> Weekly Digital Brick Award
> Digital Brick Site of the Week
> Brick-Click Site of the Week (My Fave)
I like something like 'LUGNET Weekly Community Choice Award'. The name of
the award should make it clear that the site was chosen by the LUGNET
community. Maybe something like 'LUGNET Pick of the Week'. I haven't heard
anything yet that really seems perfect to me.
> ----Allow B-Shelf Galleries:
> As you can guess from above, yes!
The way I see it, the idea of CLSotW is to honor great LEGO related
websites. Brickshelf Galleries may contain some awesome creations, but
that's not the purpose of the award.
> ----Cool Lego Site Of The Year (or whatever) awards:
> Every Month, Members may choose there favorite site from the month past
> month on a separate page just for them. These stats saved and kept secret.
> Every year, the Members are allowed to see their choices, and within those,
> vote to choose their favorites for the past year in three categories,
> CLSOTY: Best Site Design, CLSOTY: Best MOC Showcase, CLSOTY: Best
> Story/Theme Site. Then, the public will vote on these final three to award
> CLSOTY: Community Choice Award. (THE BEST)
I think this is a neat idea, but not really necessary.
> ----Prizes:
> $2 off any NEW Lugnet memberships for two runner ups and $5 for winner.
> Also, community members may add to the pot.
Prizes are another neat idea, but I don't think they are necessary. The
award _is_ the prize.
> To finish, I believe that this is a community thing, so keep it a community
> thing! Members may have the control they want while letting the public play
> a great part.
>
> ~just your neighborhood lugneter,
> Jeremy Scott
Bryan Beckwith
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Rebirth of Cool LEGO Site of the Week
|
| (...) <snipped> (...) But if you are still a participating member of the community, without paid membership, why are you not a Lugnet member? I, and many along with me, have the free, watered down lugnet. Does this fact make me not a part of this (...) (22 years ago, 6-Jul-02, to lugnet.admin.suggestions)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Rebirth of Cool LEGO Site of the Week
|
| First, I must say, hooray! I was deep in my dark ages when I first came across Lugnet. I did some coming back every now and then to see the new CLSOTW. 18 months later I come back, fully out of my dark ages and see my favorite thing I remembered (...) (22 years ago, 4-Jul-02, to lugnet.admin.suggestions)
|
25 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
