If you think it's unfair then I should have eliminated some covers way before they went eliminated with the poll. There are covers that were eliminated in the first rounds that, from an artistic point of view, were more worthy then covers that went on and on for rounds after rounds. I think these 30 covers, aside for some exception, are all really good. And BTW, only 10 covers will arrive to the last rounds, and round after round are always the same 10, even now that the jury has voted. Even now, with the Jury vote, the first 10 covers are always the same, EXACTLY the same, and in the same order. So I don't see where it's unfair, on the contrary, it's a proof the polls helped to select the right covers. And if a jury of experts "saved" 5 covers out of 40, well, go ask to those 5 cover artists, and I will go asking to the 470 that are not here, and maybe some of them had some merit to be. I can close one eye, or even two, when there are more than 500 covers in contest and since I'm not an artist and I have not the right skill to judge, but now that it's more obvious if polls are eliminating a good cover (and a cover artist) since people are voting more on the love for the author than on the merit for the artist, I need the help from someone that is both an expert and impartial. Dylan Rosser, Jesse Archer, Jack Mackenroth are all in the media world, are all used to judge beauty, and I plenty trust their vote to be impartial. AND IN ANY CASE, it didn't change anything, meaning that the SAME 10 covers are still in the SAME positions as before.
And you think you got me scared if you warn me you want to list the covers? List them please, I have no problem. The poll are open, the jury vote is public (I listed it for a reason), nothing was done behind people back. Nothing aside some strange affluence of voting from just opened account, that I would love to see how long will survive after this contest will end.
Edit to add a comment: you want really to tell me that "Alleys & Doorways" has not the right to be here? that is not a good cover? because if not for the Jury that is one of the covers eliminated (one of the 2 129 votes covers you are complaining about)... Really? really really? Or is not maybe that the artist is unknown, the author is not well known? Do you know who saved this cover? Jack Mackenroth and Jesse Archer. They didn't throw the vote, they picked only some covers, even if he could have vote for 30 out of them. And I happen to agree with them. "Alleys & Doorways" maybe will not arrive in the last 10 covers, but I think it was a cover worthy to be saved.
Thank-you for responding to my comment/questions. I was a little taken aback in your response, as I felt there was a lot more anger enclosed, and less professionalism. I am simply a reader, who has voted faithfully. Your comment suggested that there were covers that should have been gone already, and some that should still be in the competition. My findings are not the same as yours. Some of the covers that were saved, I have not liked from the beginning, and was so glad they were going to finally be eliminated. Whereas, there are covers still in the competition, that I feel are distasteful.
So, I am willing to draw a truce. And simply comment, everybody has their own opinion. If you want us non-writers, who faithfully purchase these books, to vote on covers, then it should stay that way. If you want a jury to select what stays, and what goes, then, don't have us vote.
My "anger" (even if anger is maybe a too strong feeling) is due to the fact that I would like for the non-writers to vote for the cover artists and not for the authors. And I'd like for people to vote only one time. I have no way to check if an account was opended by the same person to vote more than one time, but I have the strong feeling (due to the affluence of voting just at the right time to "save" a cover only for one/two votes) that a good % of voting have arrived in that way. More than one time I kindly asked people to be fair, to not doing strange "games", but that didn't happen, and so I had to take a decision: an external jury, without connection to authors or artists, but with skills to judge, was the less dramatic choice (the other choice was to close the contest).
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
reviews_and_ramblings) wrote2010-11-07 12:20 pm
Re: NOT FAIR IN RAINBOW AWARDS...
And you think you got me scared if you warn me you want to list the covers? List them please, I have no problem. The poll are open, the jury vote is public (I listed it for a reason), nothing was done behind people back. Nothing aside some strange affluence of voting from just opened account, that I would love to see how long will survive after this contest will end.
Edit to add a comment: you want really to tell me that "Alleys & Doorways" has not the right to be here? that is not a good cover? because if not for the Jury that is one of the covers eliminated (one of the 2 129 votes covers you are complaining about)... Really? really really? Or is not maybe that the artist is unknown, the author is not well known? Do you know who saved this cover? Jack Mackenroth and Jesse Archer. They didn't throw the vote, they picked only some covers, even if he could have vote for 30 out of them. And I happen to agree with them. "Alleys & Doorways" maybe will not arrive in the last 10 covers, but I think it was a cover worthy to be saved.
Re: NOT FAIR IN RAINBOW AWARDS...
So, I am willing to draw a truce. And simply comment, everybody has their own opinion. If you want us non-writers, who faithfully purchase these books, to vote on covers, then it should stay that way. If you want a jury to select what stays, and what goes, then, don't have us vote.
Re: NOT FAIR IN RAINBOW AWARDS...
More than one time I kindly asked people to be fair, to not doing strange "games", but that didn't happen, and so I had to take a decision: an external jury, without connection to authors or artists, but with skills to judge, was the less dramatic choice (the other choice was to close the contest).