"Is it greasing palms?" Topic

Well I dunno if I have given myself some bad press or not. But I read that bit about the Origins Awards and frankly I think that the whole process is very flawed.

Fancy……a company has to submit 8 copies of their product to even get considered? You dont even make in on the list without that. To me thats called greasing the palms of the people making the list. I was always totally against any sort of corruption when I was in the Police, and in my life since then. So I would never take part in anything like that by submitting the 8 in the first place.
I can imagine a publisher submitting one of a product for review. But 8 copies? To what purpose?

Oh…that's right, unless you do, you wont get considered!

But they are quick to say that its really the gamers who choose. The 8 copies just go to the people who decide who goes on the list for them to choose from! But even that gets my hackles up.

People should be able to choose from the games they like, not just the ones that provided the organisers with a free copy to put them on a list.

Note too, that the list is full of the usual expensive mass marketed stuff with GW leading the way. Many of the items listed are totally unknown to me, but obviously come from people who WILL give 8 free copies to get on the list.

To me its like paying your way into an election list and for me that is corrupt and therefore a moral issue.

As it happens this has not even been discussed between my publishers and myself. But if they were to inform me they intend to submit 8 copies to pay for my forthcoming Naval Convoy rules to get on the list, I would have to, for moral reasons, advise them that it is against my principles and therefore I would ask them to decline.

Dont we see enough free handouts expected by politicians and personalities, without it extending into our hobby as well? I really think its an appalling state of affairs.

maybe they'll return them?

No. Apparently not. Its not so much if it was three or thirty. Its the principle of getting on to a voting list by providing the list makers with a freebie. A review copy is fair enough. That's pretty standard practice.

Very much a moral issue for me.

I don't get the moral issue bit.

If an organization chooses a submission method of materials to be judged in their sponsored competition, then that is their business. Freedom of choice allows the submitters the decision on whether to participate.

Is the need for 8 copies to check for consistancy in the production quality?

I read on another topic that a panel determines from the submissions, which ones get voted on. They also do a road show with them.

link

And the secretary for the awards can be contacted for information beyond that.

link

"check for consistancy in the production quality?"

If that is the case then they should be returning the games. Or have them given away as prizes at the events. Or donated to a worthy cause, all 8 submissions from each company. But the way this sounds it seems the folks at origins get to keep the freebies.

Yes this does not sound right at all. Can you imagine how much stuff these folks have amassed over the years. I chanllenge these folks here on TMP to answer to this. To explain as to why they they have such a shaky procedure for being concidered in these events. And as to what they do with all those submissions after all is said and done.

8|

Howdy Papasync, you're missing some great gaming up here in NJ.

I dug around on the site I linked above and the information is right in there under the Mission Statement and Rules. One copy goes to the Academy Library, the others to the jurors who do the vetting process. So yes they are freebies for those who do the work of initial judging.

The following from
link

Jury Benefits

For serving on an awards jury, the jurors are granted free communicating membership in GAMA and free supporting membership in the Academy in the year that they serve as jurors. Additionally, the submitted products reviewed by the jurors become the property of said jurors after they have completed their work. (Divisions of GAMA may amend these benefits for their selectees.)

All that said, I still don't see the problem. Rules are posted, manufacturers are aware and can choose to enter their products or not. The benefit they get by submitting 8 copies (which I recognize costs them money) is exposure and potentially selling many more copies..It is a business decision, not a moral one.

c0nsidering what has been coming up from origins award in the last year I second both Mal and Papasync points. It is a baised process and too often the results have been silly. Much better the CSR Awards.

Why not send them 8 PDFs?

This is where Wargames Factory could really clean up in the figures categories. They can just send renders.

I'll be going now…

Hey that's quite a hilarious thought Squash at work! I wonder what they would do then?

That has really got me chuckling!

"I don't get the moral issue bit."

The moral issue for me Goldwym is that you do not reward people in advance, to give an unbiased opinion!

Remember they are not making the final decision, merely deciding who gets placed on a list where the great wargaming public can vote by popular acclaim.

The people getting the freebies decide who the wargaming public get to vote for, but not unless they get that freebie!

No gamers I know feel the Origins awards are worth diddly squat. Of course the winners think they are great. It's an attempt to get some people to perhaps show up at Origins. It is a PR plug.

For what its worth, in the business world of printed matter and website awards, they only ask for one item typically, and most are going the way of digital submission. Obviously you can't do that with figures or terrain but for printed stuff? Eight physical copies sounds very excessive to me.

"Diddly squat"

I havent heard that term in years, but its very appropriate!

An Indie Games Award of some type would be cool – one designed to let fans vote for games and products that are actually competing against their peers.

Of course, I'm relatively new to the scene, so there may already be such a beast and I'm just not aware of it. I know there is in the RPG world.

"The moral issue for me Goldwym is that you do not reward people in advance, to give an unbiased opinion! "

Is the issue giving one copy or several? Because even one copy retained is a reward in advance, yes?

As an aside, they would likely take an electronic submission of your rules.

"Note 2: If the product is published electronically, download passwords (or whatever is appropriate) can be e-mailed to the staff for dissemination to the jurors; or CDs with the product on them may be sent in."

Also, all opinions are biased. An extension of the bias argument is that since the Origins attendees are the ones voting, that the gaming public at large is being disenfranchised or that the results are skewed towards the tastes and biases of Origins convention goers.

"Remember they are not making the final decision, merely deciding who gets placed on a list where the great wargaming public can vote by popular acclaim.

The people getting the freebies decide who the wargaming public get to vote for, but not unless they get that freebie!"

I'm aware they are not making a final decision. I took the time to go to their website, so I could discuss this with some information. In the grand scheme of things this award is only important to the organization holding it and those choosing to participate, and perhaps those feeling disenfranchised because they don't feel like or can't afford to send in 8 copies of what they're selling, or simply don't like the idea of someone doing something they don't feel a part of.

To summarize my thoughts- The Gama/AAGAD people probably just decided that to retain judges/jurors for their ongoing awards process they needed to give them a perk or thank you. It is what it is. "Moral issue" is unnecessary hyperbole. If you don't like what they are doing by jurors getting an incentive for their work through retaining the submissions, set up your own awards.

Disclaimer- I'm not a member of GAMA or the AAGAD, and have never served as a juror for AAGAD. I've only attended 2-3 Origins since 1990, and the last was about 10 years ago. I had a bad experience as a GM since they screwed up my events, so have not returned. I'm not a manufacturer. I do know manufacturers who think that the awards are not worth their effort or product. I also do not take stock in the results of such awards, but I'm not going to rail against them for doing something they feel is worthwhile.

Its a good idea to have another way of doing awards. We could always ask Bill to set up a list of games on the TMP and ask the membership to vote within the catagories. TMP is after all a very wide cross section of the people who engage in our hobby.

"We could always ask Bill to set up a list of games on the TMP and ask the membership to vote within the categories."

This is already being done somewhat with the recent "Best.." polls. I would say opinion on efficacy of that method is mixed, as in all things.

"TMP is after all a very wide cross section of the people who engage in our hobby."

The question would be whether active voters on TMP represent a cross section of the people who engage in "our" hobby. Also, which hobby is that? It differs on who you ask. I would not go beyond the TMP membership reflecting anything other than itself.

You send out copies to get your product read by the Academy. It isn't payola to send a product to be reviewed by unpaid judges.

Do you think the NY Times or your local paper buys the books it reviews? Do you think review copies are sent back?

The Academy Awards sends copies of films to all the judges to be reviewed before voting.

The Library Congress requires you to send multiple copies of a book to catalog and then they send them out to other libraries, most frequently those libraries then sells those books. That is why my Ultimate Rifts has a Library Congress sticker on it.

If you want to be considered for an Origins Award you have to get your product into the hands of the Academy to review it.

If you want to market your product as an Origins Award Winner, the Academy has to see that product.

This wouldn't be considered greasing people's palms in any industry. Greasing the palms would be paying them to nominate a product.

It is a marketing expense plain and simple and any company unable to provide 8 copies isn't a professional company. In a print product that isn't POD, you will have more than 8 copies that you never paid for as overage from the printer.

Maybe…but the TMP membership would be a wider cross section than 7 people!

The answer is, and after 58 years I am very certain to almost positive about this, "That's life."

Frankly, the whole idea of an industry 'best' award strikes me as lame in the extreme. From what I've seen, whether some product receives 'X' award or not has almost zero impact on its sale potential (which is what really counts). I suppose it has some value to the company/designer who receives the award (an ego stroke, if you will), but that's about it. And as to the number requested for review; it's their award and their rules. If you want to play, you play by their rules.

An 8-copies rule certainly discriminates against small publishers, for whom 8 copies might represent a week's sales (or a month's)!

Jury bribery by giving the judge a free copy is still not a system which should be endorsed. If they need 8 copies so each judge can read, examine and play a game, fine. However, the judge should't be paid by getting to keep a copy of that which he judges unless it is something you eat in which case NO ONE will want it back when the judge is done. If you are going to do an industry wide awards program, then give the products away as prizes after the awards ceremony or in contests, pay the judges in cash, or credit for their time.

Serving as a juror should, in and of itself. sufficient reward without the need for nags of swag. I can see submitting one copy of a company's product for review. Pass it around among the jurors and then repair it to the library/museum for future reference.

But one copy per juror? No thanks. No need.

OMMV, of course. That's just how I see it.

Respects,

"Jury bribery by giving the judge a free copy is still not a system which should be endorsed."

???

How is that bribery? Bribery would be giving a judge one of the products free in exchange for his/her vote, not all of the ones being considered in that category.

Can you ask for them to be returned if you dont make the list? after all, that tells you they didnt think your product was good enought to be worth voting for.

"Of course the winners think they are great."

Some do, avidgamer. I don't. Oh, yeah, I mention it on my Web site. But you see, I remember System 7 Napoleonics' little fiddly card counters, and their winning Best Historical Miniatures one year, and how HMGS came to be--and I suppose, how far HMGS has fallen… It don't pay to get old, that's for sure.

Allen

Origins Awards????
Mal, I'll swap you an "Albury Tennis Club, C Grade Mixed Doubles" tennis trophy from the 1980's for a set of your rules. It's worth more than an Origins Award and is of far greater renown. You don't even need to send 8 copies, one will do.

I think that there are some great ideas presented here about how the Origins Awards could be much improved.

I just know that if those who have brought up these ideas, and those who don't like the way things are done now, would approach GAMA and tell them that they would volunteer to search and catalog every game, rule set, card game, miniature, supplement, module, etc., released in a year, procure them at their own expense, perform an absolutely impartial trial and judgement of the products, pick the top products in each category or allow voting on every product produced in a year, provide press releases, ballots and volunteers to man a space at Origins to have attendees vote on all of the products, count all of the votes, inform the winners and provide them trophies, press releases and stickers to put on their winning products, GAMA would JUMP at the offer and let this group do it!

So, let's hear some people step up and volunteer to do it right!

Steve

Steve,

Take a hike, buddy. You are REALLY missing the points being talked about here.

Of course, since you broached the subject, why don;t YOU volunteer to take the lead in this effort?

I'm not the one sniveling about it, nor am I the one slamming the people who do volunteer to do the work and calling them crooks. I actually know something about the amount of time and effort required to put together the program (or ANY program in this hobby)as well as the people and the organization involved in it. You obviously do not.

I don't know what you folks call it, but we call it put up or shut up.

The idea that judges get some swag is not new. It is done in movies, computer products, and in wargames… so what? The jurors are doing quite a bit of work, should they have to buy every game out there? That's just silly.

That they get to keep the stuff… again, so what?

It's not just jurors, you know. I was a GW Outrider, they used to give us $90 USD in swag of our choice for every event we'd run I owe most of my GW collection to the years I was an outrider. I was also a Bounty Hunter for AEG and AEG used to give us $10 USD in swag per hour we spent on an event. I also ran demos for SJG and they give me $20 USD in swag per event – really helped my OGRE collection.

Was I being bribed to push their products? I prefer to think I was being compensated for my time. It's no different with the Origin's Award jurors. Was anyone convinced to buy a game from a demo? I think so, simply because the games being actively demoed where the one's selling at the FLGS. Has anyone bought a game simply because it won an Origin's Award – maybe, the manufacturers seem willing enough to pursue it.

Nobody is a "volunteer"if their reward is a copy of every product submitted. That's called putting your name forward to receive the freebie perks of the job.

I'm also not snivelling. I have a genuine moral problem with anything based on rewarding judges for their….'impartiality'. So impartial that if you dont provide their freebie you dont even get a mention.

If the process is as you say, then there is something wrong with the process and its about time it was changed.

Tell me….if a couple of the 'judges' personally knew a product was extremely popular, being played extensively and breaking all sales records, would they go against the rule and vote for it to be considered for an award? Would they consider it a moral issue to vote for that product to be on the list, or would they consider it unworthy because they had not been given a freebie?

Indeed, can you give me a list of the occasions on which they have voted in such an independent manner?

Can you give me an example of the judges going with what their own judgement told them was best, but of which they didnt get a freebie, rather than what they have been given a freebie of?

In other words, show me where they voted with their hearts, minds and conscience, rather than the freebies?

You call it 'put up or shut up'….I call it 'show me the freebie!"

"The idea that judges get some swag is not new."

In most countries of the world that is called bribery, not judging. Is that how the US Legal system works?

Silly me….I thought all those TV programs and Movies boast about 'freedom and justice for all'. I must have miss heard!

BTW. This has nothing to do with not being able. It has to do with not being right.

The Hawk…..

Will you throw in a bottle of 1980's polish to keep it clean? If so I'll toss in a broken badge I have from my childhood!

Well, as a newish and smallish company, winning the best new historical miniature catagory with my range of 15mm Romano-British was pretty darn exciting. It also brought me a lot of business and exposure with new people checking out my website.
David

GreatLakesSec,

Dude,

I also know a great deal about developing and publishing rules systems and gaming products. Let's say a rules set costs $25.00. 8 copies is $200.00 USD of sales, just as an "entry fee" for the competition.

Origins has had it's collective head up it's backside for 2 decades now. GAMA thinks it is the be all end all of gaming stuff, but it isn't, and never has been. True, it gives out awards. Whoopee snot.

Anyone who throws 8 copies of their items out to the judges is simply whoring themselves out for a bit of press and a shiny bauble. I have a new set of Dark Ages rules coming out this fall. I will NOT be sending 8 copies to the GAMA folks for their "judging". I'd get a better return from spending the money on advertising in the trades than trying to buy me a trophy from some self-appointed guardians of the gaming world.

respects,

<<In most countries of the world that is called bribery, not judging. Is that how the US Legal system works?>>

Ahh it is not bribery, because you assume the judges want the material for their Smaug treasure horde.

And yes this is how the legal system works in every country. Judges are paid, evidence is given for their review. They don't pay for it out of their pocket.

And yes the US is not based on tv and movies, and the movies and tv provide emmy and oscar discs to all judges and they also have 0% returnability. When books are sent for review they aren't returned. No reviewer will go through the time, effort, cost and liability to return it.

If it becomes popular vote only, just remember you asked for it. When someone like WOTC wins all categories because they get the most votes.

And an ad in the trades is not equal to an Origins Award. That being said an Origins Award is worth more in some category than others especially family style board games. And it looks like Splintered Light said it helped his minis line as well.

<<Let's say a rules set costs $25.00. 8 copies is $200.00 USD USD of sales.>> Sales that haven't occurred are $0 USD dollars, not $200. USD Except of course they are actually negative since those books cost you money to store and the printer has to be paid whether they sell or not.

Your cost of manufacture should be about $20 USD and if you were in distribution your product would be $10 USD to the distributor. You send out product to be reviewed and posted in front of 30k of your market, even if you don't win.

GAMA actually tries to help gaming overall and they are a non-profit. Do they get everything right or course not, but they aren't hostile either. They do actually try and do good for manufacturers, distributors, and retailers.

"Anyone who throws 8 copies of their items out to the judges is simply whoring themselves out for a bit of press and a shiny bauble."

I have to agree with you. Its ok to send a promotional issue here and there. But I think this is something beyond that.

"And yes this is how the legal system works in every country. Judges are paid, evidence is given for their review. They don't pay for it out of their pocket.

Yep…but they dont get paid by the people who's cases they are hearing! Or is it based on the Roman system? The one who pays the most to the most, wins?

In other words, show me where they voted with their hearts, minds and conscience, rather than the freebies?

You keep getting hung up around "freebies" but really don't understand how the Origins Awards are structured or the scope. The jurors are nominated to judge the submitted products put in front of them. What you suggest would be akin to a painting competition where a judge votes for a painted figure he'd seen at his game store or saw in a White Dwarf because it was better than the ones people brought to the convention.

In another setting, I've been asked on several occasions to "judge", aka nominate games at Historicon and Cold Wars for the many awards given out to game masters by HMGS-E. I make my selections from the games playing, since that is the scope. Games that were not run because the GM couldn't get his game to the convention are not in consideration, even if they would be worthy of an award.

As I and others have described it is GAMA's show, their "academy" and their process. Participation is voluntary. If you don't like it or can't provide them a submission, participate in another awards process, or not. All awards processes are limited in scope by the constraints of the resources they have and thus are all biased in some manner based on the structure they commit to. As long as they stay honest to their structure and it is transparent, I have no moral or ethical problem with them. I would only agree that the Origins Awards winners are not necessarily the best products overall, as it is the best of submitted products, just like the painting competition or convention game examples I mentioned above.

I agree with Mal. In most cases that's at least $200 USD worth of product, and for most games nowadays it's closer to $400 USD or more, and only one is there for a legitimate reason (the library). If the consumer decides the winners, there doesn't need to be a vetting process – just a nomination to get it on the ballot. If it's not good, it's not going to get on there, and if it does, it's not going to win. These guys don't need to review the whole product and then keep it.

Not only does it only need a nomination, how many of the list nominated for this year, actually got the full vetting and reviewing process? Even if the submissions were limited to those shown on the list, it seems an awful lot for seven people to give full attention to. And if there were more than they rejected, that compounds it.

As for Goldwyrm's comments. I would still invite you to show me an instance where the best game of the year, was really the best game, not the best game that gave away the freebies.

"In most cases that's at least $200.00 USD USD worth of product, and for most games nowadays it's closer to $400.00 USD USD or more"

And of course you must multiply that by the number of products submitted, to get a true perspective of the extent of the 'rewards' these freebies really represent.

I think one copy should be sufficient, if it is required at all.

I also think the TMP Annual Rules Awards, by categories is a great idea.

It seems to me that the Perrys would have a great chance to win every year. They don't because they probably do not submit any miniatures. You have to wonder then, what is the worth of these awards if the best miniatures never get submitted?