2013 Audioverse Awards results are up...

That award show that's all about audio dramas released their results.

http://www.audioverseawards.com/blog...wards-results/

So, I'll just spoil it for you now and tell you that out of the categories we were nominated for, we lost each and every time.

If you're wondering who was on the voting committee? All the audio producers and crew of these shows.

--------------------------------------------------------

Many of you are fans of other audio dramas, and so maybe some of these other shows might interest you, and maybe you should check them out and compare. This isn't our first loss in these types of competitions, and won't be our last either. I still think we're the best on the block, and have you all to show for our continued success.

Fucking rigged! Here we go again with these incestuous pinheads. They can wipe their asses with their awards... WA is King in the court of public opinion...

That sounds a bit biased/unbalanced....surely the audio drama with the largest crew would win the different awards....unless they couldn't vote for themselves....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gooer

That sounds a bit biased/unbalanced....surely the audio drama with the largest crew would win the different awards....unless they couldn't vote for themselves....

---

Oh, they could, and it wasn't anonymous either.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kc

Oh, they could, and it wasn't anonymous either.

---

What a totally fair award. So, when are you going to be entered into an award that is going to be fair? lol

Swear every time i hear about an award for audio dramas, i hear that it is unbalanced/biased in one way or another.

Wipe my arse with the Mona Lisa and still call it "art"

This podcast is absolutely awesome, and consumes so much of my life, I consider it vital.

Us fans don't need awards or such in order to stay loyal to the show. I wonder how many other podcasts have to rely on "audioverse awards" just to continue.

[MENTION=1]Kc[/MENTION] you have a very loyal and continually-contributing fanbase here, and we'll always be behind you :D

When you do something awesome, as long as you are happy with it and it makes other people happy, then you are the greatest mother-fucking person on the whole damn planet. An award will not say that any louder than what is already in your hearts.

It's a lot like photography "awards". Photographers run around calling themselves an "award winning photographer" and then when nobody is looking, they email me or someone else that actually knows what they're doing with questions on how to shoot or light something.

The only thing that matters is that this is by far the best audio podcast in history. Completely groundbreaking. The fact that We're Alive didn't win simply makes the award look foolish and devalued.

Yeah, see I know of Gwendolyn Jensen-Woodard, and her Gypsy Audio, which has some fairly interesting stuff, but the production quality is NO WAY NEAR what you'd find with We're Alive. Aside from that, she mostly puts out short stories and adaptations from folktales or OTR productions. Again, not terrible... but meh. :meh:


I think the real issue here has to do with relationships and 'insider' politics. Kc doesn't seem to filter through the niche audio drama community near as much as someone like, say, Julie Hoverson from 19 Nocturne Blvd. There is a little established community, and Kc, for whatever reason (jealously, most likely) does not seem to fit into it. And so, when they come up with their bullshit little awards, We're Alive gets the snub. It really has nothing to do with the quality of the product at all; it has to do with 'who you know'. This is really not fair, in my opinion, because, from what I've heard, Kc is more than willing to lend his time to whatever podcast or website wants to interview him or whatever, no matter how small the audience.

It's too bad these people have to act as they do. Why even bother nominating WA if they know they are just going to slam it anyway? This is just like in the 2011 Parsec Awards when We're Alive lost out to HG World for the long form audio drama podcast. Absolute fucking horseshit. And I don't think Cristoff has won anything for the Leviathan Chronicles, either, even though it is probably second among production quality and story in terms of current long-form audio dramas out there.

Anyway, Kc... don't worry about it. Just keep doing what you're doing and stay true to your vision. I wouldn't be discouraged just because you haven't been acknowledged by some piss-ants who haven't accomplished half as much as you have. Take solace in the fact that you've build up a smallish, but loyal fan base who have got your back and recognize your contribution for what it is--simply the best of it's kind currently out there. Not many other people have accomplished such a feat. :nik:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Litmaster

Yeah, see I know of Gwendolyn Jensen-Woodard, and her Gypsy Audio, which has some fairly interesting stuff, but the production quality is NO WAY NEAR what you'd find with We're Alive. Aside from that, she mostly puts out short stories and adaptations from folktales or OTR productions. Again, not terrible... but meh. :meh:


I think the real issue here has to do with relationships and 'insider' politics. Kc doesn't seem to filter through the niche audio drama community near as much as someone like, say, Julie Hoverson from 19 Nocturne Blvd. There is a little established community, and Kc, for whatever reason (jealously, most likely) does not seem to fit into it. And so, when they come up with their bullshit little awards, We're Alive gets the snub. It really has nothing to do with the quality of the product at all; it has to do with 'who you know'. This is really not fair, in my opinion, because, from what I've heard, Kc is more than willing to lend his time to whatever podcast or website wants to interview him or whatever, no matter how small the audience.

It's too bad these people have to act as they do. Why even bother nominating WA if they know they are just going to slam it anyway? This is just like in the 2011 Parsec Awards when We're Alive lost out to HG World for the long form audio drama podcast. Absolute fucking horseshit. And I don't think Cristoff has won anything for the Leviathan Chronicles, either, even though it is probably second among production quality and story in terms of current long-form audio dramas out there.

Anyway, Kc... don't worry about it. Just keep doing what you're doing and stay true to your vision. I wouldn't be discouraged just because you haven't been acknowledged by some piss-ants who haven't accomplished half as much as you have. Take solace in the fact that you've build up a smallish, but loyal fan base who has got your back and recognize your contribution for what it is--simply the best of it's kind currently out there. Not many other people have accomplished such a feat. :nik:

---

I've never heard of HG world - another zombie podcast??? :O

Yeah, no. I'm sorry, but if the voting board was indeed stacked like that and carried out in that fashion... The paper is devalued by having the award printed on it.
It seems to me that this could cause more harm than good, even more than just undermining the legitimacy of their "award." It seems it would handicap the shows involved if they aren't getting challenged by newcomers and non "voting academy" nominees... all facets of production could stagnate. It also seems that it could also harm the reputation of the podcasting community as a whole. Nine years in and I still have to explain what a podcast is to people I meet IRL... I hope that this is something that those people don't hear about.

I'm sure they are all fine shows in their own right, but it sounds to me like the "awards" are merely an echo chamber of mutual admiration.
It took a moment to find non vulgar superlatives, I think I'm happy with that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Deacon_Tyler

I've never heard of HG world - another zombie podcast??? :O

---

Yeah. Go ahead and compare.... do the Zombie Pepsi Challenge:

http://zebrapix.wix.com/hg-world-entry


You can also find it on iTunes. Just search "HG World" in the iTunes store. A big part of the problem with this production, despite the fact that these guys put a good amount of time into it, is that they cobbled together audio files from disparate volunteer actors from all over the country, recording their lines in isolation, on a variety of different microphones and pieces of equipment. That is a good part of the reason for the disjointed quality of the production. I still think the audio engineer did a good job making chicken salad from chicken shit.... but it is no comparison to the sound quality of WA.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Litmaster

Yeah. Go ahead and compare.... do the Zombie Pepsi Challenge:

http://zebrapix.wix.com/hg-world-entry

---

Zombie podcasts are like women. I mean sure, we all would rather have a clean and disease free lady like Emma Watson (I meant to say 'our wives', but it always comes out as 'Emma Watson'), but sometimes you're feeling nasty and Miley Cyrus starts looking good for a side dish in between meals!

One guy that hasn't been a stuck-up dick like the rest has been my friend Fred Greenhalgh, who has been running his contemporary audio drama review show, Radio Drama Revival, since 2007. He has been verbose in his praise of We're Alive and has featured Kc on his show several times.

Fred also runs his own post-apoc. audio drama called The Cleansed, which is worth a listen if you're waiting around for another one of Kc's episodes to come out. The production quality is decent, acting is so-so (hey, the guy lives in Maine....what's a brotha gonna do?), and he has really put his heart and soul into the story, even though he is not as talented a writer as Kc, IMHO. Check it out if you have some time. :nik:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Litmaster

Yeah. Go ahead and compare.... do the Zombie Pepsi Challenge:

http://zebrapix.wix.com/hg-world-entry

---

They already lose points for having audio autoplay as soon as the page opens.

***

AAAAnnnnd I'm done. The imbedded player seems to be broken. I screwed around with the site and found what I think is supposed to be the show...
...um, no. Not impressed. I got as far as the kid... I think waking in the infirmary when I had had enough. Baaaad cut there. Fiveish minutes in and the story did not hook me, I felt more lost than anything else. The acting... well, I'll leave that alone. I only gave it five minutes.

But I will say this: I got a bit of a corny "USA Up All Night" feel... Normally that would be a cool thing, (awesome when you're 12, Buxom Blond Bikini Babes and what not) not so much for an audio drama.

This does not hold up. Especially when We're Alive is your yardstick. Pass.

I think it does matter and it pisses me off. Consider though; who else is making up these awards? There seems like a need for relatively unbiased awards by a voting body of fans (like the Hugo at Worldcon or whatever Dragoncon does). Which makes me wonder if there needs to be a convention or some way to have an accounting of activity.

Personally, I think the episode of Puck relating the events at the jail should get an Oscar or, um, whatever award is relevant.

the question I have to ask, (and im 1000% a noob when it comes to other audio-dramas, this is the only one I listen to..well, season one of leviathan) but...

if it were an unbiased, totally legit voting format...would it not be stacking the deck in w/a's favor? if we look at the other nominations, do they have the access to the resources kc does to record, to have their production levels as high? are they based in an area that is the end all be all of potential actors? are their stories as deep and rich do to the complexity of the story? again, im asking because I don't know. but when viewed in that light...yea. w/a should win hands down... just for those factors.

the thing I look at, and the reason I don't see being passed over as a big deal...this podcast is on such a different level compared to the others that it could have its own sub-genre. labeling w/a under audiodrama, while accurate, feels like an almost unworthy label. it seems like the majority of other audiodramas (with exception to leviathan and to a lesser extent, welcome to night vale) try to keep the "old-timey" feel associated with the genre. the sad truth is this podcast transcends the genre its recorded into, thusly the recognition it should get from its peers does not happen.

with a part of me being an artist, I look at what kc's doing in much the same way as when Jackson Pollack began throwing paint at a canvas on the floor instead of an easel. until his work reached a level where he had surpassed all his nar-sayers and his collegues, his work was not accepted and ultimately scoffed at. it was only after he reached a point where his acceptance was beyond what his contemporary's could achieve that he was welcomed by the community. in some ways(and in some ways not) that's what kc is doing. every aspect of this project has been very techno-forward in a very old-timey genre.

while im not inside kc's head to know his motivations, ultimately this project has been a way to progress his name and career as a writer in a field that's really, really flooded with talent. doing so in a unique way, and with the tools at his disposal. acceptance among those left behind you is really not something id concern myself with.

todd-0

motherfucking joe rogan!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Litmaster

Fucking rigged! Here we go again with these incestuous pinheads. They can wipe their asses with their awards... WA is King in the court of public opinion...

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gooer

That sounds a bit biased/unbalanced....surely the audio drama with the largest crew would win the different awards....unless they couldn't vote for themselves....

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gooer

What a totally fair award. So, when are you going to be entered into an award that is going to be fair? lol

Swear every time i hear about an award for audio dramas, i hear that it is unbalanced/biased in one way or another.

---

Lot's of speculation and hate flying around here, so I figured I'd drop in a set the record straight on a few things.

But first off, some introductions... my name's Landon Beall, and I was actually a member of this past year's AVA Team. :) Specifically, I was involved as the webmaster and oversaw the various technical implementations that were used during nominations and voting.

The way the AVA's work is that only people who work in Audio Drama are able to vote (meaning we're more or less like the SAG Awards). This criteria would include everyone on the production team for We're Alive (i.e. all of the actors, mixers, directors, writers, graphic artists, webmasters, PR team, ect.), and everyone else working in the same or similar production roles at other free audio drama and/or production group on the net. The overall idea being, that those in the audio drama community are able to vote for what they consider the best.

Now, does that mean there was any rigging or cheating? As one of the individuals in charge of monitoring voting patterns, I can definitively say there was not.

That said, one thing we *did* see was one small production group who only voted for their productions (and little else). In other words? This small group attempted to rig the vote. This did manage to impact one voting category, though the effects of their greed did not affect the outcome of the winner so we left things alone. But to clarify, this one incident does not constitute any rigging on our part; merely a selfish attitude among the individuals who participated in said attempt to rig the vote.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Litmaster

Yeah, see I know of Gwendolyn Jensen-Woodard, and her Gypsy Audio, which has some fairly interesting stuff, but the production quality is NO WAY NEAR what you'd find with We're Alive. Aside from that, she mostly puts out short stories and adaptations from folktales or OTR productions. Again, not terrible... but meh. :meh:


I think the real issue here has to do with relationships and 'insider' politics. Kc doesn't seem to filter through the niche audio drama community near as much as someone like, say, Julie Hoverson from 19 Nocturne Blvd. (cont.)

(cont.)It's too bad these people have to act as they do. Why even bother nominating WA if they know they are just going to slam it anyway? This is just like in the 2011 Parsec Awards when We're Alive lost out to HG World for the long form audio drama podcast. Absolute fucking horseshit. And I don't think Cristoff has won anything for the Leviathan Chronicles, either, even though it is probably second among production quality and story in terms of current long-form audio dramas out there.:

---

I can't speak for Gwen as I don't work with Gypsy Audio (I work with Pendant, in case anyone was wondering), but Gypsy only won in one category. And that was with next to none of their own members voting for their own shows (Again, I can confirm this since I monitored voting).

Additionally, you make an unwarranted jab at "...these people have(ing) to act the way they do." Nominations were open to everyone (fans included), meaning We're Alive was nominated because someone felt it needed to be. Also, the same goes for why it wasn't nominated in more categories... because someone felt it didn't need to be. And once more, the same goes for why it did not win in the finals: because enough voters thought another show was better.

We tried our best to keep these awards fair and honest. There was no rigging, no insider politics, and no horseshit. So, if you're wondering why We're Alive didn't win, chock it up to more folks from your production team (and voters coming from others) not voting for it (Also, for the record, I can confirm that very few people from the We're Alive team voted in the AVA's).

Some good news though: If it makes folks feel better about the AVA's, I can confirm that We're Alive came in second place in all but one category it was nominated for. Meaning you guys still did well. That's something to be extremely proud about. :)

If anyone has any questions of comments about anything I just said, please let me know! I'm more than happy to answer them: negative or positive. :)

[MENTION=8670]Beallman[/MENTION]

good on you for taking the time to post that.

[MENTION=8670]Beallman[/MENTION] which categories were they?

Thanks for setting the record straight btw :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beallman

Lot's of speculation and hate flying around here, so I figured I'd drop in a set the record straight on a few things.

But first off, some introductions... my name's Landon Beall, and I was actually a member of this past year's AVA Team. :) Specifically, I was involved as the webmaster and oversaw the various technical implementations that were used during nominations and voting.

The way the AVA's work is that only people who work in Audio Drama are able to vote (meaning we're more or less like the SAG Awards). This criteria would include everyone on the production team for We're Alive (i.e. all of the actors, mixers, directors, writers, graphic artists, webmasters, PR team, ect.), and everyone else working in the same or similar production roles at other free audio drama and/or production group on the net. The overall idea being, that those in the audio drama community are able to vote for what they consider the best.

Now, does that mean there was any rigging or cheating? As one of the individuals in charge of monitoring voting patterns, I can definitively say there was not.

That said, one thing we *did* see was one small production group who only voted for their productions (and little else). In other words? This small group attempted to rig the vote. This did manage to impact one voting category, though the effects of their greed did not affect the outcome of the winner so we left things alone. But to clarify, this one incident does not constitute any rigging on our part; merely a selfish attitude among the individuals who participated in said attempt to rig the vote.



I can't speak for Gwen as I don't work with Gypsy Audio (I work with Pendant, in case anyone was wondering), but Gypsy only won in one category. And that was with next to none of their own members voting for their own shows (Again, I can confirm this since I monitored voting).

Additionally, you make an unwarranted jab at "...these people have(ing) to act the way they do." Nominations were open to everyone (fans included), meaning We're Alive was nominated because someone felt it needed to be. Also, the same goes for why it wasn't nominated in more categories... because someone felt it didn't need to be. And once more, the same goes for why it did not win in the finals: because enough voters thought another show was better.

We tried our best to keep these awards fair and honest. There was no rigging, no insider politics, and no horseshit. So, if you're wondering why We're Alive didn't win, chock it up to more folks from your production team (and voters coming from others) not voting for it (Also, for the record, I can confirm that very few people from the We're Alive team voted in the AVA's).

Some good news though: If it makes folks feel better about the AVA's, I can confirm that We're Alive came in second place in all but one category it was nominated for. Meaning you guys still did well. That's something to be extremely proud about. :)

If anyone has any questions of comments about anything I just said, please let me know! I'm more than happy to answer them: negative or positive. :)

---

Ok, kinda clears it up a bit for me. I would of assumed if they could vote, everyone would vote for themselves. But at least we came 2nd....

I still blame Joe Rogan. #StitcherFiascoAllOverAgain

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beallman

So, if you're wondering why We're Alive didn't win, chock it up to more folks from your production team (and voters coming from others) not voting for it (Also, for the record, I can confirm that very few people from the We're Alive team voted in the AVA's).

---

As far as I know I think I was the only one who voted on our team. I felt one vote per production was fitting. In fact I didn't even nominate us for anything. I let whoever thought we deserved something do that. I still voted for us in the categories I think we excel in, which is biased considering I am the lead of this project but honest because I did listen to the other nominees.

Perhaps posting the result here just opened it up for criticism because everyone here, is here because they love our show. At the same time they're also big audio-drama fans, so reactions shouldn't be just passed off either. These reactions of the fans aren't specifically shared by the WA production team, but I agree there could be improvements for next time.

1. We have a crew of about 8 and about 88 actors... Vote stacking is easy, but also almost impossible NOT to. If any other audio drama production is voting, they WILL vote for themselves. Perhaps limiting votes per production would circumvent that. It's the only way to truly balance it out. OR, just not count the votes that are self-categories. If you open it up to public voting, then it becomes a spam contest.

2. Let the production nominated choose 15 to 30 second samples that best fit the entry being judged for that category. It's near impossible to know who an actor is in a production sometimes, so to have a segment with their best performance makes sense. Our production is currently about 43 hours long. Can anyone easily find segments? No. That goes for every other category as well. Nominated for music, have a segment that shows your best use of music. Sure, this would require some work from the productions, but is very essential. If they don't provide the segments for the nominees, then they don't qualify. How else would people properly vote for who deserves it? Comparing this competition to SAG awards isn't fair because you have faces to match, and those entries are only 2 hours long.

The goal of having this competition should be to expose people to the best of the best, and would be a great way to share listeners.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kc

We have a crew of about 8 and about 88 actors...

---

Holy.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kc

Vote stacking is easy, but also almost impossible NOT to. If any other audio drama production is voting, they WILL vote for themselves. Perhaps limiting votes per production would circumvent that. It's the only way to truly balance it out. OR, just not count the votes that are self-categories. If you open it up to public voting, then it becomes a spam contest.

2. Let the production nominated choose 15 to 30 second samples that best fit the entry being judged for that category. It's near impossible to know who an actor is in a production sometimes, so to have a segment with their best performance makes sense. Our production is currently about 43 hours long. Can anyone easily find segments? No. That goes for every other category as well. Nominated for music, have a segment that shows your best use of music. Sure, this would require some work from the productions, but is very essential. If they don't provide the segments for the nominees, then they don't qualify. How else would people properly vote for who deserves it? Comparing this competition to SAG awards isn't fair because you have faces to match, and those entries are only 2 hours long.

The goal of having this competition should be to expose people to the best of the best, and would be a great way to share listeners.

---

I thought that maybe they could make them vote for others, instead of your own piece of work, to prevent biased voting: If everyone else voted for one drama, that would be the winner (obviously). Why would they need their own votes to bolster that win? I understand it could make or break a victory, but still....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kc

As far as I know I think I was the only one who voted on our team. I felt one vote per production was fitting. In fact I didn't even nominate us for anything. I let whoever thought we deserved something do that. I still voted for us in the categories I think we excel in, which is biased considering I am the lead of this project but honest because I did listen to the other nominees.

Perhaps posting the result here just opened it up for criticism because everyone here, is here because they love our show. At the same time they're also big audio-drama fans, so reactions shouldn't be just passed off either. These reactions of the fans aren't specifically shared by the WA production team, but I agree there could be improvements for next time.

1. We have a crew of about 8 and about 88 actors... Vote stacking is easy, but also almost impossible NOT to. If any other audio drama production is voting, they WILL vote for themselves. Perhaps limiting votes per production would circumvent that. It's the only way to truly balance it out. OR, just not count the votes that are self-categories. If you open it up to public voting, then it becomes a spam contest.

2. Let the production nominated choose 15 to 30 second samples that best fit the entry being judged for that category. It's near impossible to know who an actor is in a production sometimes, so to have a segment with their best performance makes sense. Our production is currently about 43 hours long. Can anyone easily find segments? No. That goes for every other category as well. Nominated for music, have a segment that shows your best use of music. Sure, this would require some work from the productions, but is very essential. If they don't provide the segments for the nominees, then they don't qualify. How else would people properly vote for who deserves it? Comparing this competition to SAG awards isn't fair because you have faces to match, and those entries are only 2 hours long.

The goal of having this competition should be to expose people to the best of the best, and would be a great way to share listeners.

---

Thanks for the feedback KC! You have no idea how valuable it is!

While it thankfully didn't happen this past year, Gwen and the rest of the AVA team have already been discussing what to do if vote stacking does happen. While it's definitely a potential problem we need to be on top of, we don't feel like the possibility of it happening should be a deterrent for prospective voters. We should hopefully have a final policy verdict on it by this summer.

As far as public voting goes, the very reasons you noted (spam and vote stacking) are part of the reason we weren't allowing fans to vote. Though due to the overwhelming fan response, we're looking into some sort of "fans choice" award that we might be able to incorporate into the show next year, should it prove to be little extra work for the crew.

Finally, the suggestion of samples is a good one. But we purposely decided against it due to the fact that this is how the Parsecs handle things, and prior feedback we received indicated that productions hate having to put in the extra time in to produce said clips.

That said, we do have an alternative method of exposure in the works, which you'll hopefully be seeing some of later this year. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kc

As far as I know I think I was the only one who voted on our team. I felt one vote per production was fitting. In fact I didn't even nominate us for anything. I let whoever thought we deserved something do that. I still voted for us in the categories I think we excel in, which is biased considering I am the lead of this project but honest because I did listen to the other nominees.

Perhaps posting the result here just opened it up for criticism because everyone here, is here because they love our show. At the same time they're also big audio-drama fans, so reactions shouldn't be just passed off either. These reactions of the fans aren't specifically shared by the WA production team, but I agree there could be improvements for next time.

1. We have a crew of about 8 and about 88 actors... Vote stacking is easy, but also almost impossible NOT to. If any other audio drama production is voting, they WILL vote for themselves. Perhaps limiting votes per production would circumvent that. It's the only way to truly balance it out. OR, just not count the votes that are self-categories. If you open it up to public voting, then it becomes a spam contest.

2. Let the production nominated choose 15 to 30 second samples that best fit the entry being judged for that category. It's near impossible to know who an actor is in a production sometimes, so to have a segment with their best performance makes sense. Our production is currently about 43 hours long. Can anyone easily find segments? No. That goes for every other category as well. Nominated for music, have a segment that shows your best use of music. Sure, this would require some work from the productions, but is very essential. If they don't provide the segments for the nominees, then they don't qualify. How else would people properly vote for who deserves it? Comparing this competition to SAG awards isn't fair because you have faces to match, and those entries are only 2 hours long.

The goal of having this competition should be to expose people to the best of the best, and would be a great way to share listeners.

---

Tell 'em Kc-Dave!

Kidding aside, that is the most well-reasoned argument for something as subjective as a pat on the back I have ever read. That said, I still think WA got shafted. While it is more often than not buried below other things on my 'to listen' list, it remains one of the best productions I have ever heard, with some of the most interesting and unique characters. Perhaps, the next year will see an independent, non-biased group in control of the ballots. Perhaps taking the process out of the hands of the creators, and placing it in the hands of people willing to be--perhaps--more critical of the shows nominated. At the very least it should assuage the masses prone to crying foul. Perhaps a panel of writers and producers NOT associated in any way with the companies or actors on the ballot.

Someone probably already said that, and I'm just being repetitive.

#RoganBoughtHisStitcher

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beallman

Finally, the suggestion of samples is a good one. But we purposely decided against it due to the fact that this is how the Parsecs handle things, and prior feedback we received indicated that productions hate having to put in the extra time in to produce said clips.

---

That's a valid point. Parsecs wants slates and things. I would actually advise not making them clips-reels, but rather just a 15 to 30 second unaltered and unedited segment. No fades, nothing, but pure cuts. It would only take roughly a minute to export. Granted it'd take longer to choose, but the reality is that it would expose more people to samples of possible best segments. It's sort of advertising.

And of course, I feel I must add in that even though we didn't win I support you guys and the work you put into all this. Hope you don't feel that I, in any way, have any negative feelings towards you guys or the committee who put this on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kc

And of course, I feel I must add in that even though we didn't win I support you guys and the work you put into all this. Hope you don't feel that I, in any way, have any negative feelings towards you guys or the committee who put this on.

---

Oh, of course! Anyone who follows your work around these parts knows you're all about the things that advance the cause of online audio drama, including the AVA's.

And thanks once again for the feedback! Like I said before, it's highly valuable to everyone on the team. :)

Random sugestion to prevent vote stacking:
Create a panel with an odd number of judges - lets say 5 for this example. 3 people are experts in the performing/ technical production arts that are not actively involved in the audio drama industry & the other two "people" represent the final results from two open polls - one of the fans & one of the audio drama community.

This way if an entire crew or fan base decides to stack the odds they only influence part of the vote and are counter balanced by experts w/ a set if guidelines given to them by the award creators - and less of an agenda.

You could base the polls on the 15-20 second clips Kc sugested & the other judges could be given an entire episode (for a more informed decision).

Thank you all for chiming in. If just like to reiterate, the panel were NOT judges. We came up with the categories and tallied the votes. We had no say, other than our one vote each, in the winners. I felt that We're Alive had a good chance of winning. My goal with creating the AVA' s was to foster more community spirit, and try to be a closer group, rather than cliques. I do apologize if we came off differently.

Looking forward to next year, and more chances for everyone. This was the first year, and as always, bugs needed to be wrinkled out.

If you have ideas on what you'd like to see done differently, contact me. I'm always open to ideas.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gwendolyn jensen-woodard

Thank you all for chiming in. If just like to reiterate, the panel were NOT judges. We came up with the categories and tallied the votes. We had no say, other than our one vote each, in the winners. I felt that We're Alive had a good chance of winning. My goal with creating the AVA' s was to foster more community spirit, and try to be a closer group, rather than cliques. I do apologize if we came off differently.

Looking forward to next year, and more chances for everyone. This was the first year, and as always, bugs needed to be wrinkled out.

If you have ideas on what you'd like to see done differently, contact me. I'm always open to ideas.

---

.....and that is the problem - you have voting in what should be an award based upon merit and decided upon by independent and impartial judges, not popular voting.

Popular vote awards are never impartial or fair, simply because the numbers are skewed towards those nominees that put the most effort into garnering votes (or those that know how to use an IP proxy, if the voting is done online).

While I am a fan of the show, I am a fan of a lot of things and a fairly impartial person. I decided to have a listen to several of the podcasts - After all, if they won over We're Alive, they must be better, right?

I will not name names, as there are a lot of talented people out there and I don't wish to insult any of them, but it was not even close to comparing. I would not post this unless I truly believed in my heart that it was the case, but the difference in terms of quality in the majority was almost unbelievable.

Gwendolyn, if you truly want the Audio Verse Awards to be taken seriously, don't make it about popularity and instead, judge it based upon merits. Like an Oscar or a Grammy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Deacon_Tyler

.....and that is the problem - you have voting in what should be an award based upon merit and decided upon by independent and impartial judges, not popular voting.

Popular vote awards are never impartial or fair, simply because the numbers are skewed towards those nominees that put the most effort into garnering votes (or those that know how to use an IP proxy, if the voting is done online).

While I am a fan of the show, I am a fan of a lot of things and a fairly impartial person. I decided to have a listen to several of the podcasts - After all, if they won over We're Alive, they must be better, right?

I will not name names, as there are a lot of talented people out there and I don't wish to insult any of them, but it was not even close to comparing. I would not post this unless I truly believed in my heart that it was the case, but the difference in terms of quality in the majority was almost unbelievable.

Gwendolyn, if you truly want the Audio Verse Awards to be taken seriously, don't make it about popularity and instead, judge it based upon merits. Like an Oscar or a Grammy.

---

I'm guessing it wasn't made clear, we were doing like the SAG awards, where only those involved in some way in making audio drama could vote. It was expected that members of groups would vote. There was no fan vote asked. Here's how I put it, and how I wanted it "for the community, by the community".

I can see your arguments, but most seem to be based on a lack of knowledge on how the awards actually worked. I'm all for open discourse. The personal attacks further up in the thread though, were uncalled for.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gwendolyn jensen-woodard

I'm guessing it wasn't made clear, we were doing like the SAG awards, where only those involved in some way in making audio drama could vote. It was expected that members of groups would vote. There was no fan vote asked. Here's how I put it, and how I wanted it "for the community, by the community".

I can see your arguments, but most seem to be based on a lack of knowledge on how the awards actually worked. I'm all for open discourse. The personal attacks further up in the thread though, were uncalled for.

---

Those attacks weren't from me though. I only attack with kitchen appliances and small paper bags filled with poo ;)
I see what you're saying though. The facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/Audioverseawards had made it look as though voting was available to everyone and the posts made on November 29 and December 1 appeared to support that assumption, so it's easy to see how that might be confusing.

I can see that. We knew there would be kinks to work out the first year. I think my vision is sound, but it needs work on the execution. (Not the paper bags of poo....*grin*)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Deacon_Tyler

.....and that is the problem - you have voting in what should be an award based upon merit and decided upon by independent and impartial judges, not popular voting.

Popular vote awards are never impartial or fair, simply because the numbers are skewed towards those nominees that put the most effort into garnering votes (or those that know how to use an IP proxy, if the voting is done online).

While I am a fan of the show, I am a fan of a lot of things and a fairly impartial person. I decided to have a listen to several of the podcasts - After all, if they won over We're Alive, they must be better, right?

I will not name names, as there are a lot of talented people out there and I don't wish to insult any of them, but it was not even close to comparing. I would not post this unless I truly believed in my heart that it was the case, but the difference in terms of quality in the majority was almost unbelievable.

Gwendolyn, if you truly want the Audio Verse Awards to be taken seriously, don't make it about popularity and instead, judge it based upon merits. Like an Oscar or a Grammy.

---

Yeah! Nobody ever bought an Oscar or a Grammy!



















































:hsugh:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 7oddisdead

[COLOR="#A9A9A9"]
the thing I look at, and the reason I don't see being passed over as a big deal...this podcast is on such a different level compared to the others that it could have its own sub-genre.

---

So true. The only issue I have with WA is that it spoiled *every* other audiodrama out there for me. Leviathan has almost the same production quality, but story-wise I personally don't like it, too much hollywood blockbuster for my taste (we Europeans are smug like that); Dr. Carp Paranormal Therapist is also good in quality but waaaaaaay too naive in the story. The vast majority of the other dramas have 4 characters in the same scene played by actors with 4 different microphones. Now even if I find one I think it's good, it's like I mentally add "despite the usual quality issues and plot holes".
The only other one who was listenable was Edict Zero, and it went on hiatus.
Damn, I want to be entertained. I'm getting BBC's Neverwhere!

Neverwhere is a good story. I still like Leviathan aswell - the only thing I don't like is the chaotic release schedule. Mind, WA will always win hands down. :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 7oddisdead

this podcast is on such a different level compared to the others that it could have its own sub-genre.

todd-0

---

The categories should be something like this in my opinion........

Best Leading Male role in an Audio Drama that's not We're Alive.

Best Leading Female role in an Audio Drama that's not We're Alive.

Best Supporting Male role in an Audio Drama that's not We're Alive.

Best Supporting female role in an Audio Drama that's not We're Alive.

Best Use of Music in a Project that's not We're Alive.

Best Writing in a Project that's not We're Alive.


etc, etc, etc....... you get the point.

We weren't finalists ourselves, but as audio drama producers we were eligible to vote. The bulk of our nominations and votes went to We're Alive and Edict Zero, largely because if it wasn't for these shows we'd never have gotten into producing audio drama in the first place. In a way, to have that kind of influence is worth a lot more than any award. I think the AVAs are a great idea and I'm sure the organisers will use the feedback to improve upon them next year, it's always nice to win awards, no matter who you are, but if we could achieve half of what We're Alive or Edict Zero has in terms of production quality, storyline and output then I'd be more than happy to never get near another award in my life.