Should journals get awards? Who should choose them? What do you think of the diarist.net awards, and how would you change the way awards are chosen?

-- Anonymous, August 01, 1999

Answers

Beth, I think these awards will one day be actual peer-awards as they are intended to be, when more people participate and the bugs in the categories and voting procedures are worked out.

I agree that long-time journalers should be the ones nominated for these awards. Maybe at least 2 years (more?) of continous journaling should be a requirement... My main problem with your nomination, though, is that your previous journals' archives (for which you were nominated) aren't even *up*. That is already a requirement for the award, if I'm not mistaken.

That said, you were my first OLJ, so it seems just peachy keen for DJR to be nominated. So many of us are new (I've been online just over a year) that you seem like fine legacy material.

Viv

-- Anonymous, August 01, 1999

Frankly, what amazes me most is how few people seem to be bothering to read the official rules for the awards. The Legacy Award definition explicitly states that it can even be given to sites that are no longer online at all, provided that there's general agreement as to whodunnit.

-- Anonymous, August 01, 1999

Actually, Viv, DJR wasn't nominated -- it was If You See Her, Say Hello that was nominated.

But it just so happens that I'm going through both journals right now, doing some clean-up in preparation for putting the archives back up. It may take a while, though.

-- Anonymous, August 01, 1999

My opinion on this FEELS confusing, but maybe after I get it written out, it won't be confusing at all. (=

I think the awards are a tad bit imbalanced. It reminds me a bit of homecoming dance in high school. There are over 1000 or 1300 journals out there (what's the current stat?), someone that very possibly deserves an award is getting missed.

Hey, I haven't been around that long... three months isn't incredibly long, so maybe I just don't know what the hell I'm talking about, but it just seems to me that with the way things stand, people that read each others journals and who are read by the majority of the others are the ones that are going to get nominations/votes. Which some might say is the way it should be, but I just happen to disagree.

With over 1000 journals out there, what number of those are included in these that have been read and are reading others? Who's being missed?

That's just my opinion, as I look at the list of people that have been nominated. The list is comprised of people that I either read now, are on my list of "Get To Them!" bookmarks, or at the very least, I have heard of them.

But there are also several journals on my "Get To Them!"s that I have NEVER heard mentioned by another journaler that I currently read, and maybe when I read them, I'll find there is a reason, but I guess what I'm saying is they can't ALL be that bad, and my other guess would be that chances are that one or more of them deserves at LEAST a nomination.

Okay... so my opinion *is* a lil' confusing... I guess what I'm trying to say is that I think the awards are a nice idea in theory, but the cliques that do exist among the journal "community" will insure that someone very deserving is going to get missed.

It's just my lil' opinion... Like I said - I haven't been around long, so it may very-well be a crack-headed opinion... but that's just how I see it right now.

(And even though there are people out there that will maybe NEVER get nominated, this is *not* to say that the people that are nominated didn't deserve to be. =)

Congratulations, Beth! (=

-- Anonymous, August 01, 1999

I'm not quite certain how I'm becoming the designated defender of the Diarist.Net awards... but, for the record, several of the nominees -- in this quarter, and last quarter -- were of journals I'd never heard of, much less read. Allegations of one main "journal clique" are widespread and perpetual, but the fact that nobody can agree on which journals are "in" does serve to suggest otherwise... In short, if you think there are worthy sites or entries out there that are being overlooked, then nominate them! Bringing unknown good stuff to the attention of the public was much of the point of the awards, I'd thought...

With all of that having been said, the "Legacy Award" is the one award which, almost by definition, amounts to being a popularity contest.

-- Anonymous, August 01, 1999

Doesn't it *ALL* amount to being a popularity contest?

Well, not really, actually... because in my still so very humble opinion you don't pimp your own popularity... I don't know *HOW* it happens, but (keeping the high school analogy alive) I don't remember the popular people in high school wandering the halls yelling "I AM SO POPULAR I AM GOING TO BE HOMECOMING QUEEN!" OTHER people may have done that FOR said queen nominee, but the nominee, themselves, didn't.

And in a way, that's backwards of how the journal community works. If you're new, and you want to be EXTREMELY noticed there *is* an amount of self-pimpage that must go on to make it happen. And some people, me included, just don't have the time and/or the motivation to do that.

So, in that sense, YES, I do believe that there is a "journal clique"... from what you say, I feel you disagree, and hey, isn't that what forums are all about?

But there are just those people that have been around long enough to be known, and those that are willing to go in #journals and talk about their journals and/or whatever else they talk about to get people to read, and there are those of us that just do it, cuz we like to, and if we get noticed, cool - if not, Wah?

I realize this may all sound like sour grapes, anyway, and as much as I say that it's not, people still may not believe me. No, I wasn't nominated - but I didn't expect to be.

I guess I just happen to think that awards, in general, are silly things. It causes competition in an arena where it just seems foreign to me. And maybe that's what I should have said all along.

It's just silly. (=

-- Anonymous, August 01, 1999

My problem with journal awards is that I've never gotten one, which seems like a serious oversight to me since I am the greatest genius to ever walk the face of the fuckin' earth.

wonderland 2 - http://home.midsouth.rr.com/wonderland2/

-- Anonymous, August 01, 1999

Hmmm. I don't quite understand why readers without journals cannot vote. This would, I think, be a better representation of whose journal is really appreciated - rather than the 'she plugs my journal a lot so I'll vote for her'-fest I suspect some of the voting might be.

Having said that, I'm very glad Georgina's Just a Girl has been recognised, because I think it's the best journal around at the moment.

-- Anonymous, August 02, 1999

I think one of the goals of the diarist.net awards was a peer-sponsored award, which is why only other journalers can vote. I think they were trying to get away from the Whitman-style awards, where people who (supposedly) don't know much about online journaling give the awards. (I'm not giving my opinion; I'm just saying what I think the impulse was.)

But I think you're right -- I think a reader's award would be a nice addition. It could even be part of the diarist.net awards -- have one category that's a "reader's choice" award, and let non-journalers vote for that one.

-- Anonymous, August 02, 1999

The diarist.net awards should definitely be opened to everyone, readers, writers and stalkers alike.

As with last time, I was completely unsurprised by which journals were nominated - not because of the dreaded "clique" issue, but because a) only journal keepers nominate; b) the majority of those journal keepers are on diary-l; c) potential award nominees get discussed on diary-l regularly; d) the awards get the biggest hype on diary-l.

It's a flawed system, in short.

May I propose a radical idea? I honestly don't know how Ryan feels about the issue - I should ask him sometime - but my suspicion is that his award judge cohorts vehemently strike the idea of open voting down for fear that a) either they won't get picked or b) their friends or favorites won't get picked.

All of which is supposition on my part, completely unfounded in anything resembling, even vaguely, fact. Merely going on what I know about people who shall remain nameless.

Mostly, I'm peeved because I nominated Matt Sturges' hysterically funny entry with the photo of the girl pretending to get groped by Winnie the Pooh and it didn'

-- Anonymous, August 02, 1999

the whole idea of web awards, for journals or anything else, is so retarded i can't believe anyone takes it seriously in the least. when there's no authority, prestige, or judging ability behind them - literally anyone can do it. and when it's up for popular vote like this, it's just an extension of your hit count.

-- Anonymous, August 02, 1999

Sorry Shmuel, I admit I could have done some homework before posting. I suppose I was remembering MY argument in award-l against giving an award for a journal that no longer exists.

That said, I'm happy to see your archives back up, Beth! I think you are the one of the best things going, past and present.

-- Anonymous, August 02, 1999

While I think there is a value to peer recognition, I'm not sure what that's worth in a venue as diverse as online journals -- where you have experience levels ranging from teenagers to professional writers.

An award voted on by readers would mean more to me than one from fellow journalers, anyway.

-- Anonymous, August 02, 1999

I honestly don't really care about them. I know they're there, they're mildly interesting -- as are most burbs/webrings to see if there's anyone in there I'd want to read -- but otherwise, I just don't think of it as that big of a deal. The web is already so peppered with awards that one more just ... doesn't stand out much.

I'm far more interested in the upcoming journalcon, if we ever manage to pull it off:)

-- Anonymous, August 02, 1999

Hello Beth ... you are something of a legend 'round these parts and it's lovely to see you "back" and to see the ensuing excitement from people that I respect (hey Viv). So, I came, I saw and I see why. :) Nice stuff.

Now - this award stuff. I dunno - it's nice to be recognized. It's okay not to be. Depends on why you do this, I guess.

To the folk who say it's about "pimping" (what a ridiculous word, really) and hit-sluts and journal "nepotism" re: diary-l and all that - well, it seems goofy to me. It seems pretty straightfowrward, no? People come. People read. If people like they nominate. If more people like they vote. What's so complex?

If people want the more "quiet" journals to be nominated then they should ... um ... nominate them. And if they want the voting and other procedural stuff to change - they should get involved. Armchair quarterbacking is rarely successful - at least not from my chair, it hasn't been.

I'm long winded. Do I have to pay by the letter or anything?

I **LOVE** your garden journal - hope you get the sprinkler system happening.

Um? What was the topic again?

Be well, Catherine

-- Anonymous, August 03, 1999

I think perhaps the whole idea of awards such as this are a little redundant. I don't this Pamie, Kymm, or you, Beth, need an award to tell you that your writing is appreciated and recognised as being good. The number of readers who repeatedly read your writing should tell you that!

-- Anonymous, August 03, 1999

You know what else? I'm not sure what the "clique" is, and if I'm a part of it. I've never been on diary-L. I don't know who those people are, and I'm not even sure how to get on it. I don't want to. I have enough e-mail as it is. That's how I know the journallers that I know-- through e-mail. Is that cliquish? I don't know. I have constant e-mail through non-journallers, award-winning journallers, and journallers who never get nominated despite their great writing.

So, who is in the clique? Am I? Well, how did I get here?

-- Anonymous, August 03, 1999

Amen, Ms. Pamie. But I've been on diary-l on and off, for brief periods, and I'll tell you who the journaling "clique" is -- it's a rotating bunch of people who post endlessly to diary-l, put their sig files in every single message, get involved in every journal-related activity they possibly can (not that there's anything wrong with any of that), and then accuse ME of pimping for hits.

Bah.

I got my first "clique" accusation before I had ever been on diary-l. I think people secretly believe that all the journalers in Archipelago went to grade school together, and we all saved each other seats on the bus.

-- Anonymous, August 03, 1999

I'm a reader (for the last year or so), not a journaler, so I don't know if this matters.

But I just hate awards like this. I hated them when I was in an amateur writing thing (an apa). I agree with whoever said they're just popularity awards. I'm sure they must feel good to receive but are they different from email saying how great your journal is?

I don't check to see who won so I can check out that journal. The best source of new journals for me is people whose journals I like saying "take a look at this one, it's great."

-- Anonymous, August 03, 1999

Whoever thinks that the diarist net awards are all about popular people, I can disprove you.

I'm a finalist.

How many of you (besides xeney and Jolene, because they know me from before) even KNOW WHO I AM?

There. Now stop crying about not being popular. Just because I have the cool shoes, hairdo, and the cutest boy in the school doesn't mean anything.

heheh stasi

-- Anonymous, August 06, 1999

I know who you are, Stasi!

-- Anonymous, August 07, 1999

Heck, _I_ feel weird about being nominated for the Legacy Award, and I've been doing it longer than Beth or Lynda---but there are plenty of good journals (Gus', Diane's, Ceej, just to name a few off the top of my head) who have been doing it longer than I who weren't. If nothing else, Diane Patterson should have been nominated, for her seminal "Why Web Journals Suck" which points out all the defects of the genre as well as the advantages, and has had more influence on the genre than possibly any other one article has done. I can't talk though; I didn't vote for the first phase, the selection phase. I kept on meaning to, and I kept on thinking, "My favorite?" "The funniest?" etc. and too many possibles came to mind. Give me a list of possibles, and then I can decide fairly quickly-- and I voted for you, Beth, before I saw your entry about how you didn't want it--because I thought some of your defunct journals, like IF YOU SEE HER, SAY HELLO, was one of the most influential of the "defunct" journals. I knew Lynda well enough to think she might be embarassed to be nominated when so many older journals were running that she admired, and besides, there were other categories she was nominated in that I thought she'd like getting more.--Al PS. I'm the kid who drew pictures with indelible markers on the bus seats, on the bus that all the Archipelago kids were on...

-- Anonymous, August 12, 1999

So that was you, Schroeder! I'm gonna tell Lucy on 'ya!

-- Anonymous, August 12, 1999

Beth said something about Tracy Lee being nominated: I gotta second that. I realize her stuff is long gone, but it's the best I've ever read, journal-wise. I mean, she had the family drama, the work crises, and the va-va-voom! polyamorous sex thing before it became a 'net denizen cliche.

And nude pictures of herself. Big plus there.

I was on an irregular notify list she used to send out, updating on her recent happenings. Is that still happening? Anyone know? Anyone?

Awards, though? Really, I'm a Leo. I don't need awards; I already know that my shit's the bomb, baby. No need to gild that particular lily.

And diary-l, during my brief experience with it, was the same five people (NOT the big Establishment journals, either - just a bunch of indie scenesters) driving any topic within sight deep into the ground. Lots of noise, very little signal.

- H

-- Anonymous, August 12, 1999

I don't know, Beth. About these Legacy Awards. I don't necessarily know what they mean. Not to take anything away from Al, but I voted for you-- though I felt they nominated the wrong journal. It should have been Dear Jackie Robinson. Whenever I think of online journals, that's always the first that comes to mind. DJR was a great journal when other journals were just beginning to think about being good. Plus-- like I told someone in a letter-- it influenced a lot of people, created a standard with its quality, and through its popularity brought a lot of media attention to the genre.

Personally, I nominated Gus for the award, but it didn't catch. Maybe it was because the panel members weren't around when "Musings" was big. (God, even saying that makes me feel like an old timer.) It also seems like they are going from journallers who are still around in some fashion. Gus is still around, but Traci is not-- at least that's my understanding.

Even so, given those conditions, there seems to be a good volume of candidates for the award. Gus. Bill Chance. Tracings. Willa. Dianne. Doug Franklin. (There's a name I haven't heard who is surely deserving.) Etc.

But you're deserving too. Wrong journal, but right person. I wish everybody luck in any case. Hopefully this will all be over soon and we can go back to doing what we do best-- writing in our journals.

-- Anonymous, August 12, 1999

Popularity -- perhaps the journals that seem to be the "popular" ones are such (and have such a high volume of readership and discussion, and hence award nominations) because they are *good* journals. Nothing more, nothing less.

Judges -- didn't decide on closed voting for personal reasons, but because it was the only way to insure that this was an award *for* journalers and *by* journalers. What other way could this have been done?

Awards nothing more than a popularity vote -- if people are stupid, ignorant and self-serving enough to simply go and vote for their "friends" or favourite journals without examining all of the nominees in a given category before making a decision. Are people doing that? Do people care that much if people other than themselves win a damn Diarist Award? I don't think so. Perhaps, but I don't think so.

I think, like all other net type deals, the best response to the awards is thus -- if they offend, bother or annoy, avoid them. If you find them unfair and you're a journaler, you have the ability to join the committee and work for change from within the system. If you find them unfair as a reader, well, they aren't your awards, so whine elsewhere. Go call the Whitman folks and see if they find your opinions interesting.

Gah, I sound cranky today. I *am* cranky today.

-- Anonymous, August 13, 1999

wow. somebody mentioned *me*. Gawd, it's been YEARS, I tell ya. (you have no idea who I am, do ya? That's okay, I'm all old-school and stuff.)

I personally care not for awards, and don't care if I never get them but I *do* find them useful in that they point me to journals that I might have not fond otherwise.

so: inflate the ego of those who win and piss people off who wanted to win but didn't: awards are bad. but: meet new people and find on-line inspiration: awards are good.

They save me time anyway - does anybody even go to Open pages anymore? The sheer number of journals just intimidated the hell out of me. Where to start? Easier to go to the "best of" page and read the few there - I'm sure to find something I like.

What sucks about using the awards system though is that there are some really good, thoughtful, insightful, yadda yadda, journals out there that maybe 3 people know about and that I'd just looooove to read. But I can't think of anyway of including *all* of them so it's bound to happen. You do what you can and you try to be fair but understand that youcan't please all the people all the time and someone is sure to end up pissed. C'est la vie.

ahhh, it feels good to be back. http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/Coffeehouse/4668/

- t

-- Anonymous, August 14, 1999

Hi, Tracy (if that's really you)

I do remember you, if you are who you say you are. I took a peek and didn't see anything to disprove it, and the cast members fit. Why are you blowing the gaff?

Anita of Anita's Book of Days

-- Anonymous, August 15, 1999

Oh, I feel all like I'm intruding and stuff, being that this mesage board is about awards and here I go changing the topic and all.

Legally, if anybody asks, I am not back and I'm not writing and what are you talking about anyway? That Vixs person is just living a v_e_r_y similar lifestyle. That's my story and I'm sticking with it.

Off the record is a different matter.

Why now? Hmmm, different things going on in my life, been enough time (I hope) that the few looney stalker types have lost interest, and I'd like to reconect with some of the people on-line who I have lost touch with.

(now, to somehow connect with the message board topic so as not offend our Hostess for these off-topic posts)

I'm writing again because after I quit all these award things began to pop up. Nobody cared about such things back in '95 when I started. Now there are whole web sites and 'zines, etc. about the "community", special awards, listserves, etc. etc. Hey! I want in!

- t

-- Anonymous, August 16, 1999