Those Pesky Diarist Awards : LUSENET : I'd Rather Eat Glass : One Thread

I personally haven't taken an interest in the awards before now but Travis was curious about them and decided to check them out for himself. Travis, being the honest little creature that he is, feels that many of the finalists just weren't all that great. After seeing them for myself, I kind of wonder what some of the people on the awards panel were smoking. Who would you have picked instead? Tell me what you think and be honest.

-- Anonymous, May 13, 2000


Oh, please be careful. I expressed this sentiment a few days ago over on another forum, and I'm still smarting from the reaction...

-- Anonymous, May 13, 2000

I don't know WHERE the come up with some of the entries that are awarded. Ugg. The humourous ones are much easier to get into, but that's probably just because I can't relate so much to some of the subjects in the "dramtic" category . . . who knows . . . if I were in charge I'd award ya'. :) Best comedic-drama.

-- Anonymous, May 13, 2000

I have been warned. I know it was probably foolish of me to express an opinion other than favourable about the Diarist awards, but my honesty got the better of me. I blame Travis. No matter how much I may enjoy slithering in your brilliant god-like mass, Rob, I value Travis' lack of fear for encouraging me to speak out regardless of how I might be criticized on this subject. Yeah, Travis helped me make my own noose and I love him for it. I'd also like to thank Judy, who I knew I could rely on to be honest, for...well, being honest. Maybe my point to this whole thing is, why are we intimidated by these awards so much so that we don't want to say anything negative about them? We (including Rob) have a right to an opinion, anytime and anyplace, in my hardly humble opinion.

-- Anonymous, May 13, 2000

Grrrrrr! I wish I had been more on top of nominations (and will be from this point on, damn it!). I wasn't aware of when they were open or I most certainly would have nominated some of the journals I read. I voted, but had to choose "none" in a few categories because quite frankly I thought much of what I read sucked. So, here I am a little ticked about the whole thing. I'm of two minds on this subject: 1) It's elitist and doesn't mean a damn thing considering that most people who keep online journals never had receiving an award in mind when they started. 2) It is a part of the journal community and if everyone involved is going to be a part of it then the elitist attitude should be squashed and more journals looked at by Diarist.Net. And I'm not talking about only during awards time. I'm talking all the time. "DN" seems to be stuck with not enough going on and not nearly enough journals being highlighted. "Launch" isn't updated often enough and was stagnant for quite some time. The Jim Valvis interview sat in "Enter View" from Dec. 3 1999 until May 2000. "Re Entry" hasn't been updated since February. And "On Common" hasn't been touched since January. I think it's all stagnant, slow, behind in what's really happening in the journal community and quite frankly...boring. I'd like to see "DN" get moving and do what it set out to do - explore and introduce. I know. I sound angry, but my point is this: If they want to be the voice of the journal community...if they want to be taken seriously for having a knowledge of what's going on in the community they wish to cater to, then I suggest that they get in touch with it and stay in touch. There are over 2,000 journals out there on the WWW, but you'd never know by visiting their site. I'm finished bitching thankyouverymuch!

-- Anonymous, May 13, 2000

How can I answer this question without sounding biased? I can't so I won't. After reading the list of finalists, I screamed. After 15 minutes of stomping through the house and coming up with the best scheme for driving a tank through each and every person on the panel, I sat down and quietly read through the entries. First off, I feel the Sasha is one of the best journals out there. I find her to be more open, honest, and certainly better proofread than all of the "new journals". There's one in particular that says that the journaller is a professional writer but the journaller doesn't even use a spellcheck let alone proofread. What was the criteria? Maybe, I'm biased but I don't care. I'm tired of seeing the same journals being nominated everytime, and especially more than once for different categories. I know some journals that pour their hearts and souls into their entries but get overlooked time and time again. Sasha's in particular. Of course, I'm not going to mention that I'm on the hunt for the panellists and that I have access to several tanks.

-- Anonymous, May 13, 2000

Oh. And one more thing. I definitely think you, Sasha, should have been on the list of finalists. You give better rant, humor and emotion than almost anyone out there. NOW I'm finished. Hmmmph! (I really hate elitism) Fire up the tanks Travis! Can I man one the guns or whatever you call them? :)

-- Anonymous, May 13, 2000

Of course, I'm going to go and open my big ol' mouth. And seeing as I actually keep records on stuff like this ((*who I nominated and all that*)) I'm going to actually GIVE LINKS! Moreover, I'm going to shamelessly pimp my journal, a few other journals that I adore, and probably piss off a whole lot of people.

Sasha loves me. I'm allowed to be a brat. I'm good at it. And it's my birthday, goddamnit, and you know what I've got? A Visa bill for $110. That's it, thankyouverymuch, not even any fun mail. Colour me depressed. So I'm going to be a bitch. Just watch me.

Ooh, wait, quick disclaimer - Some of these sites that I'm about to be really mean to? I really really really like their authors, even if I'm afraid of them.

That aside...

First off...The Site Awards.

Under Best Writing, Tess, Patrick, and Heather were nominated. ((Find your own damn links. I'm too lazy for all this linkage shit.)) On this one, I'm actually forced to agree. All three are surprisingly good writers, a caliber of which usually isn't found in online journals. While I'm not about to say that they're the best writers, they are significantly better than most. I have a feeling that Heather will win this one, and, as much as I hate to say it, it's the baby edge. I'm sorry, Patrick, Tess, but that's just the way that things work. Maybe in the next round, okay?

In Best Design, Viv, Columbine, and Kymmi were nominated. Columbine's my vote for this one. To be honest, though, after looking at all three of them, I'm not too impressed by any. I don't read any of them regularly, and I remember why now. My bet's on Viv, but I still think that Joi's design is better. It desplays as it's supposed to in all three browsers that I've used to view it, in both 600x800 and 480x600 ((or whatever)) The javascript looks nice and doesn't take too long to load - I've seen it at 26.6 and it didn't take long to load at all. So, IMHO, the Best Design category this term is a flop. Big, ugly flop.

Then there's the much coveted Best New Journal. You get in this, and it's instant hits. So, for Algernon, Elphaba, and John Kusch, good luck. I like John because I can spell his name, but I really like Elphaba's journal. I've been meaning to ask if I can link to it, but I keep forgetting because...Oh, yeah, 'cause I suck. I'll do that tonight. That's my bet for winning. I nominated Travis for that, though, and I'm still pissed that he didn't make the cut.

For Best Experimental Journal, Catherine, Terry, and Ana are up. Rah for them. What the fuck is an experimental journal? As far as I'm concerned, these are all experiments - We change them almost daily - We redesign - We try new things, decide that they don't work, and then try other new things. And if that's not experimental, than what is? Needless to say, I didn't nominate anyone for that.

Best Overall Journal Is down to Patrick, Mike, and Rob Rummel- Hudson. I think that Patrick will win, to be honest. I nominated Sash for this one - I simply like her journal better, and think that she uses pictures and stuff like that much better than they do, but hey, that's just me.

Finally for the Legacy Award, there's Pamie, Tess, and Katie. I actually think that I nominated Pamie for this one. Not so much because of any real reason than because after you win the legacy, you're not eligable for any other awards...nayh.

I said I was gonna be a brat...

Ooh, goody, now for where I get really mean. (You didn't think that I could be any meaner in a public forum, did you. Watch me, sucker!) The Entry Awards. What the fuck ever. Colour me thrilled. Here goes.

For Best Comedic Entry, we have Someone Needs To Make Better Underwear  Covet What Was Mine, New Vocation  Inside, and Decorating Tips for Adults  Plaintive Wail. To be honest, I didn't like any of them. I don't even think that I nominated anyone for this. There just weren't all that many really *funny* things this term. Stee will win, of course, because he's Stee, and funny is what he does. Regardless of the fact that the entry in question isn't one of his funnier ones. Whatever, though.

Best Dramatic Entry is between Don't Leave Me  By Secret and Divine Signs, The Fifth Commandment  Headspace, and History of the World (Part 2)  Shelleyness. Again, I don't really like any of these. I'm seriously thinking that I'm not even going to vote this term, just because, well, to be honest, I don't really like most of the stuff that's nominated. Sure, this term it went outside of Pamie/Stee/Beth/Rob/Patrick/Al, but still. I suppose, though, that in this category, at least, I have no room to bitch, as I didnt' nominate anyone because of my own selfish motives. I wanted this entry of mine to win, 'cause I'm selfish, and seeing as we can't self nominate...Sigh. Anyhow, there's my little pity party for me in there, but whatever. I still like my piece better, but that's probably because, well, it's mine!

Tread Softly  Planning a Sky, In a Month  Jellyfish, and For Cheryl  Canadian Beauty are all up for Best Romantic Entry. Colour me unexcited, y'all. I don't know if this entry from Karen of Thought Experiment was eligable or not, but if it wasn't, I highly suggest that everyone consider it for the next round, because it's by far one of the sweetest, simplest, most touching entries that I've read in a long time.

For Best Guest Entry, we're given the choice of Daniel's Journal Entry Numero Uno  Covet What Was Mine, January 3, 2000  Bad Porno Music, or Guest Host  She's Actual Size. Again, unenthralling. Actually, this is another one of those categories that confuses me. I mean, who the hell are they awarding? The person who writes the journal? "Oh, here, you convinced this person to write a great funny entry for you, here's an award!" What the hell?

When it comes to the Best Collaborative Entry, as much as I hate to say it, out of the choices, (Welcome & An Experiment in Email  Plaintive Wail, Valentine's Day: A Chronology  Who I Am, and Drunk Talk. Sweet, Beautiful Drunk Talk  Conversations Among the Ruins;) I like Stee's. Again, it's funny, and that's what Stee does. Funny. Plus it has the bonus of being Pamie sanctioned. Stee, would you like to thank anyone?

In the Best Rant category, we have 19-Feb-00  Shamed, Special  Inside, and I Will Not Go Postal  Go Figure. Total shit, no offense meant to the writers. What happened to everything that the Misanthropic Bitch ever wrote? I mean, hi, best rant, there ya go. Her whole site wins.

Best Account of a Public or News Event. What?! There were no major events, people. Category is redundant this term. Not even commenting.

Finally, the Outstanding Entry. 3-Feb-00  Reckless Sleeper, The Dream  Sperare.Com, or The Fifth Commandment  Headspace. Correct me if I'm wrong. ((Which, I might add, I'm not.)) This is supposed to be for entries that were overlooked in previous rounds. Why are all of them from this one? Duh.

There you go. My take on the awards.

I'm going to go start a new forum topic on what makes a good webpage...Go to post in there. And yeah, it's still in Sasha's forum.


-- Anonymous, May 13, 2000

Wow, it's turning ugly and potentially violent. Cool!

-- Anonymous, May 13, 2000

Just ending my freakin' bold tag. I suck.

-- Anonymous, May 13, 2000

Well, so far there's no rain of fire from the sky. I guess the gods of Diarist.Net and their staunch supporters have decided we're worthy enough to live. I think Travis scared them with his tank talk.

I have to agree with Meghan on the "Best Guest Entry." What the hell is that? And on the "Experimental Journal" category as well. Everything we do is pretty much experimental and constantly evolving. But, I don't have any suggestions for other categories because I'm lame. Maybe best sex. I could win that. HA! Sorry if this shows up twice Sasha. The first submit wouldn't go through. Ugh

-- Anonymous, May 13, 2000

Y'all suck! Y'all evil! How dare you?

Heh. Just wanted to lighten the mood a little. Maybe it's because I'm high off finishing a new screenplay or what, but for some reason, this forum on the DNA hasn't bothered me a lick. Or maybe it's because I've had a couple of days of reading the ridiculous lengths people are going to in other forums to just chill. Beats me. :)

(And by the way, Rob, I think it sucks that you're being pounded on for saying you don't like the nominees. Yeah, my feelings were hurt, but it was never my intention to have my pissy baby moment in my journal dragged into the fray, and my intention was never to silence you, or even to go to the lengths some of those psychos are going to over this stupidity. I think it's one thing for me to say "Owie, owie, owie, that hurts!" and another thing entirely for you to be castigated for speaking your mind. I'm all for you speaking your mind, as long as it's okay for me to say in return, "Owie, owie, owie..." Heh.)

Anyways... as for the quality, maybe I haven't been doing this very long, but they were all decent nominees from what I've seen the last two rounds. (And I've only been around for two rounds, so maybe I missed the golden age of the awards or something.) Sure, there are ones I'm going to prefer over others, but that's sorta the point in voting.

What I don't understand, and will continue not to understand, is how the nominee process actually works. Of all the nominations I made this round, only two of them ended up in the voting panel. Among other people, I nominated Sasha for several awards, I nominated Travis for best new journal... meh, meh, meh, my list can go on and on.

I get that there's a panel back there somewheres that ends up voting on the nominees or whatever, but I just don't understand why they can't make it so that all eligible nominees are put on a winnowing ballot (IE, everybody gets first round noms, the first voting is to narrow it down to three in a category, then the final vote decides who wins.)

I realize that would require an extra step, and perhaps the awards would have to be held three times a year instead of four, but I think that would curtail a lot of the hurt feelings that goes on over this (in the end) ridiculous process.

But, hey, since I'm on a roll, I think if y'all wanna be mad about the nominees, you should blame the panel for it. Heh. Seeing as how anybody who gets nominated by nature of the rules has nothing to do with it, and certainly isn't making any statement of their quality on their own behest, blame the people who are making the nominee decisions for you.

As for me, I have no idea how I ended up in Outstanding Entry, I thought my entry was good, but I think I've written better ones, and I know I've read better ones. I do think, considering my competition in Most Dramatic, that I can hold my own, and if that's the best of the best of the competition, then it wasn't a completely outrageous miscarriage of justice that I ended up there.

AND HEY YOU TRAVIS! If I'm the pro writer you're banging on, say it to my face, buddy. LOL. Seriously, though, I know I have spelling errors and run on sentences and (see, I'm doing it right now) in my journal, but I don't correct them because 1) spellchecking in notepad is a bitch and I'm lazy and 2)for the most part, I write the journal the way I talk. In long run on sentences with grammatical errors. Heh. And sentence fragments, see? If I notice an egregious error on the same day I post, I go back and fix it. After that, I figure I'm revising history and should just leave it be. I can assure you that my screenplays and other saleable material are meticulously spellchecked, edited, and whatnot, and thus, bear no resemblance to what you might see in my journal. Since I ain't getting paid for the journal, I ain't gonna put the same intense level of scrutiny into it.

And that's my dollar damned fifty two cents!

-- Anonymous, May 13, 2000

(And by the way, Rob, I think it sucks that you're being pounded on for saying you don't like the nominees. Yeah, my feelings were hurt, but it was never my intention to have my pissy baby moment in my journal dragged into the fray, and my intention was never to silence you, or even to go to the lengths some of those psychos are going to over this stupidity. I think it's one thing for me to say "Owie, owie, owie, that hurts!" and another thing entirely for you to be castigated for speaking your mind. I'm all for you speaking your mind, as long as it's okay for me to say in return, "Owie, owie, owie..." Heh.)

Well, thanks, I appreciate that a great deal. If it makes you feel any better, I was in no way referring to your journal, not at all. I realize now that I was wrong to put my feelings in general terms when in fact it was only two jounrals nominated that I really had a problem with. I should have either come right out and said what I meant, or (probably better) not said anything at all.

Discretion. Ah, maybe I'll give that a try sometime...

-- Anonymous, May 13, 2000

I'm really happy with this topic so far. I knew my readers, of all people, would have no problem being honest (especially Meghan who is my own personal inhouse brat). I believe Saundra is right. Rob never should have been bashed for having an opinion in the first place and I just wanted everyone to know how much I appreciate your honesty. Especially since it's borderline violent. So please, continue being honest 'cause you all are the most intelligent bunch of violently inclined people I know. You too, Rob. Rage against the...whatever and be violent or something.

-- Anonymous, May 13, 2000

Eh. Diarist awards? I guess it's that time again, ah?

I wasn't nominated for any of them,and i probably will never be. Why? I don't take this whole journal thing nearly seriously enough. Or something. Do I care? Not particularly. My reaction to actually being shortlisted would probably be, "Uh. What?"

Though, to be slightly petty, I think my design kicks all sorts of ass, more so than any of the entries in the Best Design category. Then again, different people, different tastes.

Eh. I think I'll go back to reading the Sith Academy, now.

-- Anonymous, May 14, 2000

Let's see... considering the fact that I've been awake for nearly 24 hours, I probably shouldn't even be allowed near my computer.

I talked about this a bit in my journal at one point, but it was more of a bitching at myself for even caring. I wasn't nominated. Hell I don't even know if anyone tried to have me nominated. What I do know is that I really shouldn't care, and I don't think anyone else should either. The point of a journal, I thought, was for it to be a journal. Not a popularity contest. Yes, I have sitemeter. What do I use it for? To see if someone linked to me. That way I can put in a bit of meta saying thanks. Sure hit's are nice. Mainly they are a shock.

Did I vote? Yes. For Patrick, because I liked what I saw. I read his site. I like it. For Saundra, because of the same reasons. I think I voted for someone else for something, I don't remember. Mostly I voted none. Why? I don't have time to read all of those other journals. Someone said there are over 2000. I am lucky if I get to read the 10 I have bookmarked.

From everything I have heard, and seen... I might as well have just randomly picked people.

As far as I am concerned, if I never get nominated for anything, who cares. If I get nominated for something, um okay. thanks. I have been linked by other people, and I have ended up on the Bunt Sign list. That's cool enough for me.

I will say though, and shamelessly pimp myself in the process... I think that my Z ombie entry could have given Patrick's entry a run for comedy. And N ick is devistated that his entry wasn't picked for Guest entry.

I suppose that my goal is to be the only online journal to post every day and never be nominated. I am sure if I talk enough smack about the Awards I'll reach that goal.

Bring on the tanks, Down with the man... or something like that...

-- Anonymous, May 14, 2000

Can we say "politics" Repeat after me class..."politics" Good job! You may have a cookie.

-- Anonymous, May 26, 2000

Moderation questions? read the FAQ