GenVibe - Community for Pontiac Vibe Enthusiasts

You could change the title of this thread to reflect when each months nominations are in effect. Like adding something to note that December's nominations are open. Otherwise, people may look at the title in the active threads and not even select it, thinking it is the November nomination thread and not one for December, like I did at first.I would say keep the number of ballots secret so as not to sway people one way or the other, also.Thanks for putting your time and effort into getting this up and running. Keep up the good work, Joatmon!

Did MOTM for Jan get killed off too with VOTM?

Quote, originally posted by tnpartsguy »Did MOTM for Jan get killed off too with VOTM?No, not at all. Besides, the MOTM is semi moderated since I throw away all the BS ballots, (which so far have been obvious BS ballots) there is no rule against one person voting for multiple people, and there is no reason to stuff the ballot box since the number of nominations a person gets doesn't affect the random winner selection. So MOTM or not, as long as there is at least one vote, the winner will be selected from those that have been nominated. If nobody votes, I'll pick someone. There are plenty of people who deserve it, the hardest part is seeing who the winner is and knowing that all the nominees deserve it, but there can be only one.

Might be worthwhile to post a MOTM <insert month here> Voting Open! post after the first week into each month to remind people (since the winner annoucement provides a heads-up at the start of the month). Could even be a monthly heads-up bump to this thread. I often lose track of time (yes, I'm getting old enough to lose track of the current month for heaven's sake, or at least where we are in it. I still can't believe this coming weekend is Christmas!).Just a basic reminder, without begging or attitude This is a pretty busy month, too, so I would expect a little less participation.I still think this is a great idea, and thanks for running it!

Quote, originally posted by GMJAP »Might be worthwhile to post a MOTM <insert month here> Voting Open! post after the first week into each month to remind people sounds good to me. Guess that's your new job Quote » at least where we are in it. right now:There have been six nominations. There have been six different people nominated. There have been four different people submit nominations.

Quote, originally posted by joatmon » sounds good to me. Guess that's your new job Yes sir, sergeant. (Me & my big mouth )

seven people have submitted nine ballots, nine members are currently in the running genvibe Member of the Month ballot form

For February MOTM, so far there have been six ballots submitted, from six unique IP addresses, nominating five individualsI think the hardest part about MOTM is that all of the nominees deserve to win, and although I am always happy for the winner, I feel that the non-winners (certainly can't call them losers) don't get the recognition they all deserve. So, to make it easier for me to not feel guilty when I have to announce the non-winners, I am making a minor change to Rule 8.as previously posted above:Quote »8. Winner will be selected at random using a super secret random technique involving a high degree of randomness, which is both secret and random, and is a technique.Rule 8 is hereby modified to beQuote »8. Winner will be selected at random using a random technique involving a high degree of randomness, which is random, and is a technique.Here is the random technique, which is no longer super secret, or even just plain secret.First, I take the list of nominees and sort them alphabetically, assigning a number to each, starting with zero, counting upMy watch has a stop watch function, with hundreths of a second accuracy It counts up to 99 minutes, 59.99 seconds and then rolls over, stats over again, keeps incrementing. At some point I start the stop watch, and forget about it for a while, usually at least overnight, and it rolls over some number of times, it doesn't really matter. At some point I stop the stop watch and see what time is displayed, and convert that time into the hundreths of seconds. I divide that number by the number of nominees, and the remainder identifies the winner.So, for example, if there are six people nominated, I order and number them0 - userA1 - userB2 - userC3 - userD4 - userE5 - userFStart the stop watch, stop it perhaps about 7-8 hours later. For this example, we'll say that the stop watch, when stopped, reads 28 minutes 38.12 seconds. 28 minutes is 1680 seconds, and 1680 +38.12 = 1718.12 seconds, or 171812 hundreths of a second. 171812/6 (6 is the number of nominees) = 28635 + 2/6, -> the remainder is 2, so userC wins. I think this is about as random and impartial as I can make it, in this example each of those who did not win were within 30 milliseconds of winning, I certainly can't deliberately stop the stop watch within to a specific hundreth of a second, any bias (deliberate or subconscious) I may have is eliminated. Good luck to all the nominees, and protests on the accuracy of the selection device should be addressed to http://www.timex.comedit - actually, the timer counts up, rolls over on the hour, but keeps track of the# hours, so I convert hours/minutes/seconds/hundreths of a second to hundreths of a second

Quite a system. But don't fret; we trust you.

Quote, originally posted by joatmon »My watch has a stop watch function, with hundreths of a second accuracy It counts up to 99 minutes, 59.99 seconds and then rolls over, stats over again, keeps incrementing. At some point I start the stop watch, and forget about it for a while, usually at least overnight, and it rolls over some number of times, it doesn't really matter. At some point I stop the stop watch and see what time is displayed, and convert that time into the hundreths of seconds. I divide that number by the number of nominees, and the remainder identifies the winner.So, for example, if there are six people nominated, I order and number them0 - userA1 - userB2 - userC3 - userD4 - userE5 - userFStart the stop watch, stop it perhaps about 7-8 hours later. For this example, we'll say that the stop watch, when stopped, reads 28 minutes 38.12 seconds. 28 minutes is 1680 seconds, and 1680 +38.12 = 1718.12 seconds, or 171812 hundreths of a second. 171812/6 (6 is the number of nominees) = 28635 + 2/6, -> the remainder is 2, so userC wins. Ouch! That hurt my brain!Couldn't you just whip up a randomizer program to pick a name? Heck, I've got a dice simulator in Excel I could give you (will roll 1 or 2 die, with up to 20 sides each). I could replace a "side" with a nominated person. Heck, I'll even give it to you for the unbelievably low price of.......zero.

Quote, originally posted by ZubenElGenubi »Ouch! That hurt my brain!Heck, I'll even give it to you for the unbelievably low price of.......zero.yea that was a brain overload and too complicated for the rest of us.

So anyway, I am still doing this MOTM thing, but I get discouraged, and am tired of begging for participation, so this month, with no begging, there has been an underwhelming response of just two nominations. Also, winner announcement threads get less posts than there should be for these great people. In general participation has been meager at best.I figure the problem is with the MOTM process, because the alternative would be that you all suck. There has to be some MOTM process that can run with a respectable level of member participation that doesn't require constant nagging and reminders. The current MOTM process doesn't meet that criteria. I can continue to run MOTM as is, and if nobody gets nominated I'll just pick one of the many people I think deserve to be MOTM. I think it would be better, however, if more people participated. So, the MOTM process and rules are now wide open for any and all suggestions, post them up here in this thread, and then perhaps we'll have a poll or two to decide the process. The current process involves anonymous nominations, and the winner is selected, and then everybody is supposed to post up and relate stories of how the winner deserves to be MOTM, and stuff. One variant would be to still have the nominations the same way, but then have the winner selected by a forum poll. Another variant would be run it like VOTM, with a nominations thread and then a voting poll thread each month. There are probably other options. So keep in mind that Member of the Month is supposed to be a way to recognize the people who contribute to the site, either with info, a helpful or friendly attitude, good humor, or anything else that you think the person does to make genvibe a good, useful, fun, and/or worthwhile place. Offer up suggestions on how to change the MOTM process so that more than two people bother to participate.if you all decide to leave it the way it is i will still run the thing, there are plenty of people who deserve MOTM, so if a month comes where nobody gets nominated I will pick one of the many on my list, but it seems like it would be better if more people actually participated. but I'm not gonna beg for participation, people either appreciate or they don't, you don't need me whining about it.And nominations for April 2006 MOTM are now closed. The selection will be between the two people who have already been nominated. You can still fill out the nomination form if you like, but any new nominations will go towards the May 2006 MOTM process if the current process continues for the May 2006 MOTM cycle.

Perhaps you might put the nominees into a pool, rather than starting fresh each month? This way, those who were not selected in previous months would have another chance? I can see how after a few months the pool might need to be cleaned out if the nominations no longer apply....and this method would make things a bit more complicated for you to manage....Off to think of someone to nominate for next month. Thanks for running this contest!

Thanks Amy. Guess you're the only one with input Do you think I should take nominations and have a public poll for the winner, or continue the randomized MOTM winner selection process?

Why not try the poll idea? See which one gets the most participation Good luck, keep up the great job and like I always tell you please let us know if you need help.Sam

I like the randomized selection process because it keeps it from becoming a popularity contest. I'm wondering though if a public nominations thread might get more participation than the e-mail form method has been. I also like Amy's suggestion of keeping all of the past nominees in a pool, then just taking them out once they are the "winner" for a month.

At the very least, a monthly post with a little bumping so it'll stay on our radars (i.e., "Active Topics"). I like keeping nominations valid for a few months (say, three months?) to keep the pool of nominees filled.BTW...I got my nomination in for this month!

I got my vote in Did you

Just got my vote in the MOTM poll thread (how's that for recursiveness?). I wanted to clarify and explain my vote. First, winner random. I believe this puts the emphasis on the nomination process itself, rather than the voting process, which is relatively easy and and can turn into a name-recognition event.Second, nominee carryover. I believe that an MOTM is nominated for traits that extend beyond one month of participation at GenVibe, therefore a nomination should last more than one month. I would recommend a limit of three months, however, and no limit was mentioned in the poll.Third, nomination mixed. I prefer the anonymous process of making the nominations, but feel it would be helpful to see a listing of those persons eligible for MOTM each month. It achieves two things: first, it alerts nominators whether a potential nominee is eligible; second, it keeps the MOTM process visible by having an actively updated thread each month.I think the MOTM is a valuable feature of our site, and as an MOTM, feel a little more responsibilty to help keep GenVibe a thriving forum. Joatmon has put together a worthwhile process here and I hope we keep it running.

Quote, originally posted by ZubenElGenubi » I would recommend a limit of three months, however, and no limit was mentioned in the poll.I was shooitng for one poll, and adding a nominations carryover forever vs nominations carry over for three months would have doubled the poll options so I didn't specify. If carryover wins, then we can have a followup poll to determine carryover period.Thanks for the input, no wonder you're MotM

so far the motm options poll are atNomination hidden - Nominee carryover - Winner random (56%, 9 votes)Nomination mixed - Nominee carryover - Winner random (18%, 3 votes)Nomination public - Nominee reset - Winner poll (6%, 1 votes)Nomination public - Nominee carryover - Winner poll (6%, 1 votes)Nomination hidden - Nominee reset - Winner random (6%, 1 votes)Nomination mixed - Nominee carryover - Winner poll (6%, 1 votes)Nomination public - Nominee reset - Winner random (0%, 0 votes)Nomination public - Nominee carryover - Winner random (0%, 0 votes)Nomination mixed - Nominee reset - Winner random (0%, 0 votes)Nomination mixed - Nominee reset - Winner poll (0%, 0 votes)(16 total votes)so, that breaks out into the three items covered under the pollNominations - 10 hidden, 4 mixed, 2 publicNominees - 14 carryover, 2 resetWinner - 13 random, 3 pollDon't know how long I'll run this poll, but as long as nominations hidden and winner random are winning, I don't have to close it anytime soon.

I just marvel at the awesome power of GenVibe moderators, Joatmon! Quote »Don't know how long I'll run this poll, but as long as nominations hidden and winner random are winning, I don't have to close it anytime soon.---------------------------"As long as the incumbent candidates are still winning, we don't have to call a winner in the election." Maybe the VOTING should be hidden as well!!!

Quote, originally posted by kostby »I just marvel at the awesome power of GenVibe moderators, Joatmon! ---------------------------"As long as the incumbent candidates are still winning, we don't have to call a winner in the election." Maybe the VOTING should be hidden as well!!! I am not a moderator, but I agree, I think the moderators here are great. Regarding your other comment, I guess you didn't understand what I meant.

Zuben, do you interpret a three month carryover to mean that the May MOTM will be randomly selected from the list of members nominated since January 1, 2006?

Ack...you're making me think? My simplest interpretation of a three-month carryover is that, once a member receives a nomination, he/she is eligible for the next three MOTM elections.As stated here, persons nominated during February, March, or April (IOW, February 1 - April 30) would be eligible for the May MOTM.

Kinda jumping in the middle here, but I like the 3-month carry-over idea. I also agree with Zuben that people from Feb 1, 2006 would be eligible for May.

ArcsVibe, ColonelPanic, Mrizzle05, ragingfish, silverawd26, and trdvibe carry over for the August MOTM. So far this month there has been one new ballot, yesterday, for ArcsVibe. To whoever sent it, , thanks for participating

well, i keep forgetting to add mine... so I'll PM you, Joat with whom i nominate.

Get your nominations in for MOTM!!!

Good luck to all and once again joatmon keep up the great work it is appreciated

Quote, originally posted by joatmon »ArcsVibe, ColonelPanic, Mrizzle05, ragingfish, silverawd26, and trdvibe carry over for the August MOTM. Yesterday NascarXprt received a nomination, so he's in the running also The member I nominated is in the Aug carryover, so unless it affects the results I assume I do not have to renominate. Right?

joat, why are you not in that list too? i think you more than deserve the accolade automatically!

One of his rules is that he cannot be entered. I agree though, that he should be!!

oh i see.... can we nominate him for member of the year?? or just take a vote as a yes or no since it is more than deserved? you know, just make an executive decision by the rest of us! LOL

It's great to have hot women like you two think highly of me, but unfortunately, it seems both of you are married Maybe we should just let it go. Rule 11 is critical, repeal it, and it all ends

ha ha ha! well, can't we give you a different title? and if it's MEMBER OF THE YEAR, then it isn't member of the month, now is it?

Last Day to cast your nomination for MOTM for August.

Carryovers from June andd July nominations are ArcsVibe Mrizzle05, NascarXprt, silverawd26, and trdvibe. One new nomination thsi month so far, on 8/9 for zionzr2There has to be something wrong with the MotM process, to have so few people bother to post in the winner threads. It has to be the process, because if it isn't the process, then it would mean that almost everyone here sux big time

Maybe it's because the topic of this thread is totaly wrong.I spent the last three weeks looking for the August MOTM thread... none to be found. There has to be some consistency if you want people to continue to return and vote/participate month after month.

thanks for the input, something is wrong with the process I came up with, and all input is welcome, my friend. Still, I'm about fed up with the MotM thing. I tried what I thought should work, but it's not working. I figure the September MotM will be done the same as the others, but if anyone wants to have ar MotM after that, you all will have figure out what to do about it.

i have no problems finding this thread or using the search feature.

I can find the MOTM threads alright, but finding the link to the MOTM nomination form isn't always easy. This isn't a slight; joatmon is doing a thankless task that alone makes him deserving of MOTM.I have a couple of suggestions.First, joatmon, perhaps there is a way to reformat the bottom of each MOTM announcement post so that the nomination form link is more prominent. Bold, color, image link... anything to make it stand out a little better.Second, MOTM supporters should make some effort to publicize it more. For example, add a signature line that links to the nomination form.We have been seeing an increasing rate of new members during 2006 and I would certainly like them to see that we value meaningful and positive contributors here. I hope that the MOTM process continues.

is there an actual nomination form for MOTM?

Quote, originally posted by trdvibe »is there an actual nomination form for MOTM? Absolutely, and I have a link to it in my signature.Here is the URL:http://s93486299.onlinehome.us/cgi-bin/motm.pl

thanks! didn't even know! LOL

Good idea I'll add that to my sig right now.

In August, there were three nominations, one each for NascarXprt, northvibe, and zionzr2. In July, there were two, one each for ArcsVibe and NascarXprt. In June, there were five, one each for Mrizzle05, silverawd26, and silverawd, and 2 for ArcsVibe. A pool of seven, time was 8h 34m 48.13s, or 3088813 (s/100) 3088813/7 = 441259, no remainder, -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-GenVibe Member of the Month Version 1.0 SummaryThere have been a total of 78 valid nominations, for a total of 25 individuals, 11 of which have been highlighted as Member of the Month.:ArcsVibebinaryBlueCrushColonel Panicdrunkenvibe (now drunkenmaxx)GMJAPIMakeVibesJahntassaKariMavrikmillsterMIVibe-ToolGuyMrizzle05NascarXprtnorthvibeNSimkinsPHXLavaVibePOLOragingfishrasermonsilverawd26tnpartsguytrdvibezionzr2ZubenElGenubiAll of the valid nominations have been IM'd to the nominees, so if you submitted a sincere nomination for someone, they saw what you wrote, and all of them sincerely appreciated your gratitude for their contributions to the genvibe community. If any of the nominees would like me to resend their nominations to them, IM me.A problem that I have (one of the many problems that I have ) is that I expect to get more participation in genvibe events than is reasonable for me to expect. Sometimes genvibe feels more like a gathering of friends than the meeting place for thousands of strangers who happen to have the same car (and some who don't) The MotM process that I ran worked ok, but I expected more involvement. I should have had more realistic expectations, but somehow, the lack of interest in Mike getting MotM really disheartened me. I was never all that worried about the low nomination count, since all of the nominees have all been great people and have contributed much to other members and the site, and all deserve to be highlighted as Member of the Month. (I always figured that if nobody got nominated, there's plenty of people I could nominate myself.) But the lack of interest when winners are announced actually pissed me off. When someone like Mike gets so few responses, then there's a problem. No doubt part of it is me, part is the process that I set up, and part is, well, I won't say what I think about that. The whole thing was making me resent genvibe, and I didn't like where that was taking me. Time for me to take the site less seriously, and shedding MotM is part of that. I've also had some things come up in the real world that will be pretty time demanding, so I won't have time to nag about MotM participation, and even though I am generally disclined to do that anyway, perhaps that's what it needs. So I figure it's time for MotM version 2.0. If the Member of the Month is to continue, you all will have to determine what the new MotM process will be, who will run it, what the rules are, etc. There's only maybe a dozen or so of you that consistently participate, you should be able to work something out. I've disabled the old MotM ballot form, but I can modify and/or rehost it if the new MotM judges ask.As of this post, the MotM process is now completely undefined. An empty rulebook. Good luck with it, IM me if I can be of any assistance.

First of all, Thank you, Joatmon, for all you have done with the MOTM V1.0. I really appreciate it. I can totally understand why you are stepping down. I think the main problem with the lack of votes was there was never really month to month nomination thread for MOTM like there is for VOTM. I think that would have helped a lot. There was only this discussion thread and it wasn't even stickied. Again, thank you for all you have done for MOTM! Once someone takes it over, my first nomination will be for JOATMON!!!!!!!

I second what BC said. Joatmon thanks for all you have done with MOTM v1.0! it is a lot of work doing something like that, I appreciate all that you have done you have my vote too for v2.0

Thank you, joatmon, for getting this off the ground and trying so hard to make it work...we all really appreciate all of the hard work you put into MOTM v1.0. If v2.0 ever makes it off the ground, you will be my first nomination.