(original thread: http://goallineblitz.com/game/forum_thread.pl?thread_id=3721923 )
Greetings GLBers. After a wide search, in which over 50 applications were considered, we have decided upon 24 committee members besides myself to head the official GLB Hall of Fame. I say “we” because I worked with a panel of 3 other users to help me make these selections, and certainly the input and feedback they provided to me was invaluable. Their names will remain anonymous for their own sake. At the end of the day I am the one who made difficult decisions to choose some candidates over others and therefore I will bear any of the blame or hatred from those not selected. Without further ado I will list the committee members and then say a few words about how we selected them, what we were looking for, and some general comments about the process.
Commissioner
1.) tpaterniti
Members
2.) bhall43
3.) Bluehaze
4.) BlueWave
5.) boomer82
6.) California
7.) chili74
8.) Chugga34
9.) creeker22
10.) coachviking
11.) CTGuyton
12.) dirk41
13.) drazz00
14.) GMathiasf
15.) HALL OF FAMER Al Davis
16.) kurieg
17.) kuaggie
18.) Longhornfan1024
19.) lukin83
20.) ImTheScientist
21.) joemalaka
22.) robponce
23.) tautology
24.) tjanderson321
25.) turnit643
What were we, and especially I, looking for in a committee member?
-Well first was a knowledge of GLB and its players. We felt that committee members at the very least needed to understand what constituted an elite player and how one could determine whether a player was or was not one based on stats and game film. Almost every applicant displayed this knowledge on some level although some greatly excelled in this area.
-Second was a commitment to the method of research and discussion that would encompass the role of a committee member. As with the first criterion, most applicants displayed their commitment to impartiality and discussion, though some presented their case more impressively than others.
-Third was a willingness to put forth great effort in debate and the maturity to engage people with dissenting opinions, and perhaps even strong ones, in prolonged and productive debates. Several accepted committee members distinguished themselves in this area, although that is not at all to say that a large number of people who applied lacked these qualities.
-Fourth was a commitment to the integrity of the game and to approaching it in a manner of fairness and the spirit in which it was intended to be played. For me especially, any connection with a blatant attempt to cheat, collude, or game the system, especially if such action was serious enough to warrant some sort of official GLB sanction or penalty, was enough to give me serious pause. Many users take their dots very seriously and will take the Hall of Fame very seriously, and for certain applicants, although it was not a given that they would repeat past transgressions, it was simply not worth risking the credibility of the committee.
-Fifth was past experience with custom leagues, unofficial drafts, and other elaborate forms of rankings. To me this showed the skills needed to be a committee member: organization, people skills, a willingness to work, an ability to research (in some cases), and experience in the kinds of issues and problems that arise when trying to rank players or teams. Certainly though there are committee members who did not have this experience and others who had it but were not accepted for various other reasons.
At the end of the day this process was an accurate (and somewhat painful) exercise in how the committee will actually work. For we did not really encounter a wealth of underqualified applicants. Almost every single one was very qualified, and the issue then became not finding 24 qualified users, but narrowing down the 24 MOST qualified users, people who we felt had the total package and who had it more so than the others who applied. The wealth of applicants gave us this luxury, but at the same time it means that a great many very qualified users will be disappointed. For this I am sorry. I wish I could have accepted more, but I felt that a larger committee would have been detrimental to healthy debate.
A brief reminder to the user base that these committee members will not be selecting final inductees. They will be both collecting nominations from you the user base and also making nominations themselves, narrowing them down, then presenting the smaller list back to the user base to vote on. They have committed to complete this task with impartiality, integrity, and dedication.
Greetings GLBers. After a wide search, in which over 50 applications were considered, we have decided upon 24 committee members besides myself to head the official GLB Hall of Fame. I say “we” because I worked with a panel of 3 other users to help me make these selections, and certainly the input and feedback they provided to me was invaluable. Their names will remain anonymous for their own sake. At the end of the day I am the one who made difficult decisions to choose some candidates over others and therefore I will bear any of the blame or hatred from those not selected. Without further ado I will list the committee members and then say a few words about how we selected them, what we were looking for, and some general comments about the process.
Commissioner
1.) tpaterniti
Members
2.) bhall43
3.) Bluehaze
4.) BlueWave
5.) boomer82
6.) California
7.) chili74
8.) Chugga34
9.) creeker22
10.) coachviking
11.) CTGuyton
12.) dirk41
13.) drazz00
14.) GMathiasf
15.) HALL OF FAMER Al Davis
16.) kurieg
17.) kuaggie
18.) Longhornfan1024
19.) lukin83
20.) ImTheScientist
21.) joemalaka
22.) robponce
23.) tautology
24.) tjanderson321
25.) turnit643
What were we, and especially I, looking for in a committee member?
-Well first was a knowledge of GLB and its players. We felt that committee members at the very least needed to understand what constituted an elite player and how one could determine whether a player was or was not one based on stats and game film. Almost every applicant displayed this knowledge on some level although some greatly excelled in this area.
-Second was a commitment to the method of research and discussion that would encompass the role of a committee member. As with the first criterion, most applicants displayed their commitment to impartiality and discussion, though some presented their case more impressively than others.
-Third was a willingness to put forth great effort in debate and the maturity to engage people with dissenting opinions, and perhaps even strong ones, in prolonged and productive debates. Several accepted committee members distinguished themselves in this area, although that is not at all to say that a large number of people who applied lacked these qualities.
-Fourth was a commitment to the integrity of the game and to approaching it in a manner of fairness and the spirit in which it was intended to be played. For me especially, any connection with a blatant attempt to cheat, collude, or game the system, especially if such action was serious enough to warrant some sort of official GLB sanction or penalty, was enough to give me serious pause. Many users take their dots very seriously and will take the Hall of Fame very seriously, and for certain applicants, although it was not a given that they would repeat past transgressions, it was simply not worth risking the credibility of the committee.
-Fifth was past experience with custom leagues, unofficial drafts, and other elaborate forms of rankings. To me this showed the skills needed to be a committee member: organization, people skills, a willingness to work, an ability to research (in some cases), and experience in the kinds of issues and problems that arise when trying to rank players or teams. Certainly though there are committee members who did not have this experience and others who had it but were not accepted for various other reasons.
At the end of the day this process was an accurate (and somewhat painful) exercise in how the committee will actually work. For we did not really encounter a wealth of underqualified applicants. Almost every single one was very qualified, and the issue then became not finding 24 qualified users, but narrowing down the 24 MOST qualified users, people who we felt had the total package and who had it more so than the others who applied. The wealth of applicants gave us this luxury, but at the same time it means that a great many very qualified users will be disappointed. For this I am sorry. I wish I could have accepted more, but I felt that a larger committee would have been detrimental to healthy debate.
A brief reminder to the user base that these committee members will not be selecting final inductees. They will be both collecting nominations from you the user base and also making nominations themselves, narrowing them down, then presenting the smaller list back to the user base to vote on. They have committed to complete this task with impartiality, integrity, and dedication.
Edited by tpaterniti on Feb 5, 2010 23:23:45
Edited by tpaterniti on Jan 31, 2010 23:58:01
