Next years HOF vote? How to get more people to vote?

[Airnut]

I have been very vocal about voter turn out and as I see it the vote was flawed from the get go.
The top four candidates were picked by a select few on a open forum in a matter of days. The general membership didnt have adequate time in my opinion to voice their opinions for the top four. There should have been a open vote for the top four. I do understand that to do this would be a logistic nightmare. I do agree that it should be renamed as stated by a few members. In my opinion HOF should be reserved for a very select few that have made major contributions over many years. GTA Airgunner of the year would be my pick and if you had one person that won this award lets say five times then that would qualify them to be nominated for the hall of fame vote.
The bottom line is this process needs structure! I may be wrong but as it stands now the membership does not understand the process so why bother to vote.

[Chris USA]

I’m starting to get a feel of what the major issue is here. I’ll ponder a solution over the weekend

I think we should then have a vote on a list of possible solutions.  JK LOL

I hope everyone enjoys my sense of humor. 

As long as it does (not) involve voting machines connected to the internet!

Uh?.. Err?.. OK,... Well scrap that idea! Still, I have seen plenty of good suggestions put forth.

[Rabbit\Squirrel Killer]

First let me say this post is NOT religious but as illustrative only.
I think it is great that everyone is being asked for their ideas and opinions. In the Church I pastor the whole membership has a right to vote and to bring things up for discussion or vote in Business Meeting if they choose to be present. As Pastor/moderator in the Business Meeting We use Roberts Rule of Order, so I only get a vote as a tie breaker. To many this equality of membership seems perfect and to many it is a nightmare. I only bring up the illustration to show how no matter what is done "administratively" some will not be happy about how things went down and even complain about outcome or process when they chose to opt out of being part of that process. People just have different ideals, ideas, perspectives, and opinions, talents, and sometimes opportunities so complete unity is hard/impossible to achieve or keep. Keeping in mind "one main goal" and consideration for others is the answer to coming as close as possible to the goal of unity.
Whatever happens with regard to the HOF my goal here is to enjoy posts about airguns and be considerate to others that I already know will not share all my ideals, ideas, perspectives, and opinions, talents, and sometimes opportunities.

       

[dan_house]

Just having membership increase DOES NOT mean a community is growing, it just means more people have signed up. Growth comes from members giving to the community via knowledge transfer, material donations or technical support to other members without regard to credit or compensation. 

Most online communities have about 10-15% who are “regulars” and about 1-2% of those make up the majority of posts and traffic. Last I remember seeing any numbers for GTA membership was around 22,000 members. Which would about 2200-3000 ”regular” members and about 250 -300 ACTIVE members doing the majority of the posting. (easily enough checked out, just scroll thru any gate and threads therein and note who is posting)

Voting for anything is a (borderline) popularity contest, or at the least, name recognition. We all do it. To that end, IMO the HOF should be voted on by the GTA staff and admin, as they see more of what a given member is doing or contributing. “Airgun of the year” should be a membership vote, as we members are likely to know more about a gun, than the accomplishments or contributions of a given member....

 

[KevinJBrown]

My 2cents -

I think one problem with the process was the time of year it occurred. Other than that, with a forum as varied as GTA, there was one nominee that I had honestly never read a post that they had written until their name was on the ballot, because of where they post. I just don't have any interest in that area of the forum. Before I voted I did take a cursory look at that area (so a plus there). Three of the four people (including that one) I really haven't had much interaction with, but that wasn't why I voted for Lizzie. I felt like she had the most visible positive contribution to the forum during the time I spent here which has been pretty short in comparison to how long the forum has been in existence. I don't know that that invalidates my vote for Hall of Fame, because I did look into the past a little.

[fwbsport]

The Hall of Fame person should be familiar to all who post here currently.

I am saying the only one I know to the extent of giving the award is Hector.

If someone here has done more than he has I'm clueless.

I've seen a lot of motormouths around here including myself.

Hector says it the way it is and builds the air rifle himself to specifications.  That is an air rifle gunsmith.  They are more educated to me than any gunsmith.

[Blowpipe Sam]

HOF?  I've been a member here for two years.  I don't know who any of these people are and I wouldn't know who to vote for or why.  I think it's pretty dumb to promote an award like this and expect a lot of people to respond.  Experience with voluntary sampling shows that people won't vote in ignorance.  Most people will just pass it by because they don't know any of the personalities involved.  I know I did.
My suggestion?  Just let the moderators pick.  They are the only people who have sufficient knowledge of the situation.

[Rabbit\Squirrel Killer]

The Hall of Fame person should be familiar to all who post here currently.

I am saying the only one I know to the extent of giving the award is Hector.

If someone here has done more than he has I'm clueless.

I've seen a lot of motormouths around here including myself.

Hector says it the way it is and builds the air rifle himself to specifications.  That is an air rifle gunsmith.  They are more educated to me than any gunsmith.

I have heard of Hector but would not say I am familiar with him at all. The members have different focuses and so do the nominees. In the seven years I have been a member I have never been focused on Springers. I have and like them but my focus is wide and varied and I have not been helped by Hector. I am sure if I was into Springers more he would have from what I hear. I think all the nominees are deserving or they would not of gotten any votes, the one with the most votes (in any fair election) is the most popular with the voters and that is what the process takes place to find out period. Name recognition and interactions both play their part.

[Rabbit\Squirrel Killer]

HOF?  I've been a member here for two years.  I don't know who any of these people are and I wouldn't know who to vote for or why.  I think it's pretty dumb to promote an award like this and expect a lot of people to respond.  Experience with voluntary sampling shows that people won't vote in ignorance.  Most people will just pass it by because they don't know any of the personalities involved.  I know I did.
My suggestion?  Just let the moderators pick.  They are the only people who have sufficient knowledge of the situation.

Bias always plays a part, and the thinner and farther it can be spread lessens it's effect on the outcome to some degree. Accolades from those that just go back and forth in a small circle mean little, opinions from those they dealt with mean far more in my opinion. If anyone feels they don't know enough to vote on anything they shouldn't.