Agreed. The previous members did put in a supreme amount of effort and have created some great writeups for the resource section. I for one have no issue with how the previous years were fun. And the last couple of years have all seen some amazing sets included into the HoF.
2019 HOF Stump thread (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter bivey
- Start date
slisk250
Straight Flush
I can only speak for the committee I was on. The Paymaster set was put in that year. I stumped hard for it and Tom abstained from voting, had nothing to do with it. We unanimously placed it on the ballot @k9dr and @Poker Zombie can confirm this.
Additionally, the membership votes determine the winners, not the committee. It's just a vetting procedure and FYI - There is a set in the HOF I would disqualify from the initial year of entry as it does not meet my exacting criteria of completely original.... but who cares what I think
Please remove your asterisk from the Paymaster set...an all time great ceramic set with huge personal backstory and crazy original art.
Last edited:
They are all worthy sets. I also enjoy the stump threads, as a collection of many great sets.
But I’d still argue the best practice would be for Current committee members to not have sets in consideration. I’ve heard conversations (at meetups, etc) specifically about the HOF process, And this concept is a suggestion I've heard more than once. Just a consideration.
ekricket
Royal Flush
Along these lines should the designer(s) be allowed to vote on their sets? Some of these have one designer (only one auto vote possible) and some of them have committees of designers (many auto votes possible) - postulating that a designer would naturally vote for their design.
Poker Zombie
Royal Flush
That's a solid point.
A paid designer has something to gain by voting their own set into the HoF. It's free advertising. Use XYZ artist, because they have a dozen sets in the Hall.
That's not to say that the best sets aren't made with the assistance of a professional artist. It's just one more skewed view of how an open voting system skews who is inducted.
Rhodeman77
Straight Flush
So the “cool new set” that just came out doesn’t get right in. Let the honeymoon period end and if everyone still feels the set is HOF then it will get in.
slisk250
Straight Flush
Hmmm, something to think about but I don't really think someone like J5 needs any advertising. He must have his favorite sets of course. I know he likes Contreras Landa because he clicked a like when I nominated it again
I've been very happy with the three designers/artists I've had the pleasure to work with. Johnny, Alan, and Steve W. are just flat out the nuts...and each deserve to vote how they please. It is usually a tight race and that is the way it should be. In the end who really cares who wins, but for PCF to just let this go away?...that would be a silly shame. How about not making everyone guess what the hell is going on...
ekricket
Royal Flush
I’m talking more about a person working with the designer, having a vision of what they want, then agonizing over each chip and edgespot, coming back to the forum for advice, etc.... putting in a ton of work and thought - but one person making the decision for each chip and the whole set - his/her set. This person is naturally going to have one vote for their set.
Compared to having a committee for EACH CHIP in a set, 3-4 guys ( or some number greater than one) working the design for a single chip, so by the time your done you have 5 denoms and ~15 people who worked on “the set” design, and now that set is going to get 15 votes for “their” set.
It’s just a bias thing, and in some of these things where the total votes are under 100 it’s a big bias.
Nitpick the numbers to kill the message if you want, SOP here, but the concept and concern is the same.
slisk250
Straight Flush
I understand but how many sets out there are really design by committee? I don't really pay attention to almost any design threads so I'm curious do you have a few examples? A few years ago when Paulo dropped a set on the community with no info before I thought that was baller. Are you speaking of the hypothetical or is this a real situation? Still say everyone gets their vote.
Most people join the site, become active, make lots of friends, contribute actively to the site, and then settle into a less active membership after a while. I think it’s a natural cycle. For me, I don’t scour the site like I used to, because I no longer am on the hunt for chips. I have plenty. Some of the things that require a lot of work, like the calendar, HOF, group buys, meetups, etc. are really not sponsored by the site or staff, but by the hard work of individual members. Individuals step up and make things happen by initiative, hard work and we can all enjoy it in one way or another.
Things evolve. The calendar has gone dormant the last year or two. The number of Meetups have exploded. The HOF is looking like it may be seeing less interest by the folks who used to care a lot about it.
Not my hill to die on what goes on inside the nominating. Seemed a lot like the college of cardinals. I never paid close attention to the rules or who’s involved, I’ve just enjoyed it when there is white smoke. I think most of the cardinals have retired. Get yourself a red robe if you’re interested, IMO.
Things evolve. The calendar has gone dormant the last year or two. The number of Meetups have exploded. The HOF is looking like it may be seeing less interest by the folks who used to care a lot about it.
Not my hill to die on what goes on inside the nominating. Seemed a lot like the college of cardinals. I never paid close attention to the rules or who’s involved, I’ve just enjoyed it when there is white smoke. I think most of the cardinals have retired. Get yourself a red robe if you’re interested, IMO.
Last edited:
slisk250
Straight Flush
Is that an official invitation for Vienna? He's qualified and ready to help the two guys I know are on the committee
Many hands make light work.
Last edited:
ekricket
Royal Flush
Why does it matter if it has already happened or if it could happen? Don’t we want fair rules and a level playing field to cover probable situations that may occur?
We very seldom have cheaters in our poker games because we take precautions against it, even if it’s never happened in our particular game.
I’m not saying that anyone is a cheater.
I’m saying that we think about probable scenarios (sometimes based on previous events, sometimes by just thinking about what could happen) and we take steps to keep the playing field level.
I’m just discussing keeping fair and non biased voting and one possible scenario.
An official entry ballot that requires consistent information about each set would go a long way towards making this process a whole lot more transparent and help avoid dissension, maybe.
slisk250
Straight Flush
slisk250
Straight Flush
Not sure what you mean by official? You mean not have each member respond to a poll? Mail in paper? Not being a smart ass as at all just trying to understand as I've never thought of it this way really.
ekricket
Royal Flush
Sure, like a form:
1. Set name:
2. Who Commisioned it:
3. Date Produced:
4. Date Released to public:
5. Designer/Design Team members:
6. Inspiration (if any), provided by Commissioner:
7. Production notes:
Etc........
Something like this would also make for easier re-nomination, looking at sets in the past where information may be lost or garbled, etc......
Basicallly all the pertinent information an uninformed person would need to learn about the set and how it was designed and produced so they could make decisions on some facts in addition to emotion.
Not something filled in after the set has made it in, but filled out as part of the nomination. No info, no nomination
I agree with Jeff on this hobby being cyclical.
I'm almost 4 years into chipping and have shifted from seriously collecting chips to more of the personal/community stuff: building custom sets (never thought I'd get there), hosting meetups, meeting chippers, etc. Whatever I can do help with the HOF process, happy to contribute.
@inca911 @bivey
I believe you are the current committee. Is this still alive?
Please let the masses know, so that we can act accordingly. I offer my paper bitch services if you wish to continue but need some administrative assistance.
If not, and you do in fact want to pass it onto others to run this year, please let us know also, so we can get this year finalised with another committee.
I'll give it until Monday and I'll start working on an alternative approach. Many things are irritating me about the chipping community recently and I want to do anything I can to take the focus away from the cursed classifieds. We need to reclaim chipping as a hobbyist pursuit, so that we can get back to celebrating chips for what they are, regardless of their perceived rarity and prices.
I believe you are the current committee. Is this still alive?
Please let the masses know, so that we can act accordingly. I offer my paper bitch services if you wish to continue but need some administrative assistance.
If not, and you do in fact want to pass it onto others to run this year, please let us know also, so we can get this year finalised with another committee.
I'll give it until Monday and I'll start working on an alternative approach. Many things are irritating me about the chipping community recently and I want to do anything I can to take the focus away from the cursed classifieds. We need to reclaim chipping as a hobbyist pursuit, so that we can get back to celebrating chips for what they are, regardless of their perceived rarity and prices.
Last edited:
slisk250
Straight Flush
Just curious after rereading your post. So let's say we have a committee. What happens when the membership stumps for their set? Break it up and convene a new committee? Seems a bit over the top for a trivial social media HOF. I think the way Tom handled it was more than fair. I invite the membership to say their piece. Committee members recusing themselves from a particular set discussion seems fair enough. I've never heard anyone complain about anything regarding any HOF entries in the past at the meets I've been at, conversely the discussion has always been...man those are some great sets too bad a few more did not get in...rules
I work in procurement, and if one of my panel members has a conflict of interest, we remove them from the panel if it's too risky.
If not, we declare the conflict, write it into the final report, keep them in the panel and have them not evaluate the relevant bid.
A HoF thread is just a bit if fun. As @slisk250 says, a person just doesn't discuss their own set. Alert everyone just to be transparent and it's problem solved.
Transparency is key.
If not, we declare the conflict, write it into the final report, keep them in the panel and have them not evaluate the relevant bid.
A HoF thread is just a bit if fun. As @slisk250 says, a person just doesn't discuss their own set. Alert everyone just to be transparent and it's problem solved.
Transparency is key.
slisk250
Straight Flush
That is true, but I thought it wasn't specifically an admin annointed thing lol
Therefore, I just want to do the right thing and give the heads up publicly because I know they were the current committee.
Come Monday, if I've heard nothing I'll consider it a vacant position and start afresh.
I think it might be more that I'm salvaging an abandoned ship
Did said boat have custom chips made?
Rhodeman77
Straight Flush
*Salvaged Star*
Bert is leading the effort this year, I’m a helper. Hopefully he can provide an official update.
slisk250
Straight Flush
Thanks for the reply.
An update would be good because we all just want to know what's going on and to help if needed, as it's obviously a big undertaking.
Create an account or login to comment
You must be a member in order to leave a comment
Create account
Create an account and join our community. It's easy!
Log in
Already have an account? Log in here.
Similar threads
