Callout: the tgr co-lab voting process.......

Posts: 11939 - Karma: 21,826

Karma: 21,826

Posts: 11939

Crazy Fool

hahah. one, "ns mod" or not, i have one single vote an opinion as does every single other person on the planet. sounds like you are getting pre-emptively butthurt about what i'm getting pre-empitvely butthurt about.

two, i don't give a fuck if dale wins. i wasn't on his film crew, i didn't have a hand in the edit.

the top 20 however many make it to finals is irrelevant. hell, the bottom 6-8 in that field will have less than a handful of votes.

the deciding factor, as you so insightfully stated, is the athlete vote. there is no voting panel or greater group of judges. the athletes are required to sign some sort of ethics agreement when they cast their votes later this month. however, in the voting process, the ethics agreement doesn't mean shit. who is to say that the number 21 placed athlete doesnt TRULY BELIEVE that the number one placed video is the worst video in the contest? it's strictly someone's word against another person's word. ethics agreement or not, nobody will ever actually know what one of the athletes believes. it could be a total coincidence that 10 people believe the number one or two voted video was the absolute worst video they have ever seen. which, in turn, will have a massive effect on the outcome of the contest.

this is a competition with $100,000 at stake, not 1,000 or even 10,000. money gets the best of everyone whether you want to accept it or not.

i'm not defending anyone or calling anyone out (except for those responsible for the contest model).

who are you (those putting on the contest) to say that someone's decision is "not ethical" ? whether it looks like it or not, you'll have to live with what the athletes pick whether you think it's justified.

i just think there should be some greater governing body rather than the pool of athletes all vying for the same prize.

also, this post was made to stir the pot, and also because i'm genuinely curious as to how some of you feel. there are plenty of worthy edits.

Jul 10 2013 9:40PM

11 1

SkiBum.

Posts: 3600 - Karma: 3,909

Karma: 3,909

Posts: 3600

Addict

Ding Ding. We have a winner!!

Jul 10 2013 9:41PM

0 24

Skibumsmith

Posts: 5432 - Karma: 11,817

Karma: 11,817

Posts: 5432

No Life

agreed

Jul 10 2013 9:59PM

2 1

ESB

Posts: 9274 - Karma: 10,648

Karma: 10,648

Posts: 9274

Crazy Fool

I feel you on this point. I would suggest, however, that the pool of athletes is probably a better system than a public vote that gets skewed by mere popularity and annoying self-promotion.

I personally think the system isn't too bad. It incorporates a public vote to determine a top 18, plus 3 extra contestants chosen by a panel (your "greater governing body" perhaps?), and then the top 21 get the final say. So everyone gets their say: the public, the riders, and the insiders.

Jul 10 2013 9:59PM

5 1

Posts: 5366 - Karma: 22,011

Karma: 22,011

Posts: 5366

No Life

Well, when you decide to give away 100k, then you can run it the way you want.

Jul 10 2013 10:00PM

2 9

Posts: 11939 - Karma: 21,826

Karma: 21,826

Posts: 11939

Crazy Fool

i wholeheartedly agree with your first point. a popularity contest is totally bogus, which is what the initial part of the comp is. contestants can have their parents spam their offices, book groups, neighborhoods, etc for votes. as someone said, there is a ten year old girl with an (relative to the other entries) absolutely horrible edit that isn't far from the top. strictly because of the popular vote.

however, i think you're giving the "insiders" vote too much weight. they decide the last three in the 21 person athlete pool? in my opinion, there are less than 10 edits worthy of such a massive prize. if there were 300 edits, the final three positions in finals would carry far more weight. in this situation, it does not.

Jul 10 2013 10:03PM

5 1

Posts: 11939 - Karma: 21,826

Karma: 21,826

Posts: 11939

Crazy Fool

fair point. i was just voicing my opinion to raise discussion, i wasn't saying it was going to have an impact.

Jul 10 2013 10:04PM

2 1

PsychedelicMoose

Posts: 792 - Karma: 3,568

Karma: 3,568

Posts: 792

Ridiculous

I think the process is somewhat stupid as well, but if they give out 100k who is to tell them how to do it?

Jul 10 2013 10:25PM

1 5

NinetyFour

Posts: 8650 - Karma: 13,409

Karma: 13,409

Posts: 8650

Crazy Fool

I would make a joke/sarcastic statement in this thread....

But it's too damn soon.

Jul 10 2013 10:39PM

0 2

Girays_Brother

Posts: 13973 - Karma: 1,635

Karma: 1,635

Posts: 13973

Crazy Fool

its definately pretty fucked that Nick Mcnutts is that low down. thats what happens though in a popularity voting contest. No Hate on Dale, he's where he should be. But the TGR guys will vote so i dont think it really matters

Jul 11 2013 12:31AM

7 1

zahava

Posts: 7791 - Karma: 12,039

Karma: 12,039

Posts: 7791

Crazy Fool

COUGH Jordan Clarke COUGH

Jul 11 2013 12:34AM

2 1

Ehh...

Posts: 1897 - Karma: 1,423

Karma: 1,423

Posts: 1897

Insane

I may need someone to pull out crayons to explain this to me,
but how are athletes chosen?

And how are the athletes votes governed? I mean from what it sounded like in your post that you had down below it really seems like that its going to be a train wreck and biased mess waiting to happen.

And I apologize for answering a question that someone has to hold my hand through but I'm still really confused on the part of the athlete vote.

Jul 11 2013 12:52AM

1 1

Posts: 1762 - Karma: 1,582

Karma: 1,582

Posts: 1762

Insane

just wait for "So It Begins" kids

Jul 11 2013 1:23AM

0 4

Ski_The_E

Posts: 1036 - Karma: 944

Karma: 944

Posts: 1036

Insane

I agree completely, but I'm currently in whistler with her and she's such a boss. Not just skiing at though, she's the funniest little girl ever. That being said the contest should be judged off of skill not skill to age/size ratio.

Jul 11 2013 1:29AM

1 0

Posts: 11939 - Karma: 21,826

Karma: 21,826

Posts: 11939

Crazy Fool

Half of you arent reading my shit

Jul 11 2013 1:47AM

6 1

Zimmy

Posts: 1258 - Karma: -1,327

Karma: -1,327

Posts: 1258

Insane

Interested to see total view count, unique views and unique votes.

Jul 11 2013 2:27AM

0 0

FUUUCK

Posts: 18426 - Karma: 4,888

Karma: 4,888

Posts: 18426

Post Whore

welcome to the internet of the future. 140 characters or less.

Jul 11 2013 2:38AM

2 0

eheath

Posts: 61487 - Karma: 122,128

Karma: 122,128

Posts: 61487

Play Ball

This would solve part of the problem, but it's still a popularity contest.

TGR wants people to visit the site every day, browse around, get some more page views around their site vs come once and vote and dont come back til the winner is announced.

The real way this SHOULD be done is the staff should pick who they think should win, with consideration from the athletes. Not necessarily draw a distinct line like athletes votes count for XX% of the vote, but have the athletes vote and then the main tgr staff (maybe plus a few reps from each sport? like tom, seth, jon, pep, pollard, etc) pick who actually wins everything.

I will always be against popularity votes for winning shit, like the orage video contest. Athletes picking the winner is a little better, but when the athletes are chosen by popular vote, it almost defeats the purpose. Seeing at the majority of the "top 21" will be big mountain skiers, will they vote for dale? my guess is no, because they dont want some park skier to win. In that case, the voting system is fucked.

Jul 11 2013 2:39AM

1 2

Ehh...

Posts: 1897 - Karma: 1,423

Karma: 1,423

Posts: 1897

Insane

This makes a lot of sense in that regard of having only a limited pool to pull from due to the fact that popular vote proceeded before athlete vote.

Do you think it might have made any difference if the role was reversed; having the pro's or staff pick first, then having a popular vote after that?

Jul 11 2013 3:44AM

0 0

RockNRollNghtClb

Posts: 2013 - Karma: 2,509

Karma: 2,509

Posts: 2013

Addict

exactly

Jul 11 2013 3:54AM

0 1

Crispy.

Posts: 6108 - Karma: 7,678

Karma: 7,678

Posts: 6108

No Life

I constantly wonder how it feels to be a noob that thinks they post something funny, but checks back and it is downrated to fuck.

Jul 11 2013 5:52AM

2 11

skiierman

Posts: 28699 - Karma: -5,563

Karma: -5,563

Posts: 28699

@th1337

Whew, thanks for clearing that one up.

Jul 11 2013 8:49AM

12 1

Huck_Norris

Posts: 11487 - Karma: 18,627

Karma: 18,627

Posts: 11487

Crazy Fool

Well I think you may be blaming the wrong side of the equation to be completely honest. Don't get me wrong, I really liked Dales edit and the features were sick but he probably should have mixed in a few more things besides just lots of crazy manmade jibs to realistically have a shot at a $100k TGR contest- obviously the home of big mountain ripping and hairy-ass cliff hucks to stompage. There's only a certain kind of viewer that's going to be entertained by a 100% park edit there and while it will kill it here, it absolutely does not fit the average TGR viewer demographic.

This is NOT to dig on Dale's edit in any way, I thought it was fucking sick- just a little too one dimensional to realistically take a TGR contest IMO. That's not to say he can't, it's just to say that he may have been better served by sending a few natural features or ripping a few big faces and hucking something huge to stomp Candide/McNutt style to mix it up a little bit.

Kinda hilarious that he's so far out in front at the end of the first round and people are already complaining though. Do you want EVERY category to be stacked so someone from NS wins in huge blowout fashion like the 1st??? Look, he slayed the popularity contest and nobody complained. Time to just chill and not complain when someone else's advantage round comes up and levels the playing field.

Again, not trying to stir shit up, just give another perspective to the situation.

Jul 11 2013 9:30AM

3 2

Drail

Posts: 14012 - Karma: 10,010

Karma: 10,010

Posts: 14012

Crazy Fool

how about no popularity vote? I refuse to partake or vote in anything on the internet where you can vote more than once. I honestly don't see the point because I'm not going to be going to the site every day to vote, so I don't bother the first time. The results hardly represent a true result when someone can vote more than once.

Jul 11 2013 10:20AM

3 0

Zimmy

Posts: 1258 - Karma: -1,327

Karma: -1,327

Posts: 1258

Insane

Matt Mulligan's triple back and general pow steeze, along with Christophe Henry's mindblowing paragliding cinematography both sitting not much higher than me in terms of votes, undermine the whole voting thing in my mind, I probably still would've entered had I known voting would've been something out of a banana republic, but my expectations would've been lowered going into it. If only they just uploaded into YouTube to see a bit more stats.

Jul 11 2013 11:20AM

0 3

Posts: 1762 - Karma: 1,582

Karma: 1,582

Posts: 1762

Insane

you lost all credibility with that....

And beyond that this contest was not supposed to launch the new TGR which is an action sports platform, not the granola-fest it's been, so there goes your other points.

Jul 11 2013 12:42PM

2 2

itod910

Posts: 68 - Karma: 141

Karma: 141

Posts: 68

Wannabe

I might just be willfully naive here but I think that big mountain skiers can look at a park/urban/whatever edit and realize how insane it is and will vote accordingly. That's a pretty sad statement about the sport if somebody would specifically ruin someone's shot at 100 grand because they ski differently and I personally don't think that's the case

Jul 11 2013 12:44PM

0 0

SkiBum.

Posts: 3600 - Karma: 3,909

Karma: 3,909

Posts: 3600

Addict

I have trouble sleeping at night sometimes...

Jul 11 2013 12:55PM

2 0

Posts: 5366 - Karma: 22,011

Karma: 22,011

Posts: 5366

No Life

That's where you lost your credibility.

Jul 11 2013 1:00PM

6 2

TheClap.

Posts: 21661 - Karma: 4,104

Karma: 4,104

Posts: 21661

@th1337

Welcome to the real world

Jul 11 2013 1:08PM

0 1

Huck_Norris

Posts: 11487 - Karma: 18,627

Karma: 18,627

Posts: 11487

Crazy Fool

Ok so there was a scene that didn't revolve around a manmade feature? News flash: that's park skiing and sure it may have been filmed on a big mountain but the same feature could be built anywhere. It's simple fact that the TGR crowd isn't into that no matter how impressive it may be to us.

Just offering some constructive criticism, take it or leave it. I thought his edit was amazing but it was bit lacking in the diversity department, that's all.

I'll agree 100% that the voting system is far from perfect, but getting all worked up that a park edit isn't getting major love on a big mtn Mecca site is just silly.

Jul 11 2013 1:26PM

3 3

Posts: 5366 - Karma: 22,011

Karma: 22,011

Posts: 5366

No Life

I don't think anyone is going to try and ruin someone else's shot at 100k. they are going to vote for what they think is the best one.

One thing to note, that just because NS has nothing to do in the summer but mass vote one video, does not mean it is the best one either.

I also see a trend in here that is against the athlete vote, even though it is so cool when it happens at SCI, or Tanner Hall invitational. I guess it's only cool when it conforms to what the NS community thinks is right.

Jul 11 2013 1:29PM

1 1

Posts: 1762 - Karma: 1,582

Karma: 1,582

Posts: 1762

Insane

while you think you have a good understanding of all realms of skiing, calling an edit a "park" edit that did not have a single shot from a park is just plain wrong. critique what you may about the piece, but it's completely ignorant to call it a park edit. Beyond that your post lacks the understanding of what TGR is trying to do with their brand and the contest, it is not based around big mountain- and every one at TGR will refute that claim. Every feature was handbuilt, nothing was pushed by a cat, and several of the backcountry features have never been done before, if you want to call it park skiing, go for it, but you are flat out wrong.

Jul 11 2013 4:00PM

3 2

Karma_Police

Posts: 2655 - Karma: 1,628

Karma: 1,628

Posts: 2655

Addict

It's for sure not a big mountain edit. It's an urban edit with some BC booters in it. Happy now?

Idk why you're getting your panties in a bunch when a lot of people would call it a park edit.

Also why do you hate tgr so much?

Jul 11 2013 4:28PM

1 1

Posts: 1762 - Karma: 1,582

Karma: 1,582

Posts: 1762

Insane

A park edit revolves around features that were built by machines, dialed in for safety, and maintained by a crew of workers- no thought or work was put into the construction of the feature by the athlete or filmer. Calling urban park or urban skiers park skiers disrespects both the process and effort that went into it. I would say the same thing to anyone calling a Stept film a park movie or Clayton Vila a park skier.

And I never hated on TGR? I really look up to Todd and Steve and I think what they've done with this contest is revolutionary in this sport- don't know where you are getting that from.

Jul 11 2013 4:39PM

0 0

eheath

Posts: 61487 - Karma: 122,128

Karma: 122,128

Posts: 61487

Play Ball

Hitting cliffs and skiing big lines is just as one dimensional as hitting urban and bc booters...

By your logic, no one should win because everyones edits are either park based or big mountain based, not one really did both.

Jul 11 2013 5:41PM

2 0

Posts: 11939 - Karma: 21,826

Karma: 21,826

Posts: 11939

Crazy Fool

you obviously missed my initial point- unless you're not referring to me.

i'm not complaining about shit. after speaking with people associated with the contest and getting the exact details cleared up, i decided to make this thread. initially i had thought the finals would be judged by the top athletes in the contest as well as a panel of TGR execs.

however, like i said, this isnt the case, and the athlete vote is the ultimate deciding factor. in my opinion, this is flawed, especially in reference to their ethics agreement.

i am "chillin" and i'm not complainig about anyone elses "advantage round" i just dont necessarily agree with the format. but as session said previously, when i decide to give away 100 g's in my own contest, i'll manipulate the rules the way i prefer. thats all.

i was bitching (attempting to raise discussion) about the contest/judging/decision format ONLY, not about an outcome that obviously does not exist yet.

Jul 11 2013 6:22PM

0 0

will_powder

Posts: 3194 - Karma: 5,445

Karma: 5,445

Posts: 3194

Addict

And all along I thought the "athlete" voting meant that TGR-filmed athletes IE Martini, Sage, Mac, etc would be voting for their favorites. Guess not lol

Jul 11 2013 6:25PM

1 0

luc

Posts: 1000 - Karma: 607

Karma: 607

Posts: 1000

Insane

they should just do it like they do the innersection movie! where the winner gets 100k aswell!

Jul 11 2013 6:47PM

0 0

Huck_Norris

Posts: 11487 - Karma: 18,627

Karma: 18,627

Posts: 11487

Crazy Fool

I thought McNutt and Evans did a great job of showing both styles- big tricks on manmade AND natural features, along with big lines and hucks.

For Dan, I agree that it's not a perfect voting process but I think it was important for TGRs execs to distance themselves from the final decision simply to be fair to everyone and to avoid speculation of favoritism, etc. At least that's the only reason I can think of that would make sense for them wanting to distance themselves anyways- it's their money, if they wanted it to be their decision they wouldn't need voting at all from anyone, right?

Honestly though, would you be bothered if it was just ended now with Dale in the lead? Probably not, right? You have to admit that the "problem" arose when you saw that the popularity contest alone wouldn't be able to take it. If a contest sway thread style votealanche took $100k, that would be complete bullshit IMO.

Here is EXACTLY what the rules say in case anybody is wondering.

During Public Voting, individuals visiting www.TetonGravity.com/contests/the-co-lab will have the opportunity to vote for their favorite Segment. The 18 Segments with the most public votes at the end of Public Voting, plus 3 additional Wild Card Segments chosen by the Judges (the “TOP 21”) will move onto our Athlete Voting Round. The Judges will be a panel of three (3) industry professionals chosen at the sole discretion of TGR, not employed by TGR, with a review methodology as determined by TGR in its sole discretion.

I personally fail to see the doom and gloom in that statement and the assumptions that a park skier would never be allowed to win is bullshit as I GUARANTEE someone with strong park skills will take it. Yes it's true- there's a distinct possibility Dale might not win, but if he doesn't it will be because his edit was ALL park (albeit impressive and well shot park)- oh excuse me McLeod- "urban with some BC booters" and not because TGR's pre-bribed judges are crooked asshole puppets who hate park skiers.

Try to be a little more objective, guys. I know you want Dale to win but come on. Having Todd Jones as a judge instead would do nothing but create more speculation and saddle him with all the blame on anyone's part when their favorite didn't win.

Jul 12 2013 9:24AM

1 0

MartianMan

Posts: 1101 - Karma: 2,099

Karma: 2,099

Posts: 1101

Insane

Honestly Dale Talkington's edit is really good, but it is definitely not the best one out there. Sam Cohen's edit is sick, he skis some ridiculous lines, and Sage Cattabriga-Alosa uses the projector to make possible the coolest powder skiing i have ever seen, and he is nowhere near the top.

Jul 12 2013 10:30AM

0 0

skiwisconsin

Posts: 288 - Karma: 1,487

Karma: 1,487

Posts: 288

Loner

Seriously, Sage's edit is really interesting, and I don't think many have checked it out. Sam's edit is also sick, and so is Dale's... and Nick's.

I know the voting seems weird, but TGR kind of has to distance themselves from making the decision... especially since athletes they work with are involved in the comp. I don't think you guys are giving enough credit to the athletes involved though. Skiers are skiers; we can appreciate quality when we see it... whether it be in the park or big mountain arena.

It's also simple, smart business. The voting system drives people-- who wouldn't normally check it out-- to their page on a daily basis. If there was no public vote, it would just be the same people who are already aware of their content. They're dropping $100,000; it's only fair that they get some visibility out of the whole thing.

Jul 12 2013 11:55AM

2 0

forrest-cole

Posts: 1145 - Karma: 495

Karma: 495

Posts: 1145

Insane

Vote for Randy Evans, kid's going to throw down 10% of the winnings at the bar, and he fucking shreds hard!

Jul 12 2013 1:03PM

1 0