Jump to content


Photo

Dear 2026 Wrestling Obsessives


  • Please log in to reply
80 replies to this topic

#21 Matt D

Matt D

    4:40

  • Members
  • 10166 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 19 April 2016 - 01:54 PM

 

I didn't forget to vote for her. But she wasn't nominated. When there's a sea of nominations, pages of forgotten almost-empty threads, it's easy to not realize someone hasn't been nominated.

 

It's too bad there wasn't a master list of nominees. That would have really helped things, especially if it had links.



#22 TravJ1979

TravJ1979
  • Members
  • 1304 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Indiana

Posted 19 April 2016 - 01:56 PM

 

 

I didn't forget to vote for her. But she wasn't nominated. When there's a sea of nominations, pages of forgotten almost-empty threads, it's easy to not realize someone hasn't been nominated.

 

It's too bad there wasn't a master list of nominees. That would have really helped things, especially if it had links.

 

Honestly, I think only having two wrestlers make the list that weren't nominated after all of the people who listed wrestlers who weren't nominated, I think it turned out better than expected.



#23 El-P

El-P
  • Members
  • 8727 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 19 April 2016 - 02:05 PM

 

 

I didn't forget to vote for her. But she wasn't nominated. When there's a sea of nominations, pages of forgotten almost-empty threads, it's easy to not realize someone hasn't been nominated.

 

It's too bad there wasn't a master list of nominees. That would have really helped things, especially if it had links.

 

 

It sure didn't apparently.



#24 concrete1992

concrete1992

    Sammy D

  • Members
  • 785 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 19 April 2016 - 02:16 PM

What would be the alternative to nominating and having the opportunity to discuss individual candidates? 



#25 TravJ1979

TravJ1979
  • Members
  • 1304 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Indiana

Posted 19 April 2016 - 02:46 PM

Maybe have a committee to nominate voters instead of wrestlers.  This would prevent people voting for Gotch and Hackenschmidt, would guarantee no anonymous voters, eliminate troll/joke ballots and limit people who'd vote Naked Mideon #1 in a strategic vote. and I'm sure a few other positives that I'm forgetting.



#26 Manatee

Manatee
  • Members
  • 40 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 19 April 2016 - 02:47 PM

I would like more discussion in the threads leading up to the reveal if you think you are going to be on an island on a particular pick. As fun and shocking as the Scott Steiner and Scorpio #1 picks were, I went through their respective threads and didn't see even a hint of the projection some individuals were going to throw upon them. I wouldn't say I was immune of this either as it looks like I will be one of the high votes for someone like Tamura and I wish I would have done longer form posts in presenting my argument. 

I am someone who will most likely be the sole #1 vote for a candidate and I didn't make the case for them in their thread. I thought the guy had a decent chance of placing pretty well and I worried there may be some backlash like Parv got for his Flair case. I will definitely defend the vote once his ranking is revealed. 



#27 El-P

El-P
  • Members
  • 8727 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 19 April 2016 - 02:50 PM

No nomination, no committee, just let people discuss and vote for who the fuck they want, really.



#28 goc

goc

    A disgrace to Joe Blanchard

  • Members
  • 7359 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Virginia

Posted 19 April 2016 - 03:25 PM

 

I would like more discussion in the threads leading up to the reveal if you think you are going to be on an island on a particular pick. As fun and shocking as the Scott Steiner and Scorpio #1 picks were, I went through their respective threads and didn't see even a hint of the projection some individuals were going to throw upon them. I wouldn't say I was immune of this either as it looks like I will be one of the high votes for someone like Tamura and I wish I would have done longer form posts in presenting my argument.

I am someone who will most likely be the sole #1 vote for a candidate and I didn't make the case for them in their thread. I thought the guy had a decent chance of placing pretty well and I worried there may be some backlash like Parv got for his Flair case. I will definitely defend the vote once his ranking is revealed.

 

You should have noticed pretty much no one else got any kind of backlash for pimping their candidates. No one came after Elliot for making a big case on Satanico or OJ for pimping a lot of British guys. Mostly because they didn't try to insinuate that people's reasons for not voting their guy #1 was because they were trying to be "trendy" or "cute" with their ballots. There's nothing wrong with making a case for a guy until you start trying to attack people's intentions for not seeing them as the super awesome great candidate that you do. 



#29 Manatee

Manatee
  • Members
  • 40 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 19 April 2016 - 03:32 PM

 

 

I would like more discussion in the threads leading up to the reveal if you think you are going to be on an island on a particular pick. As fun and shocking as the Scott Steiner and Scorpio #1 picks were, I went through their respective threads and didn't see even a hint of the projection some individuals were going to throw upon them. I wouldn't say I was immune of this either as it looks like I will be one of the high votes for someone like Tamura and I wish I would have done longer form posts in presenting my argument.

I am someone who will most likely be the sole #1 vote for a candidate and I didn't make the case for them in their thread. I thought the guy had a decent chance of placing pretty well and I worried there may be some backlash like Parv got for his Flair case. I will definitely defend the vote once his ranking is revealed.

 

You should have noticed pretty much no one else got any kind of backlash for pimping their candidates. No one came after Elliot for making a big case on Satanico or OJ for pimping a lot of British guys. Mostly because they didn't try to insinuate that people's reasons for not voting their guy #1 was because they were trying to be "trendy" or "cute" with their ballots. There's nothing wrong with making a case for a guy until you start trying to attack people's intentions for not seeing them as the super awesome great candidate that you do. 

 

Those are established, respected community members and I am just some new guy. In hindsight I do wish I would have stumped for my guy though.



#30 goodhelmet

goodhelmet
  • Admins
  • 18951 posts

Posted 19 April 2016 - 03:42 PM

Manatee... you can't become an established, respected community member without putting yourself out there. 



#31 ohtani's jacket

ohtani's jacket
  • DVDVR 80s Project
  • 5676 posts

Posted 19 April 2016 - 04:44 PM

How long was the nominating/viewing period? 18 months? Two years? I'm not sure it needed to be that long. I know there are a lot of people who used that time to their own benefit, but would the final list have been that much different if we'd crammed it all into nine months? 



#32 WingedEagle

WingedEagle
  • Members
  • 5077 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 19 April 2016 - 04:49 PM

How long was the nominating/viewing period? 18 months? Two years? I'm not sure it needed to be that long. I know there are a lot of people who used that time to their own benefit, but would the final list have been that much different if we'd crammed it all into nine months? 

 

Have no idea, but on a related basis I always wondered how strong a recency bias enters into voting.  Fujinami & Martel were the two big names I hadn't seen a ton of coming into this, and on the flip side they both rated incredibly highly for me.  Did they belong there, or was I blown away by their material being not just great, but also fresh?  I have no idea but definitely thought about that sort of thing.



#33 cubbymark

cubbymark
  • Members
  • 99 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 19 April 2016 - 05:10 PM

Watch more lucha. Watch more Puerto Rico. Watch more Portland and Memphis. You have ten years until the next one, so there's plenty of time to fill in your gaps: WoS, All Japan pillars, Joshi, currently the indy wrestling. No telling if someone just starting on the independent scene will grow leaps and bounds like Sam Zayn.

#34 concrete1992

concrete1992

    Sammy D

  • Members
  • 785 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 19 April 2016 - 05:30 PM

No nomination, no committee, just let people discuss and vote for who the fuck they want, really.

While a lot of names didn't get a proper amount of discussion I can only imagine how much worse it would have been without the directory and the ability to at least see threads for all the nominated wrestlers. I think a system in place at least nudges people into discussion a little more. Maybe I'm full of it.

 

Also, make cases beforehand and not in retrospect because my "friend" Tanner is a jabroni mark who is going to do it in hindsight and that doesn't help me a lick with my process. I'm selfish, I know. 



#35 Ricky Jackson

Ricky Jackson

    The Only 5 Time Champion

  • Members
  • 2735 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Vancouver Territory
  • Interests:Wrestling, music, comics, beer, movies, history, sports...good manly stuff.

Posted 19 April 2016 - 06:35 PM

Watch more WWWF and vote for Bruno

#36 jackwebb

jackwebb
  • Members
  • 140 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 19 April 2016 - 06:40 PM

What would be the alternative to nominating and having the opportunity to discuss individual candidates

If it was a 2 year process again I suppose my own preference would be roll out threads for 4 wrestlers a week. Have everyone working on those wrestlers during that week. Keep the threads open though for later discussion. That is 416 wrestlers right there. Maybe when nominations are ongoing have polls to decide if the nominees are worthy of their own thread at that time. If not revisit them later since they likely will show up at points will working on other wrestlers. 

 

I'm not sure of this but I would at least consider the possibility of increasing the amount of workers people vote on. I'd even be open to discussion on the possibility of all voters ranking everyone. Keep people more engaged through the process less risk of faking it through a list not having seen most of the nominees. 

 

Maybe you could even go 3 years at 3 wrestlers a week. That is 468 in 3 years. Go with a 500 wrestler project and leave the other 32 spots to the obvious workers like Flair  Misawa and Undertaker. I know 3 years sounds like a lot to ask of others but only 3 wrestlers a week would keep things focused. 

 

Maybe clear guidelines one what to consider for the list called the Scott Steiner rule. Keep fools that can't help themselves from going too far outside the ropes when making picks.

 

In the end I think it depends on whether Vince puts up enough network footage to motivate everyone. Guy is sitting on a lot of treasure. Plus NWAclassics still has a lot of great content it is rolling out. 



#37 dawho5

dawho5
  • Members
  • 2500 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:North Dakota

Posted 19 April 2016 - 07:16 PM

Manatee... you can't become an established, respected community member without putting yourself out there. 

 

Bingo.  If you have something to say and can say it in a way where you don't insult somebody else, don't hesitate.  There probably will be people who disagree with you or call you crazy.  Hell, I actually agree that I was crazy for certain opinions expressed on this board in the past.  I'm glad I was corrected on my blind Kobashi hate and thank the guys who did that for me.



#38 Loss

Loss
  • Admins
  • 43386 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 19 April 2016 - 07:17 PM

2026ers, be nice to each other.



#39 Childs

Childs
  • Moderators
  • 4401 posts

Posted 19 April 2016 - 07:19 PM

How long was the nominating/viewing period? 18 months? Two years? I'm not sure it needed to be that long. I know there are a lot of people who used that time to their own benefit, but would the final list have been that much different if we'd crammed it all into nine months? 

Did we lose anything from having it be long? Voter turnout was high, interest never seemed to lag and people are having a blast with the rollout.

#40 greenmistguy90

greenmistguy90
  • Members
  • 40 posts

Posted 19 April 2016 - 07:35 PM

Can't imagine what u will have but make the most of modern technology for ur footage watching




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users