Within the past week, there has been quite the number of posts over on the A1 boards about the current state of A1E and how their winners will be handled in the future. After what was a very slow week for the fed RP-wise, the numbers were also down for public votes of the victors (a staple of the A1E).
After a very hasty post by a member of the BC, quite the uproar ensued about how A1E should handle who wins their matches on a given card. The post was basically the BC member ripping into the members of the fed for not doing their duties as members of the locker room because only one member outside of the BC managed to vote for the card's winners.
Honestly, the post was completely out of control, IMO. The language was inexcusable and the tone of the message would lead one to believe that they might have committed treason for failing to take the time to read 11 match threads, judge the winners, and then send an email to share their view of the winners. However, the message is neither here nor there, as Jarret actually came out to say that the BC as a whole were not as enraged as the message would have seemed, but they were rather concerned.
And, given that I've been around A1E since 2002, I can see where there would be concern on the BC's part. One thing that A1E has always prided itself on the fact that everyone gets a say in who wins a given match. And for the most part, the system has worked without flaw when it comes to deciding the winners. I would like to think that all of us within the hobby have a very good idea for knowing what it takes to win in this community. And because of this, the voting system that A1E employs is more than capable of allowing a fed to continue to run.
This is where I make my first argument against what everyone seems to be saying when worrying about the voting system. Everyone wants to make the case that A1E is unique because it gives the handlers the ability to decide who wins the matches. However, as I said, the voting system really doesn't change that much when it comes to deciding the winners of a match. As a former member of the BC, I know that most of the time, there is really very little occurence of the public vote overturning what the BC has already seen. These guys see over the fed for a reason, because they know what they're doing.
It is for this reason that I believe the ousting of the voting system would not be that big of a deal within the A1 community. Personally, I've never really been a fan of the voting system myself. I've seen instances when it seemed very clear that sometimes people lost matches simply based on their opponents and not the quality of the RPs. A1E has managed to rid itself of that problem, for the most part, but I still remember facing certain people just because I knew that the deck was stacked against me from the get-go and I'm still a little soured on the system for that.
Also, the changes that Jarret has brought about since becoming head booker have been phenomenal for the fed and this might be the one last change that he needs to make to make A1E a hotspot for everyone in the hobby. The voting system has really kept a lot of people from joining the fed (or so I've heard) and with the current exposure that's being given to the fed with the Tag Team Tourney, what better time to show them what A1E can offer with Jarret and his guys calling all the shots instead of everyone running the show?
Which brings me to another point... A1E has its BC, or Booking Committee. However, it seems as though all they are there for is to decide who faces who on a given week. It doesn't seem like there's much "booking" that goes on within the group. I know when I was a member of the BC, there were a lot of times I just felt like a matchwriter rather than a booker. I guess what I'm tryin to get at with this point is that if only five people are deciding who faces who, then why does everyone get to decide who wins the match? I think everyone should be involved in deciding who wins, then everyone should be involved in the making of the matches or vice versa. And logically, it only makes sense that five people would make the matches, therefore I believe only five people should be in charge of who wins the matches.
Longtime A1Eers might not agree with this, but as someone who has seen this discussion come about once a year for the past five years, you really must question when this becomes something that we quite patching up and just fix completely. All the tweaks in the world are not going to make this system perfect, and maybe that's the appeal that comes about with the A1E.
But the arguments that come about for the spontaniety that A1E brings to the table are only arguments because sometimes a head booker might choose to keep the strap on his champ, even though the challenger won the match. All that needs to be done for the spontaniety of A1E to remain is the call of the head booker to stand behind his committee if they think that the champ lost the match.
I think that the need for a change is upon us in A1E. The voting system is obviously not working the way that the BC feels that it should if we must see posts like the one that brought this discussion about. The uniqueness of A1E is not really in its voting system. The uniqueness comes from it being in its own community and having a totally different roster from any other fed on the net. The system is going to be a constant topic of argument unless drastic changes are mad. So rather than patching the road yet again, let's re-pave everything and make things better for the long haul.
3 comments:
We had a new system in place when Beast took over (after you had to leave the BC again and Roger had to leave) that basically has us doing more "booking" then we've ever done.
We are assigned programs now. It's our job to guide feuds and work with the handlers to come up with compelling storylines for them. So we are not "just writing matches" anymore.
I second Andy on this point.
Shane, you've been gone so you're not aware....but they assign each BC member to handle certain programs now. For example, Jarret was my "contact" for my program with Big Dog. Dan is my contact for my current one, etc.
It's a very good idea by Jarret that helps a lot.
I don't like public voting, but I still recognize the issue raised by Dan in the thread - that it creates a conflict of interest when the BC handle characters in the fed, if you're not gonna give the handlers the option of a vote that brings a check and balance. As long as the key word becomes "OPTION" and not "requirement".
As Andy and Dave both mentioned, there have been sweeping changes since I've taken over the BC. The new system that was mentioned makes sure that each individual on the BC has a bigger hand in the direction of the fed, and not only just doing what I ask of them.
Most of the times, I'll throw out an idea, and the guys on the BC will either be "ok, that works", or if they think they have something better, they're not only welcomed but encouraged to bring it forth. And they do. A lot of what you see in the cards are a result of the BC members throwing forth alternatives.
It's great. I'll (or anyone will) throw out an idea "A", and one person goes, "hey, not bad, but what about if you did part of A that, but threw this B in as well?". And another will go "A+B together are really cool, but can we add on C?"
As a result, you've got a group collective running A1E, and a diverse bunch of guys all chipping in to get what you see every week. This is NOT a result of just me going "here it is: march!"
The booking committee I believe is very valuable, and not only does the new system give them booking work, it takes some load off my shoulders, and best of all, gives us an infinitely better product than if I did this all on my own.
And let's not forget the handlers, who add in a great deal of their own suggestions under the new system. The new system is basically one member of the BC taking their assigned feud, contacting their handlers, and going "got any ideas you want to run?" and if they do, we work with them to develop their own storylines. If they don't, we help them come up with something. It's very much handler driven, and you end up with stories that the competitors want to run between themselves, rather than us forcing down storyline and direction upon them.
And ultimately, I do have the final decision. The rest of BC will come to me and go "we've got XYZ planned." If for whatever reason I don't think it'll work/don't like it/think it'll do something to damage A1E or an individual character(s), I won't allow it and we'll work on something else.
This truly is a committee, and a committee at work.
I see both sides of the voting issue. Yes, we need people to vote, but as Dave said (and I agree with) is we can't FORCE people to vote. I throw all this out there to remind people that you *should* vote, but again, we all understand that real life takes precedent, and some people just can't. That's cool, and we'll take what we can get. However, I don't think a reminder now then hurts.
I also see the side of having the BC do everything, and I agree that having the BC both ultimately decide AND participate isn't a good looking proposition. It wouldn't be fair, and would raise a HUGE question about the quality and fairness of the fed.
I'm not ready to dismantle my BC and/or make them all not participate in the fed to take away the public vote yet. Firstly, the guys on the BC are some of the most talented writers you're going to find anywhere, and it wouldn't be fair to them to say "no, you can't play anymore" if we took over sole judging.
Secondly, I don't have the time to take on everything myself - which is why I have individual bookers working individual feuds, and I certainly don't have the ability to keep 10 storylines fresh every cycle. I may be good, but I'm not THAT good. ;)
I know my limits, and A1E would get pretty stale pretty quick if it was left up to me alone.
The only way I see taking away the public voting would work is the following:
- Have myself, and only myself do ALL RP judging.
- Change the structure of the BC so that members are ONLY booking liasons to their assigned feuds and match writers.
Would the other BC members be happy with this arrangement? That's something we'd all have to talk about.
The only reason I'm considering this at ALL is because of Shane's point that people keep away from A1E simply BECAUSE of the voting.
There's an awful lot of discussion that's going to happen and a lot of work to be done before this decision is made. I see the pros and cons of each side, but if there's a way we can make it work that is for the better of A1E as a whole, then I'm open to it. I guess we'll see what happens.
Post a Comment