HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The History of Hockey
The History of Hockey Relive great moments in hockey history and discuss how the game has changed over time.

HOH Top 40 Goalies - Participants Survey

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-06-2013, 02:21 PM
  #51
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 37,935
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ot92s View Post
Odd that nobody thought to release the aggregate list to everyone before-hand in these situations. If you were looking to reduce confounds and the administrator just HAD to be involved it seems to be a no-brainer. Was it considered? If not maybe it should be considered as a principle in the future.
So rather than have 2 of 27 voters (both of them well known on this site and I would like to think "trusted" if with nothing else, being too stubborn in opinion to be so easily corrupted) with the potential to vote strategically, you have all 27 voters able to vote strategically? No thanks. I say this as someone on both sides - I had no idea what the aggregate list held when I was part of FissionFire's 2009 project.

And yes, we did discuss whether administrators of the project should be able to vote - the consensus at the time was "we trust you not to take advantage of your position." Muzzling administrators so they can't argue for players was never on the table.


Last edited by TheDevilMadeMe: 02-06-2013 at 02:27 PM.
TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-06-2013, 04:46 PM
  #52
MXD
Registered User
 
MXD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 20,381
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
And you continue to take shots at me. Remember where I said that you are welcome not to participate in any future projects I do on this site? Let me change that a little bit: You are not welcome to participate in any future projects I do on this site. And if I don't administer the next project (and after the experience I had administering this one, that would be a desirable outcome), I will highly recommend to whoever does that they not permit you to participate either.

Do you think we all forgot that you were banned by FissionFire (who had nothing to do with this current project) in the middle of the 2009 Top 100 (now top 70) project for repeatedly trying to undermine the project, it's procedures, and it's administrators after the early voting didn't go your way? Sound familiar? You've pulled this crap during 2 of the last 3 ranking projects on the history site, both of them with completely different groups of administrators.
I could have things to say regarding C1958's observations (or your observations regarding C1958's observations) They aren't related to my present message and are probably better off addressed elsewhere.

You did a TERRIFIC job at managing the whole thing.

And that's coming from somebody who acknowledges himself as a "high maintenance" user (something you probably noticed it in the process!).

MXD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-06-2013, 04:56 PM
  #53
MXD
Registered User
 
MXD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 20,381
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Questionable interpretation. The survey after the project looked at region not provenance by nation of birth. So Europeans by birth living in North America were included under the North American umbrella. Likewise Canadians by birth living in the USA.

The real weakness of the project was the age demographic. Only three were identified as over 40 and one - Pappyline had to struggle to be allowed to participate after a rather cavalier rejection.
The problem is -- there's no "democratic way" to address this.

The only way to improve the proportion of, let's say, the 50+ group, would be to refuse applications coming from the younger voters.

On which basis to reject?

Suppose you reject, say, me, on the basis that I'm in a well-represented demographic (30-39).

Well, you end up having the Quebec demographic underrepresented (considering its importance in the history of hockey), the Habs declared fans underrepresented (again, considering its importance in the history of hockey) and the French demographic totally absent (... I think).

That's only my case, but I'm pretty convinced there are others who are in a similar situation...

MXD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-06-2013, 06:16 PM
  #54
ContrarianGoaltender
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 569
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
I think we've improved upon the procedures during the Top 100 lists in some ways, but one thing we have not been as successful at was getting as many European posters involved.
I'd echo the lack of European participation as something that was slightly disappointing. It's certainly not anyone's fault, any voluntary project like this is going to have to just go ahead with whatever diverse or non-diverse group of people end up throwing their hat in the ring, but having more information available would have been very helpful, particularly from Russian and Czech sources.

I spent a fair amount of time trying to dig up information about international goalies and it proved to be a difficult task, particularly for the three non-NHL Euro goalies that came up for voting. Vladimir Dzurilla definitely didn't get a fair shake in the final voting round, and the Jiri Holecek debate involved a lot of guesswork on what European observers thought from tournament awards voting and hearsay from Canadian sportswriters. It would certainly have been nice to read some more primary sources or hear from people who could reliably recall what international observers were saying, particularly in the '70s and '80s.

ContrarianGoaltender is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-06-2013, 06:27 PM
  #55
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,588
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MXD View Post
The problem is -- there's no "democratic way" to address this.

The only way to improve the proportion of, let's say, the 50+ group, would be to refuse applications coming from the younger voters.

On which basis to reject?

Suppose you reject, say, me, on the basis that I'm in a well-represented demographic (30-39).

Well, you end up having the Quebec demographic underrepresented (considering its importance in the history of hockey), the Habs declared fans underrepresented (again, considering its importance in the history of hockey) and the French demographic totally absent (... I think).

That's only my case, but I'm pretty convinced there are others who are in a similar situation...
not to mention, the implication attached when someone says that there were not enough older posters, is that older posters are somehow better or more qualified to compare these goalies on a historical basis.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-06-2013, 06:36 PM
  #56
tarheelhockey
Global Moderator
 
tarheelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 31,686
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Questionable interpretation. The survey after the project looked at region not provenance by nation of birth. So Europeans by birth living in North America were included under the North American umbrella.
I would find it extremely odd if there were many Europeans-living-in-North-America in the group. That's not exactly a huge demographic.

tarheelhockey is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-06-2013, 06:41 PM
  #57
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 37,935
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
not to mention, the implication attached when someone says that there were not enough older posters, is that older posters are somehow better or more qualified to compare these goalies on a historical basis.
I think that there is something to be gained from having posters with firsthand knowledge involved, or memories of the contemporary opinion of these guys.

TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-06-2013, 07:57 PM
  #58
Nalyd Psycho
Registered User
 
Nalyd Psycho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: No Bandwagon
Country: Canada
Posts: 22,717
vCash: 500
Agreed. But I think we can safely say that not having enough participants was the largest problem.

__________________
Every post comes with the Nalyd Psycho Seal of Approval.
Nalyd Psycho is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2013, 04:18 AM
  #59
Theokritos
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 2,749
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
too stubborn in opinion to be so easily corrupted
"Corrupted" is a harsh word for what overpass describes in post #23.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
all 27 voters able to vote strategically? No thanks.
That's a reasonable position, but the contrary position is not without reason as well and doesn't necessarily imply that the administrators did not acted to the best of their belief in this project. Again, see post #23.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
And yes, we did discuss whether administrators of the project should be able to vote - the consensus at the time was "we trust you not to take advantage of your position." Muzzling administrators so they can't argue for players was never on the table.
A consensus can change. And just because something was never on the table until now doesn't mean it shouldn't ever be brought to the table.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Taco MacArthur View Post
since no one is willing to administer this project without participating
I didn't follow the preliminary discussions closely because I did not plan to vote in this project. Therefore I missed that debate, but I for my part would have been willing to administer without voting. Whether I would have been suited for the job is another question. But willing? Yes. You learn so much from these projects, but I don't consider myself knowledgable enough to take part in the voting anyway, so why not. And maybe there are others who would have been willing as well.

For the next project you could try the following approach: people who want to vote in the project have to pre-register (no lists sent in yet), then you ask people who regularly or frequently contribute on the HOH boards but who did not pre-register whether they would be interested in administering the project without voting. An active approach, go and ask people who doesn't declare interest in voting. Just a suggestion, but worth a try I think.

Theokritos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2013, 09:56 AM
  #60
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,588
vCash: 500
I'm not sure fixing a problem that doesn't actually exist is the way to go...

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2013, 10:37 AM
  #61
MadArcand
We do not sow
 
MadArcand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Pyke
Country: Slovakia
Posts: 4,511
vCash: 500
I see a whole different problem, unfortunately it can't be named 'lest I want to get banned.

(no, nothing concerning moderators or the project administrators per se)

MadArcand is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2013, 12:48 PM
  #62
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 37,935
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Theokritos View Post
I didn't follow the preliminary discussions closely because I did not plan to vote in this project. Therefore I missed that debate, but I for my part would have been willing to administer without voting. Whether I would have been suited for the job is another question. But willing? Yes. You learn so much from these projects, but I don't consider myself knowledgable enough to take part in the voting anyway, so why not. And maybe there are others who would have been willing as well.
I'll keep you in mind when it comes time to find admins for the next ranking project.

Quote:
For the next project you could try the following approach: people who want to vote in the project have to pre-register (no lists sent in yet), then you ask people who regularly or frequently contribute on the HOH boards but who did not pre-register whether they would be interested in administering the project without voting. An active approach, go and ask people who doesn't declare interest in voting. Just a suggestion, but worth a try I think.
A lot of participants send in lists last minute right before the project starts. I agree with Nayld that the more people involved the better - more people involved also means that the votes of admins are watered down even further for anyone who thinks that could be an issue. I would not want to make the procedure for sending in a list more complicated.

And you're showing that you weren't involved in the preliminary discussions. I publicly mentioned the need for a co-admin several times before seventieslord decided that he actually had the time to do it. This project almost didn't get off the ground due to lack of admins.

TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2013, 01:19 PM
  #63
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,588
vCash: 500
yeah, I pretty much saved this whole thing.

*pops collar and puts on sunglasses*

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-08-2013, 05:18 PM
  #64
Theokritos
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 2,749
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
And you're showing that you weren't involved in the preliminary discussions. I publicly mentioned the need for a co-admin several times before seventieslord decided that he actually had the time to do it. This project almost didn't get off the ground due to lack of admins.
I for my part don't see it as a matter of what went wrong in this project, but more as a matter of what could be improved in the next one. Without you admins the project wouldn't have been possible, the community owes you a lot. That however is not a reason not to think about ways to become more scientific. I don't have a sure fire solution, but we should strive for it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
I'm not sure fixing a problem that doesn't actually exist is the way to go...
The problem is that

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
knowing what was on the aggregate list had the potential to bias one's round 2 vote
Or one's posts, I might add. "Bias" not in a deliberate, malicious way.

Theokritos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-08-2013, 05:26 PM
  #65
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 37,935
vCash: 500
Meh, I really don't understand the concept of "biased posts." Biased voting, sure, in theory, though I honestly wasn't even looking at my own Round 1 list when I was voting in Round 2 (can't speak for 70s there though).

Edit: The only time I can think of this possibly being an issue for me was that I really wanted to discuss Vezina vs Benedict, and knew that Vezina was coming up in round 3.


Last edited by TheDevilMadeMe: 02-08-2013 at 05:36 PM.
TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-08-2013, 06:50 PM
  #66
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,588
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Meh, I really don't understand the concept of "biased posts." Biased voting, sure, in theory, though I honestly wasn't even looking at my own Round 1 list when I was voting in Round 2 (can't speak for 70s there though).

Edit: The only time I can think of this possibly being an issue for me was that I really wanted to discuss Vezina vs Benedict, and knew that Vezina was coming up in round 3.
I wasn't either.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:32 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.