There's been debate in the past how to determine the winner of the Spilled Lattes. I figured I'd put it to a vote.

FIRST (and current) OPTION: nominee is an honorary title for the top five vote-getters, and the winner is determined from the same initial ballot.

SECOND OPTION: nominees are derived from a first ballot, and the field is narrowed to the five top vote-getters per category. Then, once we have nominees, we allow a month or so for voters to make their selections from the more limited second ballot, whose options were determined by the first ballot. (i.e. how the Academy does it)

Pros to the first option:
- it's hard to get people to vote once, let alone twice, so it simplifies the process.
- multiple ballots often water down the results, so the top vote-getter from the first write-in ballot doesn't necessarily win on the second limited-option ballot. A one-ballot system arguably more accurately reflects the true opinions of the voters (for example: see NYFCC this year-- 12 Years a Slave won their first ballot, but once options were narrowed down, American Hustle won because more people whose first choices were eliminated from the second ballot preferred Hustle to Slave).

Pros to the second option:
- a narrower field would make it easier for aspiring voters to seek out and watch ALL the nominated films. Currently, they see what they see, so the most oft-viewed films are most likely to win. Results may prove more interesting if more people see more of the nominees.
- a narrower second vote may also encourage more people to take part, as it may feel more "official" than the current method.

I'm also obviously open to other ideas, considering the sparse voter numbers last year. Anything that will bring more people to the table, even if it means electing a more formal voting body, people who are committed to voting on the Lattes this year-- a Latte Academy, if you will.

Poll question: SPILLED LATTE NOMINATIONS: How should they work?

Poll result (6 votes) FIRST (current) OPTION (1 votes) Vote SECOND OPTION (1 votes) Vote Other (3 votes) Vote What are the Lattes? I'm new here. (1 votes) Vote

categories listed separately and everyone vote for as many or few as they'd like.

more points to the ballots that have more nominees in order, but if you just want to post one nominee, they'd still get points (on a sliding scale). use the 5, 4, 3, 2, 1 system for full ballots and say, 2 points for a post that has a single nominee.

filling out an entire ballot for every category leads to procrastination and homework. I see about 30-50 new releases per year and there's always Spilled Lattes categories I struggle to fill. if you saw 10 movies, cool -- vote on those 10. if you have only two categories you care about, cool -- vote for those. listing each category separately like FYC would encourage that.

I don't think a double-vote would ever work.

... is that it wildly favors the films that make more money/that more people have seen. If we'd done that during the Avengers/TDKR year, those films would have been 1 and 2 in the voting, because folks could have just voted on the few movies they've seen.

Not to sound anti-populist (pretty sure Avengers made my ballot and I see 100+ flicks easily), but there has to be a way to reward passion AND participation. The person who ranks Short Term 12 at #1 who sees a hundred films and the person who ranks Iron Man 3 at #1 who only saw three films... I struggle to believe that those votes should be given equal weight.

But then again, seeing a lot of movies in no way makes one smarter or more informed than someone who doesn't see as many. So I struggle to think they shouldn't be given equal weight too.

I guess I just sort of hope that the Spilled Lattes could be used to encourage folks to see films they may have otherwise skipped, and it wouldn't just be the People's Choice Awards. But there may be no actual way around that if I also want more people to participate.

You see the dilemma.

I fill out a five-nominee ballot for one category, I get five points for my first choice (and add on to the totals of all my other choices). I post one nominee for a category, and I only get two points for my first choice (or one, or three, whatever works).

I think you overestimate a "populist vote" anyway. we should be looking to increase the votes by any means -- an exclusive vote (like last year, where the whims of ONE voter could have changed every single category's winner) is just as flawed as ballot box stuffing. and I don't even think the latter would happen.

Missed the points part. Anyone who reads this who is down for Will's suggestion, I'm game.

>I fill out a five-nominee ballot for one category, I get five
>points for my first choice (and add on to the totals of all my
>other choices). I post one nominee for a category, and I only
>get two points for my first choice (or one, or three, whatever
>works).

The easy way around that if I only want to vote for one movie but I want it to get 5 points instead of 2 is to just go:

1. Twelve Years a Slave
2. Sharknado
3. Scary Movie 5
4. Identity Thief
5. Grown Ups 2

I'm just saying, if I want my first (and only) choice to get maximum points, there's a simple workaround.

Personally I wouldn't bother with any of that and would instead just say voters can cast between 1 and 5 votes in as many or as few categories as they want, and:

first vote = five points
second vote = four points
third vote = three points
etc.

>I think you overestimate a "populist vote" anyway. we should
>be looking to increase the votes by any means -- an exclusive
>vote (like last year, where the whims of ONE voter could have
>changed every single category's winner) is just as flawed as
>ballot box stuffing. and I don't even think the latter would
>happen.

I agree, although I'm not convinced that it's the current ballot format that's been hurting participation. Fuck it though, I'm down to try this to see what happens. This seems to be a year with a lot of well-liked, popular movies, so I'm thinking the turn out is going to be pretty good regardless.

>Personally I wouldn't bother with any of that and would
>instead just say voters can cast between 1 and 5 votes in as
>many or as few categories as they want, and:
>
>first vote = five points
>second vote = four points
>third vote = three points
>etc.

like will said, put up the categories like the FYC post and let people reply with their top pick in the subject and next four (or three or two or one or none) in the message, in order by preference. at that point, "nominees" would just be the top five point-getters, with the winner just whoever's first.

>... is that it wildly favors the films that make more
>money/that more people have seen. If we'd done that during the
>Avengers/TDKR year, those films would have been 1 and 2 in the
>voting, because folks could have just voted on the few movies
>they've seen.

i don't know why y'all are so hung up on making these awards so snobby. like i've said before, this is a hip-hop message board for mostly 20/30-somethings, mostly males. if dark knight rises wins best picture, GOOD. i'd way rather something like that, which reflects the actual tastes of these boards, than some phony art house garbage like amour or... god, what was that abortion from last year? *googles* holy motors. stop. stop trying to tip the scales for this stuff. if the majority of people here saw pacific rim and loved pacific rim, then pacific rim should win best picture. this is OUR awards. if you want more balanced awards or more indie-focused awards, there are tons of other places for that. films that manage to find an audience HERE should be rewarded for that HERE. films that are popular and loved HERE should be reflected in OUR awards. period.

and i have to say, i have way more faith in PTP than you do. people here have seen 12 years, they've seen wolf of wall street, they've seen gravity, her, fruitvale, captain phillips, pacific rim, 42, before midnight, the heat, dat smaug. all those discussion posts are 50+ replies. people here like movies, they see movies, and they talk about movies. otherwise, they'd be in GD. you're convinced that mediocre popcorn fare like avengers and TDKR will sweep the lattes. i don't. the taste here is pretty diverse and actually pretty solid. let the people speak.

>>... is that it wildly favors the films that make more
>>money/that more people have seen. If we'd done that during
>the
>>Avengers/TDKR year, those films would have been 1 and 2 in
>the
>>voting, because folks could have just voted on the few
>movies
>>they've seen.
>
>i don't know why y'all are so hung up on making these awards
>so snobby. like i've said before, this is a hip-hop message
>board for mostly 20/30-somethings, mostly males. if dark
>knight rises wins best picture, GOOD. i'd way rather
>something like that, which reflects the actual tastes of these
>boards, than some phony art house garbage like amour or...
>god, what was that abortion from last year? *googles* holy
>motors. stop. stop trying to tip the scales for this stuff.
>if the majority of people here saw pacific rim and loved
>pacific rim, then pacific rim should win best picture. this
>is OUR awards. if you want more balanced awards or more
>indie-focused awards, there are tons of other places for that.
> films that manage to find an audience HERE should be rewarded
>for that HERE. films that are popular and loved HERE should
>be reflected in OUR awards. period.
>
>and i have to say, i have way more faith in PTP than you do.
>people here have seen 12 years, they've seen wolf of wall
>street, they've seen gravity, her, fruitvale, captain
>phillips, pacific rim, 42, before midnight, the heat, dat
>smaug. all those discussion posts are 50+ replies. people
>here like movies, they see movies, and they talk about movies.
> otherwise, they'd be in GD. you're convinced that mediocre
>popcorn fare like avengers and TDKR will sweep the lattes. i
>don't. the taste here is pretty diverse and actually pretty
>solid. let the people speak.

Nominating an Academy sounds cool but probably not the best idea if you're wanting to encourage more participation

I like the vote on what you've seen option will suggested

>Nominating an Academy sounds cool but probably not the best
>idea if you're wanting to encourage more participation

Feeling like you're part of something may make you more likely to seek out the films on the ballot... but if it doesn't, then the voting body has been limited AND the previous problems regarding folks actually seeing a variety of films remain.

Buggin.
Will's idea is cool.


"Your current frequencies of understanding outweigh that which has been given for you to understand." Saul Williams

I'll run it the same way it's been run in the past in terms of scoring, but I'll split the categories per suggested. At the end, I'll add up the scores using both the old method of scoring and Will's method of scoring and see what the difference is.

Unfortunately, I don't really see any sort of shift in voting policy truly invigorating voter turn-out. I'll just try to rally the masses via inbox and cross-board posting per usual.

That recognizes all movies, not just the dramas/thrillers that usually get mentioned. This would include movies that are equally as awesome, but for completely different reasons, like horror, sci-fi, comic book adaptations, action, comedy, etc.