2015 UCA After Action Review

[Le Chuck]

I nominate Le Chuck.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

*snort chuckle* you know this whole mess is mostly my fault right?

[Vigo]

I nominate Le Chuck.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

*snort chuckle* you know this whole mess is mostly my fault right?

  I third Le Chuck

[yotsuya]

I nominate Le Chuck.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

*snort chuckle* you know this whole mess is mostly my fault right?

  I third Le Chuck

[Le Chuck]

I nominate Le Chuck.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

I second this.

Oh yeah cocheese?! Well I nominate you pendejo!

[yotsuya]

I nominate Le Chuck.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

I second this.

Oh yeah cocheese?! Well I nominate you pendejo!

Fuuuuuuuuck no. I'm out of gold stars.

[Ond]

I nominate Le Chuck.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

*snort chuckle* you know this whole mess is mostly my fault right?

  I third Le Chuck

Bring back Le Chuck GODDAMIT *smirk*  and bring back rep as well.

[Le Chuck]

I nominate Le Chuck.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

I second this.

Oh yeah cocheese?! Well I nominate you pendejo!

Fuuuuuuuuck no. I'm out of gold stars.

That's like three more "u" than you said you would use. You weren't joking around.

Ps. Send more dick pix.

and bring back rep as well.

Can I second this? I second this.

[yotsuya]

In all seriousness, having done this with Le Chuck for 3 years, and knowing the time he put into it, the money he's put into it in the past, and how serious he takes it, if he wants to serve again, I hope he does.

[Vigo]

Ps. Send more dick pix.

[edekoning]

First of all I would like to thank ChanceKJ and PBJ for taking to time to organize this year's UCA.

My views on the UCA awards are:
-Take it seriously as you know other people will.
-Do not break the rules, as there is no easier way to piss people off.
-Realize that you can never please everyone.
-From day one make a separate thread were people can ask questions or raise concerns about the UAC awards. Also make it absolutely clear that such discussions should not be held in the nominations/voting threads. Enforce if possible.
-Prefer fewer categories, but with more entries to choose from. I understand that getting the categories right is a tough thing. Maybe its better to define those after the nomination phase has ended.

[harveybirdman]

First of all I would like to thank ChanceKJ and PBJ for taking to time to organize this year's UCA.

My views on the UCA awards are:
-Take it seriously as you know other people will.
-Do not break the rules, as there is no easier way to piss people off.
-Realize that you can never please everyone.
-From day one make a separate thread were people can ask questions or raise concerns about the UAC awards. Also make it absolutely clear that such discussions should not be held in the nominations/voting threads. Enforce if possible.
-Prefer fewer categories, but with more entries to choose from. I understand that getting the categories right is a tough thing. Maybe its better to define those after the nomination phase has ended.

Solid points  and I agree

[Le Chuck]

*First year of the event.  UCA board was not established and kinks were being worked out on the fly
**Categories had to be reset part way through the voting as one user left the forum and requested to be removed from consideration
***Only 3 entries could be voted as we had a repeat winner in the parent category
****Included honorable mentions as certain categories could not be filled, IIRC there was another year with honorable mentions as well but I don't want to dig too far to find it. 

2014 was a rocky year with some growing pains for the event.  The old board who had gone without change since its inception unanimously decided to hang it up and give others on the forum the opportunity to carry the event forward. 

I certainly appreciate the nominations and have considered picking it back up but I haven't decided.  I'm not being coy, I just need to figure out where I am in my new move, new job, new baby, new newness, and try to forecast a year out if I'll have the inclination to do it again.  I will tell you it was very nice taking this one off.   

[n3wt0n]

So I have dug out a couple issues between all the bickering and thrown in my nickel.

1. Voting was down considerable percentage (25% if I remember correctly). Asking why has resulted in speculative finger pointing about drama and over critical review.  But, ask the people who won a UCA and I imagine they had a lot of input and support from the community. THE WHOLE COMMUNITY. That includes the drama queens and the over critical. That doesn't mean that we should all be a-holes but I think the bickering over who is and who isn't being a <insert current feature flaw here> does more damage than a honest review of someones progress.

2. How many UCA reps is a good number? Chance mentioned that 2 was a good minimum number and less than 2 is just not okay. Yots thinks more is needed and I would agree. I would say 3 as a minimum with a max of 5. 3 would appease Chances recommendation of more than 2 and prevent the scenario (of a strong personality pushing their ideas out) laid out by Yotsuya earlier. 5 as a maximum should make decisions pretty easy to decide on with a healthy amount of input.

3. It was brought up that winners should not get automatic HoF status. While I personally disagree and think that it is fine for the winners to be added to the hall of fame I would like to know what the current criteria for HoF additions is. If winning a UCA is the only reasonable way in than you bet your ass they should be added. It is really cool to go back through the hall of fame thread and see what is now the standard vs. 5 years ago. The quality has always been there but the attention to detail and the style has definitely changed over time. I really like to see the progression and putting the UCA winners in there makes that progression a yearly thing.

4. Nomination recap - Leapinlew and CheffoJeffo have had nominations and LeChuck, while a previous member who bowed out, has received nominations. Chance is not going to stay on but PBJ is going to. Personally, I would be happy with any of those members on the board and would 2nd any of their nominations. Did I miss anyone? Also, what qualifications are needed to take on this position and what is required? Time? Money? Can you self nominate or will you be burned at the stake for attempting it?

We can keep arguing about how people act vs. how we expect them to act or we can try to get to the bottom of some of these issues. Up to you.

[n3wt0n]

So... LeChuck posted his chart at the same time I posted my thoughts. It seems that 2015 in fact DID NOT have 25% less voting like someone stated earlier. Don't believe everything you read on the internet kids.  My mistake. It looks like categories AND voting was actually up from last year.

[Le Chuck]

So... LeChuck posted his chart at the same time I posted my thoughts. It seems that 2015 in fact DID NOT have 25% less voting like someone stated earlier. Don't believe everything you read on the internet kids.  My mistake. It looks like categories AND voting was actually up from last year.

I didn't bother with the math but the drop in 2014 was due to changes half way through voting, and we lost of a lot of votes - I know of at least ten that abstained from one category.  This was the first year the UCAs didn't break 80 in any event.  Missed it by "that" much. 

[harveybirdman]

I did a quick calculation based on full size participation last year and dedicated build this year. Sorry... it just felt that way based on what seemed like fewer responses in the voting thread and many voters voting without commenting.

[Token]

I nominate the following for UCA Board:

Ond
Yots (But i don't think he wants in)
vwalbridge
johnrt

They are all excellent builders who are also constructive posters. I know nothing of their character or integrity. We ain't electing a Pope here.


Regarding drama-

The UCA results thread should be focused on the builders who won. Like Malenko, I voted for the Raiden. But I don't think the UCA winners thread is the right place to argue that someone other than the winner should have won. It's also not the right place to call people out, so I apologize to the winners for derailing the thread with my Malenko-Kanye post.

[n3wt0n]

I did a quick calculation based on full size participation last year and dedicated build this year. Sorry... it just felt that way based on what seemed like fewer responses in the voting thread and many voters voting without commenting.

I would have thought the same thing.

[johnrt]

.

[yamatetsu]

I nominate the people who wanted to do it last year but chose (opted ?) not to.

On 01 March 2015 the reins of the UCAs (to include the totally baller UCA avatard) will pass to the new UCA board.  They are:

Vigo
PBJ
ChanceKJ
Opt2Not
Louis Tully
Malenko
Nephasth

ChanceKJ is out, Louis and Nephasth are gone.

PBJ, Vigo, Opt2Not and Malenko would make a good team in my book.

[yotsuya]

I nominate the following for UCA Board:

Ond
Yots (But i don't think he wants in)
vwalbridge
johnrt

They are all excellent builders who are also constructive posters. I know nothing of their character or integrity. We ain't electing a Pope here.

While I appreciate the nomination, I'm going to have to respectfully decline. I served on the first board for 3 years, asked because, ironically, I was known for my good character and integrity. I took the honor seriously, because quite frankly I wanted to help recognize outstanding craftsmanship. There are many builders and innovators who do it not for accolades and share their projects because of a love for arcade machines, which is ultimately what this is all about. I always functioned to make sure that, in order to do so, everything stayed FAIR. Otherwise, this just becomes a popularity contest.

In order to keep it fair, you absolutely NEED to make sure you stick to the criteria you set. As a board member, I frequently made sure nominations and categories were in line with the criteria we presented at the get go. If there were issues, we as a board of 5 discussed them, debated them, and ultimately voted on them. It wasn't always unanimous, it wasn't always pretty, but everyone's viewpoint was welcome. Sometimes I convinced people to see my side, sometimes I didn't - but you could never say the process wasn't fair and inclusive. I know for a fact we put more than three hours into it - hell - we probably hit that in one day during a discussion about deadlines. But that kind of diligence is critical if you want it keep the process fair. If you want to give recognition to cabinets you like simply because you like them,  you don't need awards for that - tell the builders in their threads right then and there. But I always felt the UCAs should recognize a high standard of quality and achievement. As a committee, it was our job to make sure the process stayed balanced.

Personally, I'd like to see the nomination process tightened up. I think more often than not it's a handful of members doing most of the nominations, and people saying "Seconded" without much thought. I think a limit how many cabs one person can nominate should be considered, and perhaps a boost in the amount of "seconded"s needed to make it eligible.

[yotsuya]

I nominate the people who wanted to do it last year but chose (opted ?) not to.

On 01 March 2015 the reins of the UCAs (to include the totally baller UCA avatard) will pass to the new UCA board.  They are:

Vigo
PBJ
ChanceKJ
Opt2Not
Louis Tully
Malenko
Nephasth

ChanceKJ is out, Louis and Nephasth are gone.

PBJ, Vigo, Opt2Not and Malenko would make a good team in my book.

I agree with this sentiment.

[vwalbridge]

I nominate the following for UCA Board:

Ond
Yots (But i don't think he wants in)
vwalbridge
johnrt

They are all excellent builders who are also constructive posters. I know nothing of their character or integrity. We ain't electing a Pope here.

Thank you for the nomination Token. I'm flattered but will have to respectfully decline.   I'm just too green in this hobby to be qualified.  There are far more knowledgeable builders here that will do a fine job.

[yotsuya]

I'm just too green in this hobby to have be qualified.  There are far more knowledgeable builders here that will do a fine job.

That's good. That means you're not a dirty veteran like the rest of us.

[Malenko]

I'm just too green in this hobby to have be qualified.  There are far more knowledgeable builders here that will do a fine job.

That's good. That means you're not a dirty veteran like the rest of us.

---smurfing--- drama queen 

[DeLuSioNal29]

Personally, I think we should wait before we nominate or elect anyone.  Tempers are flaring and things need to cool down.  We have quite a bit of time here...

Maybe after Zapcon in April we can re-visit?  What do you guys think?

D

[Ond]

Personally, I think we should wait before we nominate or elect anyone.  Tempers are flaring and things need to cool down.  We have quite a bit of time here...

Maybe after Zapcon in April we can re-visit?  What do you guys think?

D

Good idea.

[Malenko]

All I know is we had an all-star cast ready to run them for 2015, then Chance happened and everyone said they'd rather not do it with him involved. Instead of him doing the right thing and stepping down, he let everyone else take the high road and the end result of that is him finally having a UCA and no one really giving a ---fudgesicle--- about them anymore.


Can't hurt to wait till after Zapcon though 

[opt2not]

All I know is we had an all-star cast ready to run them for 2015, then Chance happened and everyone said they'd rather not do it with him involved. Instead of him doing the right thing and stepping down, he let everyone else take the high road and the end result of that is him finally having a UCA and no one really giving a ---fudgesicle--- about them anymore.


Can't hurt to wait till after Zapcon though 

Yeah that played a major part in it, and also the UCA committee was initially too large.  I think 4 is a good number for the committee, like The 4 Horsemen Of The Cade-ocalypse!
 PBJ, Vigo, Malenko and Me would make a decent team I would think. The wildcard being good ol' Jim here, but he's like the colour commentary of the bunch. He can be Shaq.   

But lets figure out the roster later on after Zapcom. I do have a few ideas that I would like to run by the eventual committee that could make next year's UCA more interesting and winning more coveted.

[yotsuya]

All I know is we had an all-star cast ready to run them for 2015, then Chance happened and everyone said they'd rather not do it with him involved. Instead of him doing the right thing and stepping down, he let everyone else take the high road and the end result of that is him finally having a UCA and no one really giving a ---fudgesicle--- about them anymore.


Can't hurt to wait till after Zapcon though 

Yeah that played a major part in it, and also the UCA committee was initially too large.  I think 4 is a good number for the committee, like The 4 Horsemen Of The Cade-ocalypse!
 PBJ, Vigo, Malenko and Me would make a decent team I would think. The wildcard being good ol' Jim here, but he's like the colour commentary of the bunch. He can be Shaq. 
But lets figure out the roster later on after Zapcom. I do have a few ideas that I would like to run by the eventual committee that could make next year's UCA more interesting and winning more coveted.

You need an odd number to break ties. 5 is a good number.

[opt2not]

You need an odd number to break ties. 5 is a good number.

Let's go, yots! You're up!

[Malenko]

You need an odd number to break ties. 5 is a good number.

in the event of a tie, we'll ask PBJ, then do the opposite of what he says. I kid I kid! 


You'd be the perfect #5 though yotsie

[Token]

Waiting until after Zapcon is great, but based on the nominating process outlined in the first post, here is where we stand:

Remaining on the UCA board
pbj

Nominated and accepted
Opt2Not
Malenko

Nominated and pending acceptance
Cheffo
Leapinlew
LeChuck
Ond
Vigo

The board should have an odd number of members, as Yots has already argued.

[yotsuya]

You need an odd number to break ties. 5 is a good number.

Let's go, yots! You're up!

While I am humbled by your faith in my character and integrity, I must decline. I simply don't have the time, as I'm going to be starting a new babyfighting gambling ring pretty soon. Toodles.

[DeLuSioNal29]

You'd be the perfect #5 though yotsie

[pbj]

It's March... maybe we could wait until.... October? to select the committee???

[yotsuya]

It's March... maybe we could wait until.... October? to select the committee???

I think that's a very good idea.

[opt2not]

It's March... maybe we could wait until.... October? to select the committee???

I think that's a very good idea.

Seconded.

[Token]

That makes a ton of sense. There's no need for a UAC board 10 months before nominating begins.


That also means pbj gets to be UAC dictator until October. 

[leapinlew]

That makes a ton of sense. There's no need for a UAC board 10 months before nominating begins.


That also means pbj gets to be UAC dictator until October. 

disagree. The board should be in place during the year being reviewed. There should be private running threads of projects to watch.

Also, not it!