The problems have been with M-Comm's handling of the process, not with the judges' hard work.
I think you've hit the nail on the head there, Hazel.
Mistakes aren't the problem. In thirty years of being involved in fandoms and fan projects, both as observer and participant, it's been my experience that most people are tolerant, patient and understanding of mistakes. Especially in a fledgling project, just starting out. The Merriweathers aren't the first and won't be the last to have teething troubles.
It's not the problems, but how you handle the problems that counts with people and your attitude in dealing with them. And I think that's where the Merriweathers have fallen down.
I personally found the post about the error in the HM to be somewhat flippant and appallingly insensitive in tone. I'm sure that wasn't the intention, but that was definitely the result. 90% of it was taken up with the committee patting themselves on the back for being mature and adult enough to admit to their error. The actual removal of the award was dealt with almost in passing, with no real sense it seemed to me of apology or appreciation that disappointment and hurt feelings might be the consequence of this mistake.
I knew that Hazel wouldn't be devastated <g>, but I did wonder how a new author, or one less experienced or perhaps more sensitive might have been feeling at having their award ripped away from them in such a cavalier fashion. I think it could have been handled just a little more sensitively.
The second major problem, as I see it, is in communication. We all understand about real life and shrinking free time and volunteers. Hoo boy, do we understand
that. We've all been there. Some of us still are.
The way to solve that problem, though, is not to ignore it, leaving a vacuum of empty silence on the mbs and emails. Especially when people have been asking questions. That just leads to a lot of people being frustrated and annoyed about essentially being ignored.
Two seconds out of your busy real life can easily solve this one though. All it takes is a simple boards post: "Look, guys, I'm sorry about this, but real life is being a bear and I have a huge email backlog. Please bear with me - I will get to you all ASAP. Apologies for the delay!" What that will get you is a lot of "Hey, don't worry about it, we understand. Just get to us when you can." posts. People will be accommodating. So long as you keep them in the loop.
Hazel's point about the Merriweather site initially containing implied criticisms of the Kerths is also well made. It made for what I consider to be a quite unnecessary sour note to start thing off on. Coupled with what seemed to be an inherent bias against angst and introspection in the judging score sheets - along with the Kerths, probably the two most bitterly argued bones of contention between the two halves of the fandom in the past - and the insistence of the committee on being anonymous, it perhaps wasn't surprising therefore that suspicions were aroused.
Given the history of conflict in our fandom, I'm surprised that the committee didn't realise just how that would be perceived. It seems impossible to believe that they were oblivious to the concerns and wariness it would cause. Especially coupled with the anti-Kerth sentiments of the website, which naturally led to speculation on who exactly was involved in the project and what their motives might be. A very bad start.
Unless, of course, they are all entirely new to the fandom, with no understanding of its history. Always possible.
As Hazel has said, divisions exist, and we have a unique perspective on things that perhaps other fandoms without our history of conflict don't. As such, it's always a wise course not just to be above board, but to be
seen to be above board. I think in this fandom, making a decision to have everything shrouded in secrecy was a very bad move that was bound to cause the Merriweathers difficulties.
Having said that, far from an attitude of wanting to 'cause havoc' and 'wreck the awards', as Cindy states, the sentiment that I, personally, heard expressed time and again was that people
were willing to set their (not entirely unreasonable in the circumstances) suspicions aside and give the Merriweathers and their committee the benefit of the doubt. See where this went. People were genuinely excited at this new project and genuinely keen to see it succeed.
That it has gotten off to a rocky start has more to do with the way its been handled by the committee imo, rather than any conspiracy against it.
Part of that attitude, which is never welcomed, is an apparent tendency to see the expression of legitimate concerns and questions as 'whining' or an attempt at sabotage. Again, in my experience, people will ask, guys. They're curious beggers for the most part. <g> You have to accept that your every move will be queried and deal with those queries civilly and with good humour, if you want to gain their respect and good will. If you act like you're in a siege mentality, or with hostility to questioners, people will lose faith in you pretty quickly.
In conclusion, hey, the Merriweathers have gotten off to a rocky start. Well, they're not alone. Here in the UK we still have fond memories and a wry chuckle or two over the complete fiasco that was the premiere live TV ceremony of the Brit Awards for music. A complete disaster from start to finish - I don't think a single moment of it went right. They were slammed in the press and the joke of the water cooler. <G>
The Brit Awards celebrated their 25th anniversary this year.
No reason why the Merriweathers can't get over these stumbling first baby steps and be a success either. And, despite what some may think, I think that's what most in this fandom would like to see. If the Merriweather committee are willing to learn from their mistakes and perhaps accept some friendly advice, perhaps they'll be celebrating their 25th in the years to come. And we'll all be out with the bunting and pompoms to celebrate.
LabRat
