Blogocentric Formulations

Pros and Cons of Awardicons

A recent talk with a friend got me thinking about the practice of offering contests with Awardicons as the ultimate prize. One the one hand, like any contest, there's a prize for winning. That prize - on WdC - often comes in the form of a snazzy Awardicon affixed to the item you submitted to the contest. But, on the other hand, what's a contest organizer to do when they don't think any of the entries merit an Awardicon? What happens when none of the entries, in your opinion, deserve to have a 100K or a 50K or even a 10K Awardicon adorning them?

My first thought is to say "too bad, you have to award it anyway." Just because you're not happy with the quality of the entries doesn't mean that the contestants did anything wrong. Assuming the entries meet the minimum qualifications to enter, you've already promised the prize to someone and it would be unfair to suddenly say, "You know what? I didn't like any of the entries enough to give out the prize, so I won't. Sorry!" Not to mention the fact it would open the door to making the contest process even more subjective, and might elicit accusations of unseemly activity if a contest organizer is consistently refusing to give out the promised prizes because none of the entries ever measures up.

However, I've noticed a number of items with Awardicons on them... some even with large-value Awardicons... that really aren't very good stories or poems. Not all of them are necessarily bad, but many - at least in my opinion - seem to have a stark discrepancy between the quality of the writing, and the size of the Awardicon that graces that item.

After a brief and not-so-scientific bit of research, it seems these Awardicons are often given in situations where contest and activity organizers and donors are left with no choice. In order to avoid accusations of unfairness or not honoring their commitments, they have to honor the promise of giving out an Awardicon and place it on something.

I am a bit troubled by the idea of being forced to award something and giving an item an Awardicon when every part of you is screaming that the item doesn't really deserve it. And I'll be the first to admit that I've run contests where I've felt like that. I've run contests and activities where I've been compelled to give an entry a huge awardicon or major recognition even while being completely unenthusiastic about the quality of those entries. Over my years on WdC, I've slowly developed a few bits of advice that I think will help anyone else who may be frustrated with the fact that Awardicons are being given to items that maybe don't quite measure up to the level of quality indicated by the award.

There's nothing you can really do about other people's processes, but if you run your own contest or activity or are considering donating a prize package to an auction, raffle, or other fundraiser, I would encourage you to consider the following:

Set a high enough minimum threshold so you have options. If you're running a contest, maybe insist on having a minimum of five entries in order to give out the prize (or more entries in the case of a larger Awardicon). You can always offer a consolation prize if that threshold isn't met, and if you require a minimum of five entries to give out a 50K Awardicon, for example, at least you've got choices and aren't stuck giving that Awardicon to the only item that's entered, or aren't stuck being forced to choose between only two entries of questionable quality. The more options you have, the more likely you are to be able to choose one that you're satisfied with. The same is true of prize packages you donate to raffles and auctions. If you're going to donate a prize package that's, say, a number of reviews and then an Awardicon for your favorite item, don't make the prize package only three reviews. Then you're stuck slapping an Awardicon on one out of three items when one out of five or one out of ten will give you more options. Or at least port-surf and try to find items in the winner's port that are of good quality so that you're not just reviewing the first three items you find and then indiscriminately putting an Awardicon on one of them because none really impressed you.

Don't offer too many Awardicons all at once. A lot of contests will have an Awardicon for at least one place (like first place). Others might even have Awardicons for the top three places. But if you're also giving Awardicons out to honorable mentions, people who have submitted a certain number of entries to the contest, etc. then you're putting yourself in a position where, again, you're obligated to give an Awardicon for something that may not be deserved. If you limit the number of Awardicons you offer to give out, you reduce the possibility of having to give them out to people you don't think deserve them.

The reason why I'm ranting about Awardicons is because they're attached to an item, and as such, are an indicator of quality. A Merit Badge is, in theory, a similar kind of award, but it's important to distinguish them because Merit Badges are given to an individual and not attached to an item. Additionally, they are a fixed amount (10K) and don't come in more valuable varieties. Thus, at least to me, it's easier to give Merit Badges when disappointed in quality of entries, because they can still be given to indicate an accomplishment (first place in a contest, congrats on entering every round of the contest in 2012, etc.) without tying it to a particular piece of writing. An Awardicon, on the other hand, can say the same thing, but also implies a certain level of quality for the item to which it is ascribed.

I'm always trying to think of ways to improve the running of contests and activities. If anyone has any suggestions about how to solve this Awardicon issue (assuming you think it's an issue), I'd love to hear your thoughts. And if you think I'm crazy and that Awardicons are great in all circumstances, heck, I'd love to hear from you too.