Comments on: Inkwell Awards Winners Announced

By: Inkwell Awards Winners Revised » Comics Worth Reading

Inkwell Awards Winners Revised » Comics Worth Reading — Fri, 11 Jul 2008 11:25:18 +0000

[...] “personal attacks”, I think they mean pointing out how much of a conflict of interest it is for one of the Award organizers to also be a winner, as I did. I never saw any actual attacks [...]

By: Jena- Interactive Voting System developer

Jena- Interactive Voting System developer — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 05:38:22 +0000

Johanna is right. Organizers can’t be eligible for there own awards.

By: Johanna

Johanna — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 22:29:36 +0000

Generally, “who cares what you think” answers are more believable if you don’t go on to write a page in response. Methinks you protest too much.

I still think it looks bad if the organizers win a quarter of the awards. They shouldn’t have been eligible in the first place.

By: Jimmy T

Jimmy T — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 22:19:56 +0000

What is this MSNBC!

Two posts of someone who was either jealous or not as good as Danny Miki and there is Grumbling???

Take about Junior High school reporting.

With Almost 5000 unique IP votes Miki gets high votes in four Catagories and followed closly by some others and he won his catagories plain and simple.

Funny though no matter who gets it some person will be there to complain.

The Awards are for Inkers, By Inkers and fans. If someone doesn’t like it… To Bad.

The Inking community at Large is a close and wonderful group of men and Woman ( Yes Sandra hope and some others got a lot of votes.)

So who cares what someones opinion of the winners are. And as for Tim Townsend, He has no control over the votes and did not campaign for votes.

He got those votes because he is one of the Inkers that people genuinly like and so they voted.

Votes were disqualified that had one name in every catagory or if they tried voting twice.

So with all the people that voted the numbers came in and those people won.

Anybody that doesn’t like the way it came out there’s nothing you can do for them, because at 99% positive mail in favor of the awards and results show me that the majority of the fans and peers are happy.

You will never satisfy the small community of small minded people that always know better then everyone else and will only detract from anything done.

So lets not go low and defend something that we know is right and instead focus on the Awards.

So thanks for those of you that voted and supported the Inkwell Awards.

Jimmy

By: Bob Almond

Bob Almond — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 19:22:44 +0000

Thank you for your coverage of our Inkwell Awards results. But obviously there are some items that don’t meet your acceptance or standards for how an award event should be run and I’ll be happy to attempt to address some of these matters as best I can. Please keep in mind that this was our first time out and we were bound to find it a learning experience and a work in progress. No awards system is the same now as it was on day one and they all had their birthing pains. This was an open ballot system we tried this year so as to keep a perception of no committee agenda existing. We did not choose the nominees (except in the Hall of Fame).
Our primary mission is/was to honor our own in an industry that has not done so well with that of late and to be a resource for informing/educating the community and public about the misunderstood craft and artists of inking. We feel that we did that. I would be really curious about who people who are ‘grumbling’ about the Miki wins (I saw two such posts at Heidi’s site) who they voted for. Also keep in mind the description of his categories: Prolific doesn’t mean BEST, Props award is one where the artist is deserving of more credit, and the MVP is an artist who can save/boost any job like a troubleshooter. He didn’t win a FAVORITE category and even if he had, favorite is not ‘best’, only an opinion. Danny did not campaign for himself online as far as anyone can tell and many thought he deserved these category wins. The categories themselves have been discussed at length for weeks and we will be reviewing them in a month for the 2009 year along with a possible change in the voting system itself, items we have all discussed in advance of the results.
If the voting pool is not well-educated as you say, we knew that would be an uphill battle as inking itself is not well-understood. We knew some categories would be understood more by the artists and art collectors but we will always make an effort to keep things as clear and friendly as possible. But hopefully anyone who has perused out site would feel a bit more informed and look at inking in a new light.
As for us on the committee winning awards, this will be a subject of review. But Tim would like me to pass on that he is more than happy to step aside if it will put any negativity to rest. As for the Joe Sinnott win in the award named after him, we thought it would be better if he won it instead of it being presented to him. We thought it would mean that much more to him….and the fans obviously concurred since it was an open ballot system.

Every award event has its dissenters and especially brutal they can be on a keyboard when one is learning from trial and error and every blunder is pointed out. We welcome respectful and positive criticism and have since day one. We knew this would be a tough job when we took it on but someone had to. Inkers were calling out for something to happen and I felt it better to act than simply whine. We’re not perfect but we will continue our efforts to support and promote the art and artists of inking into 2009 and beyond better each time around. I think the industry is better for us being here than not and many creators have been very grateful and vocal about what we’re doing. We can’t be all things to all people but were trying. Sorry if you don’t agree or find us credible.

Bob Almond