Movies Books Music Food Tv Shows Technology Politics Video Games Parenting Fashion Green Living more >

Lunch » Tags » Events » Reviews » 2010 Lunch Awards

2010 Lunch Awards

3 Ratings: 5.0
All reviews written in 2010 on Lunch.com are eligible to win the Lunch Award. The "best" reviews are rated highly by readers in terms of Thoughfulness, Helpfulness, etc.

   What are the Lunch Awards? First EVER award honoring online reviews! Recognizing excellence in reviews by real people! Brand spanking new! Sharing useful knowledge and opinions online is not only helpful, but actually has … see full wiki

Tags: Events, Lunchcom
1 review about 2010 Lunch Awards

A Quick Tip by Count_Orlok_22

  • Dec 17, 2010
  • by
Personally, as an egalitarian, I believe that we must see each other as equals and therefore I am opposed to the concept of competition. While I have no qualms with awards being handed out for people's contributions and I certainly encourage everyone to speak up and congratulate one another on their successes, I feel that voting on the best "this or that" when it comes to creative output will only taint the creative process and encourage a hierarchic mentality. If Lunch.com is true in its desire to bring people together and find common ground as a social networking/reviewing site, then one must assume that the site's main goal is to unify people and provide web users with informative and entertaining write-ups. The problem is that the very idea of awarding people based upon a populist voting system doesn't necessarily reflect the quality of the writing artistically or technically and will likely lead to resentments. It must also be taken into account that members with the highest number of friends are set up to receive more votes. So far as I can see, the best way to initiate an awards program would be to rely on the opinions of outsiders and experts in various fields to nominate the reviews they find most helpful. By having the very people who create the content being awarded the ones who nominate said content seems like a conflict of interest and a somewhat narcissistic proposition. Having said that, I still love this site for it's easy-to-use platform, for its members and staff, and for most of its content. But I think, in all honesty and with no offense meant, that this awards idea is misguided.
Was this helpful?
Post a Comment
December 18, 2010
Very valid and interesting points made!
December 18, 2010
hey you!
December 18, 2010
I tried to catch you on YIM, but I was still sending out my newsletter. I was too slow! LOL!
December 18, 2010
Thanks, Adri.
December 19, 2010
Hey you! (hugs)...

but not you, Orlokian! 
December 20, 2010
Welcome, Sean. :)

And, hey again to William! :-P
December 20, 2010
I'm Orlok, not an Orlokian. You're all my little Orlokians. My little pets. Mwa-ha-ha-hahahahaha!
December 20, 2010
for some reason, that sounds dirty LOL!
December 20, 2010
You are an odd one. I was being the master of the puppets and you go and make it about sex. Get your mind out of the gutter, boy. LOL!
December 20, 2010
LOL! I'm with Will on that account. :-P
December 20, 2010
Such puerile minds. Well, really! ; )
December 20, 2010
Yup. :)
December 20, 2010
Nice. :)
December 20, 2010
There is no ism.
December 20, 2010
December 17, 2010
I agree with you. I know someone who is just asking for votes and nominations because of the awards--the thing is, with any awards based on 'voting' it will fall on those areas. I thought you could nominate but the top 10 nominees for each category will be decided by a panel. I dunno, I haven't been paying attention to the awards but I have nominated some reviews.
December 17, 2010
I think it would be more pragmatic and more rewarding to have the site award people based purely upon the number of contributions and the originality of those contributions. Most of the categories that you can be nominated in are pretty limited. Still, I love the site and I want them to do well. I just don't agree that this is the best way to encourage participation.
December 17, 2010
Erm ... I don't know. I hate "awards" shows for these various reasons. It's a bit strange to say X is better than Y especially when X and Y and, generally, covering different subject matter. While I can appreciate the value in rewarding the volume of some contributor's contributions, then you find yourself in gray areas where you question "was that contribution really meritorious?" b/c not everything said about each subject is really of value.

As I've postulated in another thread, I've always believed the best way to reward contributors is to have a mix of labels that genuinely reflect what it is the site is seeking to reward.  If Joe JoJo wants to post content exclusively at Lunch.com, then grant Joe JoJo an "Lunch Exclusive Contributor" logo or brand.  If Jill Jilly wants to be viewed as a subject matter contributor for fashion, then grant her the "Lunch.com Fashion Correspondent" logo.

The reason I say that it's increasingly difficult is that most formats essentially boil down to popularity contests.  If Smack Smackterson is everybody's best friend, then there's a strong inclination to reward Smack on the ground of social awareness.

I know it may sound silly, but, as someone who struggles off and on with being a professional writer, things like "theme" and "content" and "research" and "spelling" all matter to me, but most websites really couldn't give a scratch about those aspects.  A true contest which would bring a true award is a very difficult thing to manage, and it may take Lunch.com a few years to get it right.

Also as I've postulated, I'm far more interested in gaining recognition for what I say and not so much who I am.  If my provided content leads readers in the direction of seeing my "voice" or "contributions" as being demonstrative of "Lunch.com Cinema Correspondent" then that means far more to me than would any moniker claiming "Funniest Film Review".  You know what I mean?  I'm truly far more interested at my ripe old age (I'm 203) in getting props from the people who read my stuff, gaining that type of recognition, than I am for being known as "Lunch.com's Class Clown" or "Lunch.com's Most Likely To Succeed."

It's small differences of opinion that make our world so rich with layers.
December 17, 2010
I'd love an award for "Most Likely to Succeed as Class Clown". ; )
December 17, 2010
@Trek, I have actually proposed the rankings to be abolished before and I have asked for 'stamps' as to what this member does more. I don't believe in awards either, but it is their site so they can do what they wish and I do believe they have the right intentions in their hearts. Things like this are just so tricky.

@Orlok, I agree, but right now I don''t have any ideas to encourage participation. So I can just hope it is a success for them. Btw, I want that badge too. LOL!
December 17, 2010
I already suggested a number of changes that could be made to encourage more people to join the site and to contribute more regularly, but often I don't hear back other than, "Thanks. I'll pass that on to the team." My last suggestion was a proposition that community founders could request reviews of certain topics such as DVDs, CDs, books, and other products, which if they review then they would get for free. Sort of like a rewards program or Amazon Vine.
December 17, 2010
if you remember, I gave you Kick Ass the graphic novel to review here but you never did.
December 17, 2010
LOL! That's not entirely fair. You asked me if I'd read it and then said that you'd send it to me. It was only after you sent it that you asked me to review it. And I explained that I had a huge list of reviews planned already and that it would be a long time before I could add more to that list. As I recall, you also said you would review "Watchmen" and "The Dark Knight Returns", but you never did. ; )
December 17, 2010
I have the reviews written for those already but I am waiting on the right philosophical moment. Ok, now I am asking you to review Kick Ass LOL!
December 17, 2010
It will happen someday, but like I said, not here on Lunch. Maybe I'll do it as an exclusive on Blogger.
December 17, 2010
see how can you expect people to respond to "perks" to participate when you won't even post a review of it here? ;)
December 17, 2010
It would be too controversial here. Like I said earlier, lots of violence and strong language. Lots.
December 18, 2010
whatevers. you can review it without going that far.

I would also like to add that relying on votes would cause more popular topics to be more noticed and hence, win an award. It is also common practice for members not to vote when they don't agree with the review.

As for the theory that more fans equal more votes. It may carry some weight but it only balances out the other side of the coin. The people who vote low for reasons of their own. (such as voting one thumb when the review deserves 2 or 3). I have no idea what the motivations are for that kind of behavior, but I assume it is 'award-related' since this happened since the announcement of the awards.

To close, there's nothing wrong with awards (I commend the site for trying to recognize those people whose content promotes them). But it takes major work to make it...shall we say fair and precise. Maybe it's just all for fun and we're reading too much into it.
What's your opinion on 2010 Lunch Awards?
3 Ratings: +5.0
You have exceeded the maximum length.
2010 Lunch Awards
Type: Awards
Date(s): March 2011
Organization: Lunch.com
Venue: Live Webcast

Related Topics

An event series sponsored by Lunch.com with promotional supp

Ratings on Lunch.com

Feedback by members about a topic


A live performance

© 2015 Lunch.com, LLC All Rights Reserved
Lunch.com - Relevant reviews by real people.
This is you!
Ranked #
Last login
Member since