I thought it was second-stage voting numbers that ultimately decided on the pieces to be included. But my memory is like a slice of Swiss cheese these days. 😥 

@stevef

Likewise, Steve. My memory is not what it used to be and if there was a second-stage voting, it must have passed me by. {blue}:smile:  

You are correct Steve. Anyone is free to nominate a piece of work. There has to be a modicum of restraint and discernment though as they should be outstanding. 

Then when the time is right we all voted for our favourites.

So many were nominated but after voting a selection was chosen and fine tuned by Griff if I remember rightly. 

Mandrake is taking on that responsibility as far as I can see.

 We should be able to go back a couple of years or some good pieces will be lost.

It's not up to the author to say which of his or her nominated efforts should be included.

It was a vote 😎

@stormwol. Hi Alison, you and Steve have a good memory. I remember that e-Griff also included 'editor's choices' that maybe were not voted for but I could be wrong. {pear}:nerd:  

Geez!

Someone's been busy nominating! There were only 7 noms a few days ago. That's going to be some task, sifting through that lot!

@ukadmin

Sorry, Richard, I may unwittingly have created some confusion. In reply to Dodgem who asked how far back he should go to chose work for nomination, I posted a link to the list we used for the last anthology as a guide. Some people might believe that it is the current one. {pear}:crying:  

Why make it complicated?

You’ve been asked to nominate pieces. Nominate what you like; what you believe deserves to be published. They’re the only criteria. That’s all that matters at the moment.

Nominations for 2021 will close in September. I will browse content and select what is to be included. I’ve been an editor for a few years now and find that’s the quickest and easiest part.

Don’t see any point in putting it to the vote.

Authors will be contacted for permission to publish their work, to which they will retain full copyright. They will also be asked to provide a brief biography (about 50 words).

That’s the more time consuming part; the proverbial herding of cats.

@mandrake 

if people took care in properly reading what is posted on the forum there would be no complications.
One member, Dodgem, asked a pertinent question that I believed he wanted to be answered: how far back should one go to make selections.
As no one has issued any particular guideline some members, especially new ones, are unsure about the procedure. My answer was this:
"As far as how far to go back and what to choose, maybe the last nomination list may be a point of reference. Here is the link:"
Your above communication implies that you would be the final arbiter in choosing what is included in the anthology based only on the nominations without the voting of the membership. Have you cleared this with the site owners. webmaster and moderators? I see that Andrea is happy for you to bear the burden of producing it but is it a satisfactory solution to all concerned? The sooner terms of reference are published the better the situation will be.
Finally, some politeness would not go amiss. Instead of saying “You’ve been asked to nominate pieces. Nominate what you like; what you believe deserves to be published. They’re the only criteria. That’s all that matters at the moment” would it not be better to say “ You have been invited...? Just a suggestion.

Mandrake, 

I propose that UKA members would nominate pieces to be included: say, from the past 3 years as I understand that ‘Voices From The Web 2018’ was the previous collection.

I feel that is a good indication of how to proceed.

However, I agree with Luigi, there is a dismissive attitude to your postings, sorry but there is. 
I would also welcome a fuller explanation of your comment "Nor am I a fan of quotas or tokenism"

@ionicus

@ukadmin

Firstly, thank you Luigi for the link to the last submission list - for the previous Voices from the Web. Once I opened it I found a total of 282 items, mostly in poetry; and there were multiple submissions, the largest number I counted from one member was 27. I then downloaded the Kindle version, and it is not one of the better transfers from print - no title page or contents, with the different works grouped badly. The poetry section began at 67% of the total, after fiction; and I counted 67 poems, plus another 4 or so in the challenge section; and again there were more than one item from different members.

Coming to the current nomination list; I'm a bit confused that the current total could be a task; when I first opened it there were 7, and I added a further 4; since when another 3 have come in; not quite a deluge compared to the above. And to be fair the deadline is (I understand) in September, so hopefully more members will feel motivated to join in? My point (that was not addressed) was that ones work will be chosen by another member, in my case a poem that needs more work on it, and not what I would have preferred. 

I have found myself devoting an evenings spare time to this; and time maybe I should of been working on my own stuff. I will consider the best way to contribute to the site and follow that course in future. Meanwhile, I wish all involved with the project all success, and may the pixies guide you.

God speed, and damn the torpedoes

Dodge 😉  

This is just thinking out loud but I thought a better system for the nominations lists could be something like this:

A button on each submission with 'nominate this' (as we have now)

but the submission needs to have, say, 10 nominations before it gets listed in the nominations pages.

Then maybe that list (the nominations page) should have a similar system to whittle it down to a manageable list to make the final selection.

Or is that too convoluted?

Posted by: @ionicus

@ukadmin

Sorry, Richard, I may unwittingly have created some confusion. In reply to Dodgem who asked how far back he should go to chose work for nomination, I posted a link to the list we used for the last anthology as a guide. Some people might believe that it is the current one. {pear}:crying:  

Ahhh! My mistake.

Sorry.

Carry on 🙂

@ukadmin

On principle, a good idea as a piece favoured by many people might be an indication of its quality.
I suppose you mean 10 separate nominations. How to keep count and how to avoid multiple nominations by one individual?

Posted by: @ionicus

@ukadmin

In principle, a good idea as a piece favoured by many people might be an indication of its quality.
I suppose you mean 10 separate nominations. How to keep count and how to avoid multiple nomination?

Yes, 10 separate nominations. 

I would have to create a script that names the nomination button deactivates once a member has nominated a particular submission but remains active for those who can still nominate. Also, an automatic counter in the background activates and puts the submission on the nominations page when it receives 10 nominations. 

Then the nomination button would change to 'nominated' on the submission page.

Of course, that means I would have to either create the scripts (which I don't want to start doing again) OR get a coder to create them for us (cost).

OMG To be brutally honest, going by the nominations from several years in succession (when UKA was far more active than today) I do not really recall any piece of work getting ten separate nominations. If that was the criteria, sadly I feel it will never get off the ground. 

There seems to be an apathy at commenting as things stand, never mind nominations.  Some of us had several nominated but I cannot think of anyone at all who got 10 nominations for ONE piece of writing. Correct me if I am wrong.