Raisetheroof nominated for UK Festival Award

[Raisetheroof]

Okay, so the likelihood of winning Best Metropolitan Festival against the likes of The Warehouse Project in Manchester and the Camden Crawl in London might be pretty slim, but we're told that the votes are weighted proportionately to the size of the event. So, we're in with a chance!

Best Metropolitan Festival is a category of the UK Festival Awards that recognises the inner-city festival-esque events, and there isn't that many in our category.

The odds dont seem too bad, so cast your vote and put Raisetheroof Leeds on the map!

UK FESTIVAL AWARDS

PS. Only a few more weeks to go until the event on the 8th of October - you can grab your tickets a number of places in Leeds as well as online - for ticket info read our ticket blog http://blogs.myspace.com/index.cfm?f...ogId=538900238

[eFestivals]

What you mean is that you've put your festival forwards for awards - there's naff all "nominations".

Why the bullshit?

[Raisetheroof]

I quote from the UK Festival Awards website

"Last chance to apply!

The deadline for nominations to the Festival Awards is 12 September.."

If you want to take issue with the word 'nomination' perhaps you should take issue with the UK Festival Awards in general, or would you risk losing face?

As someone new to this site I'm pretty surprised at such a bitchy comment from what is meant to be an organisation supporting festivals, in response to a totally well-meaning post. Having said that, I guess it's always easy to hide behind a computer screen.

[Ringo_Spar]

It's the annual autumn topic of choice...

How are the Festival Awards in any way credible?

[Raisetheroof]

It's the annual autumn topic of choice...

How are the Festival Awards in any way credible?

Edited October 4, 2010 by Raisetheroof

[elfweirdigan]

And I think that's a completely valid question, I just resent the hypocrisy of the issue A: being brought up by efestivals, who I strongly suspect are closely associated with the company running the awards and B: the issue being highlighted in such a needlessly offensive manner.

If efestivals had sent me a private message politely asking me to remove the 'offending post' I would have a lot more respect for the people running this website than I do right now.

Edited October 4, 2010 by elfweirdigan

[eFestivals]

And I think that's a completely valid question, I just resent the hypocrisy of the issue A: being brought up by efestivals, who I strongly suspect are closely associated with the company running the awards and B: the issue being highlighted in such a needlessly offensive manner.

If efestivals had sent me a private message politely asking me to remove the 'offending post' I would have a lot more respect for the people running this website than I do right now.

eFestivals are nothing to do with those awards (or any others).

We're nothing to do with them because they're so worthless.

The worthlessness of them is (amongst other things) demonstrated by the fact that each festival says that they've "been nominated". But who exactly has 'nominated' them?

The answer is: the festival that is 'nominated' is who has 'nominated' that festival. They put themselves forward for the award.

My post wasn't particularly at this festival - I'd have posted the same thing for any other thread I'd seen by any festival (and quite possibly punter) saying a festival had been 'nominated'.

I feel it's entirely fair and reasonable to point out that being 'nominated' means absolutely naff all. It is not a meaningful thing for any festival to do to suggest that by being 'nominated' they're somehow better at doing whatever a particular award is about than other festivals.

By saying 'nominated' when it's meaningless, a festival is misleading the ticket buying public into believing that festival is something that it isn't.

eFestivals supports festivals, but it also supports festival goers. Both are an essential part of the business. And a misled customer is perhaps not a returning customer - not only to the festival which mislead them, but to all festivals; that's a bad thing for the festival business.

Edited October 5, 2010 by eFestivals

[elfweirdigan]

eFestivals are nothing to do with those awards (or any others).

We're nothing to do with them because they're so worthless.

The worthlessness of them is (amongst other things) demonstrated by the fact that each festival says that they've "been nominated". But who exactly has 'nominated' them?

The answer is: the festival that is 'nominated' is who has 'nominated' that festival. They put themselves forward for the award.

My post wasn't particularly at this festival - I'd have posted the same thing for any other thread I'd seen by any festival (and quite possibly punter) saying a festival had been 'nominated'.

I feel it's entirely fair and reasonable to point out that being 'nominated' means absolutely naff all. It is not a meaningful thing for any festival to do to suggest that by being 'nominated' they're somehow better at doing whatever a particular award is about than other festivals.

By saying 'nominated' when it's meaningless, a festival is misleading the ticket buying public into believing that festival is something that it isn't.

eFestivals supports festivals, but it also supports festival goers. Both are an essential part of the business. And a misled customer is perhaps not a returning customer - not only to the festival which mislead them, but to all festivals; that's a bad thing for the festival business.

[Magic42]

Have to say in any communications we have had with our crowd about the awards this year we have used the wording "in the running for" rather than "nominated".

[eFestivals]

That's a much more reasonable response - but still a bit harsh I reckon.

Okay, so festivals nominate themselves to get entered into the awards... and then after that people vote for them. I think I'm right in saying any festival can nominate itself and that the process isn't too arduous or costly? So it's a fair system - the organisers of a festival just have to be bothered to 'nominate' themselves?

It's a "fair system" that isn't voted for by festival goers, yes, and where people are voting against events they haven't been to and so are unable to compare. Which makes them rather meaningless as festival awards.

But my comment was about the use of the word "nomination". They have NOT been nominated.

Even then, any festival that actually wins a category must have a lot of supporters and be enjoyed by a lot of people...

nope, not necessarily. It's the event that can motivate people to vote for them that wins - there's not necessarily any link to enjoyment, or even festival goers.

Those festivals that market themselves the best have the best chance of getting people to respond to their marketing. Such a thing is not necessarily related to how good any festival is.

Unless there's actually some deeper fraud going on and festivals are setting up hundreds of email addresses to vote for themselves from... now that would be a definite case of 'misleading' the customers...

this I know for sure very definitely happens.

unlike nominating oneself which is pretty straightforward and harmless.

Not harmless - it implies that they meet a level that other festivals don't reach over a particular aspect, when that's not necessarily the case.

For example, if you wanted to take your kids to a festival that's considered 'family friendly', would you chose from two festivals which you know nothing about the one that says "nominated for family friendly award" or the other which doesn't say that?

Edited October 5, 2010 by eFestivals

[eFestivals]

Have to say in any communications we have had with our crowd about the awards this year we have used the wording "in the running for" rather than "nominated".

then three cheers for Blissfields for having a level of integrity that most other festivals don't get close to. I very much approve.

[Paul ™]

Have to say in any communications we have had with our crowd about the awards this year we have used the wording "in the running for" rather than "nominated".

[Rich BT]

BT has not even tried to rally votes this year as I not feel its fait to harrass our customers on a regular basis pleading with them to vote. That said I would love to win an award as it would help massively with our marketing considering the saturated festy market.

I would prefer a questionnaire type voting system where people can state BAD/OK/GOOD and these answers are collated and the percentages taken from this. This will not be perfect but would add a little more integrity.

Edited October 5, 2010 by Rich BT

[Raisetheroof]

Have to say in any communications we have had with our crowd about the awards this year we have used the wording "in the running for" rather than "nominated".

[elfweirdigan]

This is probably the best idea. But with or without nominations, all awards based on voting could be argued as worthless because the majority doesn't always know best. It's the same thing people argue about democracy, just because the majority of the population think that all pedophiles should be hung, drawn and quartered, it doesn't necessarily mean it's right. And so on.

They have a similar awards thing for venues in Leeds, and I remember this tiny cafe once won 'best live music venue' - but what they were best at was promoting themselves, not putting on live music.

About this you can quite reasonably argue the toss. But I think 'Admin', or Neil in other words, lacks the impartiality and manners you would expect from an administrator/moderator discussing such as issue... shame.

[Magic42]

BT has not even tried to rally votes this year as I not feel its fait to harrass our customers on a regular basis pleading with them to vote. That said I would love to win an award as it would help massively with our marketing considering the saturated festy market.

I would prefer a questionnaire type voting system where people can state BAD/OK/GOOD and these answers are collated and the percentages taken from this. This will not be perfect but would add a little more integrity.

[Rich BT]

Paul, I agree your way has much more etiquette - we got carried away in 2008 and sent shed loads of emails out, we never want a repeat of that disgraceful behaviour.

[Magic42]

Paul, I agree your way has much more etiquette - we got carried away in 2008 and sent shed loads of emails out, we never want a repeat of that disgraceful behaviour.

Edited October 6, 2010 by Magic42

[eFestivals]

But I think 'Admin', or Neil in other words, lacks the impartiality and manners you would expect from an administrator/moderator discussing such as issue... shame.

and you lack integrity, which is what I was pointing out that has so offended you. Shame.

I'm allowed an opinion on these awards and how festivals approach them no less than you are. That is me being impartial.

PS: I could have deleted your post of course - after all, this site does not normally permit bullshit from festival organisers (as some posting in this thread already know). I suspect that you'd have found that no less 'bad manners', yet there would have been absolutely nothing bad in deleting blatant bullshit.

Edited October 6, 2010 by eFestivals

[elfweirdigan]

and you lack integrity, which is what I was pointing out that has so offended you. Shame.

I'm allowed an opinion on these awards and how festivals approach them no less than you are. That is me being impartial.

PS: I could have deleted your post of course - after all, this site does not normally permit bullshit from festival organisers (as some posting in this thread already know). I suspect that you'd have found that no less 'bad manners', yet there would have been absolutely nothing bad in deleting blatant bullshit.

[eFestivals]

Erm... I've got no vested interest in this at all... but I still think admin is being unnecessarily and unjustifiably rude. If RaisetheRoof had done what V has done it would be fair to slag them off in such a way. If the post above is correct, V have blatantly lied.

Both have told porkies. One is greater than the other tho.

But there's also another difference too - one has lied on this site, while the other hasn't. And this site is the site that I run.

And this site is NOT and never has been just a mindless mouthpiece for festivals, simply repeating any old crap they might put out (and my god, do some put out endless crap ). This site has always reserved the right to be critical about any festival when (in our opinion) it's deserving, and we have done, from the very biggest downwards.

This is a site about festivals, but supports festival goers. We are not supporting festival goers if we go along with them being told porkies.

All RaisetheRoof did was say 'RaisetheRoof Festival nominated for Festival Award... we haven't got much chance but go on vote for us...' What's wrong with that?

it's factually incorrect - as I pointed out.

I dunno, perhaps you two know each other and are fighting some other battle that us bystanders don't know about.

nope don't know them. I'm not even sure I'd heard of them until that post was made.

I just think it looks bad on efestivals part to have 'admin' of a site being so rude to someone who put up an inoffensive post.

it's not inoffensive. It was designed to mislead.

[elfweirdigan]

Both have told porkies. One is greater than the other tho.

But there's also another difference too - one has lied on this site, while the other hasn't. And this site is the site that I run.

And this site is NOT and never has been just a mindless mouthpiece for festivals, simply repeating any old crap they might put out (and my god, do some put out endless crap ). This site has always reserved the right to be critical about any festival when (in our opinion) it's deserving, and we have done, from the very biggest downwards.

This is a site about festivals, but supports festival goers. We are not supporting festival goers if we go along with them being told porkies.

it's factually incorrect - as I pointed out.

nope don't know them. I'm not even sure I'd heard of them until that post was made.

it's not inoffensive. It was designed to mislead.

[MarkyJ]

Firstly Neil I have no affiliation with the festival awards - i'm just a festival goer - the person you are defending.

The festivals DO NOT nominate themselves, they are put forward or nominated by the awards panel. FACT.

On voting up

this I know for sure very definitely happens.

Edited October 23, 2010 by MarkyJ