Conquer Club

porkenbeans wrote:Maybe someone can explain all of this to me.
I can understand recognizing someone for there valuable contribution in making a map. This is a good idea. But,
It seems to me that, the "most noble contributor", "honorable contributor", "cartographic commendation", and "cartographic distinction", awards are all pretty much the same thing.

No, they're not.... think of it like the Oscars, where you get awards for Best Actor, Best Supporting Actor, Best Actress, Best Supporting Actress, Best Art Direction, Best Director, Best Cinematography, Best Picture, Best Original Score, Best Original Song... they're all similar, but distinctly different!

There are two levels of award for making a general contribution to the foundry - 'Honourable' and 'Most Noble'. Think of this as the best Supporting Actor and best Actor equivalents; although the Most Noble award will be more akin to a Special Award.

There are also two levels of award for making a map - 'Achievement' and 'Commendation'. The 'achievement' award will be given to the up-to-two people who earn the current mapmaking medal. The purpose of the 'commendation' award is to give recognition to people who are credited for working on maps, but who are not elibible for the official CC medal. This of this as the best Song and the best Score...

The 'distinction' award will be to recognise particularly successful or groundbreaking maps; this could be equivalent to any map that might earn a distinction such as Best Cinematography, Best Foreign Language Film, or Best Documentary Feature etc.

The tutorial award and the conquest award are pretty self-explanatory.

The real purpose of having the breadth of awards/medals/icons, and the slight overlap with current CC medals is to bring together all the names into a single Roll of Honour and a permanent Hall of Fame. You're correct in saying that there is no need for the double-award for people who already receive mapmaking/contest medals, but they will be included on the Roll of Honour for completeness. For sake of continuity, it may be desireable to have an alternative icon with a style that corresponds with the full range.

Thank you, I think I can see where you are trying to go with this. If you could talk some more about your thoughts on this new award system, we will be, better able to come up with an appropriate set of icons.

From your description thus far, I am envisioning a single icon, just like The Academy Awards. Maybe they can be distinguished by making them gold, silver, bronze, ebony, and ivory. I think that we should come up with a name for our icon.

And, just as the Oscar is given to recognize all sorts of outstanding achievements, Our "Oscar" will be recognized in the same lite. This imo will be much simpler and easy to understand.

I have a wonderful idea, I think, for a statuette. I would like to start working on it, but will wait to see where this goes first.

porkenbeans wrote:Thank you, I think I can see where you are trying to go with this. If you could talk some more about your thoughts on this new award system, we will be, better able to come up with an appropriate set of icons.

From your description thus far, I am envisioning a single icon, just like The Academy Awards. Maybe they can be distinguished by making them gold, silver, bronze, ebony, and ivory. I think that we should come up with a name for our icon.

And, just as the Oscar is given to recognize all sorts of outstanding achievements, Our "Oscar" will be recognized in the same lite. This imo will be much simpler and easy to understand.

I have a wonderful idea, I think, for a statuette. I would like to start working on it, but will wait to see where this goes first.

The most obvious name for the statuette would be the Ceecy, woudn't it?

The Ceecy Award, not bad.

Or how about the cairns award ?

MrBenn wrote:The Cartography Assistants are pleased to announce...

The Foundry Medals Competition


Now that the Winter Olympics speed games bonanza has ended, it's time to start thinking about all those medals that will be dished out over the next couple of weeks! To capitalise on medal-fever, the foundry will be running a competition to design medals/awards for the soon-to-be-inaugurated Foundry Roll of Honour.

In addition to the existing Official CC Achievement Awards (medals) available for foundry contributions, there will be 5 new Roll of Honour awards. The Foundry Roll of Honour Medals will be recognised in an Official Roll of Honour Thread, but will not be Official CC Medals. The Foundry Roll of Honour will stand in perpetuity as a Hall of Fame; and while medals will not be pinned to profiles, the recipients of an award will be able to decorate their forum signature or avatar should they so desire.

show: Brief details of the seven foundry awards

Competition Rules

1. Your entry should comprise 5 separate images - one for each of the new Foundry Roll of Honour awards. *
2. Your medals/awards need not conform to existing CC medal styles. *
3. Submitted images should be 30px wide and 45px tall. Larger versions (60x90 px) should also be available.
4. Save your designs as PNG images, with a transparent background if appropriate.
5. Host your files using Photobucket or some other file sharing program, and PM a link to MrBenn by 23:59 GMT on March 8, 2010.
6. The Foundry Staff will select a shortlist of finalists, and a one-week public voting period will be held to determine the winner.

* You may choose to include alternative images for the existing awards (Cartographic Achievement/Cartographic Contest Achievement), although these will not form part of the official competition.

Just to remind folk that there is one week left before the closing date. One entry is already in - I'm hoping there will be some more before the week is out...

Shit, I was going to participate but I've been so busy with other stuff I haven't had time to design medals... well, I'll try to come up with something during the week.

The clock is ticking!

curious if you got anything yet.

RjBeals wrote:curious if you got anything yet.

=

There have been a couple of entries. I'm a bit disappointed to be honest - not by the quality, but the quantity.

There's still time for a late surge of entries though...

I'm sorry, I meant to participate, but lots of crazy stuff came up...

The entries are in - I'll be posting the poll at some point over the next 48hrs...

MrBenn wrote:The entries are in - I'll be posting the poll at some point over the next 48hrs...

are these posted somewhere?

Peanut Butter Jelly time

did i miss these medals somewhere?

With great apologies for too much real-life busyness, I am pleased to announce the voting now open for the Foundry Medals Competition. The three entries are all of a high standard - regrettably there can only be one winner. The designs, left-to-right are for awards as follows:

• Most Noble Contributor: Awarded for contributing in a capacity which is recognised as inspirational and significant, or highly distinguished and innovative; in a way that goes above and beyond general participation in the foundry.
• Honorable Contributor: Awarded for contributing to the community in a capacity which is outstanding in its field or stands out as an example to others.
• Meritorious Tutorial: Awarded for contributing a tutorial which is recognised as illustrative and praiseworthy.
• Cartographic Distinction: Awarded for developing a prosperous map which is established to be highly distinguished or innovative.
• Cartographic Commendation: Awarded in recognition for making a valuable contribution during the development of a map.
  -
• Cartographic Achievement: Awarded for developing a map.*
• Cartographic Conquest: Awarded for winning a Foundry Competition.*
  The design of these two medals was optional

Entry A wrote: |

Entry B wrote: |

Entry C wrote: |

Happy Voting!

Loved B but voted A.

Really liking entry A, even if I didn't do it. Nice work whoever did!

Loved A but voted B.

Not sure about any of them...

Liked that C followed the brief...
Liked B's use of repetition.
Liked A & C for being legible

Disliked that none of them fit the current CC L&F

C.

yeti_c wrote:Not sure about any of them...

Liked that C followed the brief...
Liked B's use of repetition.
Liked A & C for being legible

Disliked that none of them fit the current CC L&F

C.

For the uninitiated, L&F = Look and Feel

yeti_c wrote:Disliked that none of them fit the current CC L&F

Make it a rule next time maybe?

fumandomuerte wrote:

yeti_c wrote:Disliked that none of them fit the current CC L&F

Make it a rule next time maybe?

Surely that's upto the artist?!

If they wanted to make it match the site - then they would've done...

C.

yeti_c wrote:Not sure about any of them...

Liked that C followed the brief...
Liked B's use of repetition.
Liked A & C for being legible

Disliked that none of them fit the current CC L&F

C.

Yeah, same. I'm not going to vote.