Why Nominations? Did They Work?

[Hollinger.]

I like it as a bit of a safeguard against the poll getting shared in the WWECWTNA Super Mega Storytelling With Boobs Federation Fans facebook group and getting an influx of 1000 votes for Bray Wyatt as one of the 20 greatest wrestlers of all time. Is there a chance of that happening? Probably very little, but a less extreme version of that kind of happened with twitter. 

[Kadaveri]

17 hours ago, SirSam said:

My thought on nominations is that it is a good thing to have for the reasons mentioned above however it can take months for applications to join this forum to be approved and be able to make nominations.

For me, I found out about this project in March but didn't have my membership approved until a week or so ago, when I somehow found the Discord, mentioned it in there, got a reply, then DM'd someone who ticked a box in the background.

That is quite a while for it to sit in lieu and is prohibitive for new voices to enter and make nominations.

In summary while nominations are good there needs to be a more consistent and lower barrier to entry into the forum so nominations can be made as there are some deserving wrestlers that didn't get nominated.

I just want to reply to this point specifically. I'm very frustrated at how neglected this forum has become lately, but I'm not an admin so there's not a whole lot I can do about it. It really shouldn't be so onerous to just sign up to an internet forum and start posting. I don't know the admins personally but it just feels like they've moved on from this place, and that's fair enough, but if the site isn't going to just slowly die there should be some kind of handover.

This issue however is totally separate to the nomination process question, so I'll talk about that in my next post.

[oldcasper]

Lurking here for a while, I have got a lot of value out of the nomination threads.  I think they are an effective way of trying to make the list of nominees a little more manageable (even though we are over 1,000).  The best thing about a nomination process is it forces someone to think about who they are voting for and why.  A short paragraph and three matches isn't that much effort to put in if you really want to vote for someone.  I wouldn't be opposed to having a 'second' process, similar to GME but that would be dependent on enough people about to take part and second.  I think there is a clue in the title - it's 'Greatest Wrestler Ever' so for me, every nomination has to be a very strong candidate to appear on the nominee's list.  If folk are just nominating, 'wresters I quite like, or are interested in' that kind of broadens the scope of this.

 

As others have shared, the absence of those not nominated will hardly influence the final result, and there are few that I think are huge omissions (I did really like jetlag's run through of A-B though in the other thread).  I think many of us saw the odd ballot here and there were 70% of the 100 were not nominated - that doesn't reflect a failure of the process, it reflects either someone relatively early in their wrestling journey picking out the WWE wrestlers they know, the ultra niche of the niche (some dude picking all their friends from an indie type deal) or a troll.

 

Hindsight is a powerful thing, and it feels like a large proportion of voters got on late with this (in terms of weeks before the deadline).  Some of those people have submitted some great ballots but been unaware of the process of nominating.  The promotion of GWE in online spaces has been brilliant but the nomination question is more of an unintended consequence of the promotion and late interest, rather than a failure of the process perhaps.  (None of this is a dig at Grimmas or anyone else involved - the work has been superb and I think everyone can see how much effort has gone in to make this fun and interesting).

[Kadaveri]

So on the nominations process: I think part of the disagreement over this stems from a difference in opinion over what the main purpose of GWE should be, and how important the final list actually is. The two extreme ends of the spectrum are:

1. The purpose of GWE is to poll harcore wrestling fans on who they think the greatest wrestlers ever are. It's basically a survey done every 10 years. So the emphasis should be attaining as large and broad a base of voters as possible voting for whoever they want, so long as they are serious wrestling fans in order to create a list which represents the views of wrestling fandom at that moment.

2. The purpose of GWE is to facilitate a process where serious fans can explore, discuss and debate the merits of pro-wrestlers, and in the process improve our collective understanding of this medium. The final list isn't really that important. It's really about the engagement and elevated discourse that it generates, so having barriers to participation is a positive because it imposes a minimum level of engagement on everyone.

I'm not saying those two philosophies necessarily represent anyone's opinion, more that we all fit somewhere in the spectrum in between. Wherever you decide to balance things, there are going to be upsides and downsides to it.

Now for me, I do think there should be a nominations process. That's not to say that I think we should keep things the same next time, there were certainly some flaws that we should talk about now so whoever's running the 2036 itteration (inshallah!) can hopefully make wiser decisions (though who knows what the internet will look like by then). I think the biggest mistakes this time round were more down to the lack of clear communication of how to participate, what the rules are etc... It wasn't really until the last few months that we actually got a team (or 'committee' as it was later called) to actually organise things, till then everything was just being done by Grimmas by himself, which in practice resulted in a lot of stuff just not being done because he's just one guy with a job and family and it was never feasible that he'd effectively run a project like this by himself. Not meant as a personal criticism of anyone, just an analysis of what happened imo. I think the next generation should strongly consider having a committee sorted out a year in advance, make decisions on how it's going to be run and delegate tasks to each other and make sure they don't end up in a situation where everything just grinds to a halt if one person becomes inactive.

There is also the problem of the rules we made being inconsistently enforced, but to me that's far more a problem stemming from organisational failures than the system itself. The rules really were not complex or difficult to enforce. We just did a sloppy job. The Greatest Match Ever Project has similar rules and has managed fine.

The positives of having a nominations process are:

1. It's an effective way of facilitating people writing about the wrestlers. Sure, it didn't happen in every thread, but we still have hundreds of wrestlers on this forum with threads with multiple pages of posts. They're a great resource for anyone wanting to find out more about a wrestler's GWE case and wants something a bit more thoughtful than just looking at their CageMatch entry. If someone looking at the lists in 2030 or something is perplexed as to why a wrestler was voted the 83rd greatest ever, they have a very easy place to go read to find out why. I just don't think that resource would have been produced if we didn't enforce nominations.

2. Kinda related to point 1, it also just creates a list of wrestlers for people to check out. I've heard so many people talk about going through the List of Nominees for people to watch, see if they've forgotten anyone etc... 

3. It also changes the ethos of the process into something that encourages long-term participation from individual fans beyond just turning up at the end of the 10 years and submitting a ballot. When you write up a nomination, or comment on someone else's nomination, you're honing your skills in thinking about and writing about wrestling. This might sound a bit pretentious but I think that also means you're becoming a better wrestling fan. I think helping to facilitate people doing this is a much more virtuous goal than making it as easy as possible for everyone to submit a ballot voting for whoever they want.

4. It puts up a modest barrier of entry. People who insist on voting for wrestlers who have not been nominated and wanting it counted just won't be able to participate. I think that's puerile behaviour. Either you haven't bothered to engage with the project in a meaningful way, or you've found out about it at the last minute yet are demanding that people who've been working on something for years change how it works just because you, a Johnny Come Lately, think you're so important. I'd rather such people just go away than try and cater to them.

I think those 4 points outweigh the negatives that we have at the moment, basically that some votes ended up not being counted. But even that negative can be spun into an opportunity by telling people hey, here's a list of wrestlers who got votes but haven't been nominated. If you think they should be nominated, well, why don't you do it yourself! Then they will be nominated for next time. And if nobody cares enough to write a nomination for them then, well, to me that just sounds like their votes not being counted is an extremely minor detail indeed.

[ohheylook]

great post kad

[TheBean]

As far as nominating to "poll harcore wrestling fans on who they think the greatest wrestlers ever are... basically a survey done every 10 years" as Kadaveri succinctly says, should be done differently. 

I have an idea that will never happen but here it goes:

There will be three Top 100 lists by the end of this project. Anyone who made the Top 100 in '06, '16 or '26 gets automatically added to the 2036 eligible wrestler list. We don't need to re-nominate them. These wrestlers earned it. 

Additionally, we need to stop including wrestlers from the 80's, 90's etc. who haven't made the top 100 yet. They have had 3 chances to make the top 100 and haven't made it.  A lot of favorites are going to be left off but if they haven't made it yet & they aren't going to. Trust me, a lot of my favorites get slashed but so be it. Here we have to acknowledge that the list has and it's limitations- some part of it is a "popularity" contest and is a product of recency bias. That's probably not going to get better but it can be accounted for with the following points.

For anyone who's an active wrestler by the end of the 2026 project from 101-400, gets automatically added to the 2036 eligible wrestler list. These are wrestlers on the rise and we can expect them to keep pace or improve in 10 years. So, it's worth including them no questions asked. There's not actually as many as you would think. I counted around 35 wrestlers in the 201-300 range for instance. I don't follow current stuff but I know most of them as their reputation proceeds them.

Any active wrestler from '26-'36  outside of that  (or brand new) has to get nominated with matches from 2026-2036 along with some kind of substantial claim or review/write-up of those matches. See Kadaveri's point #3 for a fantastic explanation.

If it could be done without being a hassle, a 2035 approval vote like HowtobeaMark suggests would finalize a nomination. If done on PWO, the post can be made as a poll & people can vote. This probably can be done elsewhere too. If the yays outweigh the nays by the deadline, they get added. If there's no votes or they don't get enough yays then, they aren't added but that wrestler still is getting promoted/discussed. 

Then in 2036, the eligible list is set and that should be ample time for anyone wanting to research a wrestler better. And any discussions etc. should be focused on that list. So if there's anyone late to the project, they have a pre made list to construct their top 100. If they can't put a list together from that list then it's just not the project for them.

The bar to nominate has to be higher. Everyone should be welcome to vote but it needs a leaner ballot. There was 867+ people voted for and more nominated. I think 300-400 would be reasonable (I'm guessing at that number). Plus it would be more manageable for whoever is doing the work at the end. 

With this method, we should essentially have a good chunk of the 2036 nominations set in a few days too. Then it's up to the active wrestlers to keep up the good work and for us, to watch more wrestling in the meantime 🙂

[Control21]

2 minutes ago, TheBean said:

As far as nominating to "poll harcore wrestling fans on who they think the greatest wrestlers ever are... basically a survey done every 10 years" as Kadaveri succinctly says, should be done differently. 

I have an idea that will never happen but here it goes:

There will be three Top 100 lists by the end of this project. Anyone who made the Top 100 in '06, '16 or '26 gets automatically added to the 2036 eligible wrestler list. We don't need to re-nominate them. These wrestlers earned it. 

Additionally, we need to stop including wrestlers from the 80's, 90's etc. who haven't made the top 100 yet. They have had 3 chances to make the top 100 and haven't made it.  A lot of favorites are going to be left off but if they haven't made it yet they aren't going to. Trust me, a lot of my favorites get slashed but so be it. Here we have to acknowledge that the list has and it's limitations- some part of it is a "popularity" contest and is a product of recency bias. That's probably not going to get better but it can be accounted for with the following points.

For anyone who's an active wrestler by the end of the 2026 project from 101-400, gets automatically added to the 2036 eligible wrestler list. These are wrestlers on the rise and we can expect them to keep pace or improve in 10 years. So, it's worth including them no questions asked. There's not actually as many as you would think. I counted around 35 wrestlers in the 201-300 range for instance. I don't follow current stuff but I know most of them as their reputation proceeds them.

Any active wrestler from '26-'36  outside of that  (or brand new) has to get nominated with matches from 2026-2036 along with some kind of substantial claim or review/write-up of those matches. See Kadaveri's point #3 for a fantastic explanation.

If it could be done without being a hassle, a 2035 approval vote like HowtobeaMark suggests would finalize a nomination. If done on PWO, the post can be made as a poll & people can vote. This probably can be done elsewhere too. If the yays outweigh the nays by the deadline, they get added. If there's no votes or they don't get enough yays then, they aren't added but that wrestler still is getting promoted/discussed. 

Then in 2036, the eligible list is set and that should be ample time for anyone wanting to research a wrestler better. And any discussions etc. should be focused on that list. So if there's anyone late to the project, they have a pre made list to construct their top 100. If they can't put a list together from that list then it's just not the project for them.

The bar to nominate has to be higher. Everyone should be welcome to vote but it needs a leaner ballot. There was 867+ people voted for and more nominated. I think 300-400 would be reasonable (I'm guessing at that number). Plus it would be more manageable for whoever is doing the work at the end. 

With this method, we should essentially have a good chunk of the 2036 nominations set in a few days too. Then it's up to the active wrestlers to keep up the good work and for us, to watch more wrestling in the meantime 🙂

This is extraordinarily arbitrary, and it would rule a lot of people out.

[TheBean]

7 minutes ago, Control21 said:

This is extraordinarily arbitrary, and it would rule a lot of people out.

It's not arbitrary. It's using the data we have already collected the last 20 years. Not using that data and starting from scratch every 10 years is arbitrary. Ruling people out is the point of making the list to begin with.

But like I said, no one is going to use it 🙂 I mean its 10 years from now anyhow.

[Control21]

4 minutes ago, TheBean said:

It's not arbitrary. It's using the data we have already collected the last 20 years. Not using that data and starting from scratch every 10 years is arbitrary. Ruling people out is the point of making the list to begin with.

But like I said, no one is going to use it 🙂 I mean its 10 years from now anyhow.

I just think ruling out a bunch of 80s/90s guys because they didn't make the Top 100 is a bit silly. We are effectively cutting out historical candidates for modern wrestlers with that sort of rule.

[Kadaveri]

If folks in 2036 collectively decide that the previous generations were wrong to leave an 80s/90s wrestler off the Top 100 then they absolutely should be able to do that. In fact, I'd be a little disappointed if that didn't happen with at least 1 wrestler. Re-evaluations and challenging pre-existing narratives are a big part of GWE. 

Also it's not just about previous generations getting it wrong, what if a load of new footage surfaces that changes perceptions of a wrestler? For example, Carlos Colon has missed the Top 100 every time, but we're missing most of the most of the first 15 years of his career. It's not beyond the realms of possibilty that between now and 2036 a bunch of 70s Carlos Colon matches get found, he looks amazing, and people go "we need to vote for him this time".

[Grimmas]

It's wild, about 12 years ago I though, Sight & Sound is cool, we should do GWE in 2016 to mimic that. I never thought about 2026. Thankfully I had a lot of help and I'd say Kris Zellner/Dyaln Hayes, and others were a big part, especialy PWO podcasts pushing things.

During pandemic people who missed 2016 or whatever kind of came to me and asked about 2026. I tried to launch it, but yeah it's a lot. I'm kind of down now, so 2036 is for whoever.

I'm glad we had 481 voters and the list turned out okay and the excitement is there. it should be better oganized, for sure.

That said, nomination process leading to discussions and not just voting on a whim I'd highly encourage the next crew taking over to focus on.

[Reel]

15 minutes ago, Kadaveri said:

Carlos Colon has missed the Top 100 every time, but we're missing most of the most of the first 15 years of his career. It's not beyond the realms of possibilty that between now and 2036 a bunch of 70s Carlos Colon matches get found, he looks amazing, and people go "we need to vote for him this time".

If there was a greatest wrestler poll and you couldn’t vote for Carlos Colon, then that poll is 100% pure garbage. 

[TheBean]

29 minutes ago, Control21 said:

I just think ruling out a bunch of 80s/90s guys because they didn't make the Top 100 is a bit silly. We are effectively cutting out historical candidates for modern wrestlers with that sort of rule.

They weren't getting the votes to begin with. Does that mean they aren't great then? No, of course not. My rough list got shredded to bits already this time. It's 90% 80's & 90's wrestlers. 

26 minutes ago, Kadaveri said:

If folks in 2036 collectively decide that the previous generations were wrong to leave an 80s/90s wrestler off the Top 100 then they absolutely should be able to do that. In fact, I'd be a little disappointed if that didn't happen with at least 1 wrestler. Re-evaluations and challenging pre-existing narratives are a big part of GWE. 

Well, we're still using all of the top 100's of the 2006 & 2016 poll along with whatever the top 100 of this year is. I think 80s & 90s will be accounted for. I think reevaluation for younger folks will occur within that pre-existing pool (largely). I think the footage is already there for this GWE. I think there might be reevaluation of the 2000's moreso.

But my idea isn't something with every facet accounted for, just a general idea to maybe use what data we have. Again, if we're trying to make a list of the Greatest Ever 🙂 Warts & all

[fred]

1 hour ago, Grimmas said:

It's wild, about 12 years ago I though, Sight & Sound is cool, we should do GWE in 2016 to mimic that. I never thought about 2026. Thankfully I had a lot of help and I'd say Kris Zellner/Dyaln Hayes, and others were a big part, especialy PWO podcasts pushing things.

During pandemic people who missed 2016 or whatever kind of came to me and asked about 2026. I tried to launch it, but yeah it's a lot. I'm kind of down now, so 2036 is for whoever.

I'm glad we had 481 voters and the list turned out okay and the excitement is there. it should be better oganized, for sure.

That said, nomination process leading to discussions and not just voting on a whim I'd highly encourage the next crew taking over to focus on.

I’ll go ahead and throw my hat in the ring for helping organize the next one. I have thoughts on some things brought up in this thread since my initial post that I’ll have to get organized.

[cad]

I never really got how someone like Andy Kaufman gained momentum as a clever and insightful pick but Muhammad Ali shouldn't have been allowed as a nominee. Ali was no less a pro wrestler than Kaufman.

[josephweirdness]

9 minutes ago, cad said:

I never really got how someone like Andy Kaufman gained momentum as a clever and insightful pick but Muhammad Ali shouldn't have been allowed as a nominee. Ali was no less a pro wrestler than Kaufman.

I don't think Ali has the footage. You need three match recommendations to be eligible for a nomination. Was there more to Ali I missed besides the famous Inoki match?

[Control21]

6 minutes ago, josephweirdness said:

I don't think Ali has the footage. You need three match recommendations to be eligible for a nomination. Was there more to Ali I missed besides the famous Inoki match?

He had two other worked pro wrestler vs boxer matches in the lead-up to the Inoki fight. 

[Control21]

19 minutes ago, cad said:

I never really got how someone like Andy Kaufman gained momentum as a clever and insightful pick but Muhammad Ali shouldn't have been allowed as a nominee. Ali was no less a pro wrestler than Kaufman.

I think it's dumb when people start to impose their own definitions of what is considered pro wrestling and who is considered a pro wrestler, especially in projects like this. Pro wrestling is defined more by shades of grey than black and white. The evolutionary history of the sport is complicated, and if someone wants to nominate and vote for Muhammad Ali, and the footage is there, it neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg. It's not like someone wants to nominate Rickson Gracie. 

[oldcasper]

If something presents itself as pro wrestling, or if the fans and culture believe it is pro wrestling then it is.

If we can accept that you don't need a ring, or a referree, or rules, or even an audience, or competitors (Invisible Man), why does pro wrestling need to be a work for it to be wrestling?

There has to be a boundary but it can never be a firm boundary because wrestling has always had common tropes and then pushed against them.

I still think the footage has to be there and the case made that it is wrestling, but I don't have an argument against nominating Ali and Frank Shamrock. 

 

[Jetlag]

I think maybe we should make a separate list for special cases like that.

[Tetsujin]

To me, being a pro wrestler (as, that's your job, you're dedicating to pro wrestling) and being a guest in the pro wrestling world (celebrities having matches, the McMahons doing stuff, etc) are two very different things, and for a project like this I have pretty clear what I would consider and what I wouldn't. But maybe there are some wrestlers that don't fit into my definition either, idk. Sometimes is complicated because of wrestling's whacky nature.