Jump to content
RickNC

Fossil Of The Month...changes?

Recommended Posts

bear-dog

I like T.F.F. the way it is. I could be upset because no one votes for horse teeth.I have a room full of rare fossils I have found but I like horse material.I love the members finds and the votes every month.It says something about the administration.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fossils4U

I agree with you fully on your statement. :) One question though. What is to prevent unfair voting such as one person having more friends than you thus resulting in accumilation of votes for there find every mont?? Because by far a new species was beat by a perfect mastodon tooth! Any new species is in a catigory of it's own! I want to studdy it. Hard Hats off on the find. Rock chistle ping! Awesome! One for the books! I guss it does come down to the voters like in the end!

Really?

FOTM is meant to be a celebration of the best personal finds from the past month; this I think it accomplishes nicely! It also gives the Forum an archive of beautiful, rare, unusual fossil images to proudly present to the world. Every entry reflects the pride of the finder, regardless of the outcome.

Among collectors in particular, competitiveness is a natural trait, but we hate to see it diminish what should be an appreciative sharing of a common fascination.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Auspex

...What is to prevent unfair voting such as one person having more friends than you thus resulting in accumilation of votes for there find every mont??...

We prefer to think that most members show more class than that, and will express their personal appreciation for the fossil.

Again, I want to emphasize that the results are personal appreciation, and that the cold, hard determination of what may be the <rarest/most scientifically significent/"best"> fossil is beyond the scope of determination here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JohnJ

We prefer to think that most members show more class than that, and will express their personal appreciation for the fossil.

Again, I want to emphasize that the results are personal appreciation, and that the cold, hard determination of what may be the <rarest/most scientifically significent/"best"> fossil is beyond the scope of determination here.

Very well said, Chas.

:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bear-dog

Very well said, Chas.

:)

Here,here.Hats off to you Gentlemen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fossils4U

Bravo!

We prefer to think that most members show more class than that, and will express their personal appreciation for the fossil.

Again, I want to emphasize that the results are personal appreciation, and that the cold, hard determination of what may be the <rarest/most scientifically significent/"best"> fossil is beyond the scope of determination here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fossils4U

You answered my question in more ways than one! Thank You!

Very well said, Chas.

:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fossil Diver Steve

Hi everyone. In my opinion I like the idea of creating two more catagories relating to aquatic and non aquatic for both of the existing catagories. Also, what about adding a vote option where the voter would select, in their opinion, the rarity of the item, such as,

I don't know

Common

Occasional

Rarely found

Very rare

This way, the voters with the knowledge of the item can give those of us that are unfamiliar with the fossil some insight as to the fossils rarity. These are just my suggestions.

Thanks,

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32fordboy

Here's how I see it:

Leave it as it is. It's kind of crazy to get carried away over this when, really, the only award is bragging rights. I can understand having some kind of rarity guide, but then it's just getting too complicated.

As for the T-rex teeth vs sharks teeth argument: we all have the same fossil hunting capabilities. Right there, somebody is going to argue with me, saying they've only been doing this for a year, or I can't get out too often. Even the experts were at a beginner's level at one point. They paid their dues and educated themselves, pushing the limits of their "sleuthing" abilities. If somebody isn't happy that they aren't winning over a T-rex tooth, they should go out and find something better. The person who found that t-rex tooth (or was it Albertosaurus, I can't remember) paid their dues. They researched. They explored. They walked their butts off for that find. The odds were against them in the first place, even if they were looking in the right spot. But they found it.

For the first time I have an entry in the FOTM. It took over 4 years of hard work and a few thousand dollars of gas, food, and hotels to get there (over that 4 year period). Believe me, that oreodont is NOT worth a few thousand dollars. For the little bit of bone that was sticking out of the cliff, it's a miracle that anybody, of the 10 people on the ranch that week, even found it. Point is, I could still be looking, without results. Heck, right now it is winning in the polls, but at any time, someone could blast ahead of me. If that's the case, who cares? It's not going to ruin my day. If it does, then I really need to sit back and reconsider the way I deal with life. And let's not forget the people who don't compete. There are some "heavyweights" on here who don't post their finds. I can guarantee there are several people on the forum who discover new, scientifically important things and don't compete (they have to get their paperwork done before unveiling, after all). If they were to post their finds, none of us would stand a chance.

Anyway, sorry for the light rant, but shouldn't we just be thankful a FOTM contest is even possible? There's no entry fee. We get to see some really neat things every month. We get subjected to a certain amount of thrill during the voting period.

It's all good the way it is and the forum leaders are doing a heck of a good job with it.

Edited by 32fordboy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jpc

Interesting discussion. I only just found it thios omrning (procrastinating a mornig of paying bills).

I like the competition the way it is, but...

If any changes should be instituted it should be twofold: ONE the addition of a separate plant section, But I think very few of us actually collect plants regularly. I don't know, just my hunch. and TWO, adding a second place prize that could also be included in the end of the year competition. I diagree with NIck's comments above about the T rex slash shark tooth discussion... sure you can do all the homework possible, but it you don't live out here where Nick and I live, you may never find the T rex tooth that would win hands down. I do like the idea someone posted about throwing in a little line in the text about why your fossil is worth a vote and I think it already happens quite regularly, but maybe it should be included in the final voting post... the election form as it were.

On the other hand, the contest is also a great place to simply show off everyone's find of the month, whether you think you will win or not. Keep on submitting, folks. And thanks to the admin folks who do all the real work.

Meanwhile I will keep voting for the fossil dispalyed with either the largest denomination paper money, or a cat. (I will have to find my one hundred trillion dollar note from Zimbabwe for my next enrty).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mudduck

Ok, here is my 2 cents worth. 1st, I think that the fossil of the month should begin the 1st day of the following month.

2nd, this reminds me of the College Football System. I think it is call the BCS. There is always a case for some team getting left out for the National Championship game. Possible to have a playoff like setting...several categories that will merge into the final two which would go head to head. Each reigning in it's own lets say...category. Then you have the final. Kind of what you have now but you have other categories that will have plants, shark teeth, ect... Kind of like a playoff system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hrguy54

Right now on the Fossil Hunting Trips the ratio between Shark Teeth and anything else is huge. Now should/could be the Toothers time to pick up the awards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bullsnake

Right now on the Fossil Hunting Trips the ratio between Shark Teeth and anything else is huge. Now should/could be the Toothers time to pick up the awards.

This kind of stands to reason. I guess members whose climate conditions are favorable for hunting, could have an advantage this time of year over others. And teeth finds are more common in those environments.

Just speculating.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Malcolmt

I think this post might be a bit of a vent so stop reading if you don't want to hear me vent.

Unfortunately Fossil of the Month or Member of the month is not that meaningul if you look at the actual number of members that actually vote in any given month compared to the number of members that visit in a month. Fossil of the Month also seems to attracts the same people all the time, I wonder if that is because people are just not all that interested or if it is because we have a lot of members who just dont go out and collect.

Fossil of the month is not just the month in which it is found but it can also be the month in which it is prepped. Given this dual criteria for submission I don't think the people who live in the warmer climates have that much of an advantage over us winter weather dwellers who can only collect for about 2/3rds of the year. I know for sure that I have some killer fossils that have not been prepped at this point that I could roll into the Fossil of the Month any time I want. In the case of month in which prepped submissions, I believe that it should be restricted to ones that are prepped by the individual submitting the find.

I am also thinking that there should be some type of barrier to entry on the fossil of the month submissions and voting similar to what is in place in the For Sale and trade forum.

The contests need to be restricted to regularly participating members. I could envision scenarios where our fossil of the months could end up being hit and runs from individuals that really have no desire to make lasting contributions to the forum from their participation. I could definately see scenarios where someone might just be trying to draw attention to their own commercial activities outside of the forum by submitting a killer fossil to the Vertebrate or Invertebrate Fossil of the Month Contest..

For example just to make things clear I have no issue with someone like Caleb or Mike posting their invertebrate fossils every month for fossil of the month because they are highly valued regular participants and contributors to this forum. I definately have an issue if someone who just newly signed up for the forum posts a killer T Rex tooth that has a link in their profile or submission to an external site on which they are selling teeth and has not made meaning full and frequent posts in the forums.

I for one would probably vote for a pristine T Rex tooth because I have no chance of ever finding one and my perception is that they are really rare......

Anyway just My two cents worth.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bullsnake

I think this post might be a bit of a vent so stop reading if you don't want to hear me vent.

Unfortunately Fossil of the Month or Member of the month is not that meaningul if you look at the actual number of members that actually vote in any given month compared to the number of members that visit in a month. Fossil of the Month also seems to attracts the same people all the time, I wonder if that is because people are just not all that interested or if it is because we have a lot of members who just dont go out and collect.

Fossil of the month is not just the month in which it is found but it can also be the month in which it is prepped. Given this dual criteria for submission I don't think the people who live in the warmer climates have that much of an advantage over us winter weather dwellers who can only collect for about 2/3rds of the year. I know for sure that I have some killer fossils that have not been prepped at this point that I could roll into the Fossil of the Month any time I want. In the case of month in which prepped submissions, I believe that it should be restricted to ones that are prepped by the individual submitting the find.

I am also thinking that there should be some type of barrier to entry on the fossil of the month submissions and voting similar to what is in place in the For Sale and trade forum.

The contests need to be restricted to regularly participating members. I could envision scenarios where our fossil of the months could end up being hit and runs from individuals that really have no desire to make lasting contributions to the forum from their participation. I could definately see scenarios where someone might just be trying to draw attention to their own commercial activities outside of the forum by submitting a killer fossil to the Vertebrate or Invertebrate Fossil of the Month Contest..

For example just to make things clear I have no issue with someone like Caleb or Mike posting their invertebrate fossils every month for fossil of the month because they are highly valued regular participants and contributors to this forum. I definately have an issue if someone who just newly signed up for the forum posts a killer T Rex tooth that has a link in their profile or submission to an external site on which they are selling teeth and has not made meaning full and frequent posts in the forums.

I for one would probably vote for a pristine T Rex tooth because I have no chance of ever finding one and my perception is that they are really rare......

Anyway just My two cents worth.....

I was by no means trying to stir anything up, Malcolm! The thought just came to me that this may be a variable (however slight) in participation.

I agree with all you said, and I feel there is really no need for change. :)

Edited by Bullsnake

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Malcolmt

BullSnake... Was not really commenting on your post other than I do not believe length of collecting season is that big a barrier because you also have the month in which it was prepped criteria. The only change I think would be nice is a retriction to members that participate

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
KansasFossilHunter

Some good points here- with the member of the month, it seems people who haven't even been on in months are cycled through until they "win"

Edited by KansasFossilHunter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MarleysGh0st
Fossil of the Month also seems to attracts the same people all the time, I wonder if that is because people are just not all that interested or if it is because we have a lot of members who just dont go out and collect.

I'll be glad to enter a fossil in the contest, as soon as I find one that's worthy. But if I wouldn't even vote for my own fossil, compared to the competition that a typical month brings, I don't see why anyone else should. ;)

Edited by MarleysGh0st

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ohiofossilhunter

I like how its set up now and wouldn't want it to change. But since so many people want more categories couldn't there be a couple of year end categories that you could enter anything you found that year?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Auspex

Malcolm, we are ever vigilant for commercial interests who pop in to work our system to their advantage. Trust me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RomanK

Nice and useful several aspects exposed and even nicer they mostly guide to the same conclusion.

Have to add my somehow different opinion without finally disagreeing!!! How does it happen?

The former FOTM contest divided (justifiedly in my opinion) into today's VFOTM and IPFOTM contests since January 2010 after this poll: http://www.thefossil...or-separate-it/ . Since then, in the upcoming 34 IPFOTM contests the fossil flora have got just 3 wins, number clearly not corresponding the paleontological value and the significance of the fossil plant participations to the contests and indicating the given disadvantage of the flora against the fauna. As a result, I believe that some members avoid their important fossil plant entries becouse they think there is no chance to win and that this way the projection of first quality finds is lost.

For those reasons I think that it would be fair and necessary a seperated plant contest. That way the two basic forms of life would be sufficiently covered by the three contests (Vertebrate FOTM and Invetebrate FOTM for fauna and Plant FOTM for flora).

I know that a change like this requires additional work that couldn't be done under today's conditions. Cris is already lifting a heavy TFF load and it is much appreciated. Thus, it's just a thougt for the future and I vote for the remaining of the FOTM contests as now they are.

Precision remark! I have exactly the same opinion!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fossildude19

Some good points here- with the member of the month, it seems people who haven't even been on in months are cycled through until they "win"

I really don't believe this is the case, Kris. :unsure:

The admins/mods can correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe they draw from a pool of people who contribute regularly, and often, most especially in the month they are nominated in.

That is precisely why they are nominated. :)

Perhaps you have missed their posts, but I know that all of this months nominees have contributed lots to the forum in the past month.

In my three years on here, I do not believe I have seen this.

You will see the same people cycle through, but I am fairly certain that they all contribute often enough to warrant the Member of the Month nomination.

Regards,

Edited by Fossildude19

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Auspex

Most of the entries are from stalwart regulars, and even the few 'drive-byes' give us some pretty exciting eye-candy. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
THobern

It's like Wikipedia; you may be able to come up with reasons why it won't work, but the fact is that it does. If there are flaws, it doesn't seem like they really detract from the competition, which is not supposed to be a considered attempt to rank the inherent worth of fossils.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×