Login

skyrrhawk · 05-14-2024, 03:09 PM

05-14-2024, 02:48 PMTate Wrote: It doesn't take away from the time and work that went into my audiobook, that's why I ask that you skim through it before you make a judgement. Again, for me, solving a problem with a person should have both sides happy. We should be happy to have members like me create media like I did, and also happy to reward them. I genuinely do not feel like I cheated the system, I gave 110% on my audiobook. My impression of Putin in Ep. 12 is remarkable considering how god awful I am at doing voices.

I really tried, and I shouldn't be faulted for it. More help than push back. Anywho, not trying to point at Mike and co, I get what they're doing --- but they also didn't listen, so.

Time and effort put into a piece are all well and good, and i think everybody here respects that you want to see payment for that time, but that doesn’t take away the fact that the media team has bent the rules for what they’ve already given you. The guidelines are pretty straightforward. Nobody here is required to engage with your media piece to point out the flaws in your argument, or that you went ahead with a decision and seem to have assumed that the media team would work around you rather than checking in the first place to see if your piece fell within the guidelines.

Tate · 05-14-2024, 03:11 PM

05-14-2024, 03:09 PMskyrrhawk Wrote: Time and effort put into a piece are all well and good, and i think everybody here respects that you want to see payment for that time, but that doesn’t take away the fact that the media team has bent the rules for what they’ve already given you. The guidelines are pretty straightforward. Nobody here is required to engage with your media piece to point out the flaws in your argument, or that you went ahead with a decision and seem to have assumed that the media team would work around you rather than checking in the first place to see if your piece fell within the guidelines.

There is a better way to have fixed all of this, but I don't think what happened with me is right. People have the right to disagree, and rather than make this much longer with me going back and forth with others on the site I am going to leave my arguments as they stand. I am not perfect in this, but I did put my best foot forward. Just looking for some love back.

At this point I'll wait to hear back from HO, and that'll be the end of it. Thank you to everyone who has been supportive and kind, makes me feel appreciated!

*JURT* · 05-14-2024, 04:34 PM

Guidelines are there for a reason. There's a wide spectrum between

- "here's a detailed ancestry of my player with a new tidbit every few hundred words that draws a parallel to the player and explain why he plays the way he does, or stuff about his personality that shows up in PTs and other media"

and

- "here's a historical fanfic I wanted to write, and by the way the character is an ancestor of my character so give me money"

I'm not accusing you of the latter, I think you probably fall somewhere between the two, I just wanted to examplify why the guidelines exist and why it's important to not just start going around them anytime someone feels like we should.

I'll happily align with the rest of HO and/or back the media team if there's a final decision that judges otherwise, but personnallly, I think if something is over an hour long, but also can't be submitted in parts because the first part (or parts) would then not be graded on the grounds that they don't seem to have anything to do with the SHL, maybe it's not as much about the SHL as initially thought. I believe that the reason why we have these guidelines is that for any given hour of submitted media, the media team is actually grading something that has to do with the SHL.

Add on top of that that you've already been paid for what is in essence the same story, and I think the decision to grade one hour of it as new content isn't a terribly unfair decision and precedent to set. I don't think there's ever been a payout for a "re-worked" media piece, signature, or other. It might suck but time and effort do not trump the rules, just ask anyone who has made a sig for a teammate without realizing there was a cap on how much they were allowed to get paid for it.

***frithjofr*** · 05-14-2024, 06:28 PM

05-14-2024, 10:26 AMsköldpaddor Wrote: The media team worked with you to allow you to get paid for media that was not clearly related to your player (though I understand that it would eventually lead to your player, some of this is just really solid writing that could be read completely out of the context of the SHL and be a compelling story anyway), I think it is fair for them to ask you to work within the bounds of the system we've established here for the podcast as well.

Not trying to go a gotcha here, because I feel like you did cover this in this sentence, but I'm just adding my 2 cents that I've had media for recipes graded in the past (even for 2x draft day media) because I just prefaced it by having my player say "Hey, I'm Darnell Johnson, and welcome to Chef Darnell"

Draft Day Dining with Chef Darnell

So I mean, I feel like the bar to clear for "clearly related to your player" is so low that a story about Tate's player's ancestors should make the cut pretty easily, nevermind that it does eventually tie back into the modern day.

Would it help if he did it like I did and said at the beginning, "Hi, I'm Savva Kirik and this is my story"?

Not trying to troll, by the way, genuinely asking because that's what I did with my recipe media.

***sköldpaddor*** · 05-14-2024, 06:44 PM

05-14-2024, 06:28 PMfrithjofr Wrote: Not trying to go a gotcha here, because I feel like you did cover this in this sentence, but I'm just adding my 2 cents that I've had media for recipes graded in the past (even for 2x draft day media) because I just prefaced it by having my player say "Hey, I'm Darnell Johnson, and welcome to Chef Darnell"

Draft Day Dining with Chef Darnell

So I mean, I feel like the bar to clear for "clearly related to your player" is so low that a story about Tate's player's ancestors should make the cut pretty easily, nevermind that it does eventually tie back into the modern day.

Would it help if he did it like I did and said at the beginning, "Hi, I'm Savva Kirik and this is my story"?

Not trying to troll, by the way, genuinely asking because that's what I did with my recipe media.

Totally valid question - was actually talking to JURT and a couple others in HO about this a while ago, because I've also had some media graded that was tangentially SHL related at best in the past. What I said then, and will tell you now, is that the current media heads have a clearer view of what they want to ask their staff to grade, and that is completely fine - that's not something I'm going to step on toes on as HO because we largely trust department heads to run their own show. If something seemed wildly inappropriate or unacceptable to us we'd likely step in, but it is ultimately up to the media team to set standards as far as what they expect the people who work for them to read/listen to and grade. If the current media team sets those expectations clearly (even if previous media departments might have let it slide), that's their prerogative.

In this case, they already worked with the user once to pay out for the written version of this media, and I completely understand why they are hesitant to pay out again for what is the same writing (albeit beefed up with sound effects and voices).

To be clear, I think audio drama is a very cool medium and I'd love to see more of it, but I do think that there should be a difference between a completely original audio drama that has never been produced before, and a "re-telling" of something that has already had a payout when published in written form, and that difference is, again, ultimately up to the media department to decide.

***frithjofr*** · 05-14-2024, 07:02 PM

05-14-2024, 06:44 PMsköldpaddor Wrote: Totally valid question - was actually talking to JURT and a couple others in HO about this a while ago, because I've also had some media graded that was tangentially SHL related at best in the past. What I said then, and will tell you now, is that the current media heads have a clearer view of what they want to ask their staff to grade, and that is completely fine - that's not something I'm going to step on toes on as HO because we largely trust department heads to run their own show. If something seemed wildly inappropriate or unacceptable to us we'd likely step in, but it is ultimately up to the media team to set standards as far as what they expect the people who work for them to read/listen to and grade. If the current media team sets those expectations clearly (even if previous media departments might have let it slide), that's their prerogative.

In this case, they already worked with the user once to pay out for the written version of this media, and I completely understand why they are hesitant to pay out again for what is the same writing (albeit beefed up with sound effects and voices).

To be clear, I think audio drama is a very cool medium and I'd love to see more of it, but I do think that there should be a difference between a completely original audio drama that has never been produced before, and a "re-telling" of something that has already had a payout when published in written form, and that difference is, again, ultimately up to the media department to decide.

Thanks for the response, I wasn't expecting that so quickly. I see your perspective (and theirs) and largely I agree that it's an okay interpretation of the rules as they're written. That's why I brought up my past media, but you probably noticed it was from literal years ago - yeah, different time, different standards. It wasn't meant to be a gotcha but rather an example to say like... Where do we draw the line? (Specifically in reference to things about the player, since one thing Tate mentioned was that he was told he couldn't post episodically because episodic content that didn't explicitly feature his player wouldn't be graded)

In that regard, I'd appreciate a clarification, though I'm not expecting one from you right now.

I've personally had discussions with Mike Liut in the past about how I feel that the way audio media is graded discourages people from doing high effort productions. In my case, I was considering setting up a series of interviews with key figures in the league, coaches/GMs, job heads, HO, etc, to get their perspectives on what they do, why it matters, etc. But I found that the effort involved in taking time to research topics, prepare questions/prepare guests, record both sides of the conversation and then edit it together wasn't properly rewarded by the podcast grading scale, and the vague suggestion that if it's considered exceptional media it could come with a bonus payout... Ehh...

I think that Tate's brought up some interesting points and I just wanted to add my 2 cents here for the media team. I think that there's a lot of work that could be done specifically when it comes to audio types of media, and Tate's media is so exceptional that I think it sort of stands on its own, and it's a shame that his misfortune has to be the launching point for this discussion.

Tate · 05-15-2024, 12:49 PM

I spent some time away from this yesterday, and it put my mind at ease. I thank everyone for their thoughts, and taking the time to think on mine.

My heartfelt apology to the graders, Mike, TheGreatToeJam, and Akoustique, who were all really great in dealing with me. I think that what they do is very difficult, and I appreciate the help I've been given by them.

I said to my team this morning that after I really thought about it, I was upset because I wanted the money to validate my work on my audiobook, and after I spent time away I knew that I didn't need the money to know that I did a good job, and that I was happy with what I did. It ended up changing the way I write because when you try to tell a story using the written words, it's not as easy, and it doesn't flow like it does in your head. I remember thinking at the time, "I should do this every time." (not the sound production of course, but talking it out)

Anyway, it's on me to be proactive, and to work within the system that has been established. This one is on me, sorry for doing that! I promise, and pinky swear that I will not do this again. Smile

Thank you

Navigation

Extra Menu

About us