Do you think that AOTY Suggestions From Members Should be Considered?

Well like you said last night via text. ALL FISH WERE EXCEPTED.. Well that didn't seem to be the case with Brian. According to him and his crew some pics of his fish were deleted from Melones. Those fish would not have put him in first place but that's not the point. Some juniors worked there asses off this year like you did. Targetting numerous lakes and species being very carefull to submit the fish with there mouths open etc. Maybe there should be a cut off of age or something?? I don't know. Maybe a taoty? Tot angler of the year? Again I don't know just frustrated.

Show me one pic that was not excepted because of pic quality.

I see new melones pics under both Andrews and brians fish

I tried to get him to show me the screen shot but he couldn't find it. They insist most definetly some of his fish were Dqd. We just need to level the playing fields is all. I don't believe that every kid on a soccer team should receive a first place plaque. Its kinda the same thing here. I understand its to get more kids to fish and YOU of everybody should know how I feel about children fishing and being in the outdoors. Pretty fucked up for you to say that!

Jim, show me where the suggestions were considered, voted on, and approved and I'll shut my trap.  But year after year I see the same thing happen.  People that want to voice their opinions get shot down and ridiculed as if their thoughts and suggestions aren't valid or somehow feel that discussing it detracts from fundraising efforts.  That's what i'm tired of Jim.

Al,

We do take participant input seriously, and the committee does vote on proposed changes. The only problem I have with the proposed changes for 2016 is that they were made AFTER people started competing in the 2016 AOTY. 

If you want rules changed, waters added etc., then get some popular support for your change and submit the proposal to the committee BEFORE the new year.  We will consider and vote on every proposal particularly if it has popular support.

I think I can speak for all of the committee when I say that we try to make rules that are inclusive and fair to all participants. We also set rules in attempt to eliminate inter-competitor conflict (and greifing /metagaming).  The mouth closed rule is an example of the latter.

As far as I know, there is no formal process to committee selection. Those committee members who have been added during my time have been nominated by an AOTY participant and/or committee member and then approved by a unanimous vote by the committee. We will be adding one committee member in the very near future, and I think everyone will agree that he is a great choice for the job.

Please remember that we are trying to make money for PIF (The A-Hulls charity).  Many of us on the committee have absolutely ZERO say as to what happens with PIF funds, and we are cool with that. In addition, that PIF refuses to get 501c status makes it a little more difficult for us to solicit sponsor prizes.  No biggie.. we don't want to interfere with what you guys got going. However, we ask that you take this into consideration before bashing the committee.

I tried to get him to show me the screen shot but he couldn't find it. They insist most definetly some of his fish were Dqd. We just need to level the playing fields is all. I don't believe that every kid on a soccer team should receive a first place plaque. Its kinda the same thing here. I understand its to get more kids to fish and YOU of everybody should know how I feel about children fishing and being in the outdoors. Pretty fucked up for you to say that!

Level the playing field how? Tell me.

I told you last night privately in text you were off base and you said you wanted to post it publicly and you did so I am responding publicly.

Jim, show me where the suggestions were considered, voted on, and approved and I'll shut my trap.  But year after year I see the same thing happen.  People that want to voice their opinions get shot down and ridiculed as if their thoughts and suggestions aren't valid or somehow feel that discussing it detracts from fundraising efforts.  That's what i'm tired of Jim.

Al,

We do take participant input seriously, and the committee does vote on proposed changes. The only problem I have with the proposed changes for 2016 is that they were made AFTER people started competing in the 2016 AOTY. 

If you want rules changed, waters added etc., then get some popular support for your change and submit the proposal to the committee BEFORE the new year.  We will consider and vote on every proposal particularly if it has popular support.

I think I can speak for all of the committee when I say that we try to make rules that are inclusive and fair to all participants. We also set rules in attempt to eliminate inter-competitor conflict (and greifing /metagaming).  The mouth closed rule is an example of the latter.

As far as I know, there is no formal process to committee selection. Those committee members who have been added during my time have been nominated by an AOTY participant and/or committee member and then approved by a unanimous vote by the committee. We will be adding one committee member in the very near future, and I think everyone will agree that he is a great choice for the job.

Please remember that we are trying to make money for PIF (The A-Hulls charity).  Many of us on the committee have absolutely ZERO say as to what happens with PIF funds, and we are cool with that. In addition, that PIF refuses to get 501c status makes it a little more difficult for us to solicit sponsor prizes.  No biggie.. we don't want to interfere with what you guys got going. However, we ask that you take this into consideration before bashing the committee.

So I think one of the main issues here is that there's really no insight on what the AOTY committee is doing regarding rules changes.  I, as well as other people, are thankful that the committee does what it does, and none of us are particularly interested in the inner workings of the day to day type decisions like DQs, complaints about other anglers, etc.

But there is a lack of transparency as to what is considered for an annual rule change, and some of us tend to sit there and wonder if anything is coming.  There's no formal process to discuss what is being proposed behind the scenes, and it affects the competitors, as we don't know if the committee has considered our thoughts at all.  If these things are being raised up at inappropriate times, i'm sorry, but sometimes people forget, and need reminders.  Heck the payment button was just kind of assumed to work for 2016 until Jim brought it up very recently (thanks for the reminder Jim!).  I think its just a fact that towards the end of the year people start focusing on other things, and I highly doubt any of us would have thought of AOTY rule suggestions unless reminded. 

Andy,

Here is the fish in question...same fish submitted 4 times. Verified once for Andrew and rejected the other times.

I just went through every single other Junior submission for 2015. No other rejections.

Anything else??

Jim, show me where the suggestions were considered, voted on, and approved and I'll shut my trap.  But year after year I see the same thing happen.  People that want to voice their opinions get shot down and ridiculed as if their thoughts and suggestions aren't valid or somehow feel that discussing it detracts from fundraising efforts.  That's what i'm tired of Jim.

Al,

We do take participant input seriously, and the committee does vote on proposed changes. The only problem I have with the proposed changes for 2016 is that they were made AFTER people started competing in the 2016 AOTY. 

If you want rules changed, waters added etc., then get some popular support for your change and submit the proposal to the committee BEFORE the new year.  We will consider and vote on every proposal particularly if it has popular support.

I think I can speak for all of the committee when I say that we try to make rules that are inclusive and fair to all participants. We also set rules in attempt to eliminate inter-competitor conflict (and greifing /metagaming).  The mouth closed rule is an example of the latter.

As far as I know, there is no formal process to committee selection. Those committee members who have been added during my time have been nominated by an AOTY participant and/or committee member and then approved by a unanimous vote by the committee. We will be adding one committee member in the very near future, and I think everyone will agree that he is a great choice for the job.

Please remember that we are trying to make money for PIF (The A-Hulls charity).  Many of us on the committee have absolutely ZERO say as to what happens with PIF funds, and we are cool with that. In addition, that PIF refuses to get 501c status makes it a little more difficult for us to solicit sponsor prizes.  No biggie.. we don't want to interfere with what you guys got going. However, we ask that you take this into consideration before bashing the committee.

So I think one of the main issues here is that there's really no insight on what the AOTY committee is doing regarding rules changes.  I, as well as other people, are thankful that the committee does what it does, and none of us are particularly interested in the inner workings of the day to day type decisions like DQs, complaints about other anglers, etc.

But there is a lack of transparency as to what is considered for an annual rule change, and some of us tend to sit there and wonder if anything is coming.  There's no formal process to discuss what is being proposed behind the scenes, and it affects the competitors, as we don't know if the committee has considered our thoughts at all.  If these things are being raised up at inappropriate times, i'm sorry, but sometimes people forget, and need reminders.  Heck the payment button was just kind of assumed to work for 2016 until Jim brought it up very recently (thanks for the reminder Jim!).  I think its just a fact that towards the end of the year people start focusing on other things, and I highly doubt any of us would have thought of AOTY rule suggestions unless reminded.

Well, there is your problem. Siting and waiting for change doesn't get anything done. The committee has limited time, and we already spend a fair amount of time checking on submissions, voting on iffy submissions, reviewing and discussing disputed submissions, and proposing rule changes to eliminate conflicts.  It is unreasonable to expect the committee to see every permutation of every possible rule, or to read the minds of our participants. Thus, we rely on participants to suggest many of the proposed rule changes with only one condition: The proposed rule changes must be made in a manner that allows new rules to be discussed, voted on, and adopted BEFORE the competition begins.

Jim, show me where the suggestions were considered, voted on, and approved and I'll shut my trap.  But year after year I see the same thing happen.  People that want to voice their opinions get shot down and ridiculed as if their thoughts and suggestions aren't valid or somehow feel that discussing it detracts from fundraising efforts.  That's what i'm tired of Jim.

Al,

We do take participant input seriously, and the committee does vote on proposed changes. The only problem I have with the proposed changes for 2016 is that they were made AFTER people started competing in the 2016 AOTY. 

If you want rules changed, waters added etc., then get some popular support for your change and submit the proposal to the committee BEFORE the new year.  We will consider and vote on every proposal particularly if it has popular support.

I think I can speak for all of the committee when I say that we try to make rules that are inclusive and fair to all participants. We also set rules in attempt to eliminate inter-competitor conflict (and greifing /metagaming).  The mouth closed rule is an example of the latter.

As far as I know, there is no formal process to committee selection. Those committee members who have been added during my time have been nominated by an AOTY participant and/or committee member and then approved by a unanimous vote by the committee. We will be adding one committee member in the very near future, and I think everyone will agree that he is a great choice for the job.

Please remember that we are trying to make money for PIF (The A-Hulls charity).  Many of us on the committee have absolutely ZERO say as to what happens with PIF funds, and we are cool with that. In addition, that PIF refuses to get 501c status makes it a little more difficult for us to solicit sponsor prizes.  No biggie.. we don't want to interfere with what you guys got going. However, we ask that you take this into consideration before bashing the committee.

So I think one of the main issues here is that there's really no insight on what the AOTY committee is doing regarding rules changes.  I, as well as other people, are thankful that the committee does what it does, and none of us are particularly interested in the inner workings of the day to day type decisions like DQs, complaints about other anglers, etc.

But there is a lack of transparency as to what is considered for an annual rule change, and some of us tend to sit there and wonder if anything is coming.  There's no formal process to discuss what is being proposed behind the scenes, and it affects the competitors, as we don't know if the committee has considered our thoughts at all.  If these things are being raised up at inappropriate times, i'm sorry, but sometimes people forget, and need reminders.  Heck the payment button was just kind of assumed to work for 2016 until Jim brought it up very recently (thanks for the reminder Jim!).  I think its just a fact that towards the end of the year people start focusing on other things, and I highly doubt any of us would have thought of AOTY rule suggestions unless reminded.

Well, there is your problem. Siting and waiting for change doesn't get anything done. The committee has limited time, and we already spend a fair amount of time checking on submissions, voting on iffy submissions, reviewing and discussing disputed submissions, and proposing rule changes to eliminate conflicts.  It is unreasonable to expect the committee to see every permutation of every possible rule, or to read the minds of our participants. Thus, we rely on participants to suggest many of the proposed rule changes with only one condition: The proposed rule changes must be made in a manner that allows new rules to be discussed, voted on, and adopted BEFORE the competition begins.

So how is someone supposed to submit a proposed rule change?  Forum? PM?  Text? Smoke signal?  How do competitors even know that a rule was proposed and voted on?  I'm tellin' ya, Hydrospider brought up the SUP issue last year, and I thought it was being considered.  But...nothin'.  How am I supposed to know if the committee even considered it?  If they did and voted against it, fine. 

In the case of suggestions for the following year, perhaps just designate 1 December as a date to start the discussion, put it on the calendar.  Participants and committee members can then vote and identify any changes before Christmas so folks can register for fishing on 1/1.  It's all supposed to be fun.

In the case of suggestions for the following year, perhaps just designate 1 December as a date to start the discussion, put it on the calendar.  Participants and committee members can then vote and identify any changes before Christmas so folks can register for fishing on 1/1.  It's all supposed to be fun.

Great idea.


I would also add that if some of you guys don't like that we don't have a codified formal process for committee member selection and rule changes, that you could help us by suggesting such a formal process.

Jim, show me where the suggestions were considered, voted on, and approved and I'll shut my trap.  But year after year I see the same thing happen.  People that want to voice their opinions get shot down and ridiculed as if their thoughts and suggestions aren't valid or somehow feel that discussing it detracts from fundraising efforts.  That's what i'm tired of Jim.

Al,

We do take participant input seriously, and the committee does vote on proposed changes. The only problem I have with the proposed changes for 2016 is that they were made AFTER people started competing in the 2016 AOTY. 

If you want rules changed, waters added etc., then get some popular support for your change and submit the proposal to the committee BEFORE the new year.  We will consider and vote on every proposal particularly if it has popular support.

I think I can speak for all of the committee when I say that we try to make rules that are inclusive and fair to all participants. We also set rules in attempt to eliminate inter-competitor conflict (and greifing /metagaming).  The mouth closed rule is an example of the latter.

As far as I know, there is no formal process to committee selection. Those committee members who have been added during my time have been nominated by an AOTY participant and/or committee member and then approved by a unanimous vote by the committee. We will be adding one committee member in the very near future, and I think everyone will agree that he is a great choice for the job.

Please remember that we are trying to make money for PIF (The A-Hulls charity).  Many of us on the committee have absolutely ZERO say as to what happens with PIF funds, and we are cool with that. In addition, that PIF refuses to get 501c status makes it a little more difficult for us to solicit sponsor prizes.  No biggie.. we don't want to interfere with what you guys got going. However, we ask that you take this into consideration before bashing the committee.

So I think one of the main issues here is that there's really no insight on what the AOTY committee is doing regarding rules changes.  I, as well as other people, are thankful that the committee does what it does, and none of us are particularly interested in the inner workings of the day to day type decisions like DQs, complaints about other anglers, etc.

But there is a lack of transparency as to what is considered for an annual rule change, and some of us tend to sit there and wonder if anything is coming.  There's no formal process to discuss what is being proposed behind the scenes, and it affects the competitors, as we don't know if the committee has considered our thoughts at all.  If these things are being raised up at inappropriate times, i'm sorry, but sometimes people forget, and need reminders.  Heck the payment button was just kind of assumed to work for 2016 until Jim brought it up very recently (thanks for the reminder Jim!).  I think its just a fact that towards the end of the year people start focusing on other things, and I highly doubt any of us would have thought of AOTY rule suggestions unless reminded.

Well, there is your problem. Siting and waiting for change doesn't get anything done. The committee has limited time, and we already spend a fair amount of time checking on submissions, voting on iffy submissions, reviewing and discussing disputed submissions, and proposing rule changes to eliminate conflicts.  It is unreasonable to expect the committee to see every permutation of every possible rule, or to read the minds of our participants. Thus, we rely on participants to suggest many of the proposed rule changes with only one condition: The proposed rule changes must be made in a manner that allows new rules to be discussed, voted on, and adopted BEFORE the competition begins.

So how is someone supposed to submit a proposed rule change?  Forum? PM?  Text? Smoke signal?  How do competitors even know that a rule was proposed and voted on?  I'm tellin' ya, Hydrospider brought up the SUP issue last year, and I thought it was being considered.  But...nothin'.  How am I supposed to know if the committee even considered it?  If they did and voted against it, fine.

Exactly. 

Actually, looks like it was brought up in 2014 - tabled?  Who knows?  Pat did mention in passing on one thread that there didn't seem to be much "interest" in it, but competitors weren't engaged for their own input. 

Last year was the first time that I participated in AOTY. It was a very disappointing experience to say the least. Since then i have taken a breather from the tournament. I have heard a lot of things about AOTY (Good and Bad) but experiencing it first hand was another thing.  To me, AOTY has become something completely different from what NCKA represents. (This is me). Blast me, yell at me, say i'm stupid for blah blah blah, I stand by this statement.

It has been stated that "If you don't like it" don't participate, which is true, but if the members of this community does not support it, except for a select few, then is it really NCKA? Competition brings out the best and worst out of people. AOTY seems to go bring out the worst in people, maybe it's time to listen and put changes in place that bring it back to the values of NCKA.   

But, NO ONE is getting paid for the hours and hours they spend on AOTY and DOTY, and the profits all go to PIF

You do. ....

How do I get paid for my work on DOTY Andy??

I really wanna know WTF you're talking about?

Last year was the first time that I participated in AOTY. It was a very disappointing experience to say the least. Since then i have taken a breather from the tournament. I have heard a lot of things about AOTY (Good and Bad) but experiencing it first hand was another thing.  To me, AOTY has become something completely different from what NCKA represents. (This is me). Blast me, yell at me, say i'm stupid for blah blah blah, I stand by this statement.

It has been stated that "If you don't like it" don't participate, which is true, but if the members of this community does not support it, except for a select few, then is it really NCKA? Competition brings out the best and worst out of people. AOTY seems to go bring out the worst in people, maybe it's time to listen and put changes in place that bring it back to the values of NCKA.   

you're stupid keith.    cya at shadow cliffs soon?