Date: September 7, 1978
To: All Local Group Newsletter Editors
From: Richard A. Amyx
           Publications Officer
Subject: Editors' Awards

Copies to: Charles M.Fallon

The bulk of the work of the AMC Subcommittee on Editors' Awards—determining what the real choices are—is over.  Now it's time for you to vote on how next year's Editors' Awards will be carried out.  In order to help you make your best-informed choice (as well as to show you some of the gyrations we've been through). I'm enclosing copies of the subcommittee's reports for the last three AMC meetings.  I hope you'll take the time to read them, especially the last one.  Their main contents are, in brief, as follows.

  • Report dated February 19 (submitted for March 4 meeting):  Outlines four major criticisms of the current method of determining Editors' Award winners; broaches the subject of a panel selection versus the editors voting; outlines my experience with (airs my gripes about) the Editors' Awards during the previous two years.  This report was not accepted by the Chairman.  Instead, the topic was referred back to a committee of the whole for further discussion.

  • The Editors' Awards Panel (outline submitted for May 6 meeting): During the two months between the March and May meetings, AMC members submitted their comments to me.  While nothing could be decided based on the input received, the question of panel vs. editors was raised again and again.  Taking that to be the concern of the majority, I assembled this outline of a probably workable panel system, adhering quite closely to the general format Hans Frommer had suggested, together with running commentary.  No action was called for, and the whole business went back to the subcommittee.

  • Report dated August 15 (submitted for August 19 meeting):  Describes in some detail the workings of this year's voting; discusses why size categories and 1st, 2nd, and 3rd place rankings are difficult to deal with; offers a logical solution to the problems presented; discourages use of a panel; makes recommendations for action.

The recommendations of this last report were accepted by the Chairman:  that's why this mailing to you.  The final report of the subcommittee will be the results of your voting.

I make no bones about saying that I favor the editors voting for specific categories.  It seems to me to be the only way around most of the problems inherent in the current system without creating a cumbersome and dubiously reliable machine.

In any event, your voting will determine what the method will be.  And if 30 editors determine the course of action for all 81, so be it.

Please note that the ballots are due in to me by October 13.

Publications Officer, AMC

[ Index | Report ]