Not a single Harvey Award for Valiant

[Thomas]

http://mostviral.club/saga-march-win-bi ... ey-awards/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
I saw that coming.

[lorddunlow]

I take exception to this quote: "Notably absent from the winners was Valiant Entertainment,who dominated several nomination categories thanks to a wave of fan support during the open nominations process."

Umm... "fan support"? I thought nominations were only from industry professionals. Seems a little trite referring to colleagues as fans.

[Ricomortis]

http://mostviral.club/saga-march-win-bi ... ey-awards/
I saw that coming.

Are you *SQUEE* kidding me? What a *SQUEE* joke this industry has become.

Nothing but a bunch of sheeple. "Harley Quinn this and Deadpool that" blearggghhhh!

[Shadowman99]

Haha! *SQUEE* the Harveys

I thought that the Harveys weren't open to public vote though? Article states that it was the fan participation during the open voting process that basically disqualified Valiant from all categories. I thought it was 100% industry-based though, I didn't think the public had a say in it? Or, weren't supposed to be able to at least?

[paradise]

I take exception to this quote: "Notably absent from the winners was Valiant Entertainment,who dominated several nomination categories thanks to a wave of fan support during the open nominations process."

Umm... "fan support"? I thought nominations were only from industry professionals. Seems a little trite referring to colleagues as fans.

Are you not able to accept the fact that there is ZERO CHANCE that pros liked valiant books enough to nominate so many of them in every category and that there was no tampering by fans?

isn't it a Lot more likely that there was tampering? Valiant fans are Fantastic and love the brand but in this case, I personally believe some people crossed the line, and not in a soft feather way, but in a full on hammer way, and it was obvious.

now, some of the blame is on Harvey's for not having a voting process that screens out this type of stuff, but after everyone seeing 2-3 books in every category what do u think was going to happen?

[Jude Terror]

Guys, I've reported on this injustice at The Outhouse: http://www.theouthousers.com/index.php/ ... ctory.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Hopefully we can make the people who rigged this vote against Valiant pay for their crimes.

[Ricomortis]

Yea... Well I would take Imperium, Divinity or Ivar, Timewalker over ANYTHING at Marvel or DC. Yes I read Saga, Invincible, and East of West... Etc. and I still like these three more.

I know something wasn't right about the nominations, but come on man, that is ridiculous how blinded the so called "professionals" are in this industry. It's the herd mentality.

[Gavin Dillinger]

Hey guys. I was busy going door to door and asking people if they've accepted Valiant into their heart as their personal savior. What did I miss? Did Circle Chest win all of the Harvey's?

[paradise]

Guys, I've reported on this injustice at The Outhouse: http://www.theouthousers.com/index.php/ ... ctory.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Hopefully we can make the people who rigged this vote against Valiant pay for their crimes.

You, Sir, are a giant d-bag. Not for the stupid and not so funny article you wrote but for the way you come here and gloat. Yes, some overzealous fans voted WAY too many times (more so than other publishers' fans.) That is a topic for an internal soul searching and possibly a civil discussion between real members of this site, and even more so, for the Harvey's to figure out if they are legitimate awards (which means they need a better system for voting) or just another piece of Crap website like yours. But you are flat out accusing VEI employees of doing this with ZERO proof shown and thus reveal yourself a total hack.

[Jude Terror]

Guys, I've reported on this injustice at The Outhouse: http://www.theouthousers.com/index.php/ ... ctory.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Hopefully we can make the people who rigged this vote against Valiant pay for their crimes.

You, Sir, are a giant d-bag. Not for the stupid and not so funny article you wrote but for the way you come here and gloat. Yes, some overzealous fans voted WAY too many times (more so than other publishers' fans.) That is a topic for an internal soul searching and possibly a civil discussion between real members of this site, and even more so, for the Harvey's to figure out if they are legitimate awards (which means they need a better system for voting) or just another piece of Crap website like yours. But you are flat out accusing VEI employees of doing this with ZERO proof shown and thus reveal yourself a total hack.

Sir, I don't know what article you were reading, but I explicitly said that Valiant employees did *not* rig the awards. As a proud, card-carrying member of the Valiant Fan Forums, I wanted nothing more than for Valiant to win all of the awards, and possibly for the Harveys to create new awards just to give to Valiant.

[hawkeyeps]

Guys, I've reported on this injustice at The Outhouse: http://www.theouthousers.com/index.php/ ... ctory.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Hopefully we can make the people who rigged this vote against Valiant pay for their crimes.

You, Sir, are a giant d-bag. Not for the stupid and not so funny article you wrote but for the way you come here and gloat. Yes, some overzealous fans voted WAY too many times (more so than other publishers' fans.) That is a topic for an internal soul searching and possibly a civil discussion between real members of this site, and even more so, for the Harvey's to figure out if they are legitimate awards (which means they need a better system for voting) or just another piece of Crap website like yours. But you are flat out accusing VEI employees of doing this with ZERO proof shown and thus reveal yourself a total hack.

Sir, I don't know what article you were reading, but I explicitly said that Valiant employees did *not* rig the awards. As a proud, card-carrying member of the Valiant Fan Forums, I wanted nothing more than for Valiant to win all of the awards, and possibly for the Harveys to create new awards just to give to Valiant.

Hey Jude, Don't make it bad

[SwiftMann]

From here

This isn't new. CrossGen did this 15 years ago. Got mostly the same results too. No wins.

How can it be the "same result" of "no wins" if the results are not even out yet?

Because Valiant did this last year leading all publishers with 20 nominations (and to a lesser degree the year before by getting Q&W to be the most nominated single title) and came up empty.

2014's plan - Get multiple nominations for one title.
2014's result - No wins.
2015's plan - Get multiple nominations for multiple titles across all possible categories.
2015's result - No wins.
2016's plan - Get multiple nominations in the same categories for multiple titles across all possible categories.
2016's result - ???

I'm just hoping they do win something so 2017's plan isn't "Get ALL nominations in the same categories for ALL titles across all possible categories."

Oh no. My fears are being realized. Next year there will be nothing but Valiant nominees.

And, for the record, 83% of these comic creator voted awards (supposedly not fan based in any way) went to non-Big 2. Five each to Image and Boom (mostly for Saga and a Peanuts tribute book). Three to Marvel. Two to IDW, Dark Horse and Top Shelf. One each to three independent publishers and DC. Hard to call that a bunch of Harley Quinn and Deadpool sheeple.

[Ricomortis]

From here

This isn't new. CrossGen did this 15 years ago. Got mostly the same results too. No wins.

How can it be the "same result" of "no wins" if the results are not even out yet?

Because Valiant did this last year leading all publishers with 20 nominations (and to a lesser degree the year before by getting Q&W to be the most nominated single title) and came up empty.

2014's plan - Get multiple nominations for one title.
2014's result - No wins.
2015's plan - Get multiple nominations for multiple titles across all possible categories.
2015's result - No wins.
2016's plan - Get multiple nominations in the same categories for multiple titles across all possible categories.
2016's result - ???

I'm just hoping they do win something so 2017's plan isn't "Get ALL nominations in the same categories for ALL titles across all possible categories."

Oh no. My fears are being realized. Next year there will be nothing but Valiant nominees.

And, for the record, 83% of these comic creator voted awards (supposedly not fan based in any way) went to non-Big 2. Five each to Image and Boom (mostly for Saga and a Peanuts tribute book). Three to Marvel. Two to IDW, Dark Horse and Top Shelf. One each to three independent publishers and DC. Hard to call that a bunch of Harley Quinn and Deadpool sheeple.

Industry as a whole, not just these awards... If you can't see that... I don't know what else to say.

In reference to my sheeple comment... Which is my personal opinion... Not that that means anything. Lol

[paradise]

Sir, I don't know what article you were reading, but I explicitly said that Valiant employees did *not* rig the awards. As a proud, card-carrying member of the Valiant Fan Forums, I wanted nothing more than for Valiant to win all of the awards, and possibly for the Harveys to create new awards just to give to Valiant.

Keep posting, your site's credibility is growing in leaps and bounds. Great business strategy to act like a first class hole. You probably think you are doing investigative journalism here. I think you missed the mark. And The Onion is actually funny.

[paradise]

From here

This isn't new. CrossGen did this 15 years ago. Got mostly the same results too. No wins.

How can it be the "same result" of "no wins" if the results are not even out yet?

Because Valiant did this last year leading all publishers with 20 nominations (and to a lesser degree the year before by getting Q&W to be the most nominated single title) and came up empty.

2014's plan - Get multiple nominations for one title.
2014's result - No wins.
2015's plan - Get multiple nominations for multiple titles across all possible categories.
2015's result - No wins.
2016's plan - Get multiple nominations in the same categories for multiple titles across all possible categories.
2016's result - ???

I'm just hoping they do win something so 2017's plan isn't "Get ALL nominations in the same categories for ALL titles across all possible categories."

Oh no. My fears are being realized. Next year there will be nothing but Valiant nominees.

And, for the record, 83% of these comic creator voted awards (supposedly not fan based in any way) went to non-Big 2. Five each to Image and Boom (mostly for Saga and a Peanuts tribute book). Three to Marvel. Two to IDW, Dark Horse and Top Shelf. One each to three independent publishers and DC. Hard to call that a bunch of Harley Quinn and Deadpool sheeple.

Correct, to think Valiant got snubbed is insane. The books that won, while may not be yours (or in some cases mine) cup of tea but they brought something new and original to the field or brought new readers. Valiant publishes fantastic (specially for us fans) superhero comic books but number of nominations, specially when they were nominated by largely anonymous online voting, means nothing.

[magnusr]

A bit off topic, but can anyone explain their Hall of Fame to me? This year Carl Barks was inducted into the Harvey Hall of Fame and previously he was in their Kirby Hall of Fame. Did they cancel the Kirby Hall of Fame and start again from the beginning or is it supposed to be the same thing? On their home page they say the Kirby Hall of Fame is still among the categories, but all recent listings name it the Harvey Hall of Fame. As the listings on their home page are incomplete it's not easy to understand.

/Magnus

[Phoenix8008]

I take exception to this quote: "Notably absent from the winners was Valiant Entertainment,who dominated several nomination categories thanks to a wave of fan support during the open nominations process."

Umm... "fan support"? I thought nominations were only from industry professionals. Seems a little trite referring to colleagues as fans.

Are you not able to accept the fact that there is ZERO CHANCE that pros liked valiant books enough to nominate so many of them in every category and that there was no tampering by fans?

isn't it a Lot more likely that there was tampering? Valiant fans are Fantastic and love the brand but in this case, I personally believe some people crossed the line, and not in a soft feather way, but in a full on hammer way, and it was obvious.

now, some of the blame is on Harvey's for not having a voting process that screens out this type of stuff, but after everyone seeing 2-3 books in every category what do u think was going to happen?

Either the Harvey Awards are only voted on by industry professionals (as they claim) or not. If somehow 'fans' from outside the industry are able to vote in any way, shape, or form, then the Harvey awards need to stop claiming that they are "The only comics awards both nominated and selected by the full body of comics professionals." If 'fans' not working in the comics industry could somehow get involved to spike the votes to get Valiant so many nominations, then why didn't they also spike the final ballots to give a bunch of wins to Valiant as well?

Let me be clear that I'm not advocating for cheating in any form. It just doesn't make sense that some group that could rig the nominations wouldn't also rig the final votes. I mean, the only reason to do that would be to increase people's paranoia about Valiant 'rigging' votes. After last years debacle with the /r/comicbooks Reddit poll, we now have two big instances where it looks like vote rigging took place. So any future awards Valiant may eventually get come pre-tarnished as people wonder how legitimate it is. That's my fear. It would have been better to either win a few of the awards that they were nominated for this time, or to not have dominated the nominations at all. Now it looks like Valiant has a 'history' of cheating.

[Watchtower]

Okay, I can already see the misinformation spreading, so let's clear some things up.

Notably absent from the winners was Valiant Entertainment, who dominated several nomination categories thanks to a wave of fan support during the open nominations process.

The word is dominated, not disqualified. We have no idea why Valiant didn't get any Harveys, just that fan support was why they got so many nominations in the first place.

On one hand, I'm no longer surprised when we as a fandom (or even we as a forum) lead to Valiant getting disqualified for something: we've kinda got a bad reputation for being a bit too overzealous. On the other hand, I'm calling shenanigans at fan support playing any role in the Harveys process, since everything I've found makes it explicitly clear that it has to be within the industry. To quote their own site:

WHO CAN VOTE: The Harvey Awards may be voted on exclusively by Comic-Book creators, those who write, draw, ink, color, letter, design, edit, or are otherwise professionally involved in the creative aspect of comics, online or in print. Fans, retailers, distributors, and accounting, administrative, and other business operations personnel votes will not be counted. All ballots must include requested professional verification information.

[lorddunlow]

Okay, I can already see the misinformation spreading, so let's clear some things up.

Notably absent from the winners was Valiant Entertainment, who dominated several nomination categories thanks to a wave of fan support during the open nominations process.

The word is dominated, not disqualified. We have no idea why Valiant didn't get any Harveys, just that fan support was why they got so many nominations in the first place.

On one hand, I'm no longer surprised when we as a fandom (or even we as a forum) lead to Valiant getting disqualified for something: we've kinda got a bad reputation for being a bit too overzealous. On the other hand, I'm calling shenanigans at fan support playing any role in the Harveys process, since everything I've found makes it explicitly clear that it has to be within the industry. To quote their own site:

WHO CAN VOTE: The Harvey Awards may be voted on exclusively by Comic-Book creators, those who write, draw, ink, color, letter, design, edit, or are otherwise professionally involved in the creative aspect of comics, online or in print. Fans, retailers, distributors, and accounting, administrative, and other business operations personnel votes will not be counted. All ballots must include requested professional verification information.

This was my point. The article claims fans stuffed the nomination ballots when the Harvey awards claim the voting is only from industry professionals. I don't know how anyone can claim fans affected the vote in any way without saying the Harvey's are full of *SQUEE*.

[bygranddesign]

I'm very disappointed in the Valiant fans that stuffed the ballot

They have made a mockery of the system ... and have brought great shame to the Valiant fan community

How can you go through all that effort to stuffing the ballot ...

getting valiant creators nominated in almost every single category

... and NOT get ONE NOMINATION for Josh Dysart or Imperium !!!!!

Not ONE nomination for the best writer at Valiant?

Worst.

Ballot.

Stuffing.

Ever!!

Shame on you shady Valiant fans

Shame on you!

[paradise]

Harvey's nomination process has no checks. Anyone can nominate off their website, making up name and/or their qualification. Easy to cheat as they get thousands of votes thst nobody vets.

Voting for the winners is then done by a controlled book of industry creators. Thus one can fake nominations but not votes

[paradise]

. I mean, the only reason to do that would be to increase people's paranoia about Valiant 'rigging' votes. After last years debacle with the /r/comicbooks Reddit poll, we now have two big instances where it looks like vote rigging took place. So any future awards Valiant may eventually get come pre-tarnished as people wonder how legitimate it is. That's my fear. It would have been better to either win a few of the awards that they were nominated for this time, or to not have dominated the nominations at all. Now it looks like Valiant has a 'history' of cheating.

That is what I am trying to say. This may take years to untangle now

[lorddunlow]

Harvey's nomination process has no checks. Anyone can nominate off their website, making up name and/or their qualification. Easy to cheat as they get thousands of votes thst nobody vets.

Voting for the winners is then done by a controlled book of industry creators. Thus one can fake nominations but not votes

Well then the Harvey awards are a sham. Putting any stock in them as an actual industry award is idiotic.

[bygranddesign]

My previous post was obviously tongue in cheek

But I think the fact that Dysart wasn't nominated for anything is actually pretty telling

Most hardcore Valiant fans on this board (and elsewhere) are huge Dysart fans

If this was done by fans it was probably done by a very small group who inexplicably aren't big fans of Dysart

It feels more like a few very enthusiastic / over zealous employees (marketing people) that have a stake in bringing attention to Valiant ... More than some big fan effort... just my 2 cents

[lorddunlow]

It feels more like a few very enthusiastic / over zealous employees (marketing people) that have a stake in bringing attention to Valiant ... More than some big fan effort... just my 2 cents

QFT