AIC Awards 2009- Completely revamped!

Jessica · Post by **Jessica** » October 27th, 2009, 9:04 am

I would like it if someone let us know privately that we or our "group" was nominated, but didn't win. I think that might be nice to know, but not to necessarily put out to the entire community.

Jules · Post by **Jules** » October 27th, 2009, 9:46 am

I second Jessica. I enjoyed getting notes last year that I'd been nominated for something. I think people who get nods about their talent or how they inspire people should hear about it, if possible.

smerlin · Post by **smerlin** » October 27th, 2009, 11:33 am

I think it's nice that this year the winners will be announced ahead of time, so that the actual event won't be stressful or disappointing for any of the nominees.

Ofcourse, as with any selection process/awards, people might feel burned, but at least they can feel disappointed in private and not in front of everyone at a party.

Also, I think The Love Notes should somehow be involved in the love notes.

starkserious · Post by **starkserious** » October 27th, 2009, 1:53 pm

I just voted.

gene · Post by **gene** » October 27th, 2009, 2:18 pm

I usually don't campaign for anything, but I have no problem saying that Michael McGill should be among the folks honored at the AIC banquet.

Mike has done a lot for the AIC and the improv community behind the scenes.
You may not know Mike because unlike anyone else who gets nominated, he does not perform on stage.

He does all of this for love of the improv community.

Mike was the treasurer for the AIC for most of the last two years. A difficult and thankless job that involves dealing with bureaucracies, filing lots of documents and getting hard to find information. Imagine doing your taxes times ten.

He used his business acumen to help the current owners of the Hideout take over the lease. I don't have the details, but there were multiple parties involved and the landlords were not easy to deal with.

He has spent multiple sleepless nights helping to write grant proposals for the AIC including the successful grants from the city of Austin.
http://forum.austinimprov.com/viewtopic.php?p=67223

Mike (known as Miggy in the forums) has a lot of insight into city politics which he shares in a fair and impartial manner. I think he does a better job than the local press.
http://forum.austinimprov.com/viewtopic ... sc&start=0

Mike has teched a lot of shows including improvised Shakespeare and Afterschool improv. There is probably a lot of other contributions that I have failed to mention.

Finally, he blew up the Intel building. So don't mess with him.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lxKlof0qhag

acrouch · Post by **acrouch** » October 27th, 2009, 3:22 pm

gene wrote:I usually don't campaign for anything, but I have no problem saying that Michael McGill should be among the folks honored at the AIC banquet.

Mike has done a lot for the AIC and the improv community behind the scenes.
You may not know Mike because unlike anyone else who gets nominated, he does not perform on stage.

He does all of this for love of the improv community.

Mike was the treasurer for the AIC for most of the last two years. A difficult and thankless job that involves dealing with bureaucracies, filing lots of documents and getting hard to find information. Imagine doing your taxes times ten.

He used his business acumen to help the current owners of the Hideout take over the lease. I don't have the details, but there were multiple parties involved and the landlords were not easy to deal with.

He has spent multiple sleepless nights helping to write grant proposals for the AIC including the successful grants from the city of Austin.
http://forum.austinimprov.com/viewtopic.php?p=67223

Mike (known as Miggy in the forums) has a lot of insight into city politics which he shares in a fair and impartial manner. I think he does a better job than the local press.
http://forum.austinimprov.com/viewtopic ... sc&start=0

Mike has teched a lot of shows including improvised Shakespeare and Afterschool improv. There is probably a lot of other contributions that I have failed to mention.

Finally, he blew up the Intel building. So don't mess with him.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lxKlof0qhag

I know for a fact that Mike McGill frequents Thai prostitutes -- let that sway you in whatever way it will.

HerrHerr · Post by **HerrHerr** » October 27th, 2009, 5:34 pm

I'm not trying to rock the boat here. Sincerely. But I'm curious. Who decides when/how we have
an awards banquet? For three years things worked fairly well (in my opinion). Sure things could
have been tweaked. But how is that we went from one format to a completely new one?

If we're worried about inclusion...shouldn't more people be included in how things play out?

Or did I miss a meeting or discussion on the forum. If so, my apologies.

mpbrockman · Post by **mpbrockman** » October 27th, 2009, 5:43 pm

HerrHerr wrote:Initially, I am not fond of the idea of honoring--what will probably be--the same old troups entities etc... that already get a lot of honors, kudos etc...in the community.

Apparently since I've received my ballot this is a done deal, but I echo Ceej and Bryan's reservations. What about new troupes that could use the validation that comes from being nominated in (or winning) a best new troupe category?

As an imperfect parallel I will point to the ADDY's (advertising awards) here in Austin. GSD&M (and one or two other firms) sweep up pretty much everything on a regular basis. As such, attendance and interest in the awards has dropped yearly.

As the community continually spins off new troupes and performers I think it's important they have a shot at some recognition for their efforts and the new awards format would seem to preclude this. While the more highly visible and well known troupes and individuals have certainly earned all the kudos they receive, I fear this new format will ultimately decrease interest in the awards show.

LuBu McJohnson · Post by **LuBu McJohnson** » October 27th, 2009, 5:56 pm

Also, is putting your name on the ballot a required field?

Asaf · Post by **Asaf** » October 28th, 2009, 12:39 am

One of the reasons that we needed an alternative awards format was because too much time had gone by before someone said "Hey what about the awards?" As a result, there was not enough time to do the traditional Oscars-style format which requires a round of nominations followed by a round of votes. It was either going to be this or nothing. There wasn't even time to take a formal vote on which format we should take. Bottom line, there was a trust put in the folks who are in elected positions (Brad Temple as Managing Director, Matt Pollock as Treasurer, Kristin Firth as Secretary, Valerie Ward as Social Director) and we should allow that trust to include the ability to make a decision like this.

I understand everyone's concerns and there are three things that I can cite at this moment:

1) I am seeing the votes come in and there is a remarkably varied list of nominations coming out of it.

2) Winners will not be eligible for future Honors which will inspire us to constantly look to the future and widening the nomination pool.

3) If this doesn't work this one year, we can always go back.

There seem to be a lot of people excited by the new format. Let's join in that excitement and see what happens.

Post by **Jon Bolden** » October 28th, 2009, 9:30 am

I didn't look super hard, but was there a date announced for this event?

Matt · Post by **Matt** » October 28th, 2009, 9:46 am

Jon Bolden wrote:I didn't look super hard, but was there a date announced for this event?

I believe the Sunday of Wafflefest, Nov 22nd, was the target date. This would be the Sunday before Thanksgiving.

HerrHerr · Post by **HerrHerr** » October 28th, 2009, 3:54 pm

Asaf wrote:One of the reasons that we needed an alternative awards format was because too much time had gone by before someone said "Hey what about the awards?" As a result, there was not enough time to do the traditional Oscars-style format which requires a round of nominations followed by a round of votes. It was either going to be this or nothing. There wasn't even time to take a formal vote on which format we should take. Bottom line, there was a trust put in the folks who are in elected positions (Brad Temple as Managing Director, Matt Pollock as Treasurer, Kristin Firth as Secretary, Valerie Ward as Social Director) and we should allow that trust to include the ability to make a decision like this.

I understand everyone's concerns and there are three things that I can cite at this moment:

1) I am seeing the votes come in and there is a remarkably varied list of nominations coming out of it.

2) Winners will not be eligible for future Honors which will inspire us to constantly look to the future and widening the nomination pool.

3) If this doesn't work this one year, we can always go back.

There seem to be a lot of people excited by the new format. Let's join in that excitement and see what happens.

Fair enough. Thanks!

vine311 · Post by **vine311** » October 28th, 2009, 4:15 pm

Matt wrote:Nov 22nd, was the target date. This would be the Sunday before Thanksgiving.

Crap. I should never plan anything months in advance ever.

Post by **bradisntclever** » October 28th, 2009, 5:36 pm

Asaf wrote:3) If this doesn't work this one year, we can always go back.

This was one of my main points in helping make the decision to go through with the format change this year. Some may think nothing was broken with the old format, but there are quite a few who believe something was fundamentally flawed. Look to this year as an experiment - a new format, a potential new venue.

The format is a done deal for this year. I will be very interested to hear your feedback.