Shaggy
Full House
I encourage everyone to read the descriptions... don't just look at the pics. That swayed my vote to include the Antarctica Club. I was unaware of its history.
2016 HOF Voting Thread (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Mr Tree
- Start date
Psypher1000
Straight Flush
Wow...it's an honor to even be in the list of those considered! I definitely agree with the HOF committee, though, that my set didn't belong among those that are up for voting this year.
You speak truth, sir!
There's is a lot more to many of these sets than meets the eye. The brilliance of them is not always immediate. That's why deciding on which to vote for is proving difficult for me...
Can you be bribed? I found this gold ring that may interest you
My precious?!? The Aussies founds it?! Smeagol hawked it for pretty Mapeses, my love.
slisk250
Straight Flush
He won't need to...
toad94
3 of a Kind
Hey guys, sorry I haven't been active in the forums lately, you know how "life happens". But I'm honored to be part of this amazing line-up--thank you!
I use the $11 chip as a giveaway/souvenir chip. One night my brother lost several hands with the usual $10 bet/raise. He switched to an $11 raise the next hand and everyone folded (the magical extra $1 was enough to force everyone out of the hand I suppose). Through the night he kept winning whenever he bet $11 and it kind-of became this thing. It also helps that the Spinal Tap line was employed quite a bit, "He goes to $11..." So I made up the chips to hand out to everybody in the game (not that they're put in play, but we can technically "go to 11" with one chip now).
Ben, thanks for posting the pic.
Bergman, thank you for the great write-ups--that's very cool, my friend.
I use the $11 chip as a giveaway/souvenir chip. One night my brother lost several hands with the usual $10 bet/raise. He switched to an $11 raise the next hand and everyone folded (the magical extra $1 was enough to force everyone out of the hand I suppose). Through the night he kept winning whenever he bet $11 and it kind-of became this thing. It also helps that the Spinal Tap line was employed quite a bit, "He goes to $11..." So I made up the chips to hand out to everybody in the game (not that they're put in play, but we can technically "go to 11" with one chip now).
Ben, thanks for posting the pic.
Bergman, thank you for the great write-ups--that's very cool, my friend.
OP
OP
Mr Tree
Straight Flush
Good to see you Toad! Pretty impressive to get two sets into consideration.
shawn15p
Two Pair
All amazing sets that are making me drool and want to order my custom set today ! Love me some Suicide Queens and Colony Clubs especially....grand slams in my book.
Despite my disappointment that my set didn't make the list, I have reviewed the choices and cast my votes. Good luck!
tikipirate
Sitting Out
Great work putting this slate together. Tough choices, I think I already have four I want to vote for in next year's election...
bergs
Royal Flush
We've been talking about that - I'll let Tree chime in, but we're probably going to be doing something similar to what other sports hall of fames do and limit the number of times a set can appear (or the number of years of eligibility that they have after they're first nominated). Keeps things special, so to speak.
I have a couple that I'm hoping get nominated next year as well that won't get in this year. Somethings these need to get nominated to get in people's consciousness and they're elected to the hall later (I could also be talking about Mike Piazza, incidentally).
OP
OP
Mr Tree
Straight Flush
Ongoing conversation. We have sets that have now been nominated two years in a row. Some of them are doing fairly well in the voting this year but there has been some discussion on if a set keeps falling short how many chances do you give it before you say we are just jamming it down people's throats.
Given how short the HOF has been in existence, I would be hesitant to start putting restrictions like this so early in the process.
OP
OP
Mr Tree
Straight Flush
We are not talking immediately. But, for example if a set keeps getting nominated by the committee (which changes members every year) for say five years and never gets enough votes to make it in does it make sense to keep nominating it?
Psypher1000
Straight Flush
That's exactly the length I had in mind.
manamongkids
Full House
We need to give more old crusty white guys nomination ballots
tikipirate
Sitting Out
Ditto. There's always going to be players, sets, whatever that are good enough to get nominated but never win. A balance needs to be struck between giving them a chance and preventing the ballot from being clogged up.
Incidentally, I applaud the committees choice of putting sets from 2015 on the ballot. Art stands on its own merits.
OP
OP
Mr Tree
Straight Flush
Eventually you have to figure we will only be looking at relatively new sets. The first several years old sets will keep cycling but eventually they will all have been addressed and instill only be new or relatively new sets being considered.
While I don't necessarily agree with it, but should future sets perhaps be a certain age to get nominated? I personally feel more recent sets will always get more votes than older sets as the excitement over the sets is still relatively fresh. Reading the write ups I completely agree a set like JMs should probably make the cut, but isn't going to get the appreciation it deserves when sets with new colors and spots is its competition.
OP
OP
Mr Tree
Straight Flush
This is a conversation we had this year and ultimately decided not to. I do agree that more recent sets get a boost from recentsy effect. Ultimately we decided our job was to put forward the best sets we can. Also there will come a time in the future when most of the sets up for consideration are newer sets so eventually the rule would be counterproductive.
You guys did a great job with descriptions, pics etc..., and I don't envy you your task 
.
Just one thought, if I may. Would it be worth considering letting the owner of the nominated/considered sets write their own public blurb as well (how it originated, why it is 'worthy', etc...), and the committee member then adding their own 2c to the bottom section as to why it is considered/nominated. Sorry if this was already done/considered and I missed it, as I have not read all threads/posts avidly regarding the HOF. I was flattered to see Blades in the list, but with so much amazing work, it would have been a long bow to draw.
Cheers,
.Just one thought, if I may. Would it be worth considering letting the owner of the nominated/considered sets write their own public blurb as well (how it originated, why it is 'worthy', etc...), and the committee member then adding their own 2c to the bottom section as to why it is considered/nominated. Sorry if this was already done/considered and I missed it, as I have not read all threads/posts avidly regarding the HOF. I was flattered to see Blades in the list, but with so much amazing work, it would have been a long bow to draw
.Cheers,
You guys did a great job with descriptions, pics etc..., and I don't envy you your task
Just one thought, if I may. Would it be worth considering letting the owner of the nominated/considered sets write their own public blurb as well (how it originated, why it is 'worthy', etc...), and the committee member then adding their own 2c to the bottom section as to why it is considered/nominated. Sorry if this was already done/considered and I missed it, as I have not read all threads/posts avidly regarding the HOF. I was flattered to see Blades in the list, but with so much amazing work, it would have been a long bow to draw
Cheers,
Some of the users have not been active since 2009 on ol' Bloo. Not sure if they are contactable but I'm thinking not via forum comms
As soon as I posted it, I realised/remembered that was the case with a number of the sets
. I meant to say, if able to be contacted as well .
bmichaelhorn
3 of a Kind
It seems that owners of 2015 sets that made the final HOF cut last year were allowed to provide their own description...not during the nomination process but for their final posting in the HOF. I personally thought it was interesting to hear the committees thoughts this year but also like the additional owner comment if it makes it to the HOF.
You guys did a great job with descriptions, pics etc..., and I don't envy you your task
Just one thought, if I may. Would it be worth considering letting the owner of the nominated/considered sets write their own public blurb as well (how it originated, why it is 'worthy', etc...), and the committee member then adding their own 2c to the bottom section as to why it is considered/nominated. Sorry if this was already done/considered and I missed it, as I have not read all threads/posts avidly regarding the HOF. I was flattered to see Blades in the list, but with so much amazing work, it would have been a long bow to draw
Cheers,
Almost like a, "It is just an honour to be nominated (tear), I'm so humbled, can't think what to say right now .... but, here is a 2-page response I prepared earlier as to why my set should be in the HOF" .
.
bmichaelhorn
3 of a Kind
Almost like a, "It is just an honour to be nominated (tear), I'm so humbled, can't think what to say right now .... but, here is a 2-page response I prepared earlier as to why my set should be in the HOF"
Let's just hope Steve Harvey isn't announcing the winners.
C U Next Tuesday
Contreras Landa
Colony Club
The Boulevard
These sets got my vote. It was a hard decision between the FDL-mold sets. They are all great.
It reminded me also how much I miss BCC. Those two sets are stunning.
Contreras Landa
Colony Club
The Boulevard
These sets got my vote. It was a hard decision between the FDL-mold sets. They are all great.
It reminded me also how much I miss BCC. Those two sets are stunning.
Last edited:
Create an account or login to comment
You must be a member in order to leave a comment
Create account
Create an account and join our community. It's easy!
Log in
Already have an account? Log in here.
Similar threads
