The Criteria Question

by Kim Cole, Webmistress
Kimmy's Atheist Site (site closed)
1 February 2002

Print Version

Temptation

The site review process begins innocently enough. One site is disqualified (it's covered in animated gifs). Another site passes the initial evaluation, and you put it aside so that you can look at it freshly tomorrow or the next day. A third site finishes its journey by winning your silver award. But this fourth site ...

Yes, you require that sites with Java navigation have an alternate form. You instituted that rule because you remember how irritating it was to lose navigation because of old software or computers. "But," you wail, "this fourth site is perfect except for the lack of alternate navigation!" The design is flawless, the graphics are gorgeous, and the content is nothing short of fascinating.

You begin to wonder if you couldn't put your criteria aside, just this once. You think of how happy you'd be to have this site in your winner's list, and to have your award on this site. After all, look at how many other awards it has won! You're flattered they even applied for yours! Surely making an exception, just once, wouldn't hurt anyone.

Doubt

Your eyes fall on the printout of your criteria that you keep next to the computer. Specifically you see the line that reads, "ALL sites with Java navigation MUST have an alternate form of navigation."

Well, what exactly does that criteria mean to you anyway? After all, aren't some sites (like this one) designed for more of a high-end audience? Won't that particular audience be able to handle the Java navigation without problems? Of course, you know some sites don't fit that mold at all. Many Java-only sites desperately need alternate navigation, and you wrote this criteria point intending to support that idea.

Then you remember the site you disqualified last week for just that reason. It wasn't as breathtaking as the site you're currently looking at, but it was fairly nice. How will they feel when they see this particular site on your winner's list? And how will you feel if the disqualified site owner calls you on your decision?

Redemption

You sigh to yourself as you begin to write the disqualification e-mail. Rules are rules, and your criteria must stand as written. Hold on a moment, though. Maybe you could change the rules? You could just add a little statement to the disqualification point to make an exception for sites that are aimed at a particular high-end audience, if the site is otherwise beyond reproach.

You add a quick note to the end of the disqualification letter to inform the applicant that your rules will be changing on a certain date. You ask the applicant to re-apply after the appropriate waiting period.

Closing your e-mail program and site scoring sheets, you realize that you feel better about your program now than you did when you started. This is what it is about: bettering the web, yourself, and your awards program. All at the same time!

A Wider View

Of course, not all situations that tempt you to sidestep your criteria are going to be that simple. Many situations bring into question the definitions and applications of rules and laws regarding pornography, or copyright. Perhaps you have caught yourself wondering if that horizontal scroll bar was a design flaw or a design innovation. It's easy to imagine yourself realizing that, when you wrote the rules against animation, you didn't have in mind some of the beautiful work available online today.

In cases such as scroll bars and animation, it's fairly easy to remedy the problem. Deal with the site using the criteria it applied under. Once you've done that you can fairly amend the criteria to leave it open for those few exceptional sites and their innovations.

We must remember that we, as award givers, have a responsibility to encourage the best of the web, whatever we perceive that to be. We must also try to remember that what defines "best" can change, and it will as the Internet and its possibilities mature. We always have to leave ourselves open to new ideas, provided they are good ones.

Right or Wrong?

In cases such as possible pornography or copyright violation, however, things can get a lot more complicated. You may have to consult with outside sources. You will definitely have to do a lot of searching within yourself. It's important to decide what your criteria means to you. The site you award today will set the standard for tomorrow.

In the case of copyright, there are fortunately a lot of resources online. What Is Copyright Protection?, for instance, provides some very good information. The United States Copyright Office is about as complete a guide as you could want for regulations in the United States. The Copyright Website also has very good information in a multitude of areas, including famous cases and how they were decided. Hopefully these, and other sites available by searching copyright in any search engine, will help you make a decision.

Nudity and pornography present a more difficult situation. If your criterion state "No pornography," does that include all nudity? Do you believe that some nudity is artistic, or do you feel that nudity is never appropriate? Can you have, or link to, nudity and still call yourself a family-friendly site? These are very difficult questions, and they often depend very strongly on personal feelings and definitions.

You can find some online help, though. The website Ideas & Energy for the Next Generation has an informative page on the definitions of pornography. Also, About.com's Photography section has a fairly good discussion on what constitutes art and what constitutes pornography. Hopefully these, along with your own feelings and thoughts, will help you make this difficult decision.

Between Friends

Having a friend apply for your award can produce many feelings. I was elated when a respected person in the awards community, who I was quite fond of, applied for my award. I was never so happy about granting a gold award or adding a name to my winners list. However, you have to be careful to make sure that your joy, or your friendship, doesn't get between you and your criteria.

In another instance the feeling was quite different. As much as I respected and liked the applicant, the site simply did not meet my criteria and I had to write a much-regretted disqualification letter.

Good friends will understand they are meeting you on a purely professional level when they apply for your award. They know they will lose points for having music with no controls, if that is a point in your criteria. They realize you gave them full points for navigation because their's is clear and easy, not because you like them personally.

To avoid any possible bad feelings, some award givers will not review the sites of friends. They clearly state this in their award programs so that friends will not apply for their awards.

Final Thoughts

You must keep one simple idea in mind at all times — your criteria are the bones and body of your awards program. The graphic certainly makes for a pretty face, but without the criteria to back it up, it's just a mask sitting on the floor. The criteria got you the rating you so richly deserved. It earned you that impressive winners' list.

None of this means anything if you don't stick by what you have created. By all means, learn and grow! Change your opinions, change your mind! Discover some of the truly innovative things the web has to offer. Just be sure you don't damage your own ethics and image while you're at it.

You know what you had in mind when you wrote your criteria, and you know how you've applied it in the past. Only you can determine if you're following the criteria, or flouting it. Remember, no matter how good it would feel to award "that" site, it will feel even better if you know the site truly meets your criteria!