2012 Collector Awards

[Randall Flagg]

It would be a ton of work, but fun to determine the "winners" (highest score) from a collecting standpoint of King's books. We would likely separate the books into several categories-probably the same as our Wiki section: SK First Editions US & UK, Collectibles, ARC/Proofs.
We'll set up polls and all you have to do is rate the books based upon the 3 or 4 criteria in the poll. The results would be tabulated and a 2012 DT.ORG Collectors Choice winner would be named.
BTW, don't hold me to it, but Shannon has a tentative template for grading. All one would have to do is check the box in four areas of grading:

Uniqueness
A - Very unique. There is nothing else like it.
B - Unique. Some parts of the item remind me of other items.
C - Not unique. Nothing special, very similar to other items.

Craftsmanship
A - Excellent production. The finest materials were used and it is very well put together using intricate and inventive techniques.
B - Good production. Better than your average item, but doesn't hit high marks in every area.
C - Bland production. The publisher/producer did not care at all about using fine materials or intricate techniques to create this item.

Artwork (Dustjacket and Interior)
A - Beautiful artwork. Memorable and enjoyable to look at.
B - Item includes some artwork, but it is nothing special.
C - Item does not include artwork and/or the artwork is not good/memorable in any way.

Importance. How important would this item be to add to your collection?
A - Mandatory. My collection would not be considered complete until I own this item.
B - Important. I would like to own this item, but I am waiting to find a great deal before I purchase this item.
C - Not important. The only reason I would add this to my collection is because someone gives it to me.


Thoughts?

[Garrell]

Like

[Robert Fulman]

Excellent. I have actually thought of building a predictive model that would tell me what books are over- or under-valued, and this exercise would help nicely.

[harrison ryan]

This sounds like tons of fun. Count me in!

[The Library Policeman]

That sounds like a great idea!

[Roseannebarr]

I like the idea as well.

Importance. How important would this item be to add to your collection?
A - Mandatory. My collection would not be considered complete until I own this item.

signed 1st edition of every book he wrote. the new lieutenant's rap.

C - Not important. The only reason I would add this to my collection is because someone gives it to me.

signed copies of Dean Koontz books.

When do we start!!!

[Merlin1958]

This sounds like tons of fun. Count me in!

Me too!!! Sounds like a blast!!!! How often do you get a chance to give Carlos and a few others some grief??? LOL LOL J/K fellows!!!!

[Patrick]

Sounds interesting and enjoyable.

[Tito_Villa]

Great idea!

[ELazansky]

Sounds like fun

[Stockerlone]

Great idea, but DON´T forget the´NOT US/UK = GERMAN sig lim, arcs....

[AKC]

Let's ROLL!!!!! Gonna' be interesting!

[Ari_Racing]

Sounds cool

[Randall Flagg]

We are trying to work out the details. I don't want to swamp the board with >150 polls, one per book. We also have to figure out tie breakers etc.
<------------------------------Ponders the best way to conduct the process.

[ELazansky]

Well, although it might not be the best idea in the electronic world, maybe you could post the awards "ballot" as a single post, and everyone can email their responses back to someone who could post the results (maybe set up a special Yahoo! email for everyone to send the responses to). A little more time consuming, but solves the issues of a ton of posts on the board.

[Randall Flagg]

That is one thought. We would post a list of all the books and one criteria, members could C&P the list with a score beside each title and then PM it to the designated person. We are bouncing several ideas. I appreciate the feedback.

[Mr. Rabbit Trick]

"email their responses back to someone". - "PM it to the designated person".

Poor sod. Glad its not me!

[Randall Flagg]

Well, what we are trying to do, and this is hypothetical, is whittle the choices in each category down to the top 10. Then we would have a poll, and discussion thread for each of the 10 books to be ranked.
Example (and please don't hold me to this-it's a work in progress), we have 5 major categories:

• King US First Trade Editions
• King UK First Trade Editions
• King S/L (numbered), and I know we will have a few decisions to be made as to what is a "numbered", versus a "lettered"
• King Lettered Editions
• King Proofs/ARC's

We would likely post a list of the entries for one category and ask members to C&P the list with a score for each of the four criteria. The score would be a 1-10 basis with 10 being the highest and 1 being the lowest.


Uniqueness 1-10
A - Very unique. There is nothing else like it.
B - Unique. Some parts of the item remind me of other items.
C - Not unique. Nothing special, very similar to other items.

Craftsmanship 1-10
A - Excellent production. The finest materials were used and it is very well put together using intricate and inventive techniques.
B - Good production. Better than your average item, but doesn't hit high marks in every area.
C - Bland production. The publisher/producer did not care at all about using fine materials or intricate techniques to create this item.

Artwork (Dustjacket and Interior) 1-10
A - Beautiful artwork. Memorable and enjoyable to look at.
B - Item includes some artwork, but it is nothing special.
C - Item does not include artwork and/or the artwork is not good/memorable in any way.

Importance. How important would this item be to add to/have in your collection? 1-10
A - Mandatory. My collection would not be considered complete until I own this item.
B - Important. I would like to own this item, but I am waiting to find a great deal before I purchase this item.
C - Not imporant. The only reason I would add this to my collection is because someone gives it to me.

[Mr. Rabbit Trick]

Sounds good to me, especially out of 10, rather than 5. Categories are good.

..."King S/L (numbered), and I know we will have a few decisions to be made as to what is a "numbered", versus a "lettered"...

I might not be the brightest light on the Christmas tree, but even I know a number from a letter, even if it is a Roman numeral!

[Randall Flagg]

Sounds good to me, especially out of 10, rather than 5. Categories are good.

..."King S/L (numbered), and I know we will have a few decisions to be made as to what is a "numbered", versus a "lettered"...

I might not be the brightest light on the Christmas tree, but even I know a number from a letter, even if it is a Roman numeral!

A good example would be "The Colorado Kid". There are three that IMO fall under the "Lettered" umbrella. All three are numbered 1-33, but in order to classify them I believe they should be in the Lettered category. Not etched in stone. If we go literally by numbered/lettered I suppose it goes in the numbered category-the same with Dandelion Wine; although terribly expensive, it is numbered 1-100.. Some behind the scenes decisions will have to be made, but this is why we are discussing it.

[Mr. Rabbit Trick]

'All Colorado Kids are 'numbered' 1/33, or 1/150, as well as Dandelion Wine 1/100, and also 'A Book of Horrors' 1/100. They may be very limited, but they are still numbered.

The 'Salem's Lot' 1/10 Black, or 1/15 Red Roman numerald are still 'numbered' and not Lettered. (Also Six Stories).

I would love them all to be lettered, but my OCD only allows them to be included in my S/L numbered pages.

[Garrell]

LOL, seems most of us scots have a touch of OCD

[jhanic]

I would add a category in the Importance category for us OCD (obsessive) collectors. "I don't have one, therefore I want one." A lot of my proofs would probably fall in this category.

John

[Randall Flagg]

Doesn't this say the same thing? " Mandatory. My collection would not be considered complete until I own this item."

[Shannon]

I like the feedback going back and forth but some things have entered my mind that I must discuss with Crow-Man. So, please don't get attached to the above (tentative) ideas.