Finalists Announced for LPIN 2018 Awards

[MrTShirt]

Congratulations LPIN Awards Courtesan, Brothel & Rural Brothel of the Year 2018 Finalists

Courtesan of the Year 2018 Finalists – Courtesan's Brothel
Dahlia – Chicken Ranch
Lily – Mona's Ranch / Inez's D&D
Roxy Gold – Sagebrush Ranch
Vanity Affair – Desert Club
Victoria – Mustang Ranch

Brothel of the Year 2018 Finalists – Location
Chicken Ranch – Pahrump 
Mustang Ranch – Sparks (Exit 28)
Sagebrush Ranch – Mound House
Sheri's Ranch – Pahrump

Rural Brothel of the Year 2018 Finalists – Location
Alien Cathouse – Amargosa
Dovetail Ranch – Carlin
Inez's D&D – Elko
Love Ranch South – Crystal
Mona's Ranch – Elko[/size]

The FINAL Voting Round for all awards begins April 4, 2019 and ends midnight April 30, 2019 PDT.

Winners will be announced at LPIN Awards Banquet 2019 Hosted by Mikey on Friday July 19, 2019.

2018 Awards Finalists who were subsequent Winners designated in blue.

LPIN Awards FINALISTS by Year 

LPIN Awards WINNERS by Year

Nominees for 2018 Courtesan, Brothel & Rural Brothel of the Year Awards

LPIN Awards Committee
firefighter, FumbleNutts, highdrive, Little Richard, Mikey & MrTShirt[/size]

[SixT9er]

Congrats to all the finalists

[firefighter]

Congratulations LPIN 2018 Awards Finalists!

Courtesan of the Year Finalists
Dahlia – Chicken Ranch (finalist 2018, 2015, 2014, 2013, 2012 & 2011)
Lily – Mona's Ranch / Inez's D&D (finalist 2018)
Roxy Gold – Sagebrush Ranch (finalist 2018 & 2017)
Vanity Affair – Desert Club (finalist 2018, 2017 & 2014)
Victoria – Mustang Ranch (finalist 2018, 2017, 2016 & 2015)

Brothel of the Year Finalists
Chicken Ranch – Pahrump (winner 2001)   
Mustang Ranch – Sparks (Exit 28) (winner 2017, 2016, 2015, 2014 & 2013)
Sagebrush Ranch – Mound House (winner 2000, 1998 & 1997)
Sheri's Ranch – Pahrump (winner 2012 & 2011)

Rural Brothel of the Year Finalists
Alien Cathouse – Amargosa (winner 2012)
Dovetail Ranch – Carlin (winner 2017, 2016, 2015, 2014, 2013 & 2011)
Inez's D&D – Elko (winner 2010)
Love Ranch South – Crystal (finalist 2018, 2017, 2015, 2014 & 2013)
Mona's Ranch – Elko (finalist 2018, 2017, 2016, 2015 & 2007)[/size]

[Midwest Couple]

Congratulations ladies and the fine establishment for Brothel awards! 

Best of luck to all of you! 

[Dirk Diggler]

Congratulations to the finalists.

[Vanityaffair]

Thank you everyone who voted for me. I humbly and gratefully accept being one of the 5 finalist. Thanks again.
XO Vanity

[AQuietMan]

Congrats to the finalists!  And best of luck to everyone in the final round!

I see that Dahlia is in the running again.  She may have broken Belle's or some other ladies' record for the number of years as a finalist.  I'm not really sure who has been in the finalist round the most times, since the point affter the rules were changed to 'can only be a COY once'.  I'm sure Firefighter has that info at his fingertips, but he may not be able to comment on that until after the contest is over, seeing that he's an election judge.  Someone else might know though!

Again, the best of luck to the ladies!

It'll be interesting to see if anything changes in the RBOY category this year.  The Dovetail is getting closer to the Shady Lady's record for most wins in RBOY.  If I'm counting the past results correctly on the LPIN Awards website, the Shady Lady took home 8 wins during it's time in operation.

I find it interesting that neither the Bunny Ranch and the Love Ranch made it to the final round, but the four finalists in the BOY category certainly are certainly deserving of the nod!  Team Bunnyranch probably should take note, but the Sagebrush is in the running, and it's part of the Bunnyranch empire so I suppose that counts.

Soapbox time:

It should be pointed out that the nomination round is now effectively redundant, due to the fact that the committee is no longer announcing the nominees until the end of the nomination round.  Before, if someone was waffling between two nominees, well they could check the list to see if one of them is nominated, and then nominate the other person so that they wouldn't be left out.  But now, well the person someone nominates will most likely be the person they vote for in the first round. 

One of the purposes of the nomination round was to let various ladies know that they are particularly appreciated for their efforts, and making that a 'secret ballot' has denied a few ladies that recognition.

I'd also argue that the nomination round change wasn't properly vetted with the voter base, but the awards committee has the final say of course.  MOST people weren't even aware that there was a change until the nomination round commenced, which tells me that it wasn't properly vetted with the voter base.

I thought about suggesting that people publicly announce their nominees themselves during the nomination round as a form of protest, which of course would put them on the spot later if they lied about who they nominated.  That would have given others a chance to choose a different person to nominate. 

But my registration on this forum wasn't approved until the latter part of February, so at that point the nomination round was almost over.  Plus, I didn't want to make waves with my first posts, as I don't post that often to begin with, and I mostly like to just keep to myself.

So that might be a thought for next year though.  I really do think that the ladies need as much recognition as they can get for their efforts, and the 'old system' did result in more nominees.  But under the current system, I'd suggest simply not having a nomination round at all, because it's a false pretense.  A couple of people might have changed their vote between the nomination and final rounds - the committee can check that easily enough to see how many people actually chose a different person from their nominee in this contest. 

If the number of people that changed their choice between the nomination and first round is more than 5% of the voting pool, I'd be surprised.  But since the ballots are secret, the committee has pledged to not share that information.

Not having a now much less useful nomination round would save the committee some time and effort that simply may not be needed anymore under the newer system.  The main thing that the committee accomplished with the change was to piss a number of people off anyways, and I'd suggest that they either change it back for next year instead, or simply just not have a nomination round in the future and stop wasting everyone's time.

It'd be easy enough to poll the voter base as to which system they would prefer, but that might set a precedent that the committee may not want to set.  The committee needs to decide if this is their contest, or the voter's contest.  If it's the voter's contest, then they really should involve the voters more, and give them more say in any changes that the committee may be contemplating. 

As opposed to just posting the changes on some forum most people aren't going to visit regularly anyways, with such changes being buried in a wall of text, like what happened this time around. 

I'm sure that most people certainly appreciate the LPIN Awards Committee's time, efforts and contributions to their awards contest, I just personally think that this particular change wasn't handled well.

But I'm not on the current voter rolls, so I'm just observing from afar mainly.  So that's my two cents from the cheap seats.


Anyways, again, best of luck to the deserving finalists!

[rachelvarga]

The rule change makes perfect sense. You are supposed to vote for who you think is best. When you pick someone because your pick is already taken then you are not voting for who you think is best.

[AQuietMan]

The rule change makes perfect sense. You are supposed to vote for who you think is best. When you pick someone because your pick is already taken then you are not voting for who you think is best.

That's why I'm saying that the nomination round is now essentially redundant.  Why vote for someone twice (nomination and preliminary round) if you can accomplish the same thing by simply not having a nomination round?  It'd save the awards team time and effort, as well as the voter base's time, as they wouldn't have to track the nominations in a separate round.  They could just count everyone's pick in the preliminary round, and then give a full list of everyone that received votes at the end of the prelim round, noting the five finalists - Those finalists being the five people that were deemed to have the most picks, first in the case of ties for 5th place. 

It'd also make the contest 28 days shorter, so not as drawn out.

For that matter, you could eliminate the preliminary round as well, but the dynamics there are a bit different.  The chances of a first place tie with 5 finalists are significantly less than with 33+ nominees.  A first place tie in the prelims isn't a big deal, as long as you end up in the top 5 and 'make the cut'.

But others have pointed this out already, I'm simply suggesting asking the contest voters about if they prefer going back to the way it has been done for many years before this one for next year, or perhaps about simplifying the process even further and stop wasting people's time. 

That's something that IMHO the committee SHOULD poll their voters on, and now is as good a time as any to open that question up for next year.  The committee meets in July, so doing a poll of the voters querying about this change can easily be accomplished during the May-July timeframe.  That is, if they actually care what the voters as a whole think about this.

The Committee members are the caretakers of this particular contest, which has been going on in various iterations for over two decades now under the guidance of a number of volunteers, many of which aren't involved in the contest anymore as either voters or committee members.  So the Committee should be mindful of what their voters as a whole actually want as well as the historical norms that have been in place up to this point.

Change for the sake of change is just silly, and in this case it bothered a number of people that in some instances have been longstanding voters in this contest, with how it was rolled out.  A lot of the voters weren't even aware that there had been a change until 1 February 2019, when the nomination round was opened, which tells me it wasn't well publicized. 

As a comparison/counterpoint instance, when the physical person verification rules were put in place, due to a handful of unscrupulous people gaming the system with multiple voter handles in previous contests, that change WAS suggested and publicly discussed at length in advance.  And a number of people offered input on that decision, which helped arrive at the current solution in place today.  In short, it wasn't perfect, but the committee did it's best to arrive at a mutual consensus of sorts, with the goal of ensuring the fairness of the contest.

Incidentally, that 'multiple handles' thing is also why the voting was moved OFF OF the house boards a number of years ago.  It's pretty simple to have multiple accounts on a house forum, just use different email addys for each, and IP's can be spoofed/worked around.  And the Bunnyboards have more members than all other house boards combined, even back then when it was just 2 houses, so it was pretty clear to the contest judges at that time that the contest was unbalanced.  Hence that particular change of moving the contest to neutral ground.  Just in case you were wondering about why votes aren't handled via house boards anymore.

But back to the point of my observation here:

IMHO the Committee really should poll the voters on this change for next year's contest and see what they want, between now and July.  That's what I'm suggesting.  ASK THE VOTERS.  If the majority is good with the change, that's all fine and good.  If they aren't... well we won't know that until/if the question is actually properly asked.  And also perhaps ask the followup question of not even bothering with a nomination round in the future if people prefer the new way, since IMHO it's now essentially redundant.

I've said my piece.  It's up to others to make their feeling known to the committee if they care enough to let them know. 

If others have thoughts on this, I'd suggest PMing the committee members directly, so as to not cause too much friction on this board or cluttering up this specific thread any more than I already have.  I simply wanted to point out the redundancy in the current system, and that it now seems wasteful and unnecessary to me, which I've done. 

Carry on!

[Chicagobob]

The rule change makes perfect sense. You are supposed to vote for who you think is best. When you pick someone because your pick is already taken then you are not voting for who you think is best.

I agree! 8)

[SixT9er]

If I’m only nominating and voting for who I think is best then I shouldn’t even participate as who I believe is the best is ineligible.
It’s been said by many that the best will rise to the finalist level. For this reason I and many others view the nomination round as a recognition round for Ladies. I nominated a Lady I wanted to give recognition to because the Lady who I thought was best is intelligible.
In the last round I voted for who I thought was best given the choices presented but not who I think is the best Courtesan because she isn’t an option. This final round I will do the same, cast my vote for the best option left available who I think is a great Lady but again not who my choice for the best in the business because that option was removed before nominations began.


This brings up the question of should former winners now be allowed to win again since there have been so many rules put in over recent years to curb voter fraud from the time when repeat winners were allowed? If that change was made I and others could truly nominate and vote for who we believe is the best


Sorry for taking away from the topic at hand of congratulating the finalists. I just wanted to respond to the other off topic posts in this thread by others

[FumbleNutts]

Congratulations to all nominated in every round  This is a way to honor every lady in/and every brothel  I appreciate this for all associated with LPIN - The very best to all  :-*

[Dr. Who]

Congrats to all the COY, BOY, and RBOY finalists, as well as all of the ladies who were nominated in the early rounds! 

[Olivia Lush]

Congratulations and good luck to all finalists!
Xoxo
Olivia

[monaselko]

Congrats and good luck to everyone!

[firefighter]

Congratulations and Good Luck to all the finalists!