HALL OF FAME Discussion Thread

^I've been called much worse by better people

I think the induction of Lolly rather supports the idea of an initial nomination phase, where the top 8 (or more, in case of ties) make QFs. There are so many HOF-worthy performers from the last 20+ years that to make the top 8 in a year suggests a high likelihood of suitability for the HOF. If a babe makes the top 8 and then goes all the way by beating babes who received more mentions in the preliminary suggestion thread (as Lolly has), she has in effect won people over and convinced voters that she deserves to be in the HOF.

Kelly swept the board; Lolly came from the back of the leading bunch. Both impressive victories in the head-to-head finals.

I wonder whether it might not be better to have a pre-boob job photo of Lolly in the Hall of Fame induction thread - if one is available. I thought she was at her very best when she was all natural.

(25-12-2025 19:53 )verybadroger Wrote:  I think the induction of Lolly rather supports the idea of an initial nomination phase, where the top 8 (or more, in case of ties) make QFs. There are so many HOF-worthy performers from the last 20+ years that to make the top 8 in a year suggests a high likelihood of suitability for the HOF. If a babe makes the top 8 and then goes all the way by beating babes who received more mentions in the preliminary suggestion thread (as Lolly has), she has in effect won people over and convinced voters that she deserves to be in the HOF.

Kelly swept the board; Lolly came from the back of the leading bunch. Both impressive victories in the head-to-head finals.

I've never looked at the nomination phase in the way that you describe it. I believe that Lolly got inducted despite the format used, not because of it.
How can scrapping in to the quarter finals with just 3 nominations suggest a high likelihood of suitability.
Once members were faced with the final 8 there was obviously something of a lightbulb moment & Lolly's name stood out to more voters when compared to the other options.
Although Lolly eventually won by a substantial margin, the fact that she made the quarter finals at all was very tenuous to say the least, just one vote less & she'd have been forgotten about for another year.

Blimey, why not split it into 00s babes and 10s babes and take it from there, one from each. That has the plus points (fnar) of encouraging more arguments about who falls into which category

Or just induct more!

(25-12-2025 20:45 )Boomerangutangangbang Wrote:  

(25-12-2025 19:53 )verybadroger Wrote:  I think the induction of Lolly rather supports the idea of an initial nomination phase, where the top 8 (or more, in case of ties) make QFs. There are so many HOF-worthy performers from the last 20+ years that to make the top 8 in a year suggests a high likelihood of suitability for the HOF. If a babe makes the top 8 and then goes all the way by beating babes who received more mentions in the preliminary suggestion thread (as Lolly has), she has in effect won people over and convinced voters that she deserves to be in the HOF.

Kelly swept the board; Lolly came from the back of the leading bunch. Both impressive victories in the head-to-head finals.

I've never looked at the nomination phase in the way that you describe it. I believe that Lolly got inducted despite the format used, not because of it.
How can scrapping in to the quarter finals with just 3 nominations suggest a high likelihood of suitability.
Once members were faced with the final 8 there was obviously something of a lightbulb moment & Lolly's name stood out to more voters when compared to the other options.
Although Lolly eventually won by a substantial margin, the fact that she made the quarter finals at all was very tenuous to say the least, just one vote less & she'd have been forgotten about for another year.

Each voter only puts forward three babes per section, but can still feel strongly that other nominees should be in the HOF one day. I know that I nodded in approval when I saw Lolly finally mentioned on page 3 or 4 of the nomination thread. I don't think her three votes initially is a sign at all that forum members weren't on board.

Surely you would agree that there are many, many HOF-worthy performers, with the top 8 from a given year very likely to be strong candidates?

The picking up of steam or lightbulb moment of subsequent rounds shows that voters endorse her and feel she is richly deserving of the HOF.

To me, her progressing to the QFs and going on to claim the whole thing is an endorsement of Lolly in the HOF by the majority and a lovely example of the possibilities offered by this system - people can support more than the three they named initially, should they be knocked out. It's a recognition of the riches of the last 20+ years, allowing us to transfer our memories, affections and our vote, ultimately.

Even though I didn't nominate her I am thrilled that Lolly is now in the Hall of Fame, and enthusiastically say that she very much belongs there!

^^ Lol. Say what you like, I'm not sure why you want to argue the toss, the 3 votes that Lolly received at the nomination stage is exactly what it is, it was a sign that other than those 3, they weren't on board.
What you could have identified is that many might well have had Lolly as their 4th choice & once some of their other 3 picks had fallen by the wayside they supported Lolly.

You seem unable to accept that Lolly was still one vote away from failing, the system did give her a second chance. But that still doesn't make it the most perfect system.

The whole process is complex & I'll admit that there are some advantages of the format used, but equally some disadvantages. The main one is being able to influence babes fate in a head to head by virtue that you have never watched one of the babes, so the default setting is to just vote for the other babe that you have. Everything about is is unfair & wrong.

Looks like I need to visit the fridge again...

^^ get us one while you're there if you don't mind, my head already hurts.

(25-12-2025 21:54 )Boomerangutangangbang Wrote:  ^^ Lol. Say what you like, I'm not sure why you want to argue the toss, the 3 votes that Lolly received at the nomination stage is exactly what it is, it was a sign that other than those 3, they weren't on board.
What you could have identified is that many might well have had Lolly as their 4th choice & once some of their other 3 picks had fallen by the wayside they supported Lolly.

The whole process is complex & I'll admit that there are some advantages of the format used, but equally some disadvantages. The main one is being able to influence babes fate in a head to head by virtue that you have never watched one of the babes, so the default setting is to just vote for the other babe that you have. Everything about is is unfair & wrong.

I'm disagreeing with you because I think Lolly picking up steam illustrates perfectly that this system can work very well. A number 8 seed who sneaks in will still have to win three match-ups to get to the Hall of Fame. Ample opportunity for her to be knocked back. Lolly's popularity, if anything, swelled.

I was on board with her (despite not nominating her), as evidently were many others. I suppose my over-arching feeling is that there are so many HOF-worthy babes, and a single user can't nominate them all.

I'd probably agree with you that it would be good to institute a rule that one must have seen both babes in a match-up to be able to vote in that match-up. That would seem only fair.