I feel like I should abstain from voting. The only game I've played on most of these lists is 7 Wonders, and I hate how stuff like this becomes more of a popularity contest than an actual judgment of merit.

Looks like a voting method for the most bought game.

I have a better suggestion for next year:

I think a professional panel nominated and voted in by fellow BGG members for each category of games, who then pick the winners from a Top 40 list (that should give a broad enough selection for each category) would result in a more meaningful result.

For example: In the Wargame category, you have people who actually care and play wargames, select a group of "peers" that they respect as the selection panel, then have everyone on BGG nominate 10 games in that category that should be considered... collate a list of 40 games for the panel to select... the panel deliberates and have a sub-voting system they agree to and over a bottle of beer decides the winners.

For GREAT reading and to keep the professional panel honest, you could have each panel describe the reasons for the selection! That would make me LOOK!!!!

Remember, it's not about the best dancer, but the most popular dancer.

Wait a minute, that's Dancing with the Stars! Why the hell do we have the same system for selecting the best strategy game as Dancing with the Stars!?

Looks like a voting method for the most bought game.

I have a better suggestion for next year:

I think a professional panel nominated and voted in by fellow BGG members for each category of games, who then pick the winners from a Top 40 list (that should give a broad enough selection for each category) would result in a more meaningful result.

For example: In the Wargame category, you have people who actually care and play wargames, select a group of "peers" that they respect as the selection panel, then have everyone on BGG nominate 10 games in that category that should be considered... collate a list of 40 games for the panel to select... the panel deliberates and have a sub-voting system they agree to and over a bottle of beer decides the winners.

For GREAT reading and to keep the professional panel honest, you could have each panel describe the reasons for the selection! That would make me LOOK!!!!

Artus is in no way an abstract

Personally I think popularity and mass appeal IS a key factor in a game's success and how "good" a game is.

It comes down to matter of philosophy but if a game is very widely played and liked and another game is much less widely played and loved... the edge to me should go to the more widely played game.

There are plenty of game awards that use panels of "experts" to make their appointments of the best games. I assume the Golden Geek awards were set up to go in the other direction... a people's choice type of award chosen by a large cross-section of people that are involved and participating in the biggest boardgaming site in the world.

Yes, popularity is a key factor... but definitely does not necessary reflect how "good" a game is (doesn't mean its not good either)!! Its definitely a reflection of a game's financial and marketing success though.

No doubt that this way is more "accessible" to the average BGG'er but if the results are not very meaningful... whats the point?

I would much rather look at the ratings/reviews/comments on BGG to get a better idea of which games are most appealing and then play them to find out if they actually are.