Cancel the Good Furry Awards?

Dear Furries,

As some of you know, I have been running the Good Furry Awards for over five years now. The purpose of these awards was to thank the thankless in the fandom who do wonderful things both for furries and non-furries. We have had some wonderful winners in the past, including Ash Coyote, Dogbomb, Mark Merlino, and Rod O'Riley. I was particularly glad that Mark was able to receive a Lifetime Achievement Award before he passed away.

I never wanted these awards to be "popularity contests." Honestly, I value everyone who was nominated because the intention was to give everyone who makes an effort to make the fandom a better place a paws up and a fuzzy hug. That's exactly the message in our theme song that was written by the fabulous Pepper Coyote. No, the true reason I started this project was that I was so exhausted from hearing furries criticizing the fandom all the time that I wanted to counteract all the negativity with something more positive: the Good Furry Awards.

From the beginning, the GFAs have been criticized by the furry community. They have been called "fake awards," "popufur contests," and worse. Furries have tried repeatedly to stuff the voter box and to nominate fake people. At first, I brushed this off because I had the same reaction when I started the "Ask Papabear" column. I said to myself, "Buck up, Grubbs. People don't understand what you're trying to do, but they will eventually, and they'll see you are doing something good for the fandom." Things did get better for my column (although I still get snarky comments on occasion), but the same cannot be said for the GFAs.

After five years, I still feel like the community finds these awards somehow offensive. I still get criticized for them all the time (which is weird because people don't criticize the Ursa Major Awards, but whatev). I've been wracking my brain as to why. Is it because the award winners are selected by popular vote? If that were true, the People's Choice Awards would have failed long ago. Is it because it is "fake" because I do all the work and not some corporation or national organization? Therefore, it's not "legit"? Or are the GFAs merely despised because furries who don't get nominated feel they aren't getting acknowledged?

I honestly do not know the answer.

But I do know this: Even though my intentions were always good (which is how one paves the Road to Hell, am I right?), if I am putting thousands of dollars and hundreds of hours of my own money and time into a project that nobody wants, then maybe my entire concept was misguided and wrongheaded. Perhaps I should try to find another way to thank furries on my own and not worry about what the fandom as a whole thinks. After all, if YOU don't want the GFAs, then why the heck am I doing all this work? My bad.

As with the awards, though, I didn't want to make this decision without any input from furries. After all, I could be wrong. Maybe there are a lot of fans out there, and I just don't know it.

So, here's the deal: I'm putting it to a vote.

From now until August 31, you can vote on whether of not the Good Furry Award will stop now or continue on. How does this work? Well, being the good anal bear that I am, I made up fake ;) guidelines, towit:

1. There must be at least 200 votes received by the end of the month. (Weak turnout indicates apathy, and with several hundred thousand furries in the world, if I can't muster 200 votes, that's pretty telling.)
​
2. There must be a 2:1 ratio of Yes to No votes for the Yes column to win.

I will announce the results September 1.

GO HERE TO VOTE
​