It's a good question, one that I considered for a while before last year's URAs.
First of all, my motive for doing the URAs is not to point out that this site or that fic Is The Absolute Best so much as to recognize those sites, fics, and so on that stand out above the rest. Those that really deserve recognition for their achievements.
As such, previous URA winners really have been recognized and commended. Winning repeatedly would be gilding the lily, and be frustrating to those who lost to the same site yet again. Hence the "give someone else a dang chance!" rule. (No, I haven't actually written up a rule like that. )
Yes, I know, it can be argued both ways. Both arguments are valid. But these are the Unofficial ReBoot Awards, done by fans for fans, and by their fannish nature they are imperfect, right? Plus, let's be honest, the URAs are a popularity contest. It ain't an exact science. In the end I decided for what I (and the people I discussed it with) felt was the better of the two options.
Are we trying to not be 'mean' or something? Because, really, if someone's getting upset because they didn't win an contest over the internet... O_o
Oh, you might be surprised. I could give examples, but I'd rather not drag old issues up here. Suffice it to say that if one person has a much higher opinion of his or her work than the rest of the people actually doing the nominating, they can throw quite a tantrum over it.
I'm curious, though. I don't expect anyone to jump up and change it. I'm sure everyone is working hard with what they have, and the contest starts pretty soon.
And you'll be seeing what-all it involves close-up. Heh, there's probably a good reason none of last year's URA committee volunteered for this year! Can't say I blame them.
-- Slack, who has disqualified herself from a number of categories.
)