forums.marpirc.net

OK - I'm going to try it this way... this affects people who voted for the last tournament.
<p>

1. New Players can vote for 4 games.

<p>

2. Players who played all 10 games can vote for 5 games.

<p>

3. Players who played 8 - 9 games can vote for 3 games.

<p>

4. Players who played 6 - 7 games can vote for 2 games.

<p>

5. Players who played 4 - 5 games can vote for 1 game.

<p>

6. Players who played 0 - 3 games can't vote at all.

<p>

I personally don't like giving those people who play well an advantage... I like everything on a level playing field.

<p>

If you for example voted in the first tournament, didn't vote for the second, and wanted to voted in the third, you are considered a new player.

<p>

What do you think of this system? Think it's fair?

--
goldengameboy@yahoo.com

Fair? Definately not. To penalize anyone on the basis of whether or
not they touched T2 with all the cheating, vote ganging, and
everything else that went on with it is totally rediculous!

--
cparsley1@hotmail.com

No, it's not fair : according to your proposition, it's better not to
play the t2 than playing 9 games . We can wonder why ...

<p>

Lagevulin, who maybe drinks too much whisky...

--
darre@club-internet.fr

I'll vote to apply this to T4 voting and just have static number of
games for each player in T3.

--
info@kaupp.cx

Alright! I'll go back to everyone votes 3 games... sheesh...
<p>

Still trying to figure out what rules you want...

--
goldengameboy@yahoo.com

I don't think it's sensible to allow less votes to someone who has a
history at MARP than to a newcomer, since we can all pretend to be
newcomers if we wish. I also don't think it's very fair to allow
more votes to established players. If I just discovered the site,
I'd be annoyed that I couldn't have my say as to which games are in
the next tournament. I guess giving the same vote to each person is
the best way to do it, although you still have a problem in that some
people have lots of friends/clones who all like exactly the same
games as each other, and can swamp the vote by all voting the same.

<p>

Chris.

--
zwaxy@mail.com

I don't think it's fair to give less voting power to newbies.
<p>

However, I think that people who voted and didn't play any games, or
only 1 game or so, should have a lot less voting power next time.
After all, it can affect the outcome of a tournament. Theoretically,
it is possible to end up with a tournament in which none of the games
were actually voted for by any of its participants. When going
through the votes for T2, I noticed that there are quite a few people
who voted but never showed up. When voting for a tournament it is
very likely that the games that will be selected are not all to your
liking. If you can't deal with that, then don't vote in the first
place. You can't have your cake and eat it too. I think it doesn't
display good sportsmanship to first vote and then not play when you
don't like the outcome. And just like in lots of other events, making
a commitment and then not following up on it should be penalised.

<p>

And I think it's a bit strange that someone who didn't even come
close to finishing T1 and "don't" look like coming even close to
finishing T2 is so concerned about the voting rules for the next
tournament... . But then again, he'll complain about everything...

<p>

Ben Jos.

--
walbeehm@walbeehm.com