Very well Tommi. You seem to be impervious to both logic and rationale, so let me make the following quite clear:(posted 9218 days ago)1) I can and do have the right to cancel votes at MARP, if I feel they are either biased or in contradiction with MARP Rules. The exception, is, of course, when a MARP Rule is subjected to vote. In any case, the person polling the vote should have been involved in the debate over the subject. All 6 players who voted for the #2 were part of the debate, and have contacted me personally. GUess who didn't, and who seems to be completely ignorant of the reasons why we didn't call a vote in the first place.
2) Your vote can continue.
3) The results will not be ratified, in any way shape or form, and will not be enforced by the Editors. Nor will the Editors involve themselves in the vote.
4) Support for unlimited time by inserting quarters in pc_10 games is at maybe 30% of the active voice of the community. For dip changes it is around 80-90%. I think you can do the math.
Furthermore, let me thank you personally for forcing me to put down the heavy hand in this situation. Everybody else was okay with waiting a beta and then voting after the dips were listed. So maybe you can explain to me, either here or in a personal e-mail, what is so important about finishing SMB, a game that intelligent rodents and probably some bacteria can beat without any problems.
If you have a problem with my status either as an Editor or as the Rules Coordinator, by all means, post on it or contact another Editor. I am responsible and accountable to the community, and the moment I'm not, I'm out. As such, I have been granted certain rights and been allowed to take temporary (ie: not permanent) measures in resolving conflict. I will not even beg the question of what MARP would currently be like if my, or the other Editors' positions, did not exist, although I'm sure the topic will be raised again at some point.
MARP works under a set of guidelines that allows games to follow a specific notion: one quarter, most skill. It has never been about completion. It will never be about completion. It is not even always about 'doing what the most players want.' If it were, we would very likely have RLH still in T&F recordings. Feel like competing on that Mr. Tiihonen? Or what about extra credits in Gauntlet? Why not? I'm sure lots of players could sit and shoot ghosts for an hour.
Finally, if anyone else wants to protest over this matter, with a decent reason as to why more quarters should be allowed, let me make the procedure crystal clear.
1) You are challenging a rule at MARP (2a), not changing settings for a game. As I said earlier, if you want to post a vote on those lines, that's your right, and I will not interfere--I will participate. Leading to 2...
2) Contact me before posting the vote, so any inconsistencies can be worked out. Several players did this with the PC-10 quarters issue, and seemed satisfied to agree to wait a beta. (although now I'm wondering)
3) You must have a reason for the challenge. I would hope this would seem obvious, but either Tommi has not been reading BBH's posts or has just been ignoring the question.
Again, this is more than I wanted to say on this topic, but I don't want it to seem like I'm making decisions out of thin air. Which is what you seem to be doing, Mr. Tiihonen. Please, for the sake of everyone involved in this argument, take some time and get informed.
Q.T.Quazar, MARP Rules Coordinator