1. Aside from the framerate issue (for which judging is uncertain at best, but we all have to trust sometime), odds are if a game gets voted in at least one person here will know it well enough to judge it.(posted 9683 days ago)2. Each person who joins picks a game. Any number of people can enter before the final scoring deadline, but only the first twenty people who enter before the voting deadline get to help pick. The voting players are also stuck having their performance recorded no matter what, to prevent joke votes (MACH 3) or chickening out when someone else picks your worst game (mine is Joust)
3. 2 weeks to vote, 3 months to play is good.
4.The two simplest ways:
Raw percentage (so Krogman can bury us all at Galaga), added total, missing INP counts as 0 points, highest score wins.
Place ranking, added total, missing INP counts as 0 points, highest score wins.
What I mean by place ranking is you score based on how many contestants you beat, total entrants - your rank (can't beat yourself), last place would be the only 0 score. Missing INPs at the final deadline would be in last place.
Both methods allow for almost all entrants to get points on every game, and have simple math requirements - making it easier to judge. Averaging the points doesn't change the score order but does add a division, which increases the chance of a scoring error.
I love the idea.
Aqua