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

1. New Players can vote for 4 games.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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.

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

-- Gameboy9 (goldengameboy@yahoo.com), December 12, 1999

Answers

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!

-- Chris Parsley (cparsley1@hotmail.com), December 12, 1999.

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 ...

Lagevulin, who maybe drinks too much whisky...

-- Lagavulin (darre@club-internet.fr), December 12, 1999.

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

-- Dave Kaupp (info@kaupp.cx), December 12, 1999.

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

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

-- Gameboy9 (goldengameboy@yahoo.com), December 12, 1999.

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.

Chris.

-- Zwaxy (zwaxy@mail.com), December 12, 1999.

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

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.

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...

Ben Jos.

-- Ben Jos Walbeehm (walbeehm@walbeehm.com), December 13, 1999.