WXV Rules Discussion 2018

[GoLions]

[Nige]

Giving GL a post quota.

[RaisyDaisy]

Stop spamming this thread lol

[meow meow]

I say we vote on Nigel scrapping the awful song selections in World Idol

[iZander]

I say we vote on Nigel scrapping the awful song selections in World Idol

I got "the scientist", im happy :P

[Nige]

I say we vote on Nigel scrapping the awful song selections in World Idol

I had no intentions on doing it again anyway.

[Purple 77]

Naw, I liked it  :'(

[Purple 77]

Well, I was about to send the rule vote out, then saw we had a suggestion for people should have the option to indicate that they don't care about the rule.

So, I then went about sending out a vote just to decide on how we vote, before we vote  ::)

I was gonna send the following, and force people to vote for this... but alas, I'll give it some time for people to digest and see reactions.

Please tell me what you think ASAP, as I want to send out something tomorrow.



I'm going to put my foot down a little here, and insist you can't donkey vote in Worlds.

Because we should all be involved in whatever we decide, else it's really not a collective decision. Take American non-compulsory voting for example, at the end of the day, 70% of people (I dunno if that number is accurate, but it's something around that mark) didn't actually vote for Trump, yet he's the one in charge. So yeah, you WILL be voting. And yes, I see the irony in this paragraph.

Vote Severity
Should we introduce vote severity in our vote responses, instead of our Yes/No response?

For example, in the past we've had rules that have been fairly 50/50, but one side feels more strongly about it than the other, and the those whom cared more about it lost in favour of those whom didn't really have a preference either way, but because they were forced to vote, voted against the people whom really cared about it.

Say, we have the following vote proposed:

Who had the better career? Cale Morton or Jimmy Toumpas?
A) Morton
B) Toumpas.

Currently, you'd be forced to vote either A or B. We might have 7 coaches who really fervently believe Morton had the better career, but there was 11 coaches who really don't feel that strongly about this vote, and happened to vote for Toumpas.

I propose, that you are STILL forced to vote for either option... but have a choice as to whether you put '1' point or '2' points to your option.

So in the above scenario, instead of Toumpas being decided has having had the best career (because all 11 coaches put '1' point to him), Morton is now the new winner as all 7 coaches felt strongly about it, and put down '2' points (14 in total).

All draws will be decided by the side whom had the most coaches vote. So 12 despondent coaches would beat 6 passionate coaches. If both the number of points and coaches are equal, then my vote decides, as I'm the one that has to implement and manage the decision.

Thoughts?

[RaisyDaisy]

Not a big fan of giving an option a 1 or 2

Think I prefer having a 3rd choice along the lines of "don't care", and then just tally the A vs B result to decide the winner

[iZander]

Not a big fan of giving an option a 1 or 2

Think I prefer having a 3rd choice along the lines of "don't care", and then just tally the A vs B result to decide the winner

Just keep it the way it is, stop being such fence sitters :P

[RaisyDaisy]

Not a big fan of giving an option a 1 or 2

Think I prefer having a 3rd choice along the lines of "don't care", and then just tally the A vs B result to decide the winner

Just keep it the way it is, stop being such fence sitters :P

If we keep it the way it is then the problem that Purps outlined remains

I'd rather someone sit on the fence if it's something they don't give two showers about instead of being forced to pick one which could change the outcome which is again the problem Purps outlined

[iZander]

Not a big fan of giving an option a 1 or 2

Think I prefer having a 3rd choice along the lines of "don't care", and then just tally the A vs B result to decide the winner

Just keep it the way it is, stop being such fence sitters :P

If we keep it the way it is then the problem that Purps outlined remains

I'd rather someone sit on the fence if it's something they don't give two showers about instead of being forced to pick one which could change the outcome which is again the problem Purps outlined

When it comes to trade voting you shouldnt be able to not give a flower, look at the trade, and decide weather its fair or if its not and pick a damn answer. This system doesnt work if there only 5 people who "dont give two showers"

[Purple 77]

Not a big fan of giving an option a 1 or 2

Think I prefer having a 3rd choice along the lines of "don't care", and then just tally the A vs B result to decide the winner

That falls in the 'Donkey vote' category, which I will not be permitting.

[Purple 77]

My personal preference is the current system FWIW, but this vote is an effort to recognise those who suggested it.

[Torpedo10]

I always thought the general consensus was if you're a fence sitter, you vote to stay with what is already in place?