Ratings points

Saladin · Post by **Saladin** » Tue Mar 09, 2004 3:19 pm

Hannibal wrote:I really can't see what all the fuss is about (although it does make great reading).

And that's the whole point! To lift the boredom from sitting at work.

It costs you so little to comply with the consensus that it makes no sense, except only in the sense of wanting to throw your ego around on any little topic. I repeat the challenge: tell me how you would suffer in any way at all by complying? Except for climbdown.

Well said by the man with the fancy words...kudos!

Post by **gm_al** » Tue Mar 09, 2004 4:57 pm

I must say Im getting really disturbed by Nick's attitude... now he is asking that his "shared RIP" proposal to the WSC shouldnt be considered as "official" vote.... ?!

here some extract of my answer to him:

"Maybe you are affraid of the outcome of this vote ? Shouldnt matter to you anyways, as you are not going to stick to a WSC resolution that doesnt please you, not even if the majority of the community votes differently.

Im getting irritated that the WSC chairman is actually not following WSC decisions at his own will. Maybe you should consider stepping down ?

I kindly ask you to make your request an OFFICIAL vote, just like it was initially planned. I also urge you to respect WSC decisions. Period."

And may I just cite the WSC page:

"All decisions of the WSC are final. The members of the WSC agree to accept them as such and take the appropriate actions if required. "

Its a bit lame to change a vote into something non-official, just so that you dont have to follow it, no ?

And yes, you initially volunteered to pick up the WSC job. We appeciate that. But since I had to wake the WSC from the dead corner where it was peacefully sleeping I keep thinking that maybe its time for a change. Some new blood may be good for the WSC.

Post by **Dameon** » Wed Mar 10, 2004 2:42 am

I am copying my reply to the WSC here since Al has been leveling more baseless accusations against me:

Al, I am really quite tired of you harping on about how I am not respecting WSC decisions when it is a flat out lie. It says CLEARLY, in black and white, on Bjorn's rating page that the rating sysem will be optional for GMs. The vote was to institute the system as it was described on Bjorn's page. There was never anything about GMs being forced to use the system, and you are frankly just wrong when you claim otherwise. If you wanted to make the system mandatory you should have stated it on Bjorn's page, instead of stating just the opposite! I am dangnabbit sick and tired of you whining about something that is completely false! Or are you going to claim that the part about the system being optional was never part of your vote and Bjorn was wrong?

And again, I offer to step down as WSC Chair if anybody else wants the job. I have made this offer several times. The only reason I am chair in the first place is because nobody else wanted the job. I have made an effort recentely to take the position more seriously by updating the WSC roles and keeping active clans out of Clan Score, but again, if anybody wants the job, it's theirs. In fact, if you want it Al, take it! If you don't, stop complaining about how you don't like the job I am doing!

Finally, I am withdrawing the shared-RIP bonus vote since it isn't getting any support. The reason I didn't make it an official vote is A) because I didn't have two supporters and B) because Al changed the M3 ruling all his own without any WSC vote, so I figured official votes aren't necessary when it comes to the rating system. Also let me add, C) I was never going to use the rating system, so even if this WAS an official vote and it didn't pass, that wouldn't change my position. In any case, I guarentee you I will never support or use a rating system that depends on luck for some of its ratings points, that's for sure.

That is that! I am done with this topic! It's turning into a pointless flamer, especially as Al is lying outright and refusing to address the reality of what Bjorn's page says. I certainly apologize for bringing up an idea that would allow me to be comfortable with using the rating system, as that turned into a large mess. I will continue GMing without the rating system for any of my games, end of story. If the WSC passes a rule making the rating system mandatory, I will retire from GMing. It's not a threat, simply a fact. I GM because I enjoy it and because I want to give back to the community. If the community doesn't want my games without ratings, I will respect that fact and quit while I am ahead. If people still sign up for my unrated games, then that is their perogative, and the WSC certainly should not try and force them to do otherwise- just one man's opinion, of course.

Calidus · Post by **Calidus** » Wed Mar 10, 2004 4:41 am

Saladin wrote:Larry,

1. The games you GM? What games? That was a lifetime (read: 4 clans)ago that you gm-ed!

2. Yes it is childish...if the community agrees on something you disagree with then to say that you won't GM any more...CHILDISH. You should know how to follow rules being a (former) slave to the army and such.

3. When are you going to find another clan to 'play' for?

4. Does Ecrivian really whipe your @ss everytime you've taken a dump or does it only appear that way?

AD HOMINEM - marked by an attack on an opponent's character rather than by an answer to the contentions made

Grow up simpleton. I was not a "slave" to the Army. Our Army, as well as the rest of the United States military is strictly made up of VOLUNTEERS. We volunteer because we believe in something and are not afraid, much unlike yourself, to stand up for what we believe. So spew your retoric somewhere else.

I have a Clan jackass. Its called the First Family. Got a problem with that?

As for your comments about Ecrivian, see the definition above. Does that attack come because he makes a stand for a friend? The more you talk, the more ignorant you sound. Maybe its time for you to shut up?

Mylantis · Post by **Mylantis** » Wed Mar 10, 2004 6:05 am

Hey Calidus, did you fart? I thought I heard an as.......oh wait, it's just Saladin

opening his mouth again............

Saladin · Post by **Saladin** » Wed Mar 10, 2004 8:42 am

LOL

Post by **gm_al** » Wed Mar 10, 2004 9:41 am

And again, I offer to step down as WSC Chair if anybody else wants the job. I have made this offer several times. The only reason I am chair in the first place is because nobody else wanted the job. I have made an effort recentely to take the position more seriously by updating the WSC roles and keeping active clans out of Clan Score, but again, if anybody wants the job, it's theirs. In fact, if you want it Al, take it! If you don't, stop complaining about how you don't like the job I am doing!

So we can consider it to be vacant and call for candidates to take it, right ? Just checking so we can do a smooth transition and find candidates.

Finally, I am withdrawing the shared-RIP bonus vote since it isn't getting any support.

Its rather "NOBODY wants it". Withdraw it ? No way, lets make this official that we dont want shared RIP bonus, shall we ?

The reason I didn't make it an official vote is A) because I didn't have two supporters and B) because Al changed the M3 ruling all his own without any WSC vote, so I figured official votes aren't necessary when it comes to the rating system

Hahaha - the difference is that we all agreed on the M3 ruling change, while the shared RIP bonus hardly ever found any supporters (and therefore needed a vote). I even offered to put the M3 change to a vote, but no one claimed we needed it. Cant you see and read these things ??

If the WSC passes a rule making the rating system mandatory, I will retire from GMing.

Grow up, little child. Everyone is trying to be part of a team - except you. Im not even shocked by your latest threat, it just bores me. You are part of the WSC (and the GMC), and have promised to follow democratic decisions. Its clear you simply will not live by this rules, simply because you think that only "your way is the highway". A community lives by rules, and you are asked to follow them - there are rules I personally voted against on the WSC, but am I complaining or threatening anyone ? No, I comply to them, because the majority wanted them.

You fail to realise that with all the crap you start (Arse-reg turns into VO, but maybe changes name first or maybe not, the "rating wars" where you neglect WSC decisions, the retracting of a vote that turns against your will etc.) you begin to move outside of the community, away from it with every new step you take. Its even more ridiculous when you think about what the ratings really are: keeping track of THREE numbers to make games a bit more lively. And you cant even comply to that if it doesnt go 100% how you want it to. If I wouldnt know better Id think Im talking to a 12-year old. Im affraid thats the reason why we dont want you to do anything else but GMing Nick. Please step down from the WSC and GMC and stick to running games.

Post by **Dameon** » Wed Mar 10, 2004 3:52 pm

Al, one day if you learn how to read, go to Bjorn's ratings page and scan the part where it says "The rating system will be optional for all GMs". Until then, I basically refuse to deal with an illiterate. This is going to be my last post on the topic, what a completely unnessecary headache!

Saladin · Post by **Saladin** » Wed Mar 10, 2004 4:30 pm

Nick (of course) is right. But that can easily be ammended by having a little vote on the WSC to make it compulsary.

Post by **ThinKing** » Wed Mar 10, 2004 4:58 pm

Dameon wrote:Al, one day if you learn how to read, go to Bjorn's ratings page and scan the part where it says "The rating system will be optional for all GMs". Until then, I basically refuse to deal with an illiterate. This is going to be my last post on the topic, what a completely unnessecary headache!

Why exactly does Bjorn have supreme power in WOK all of a sudden?

I dont think anything printed on his site immediately becomes law.

I am glad you wont post again Nick. You have already reached the level of calling Al "illiterate". If you continue to post, who knows what new lows you will produce...

Post by **trewqh** » Wed Mar 10, 2004 5:14 pm

Dameon wrote: [...]what a completely unnessecary headache!

I'm glad to announce:

TOLD YA!

trewqh

Post by **gm_al** » Wed Mar 10, 2004 5:23 pm

Im officially calling for candidates to pick up the now vacant WSC chairman job until 1st of July.

I also filed two proposals:

#20 - Allow shared RIP bonus for rated games

#21 - "GMs must announce in advance if their game will be rated or not. The decision will apply to all participating Players."

If we get 3 supporters in the WSC we will have some official vote on the matter and hopefully put an end to the rating wars.

Boyscout literature teacher Nick didnt yet answer me - are you also offering to step down as GMC chairman ? Just so that you can stick to putting all your energy into GMing.... (unrated WOK5 X-games of course !)
We really would appreciate it if you could focus in this area alone.

Saladin · Post by **Saladin** » Wed Mar 10, 2004 6:37 pm

Sadly, if ratings will not be mandatory i won't be able to keep track off them either. I see no point in a system that only tracks part of the games being played, the whole ratings would be meaningless than. :S

Bjorn · Post by **Bjorn** » Thu Mar 11, 2004 2:35 am

gm_al wrote:I think we all can agree that any Player quitting or going M-3 should have the FIRST missed Turn to be seen as the one where he did quit, thus placing him eventually in a worse final position for the rating. Good, less people going M-3. Mission achieved. Update please Bjorn.

I guess I should check this board more often.
OK, I will add this tonight. I will also look into the wording of the M3/RIP situation to see if I can make it better.
"A person who goes M3 is treated as being eliminated on the turn they went M1. In cases where a player is RIPed on the same turn a QUIT player went M1, the QUIT player will be considered to have been eliminated prior to the RIPed player." Or something like that.

Yes, in my ever constant attempts to make life as easy for GMs as possible, I left it up to the GM if he wants to have the game rated or not. I see no reason to compel a GM to rate a game. In fact, if I were a beginner I might prefer a non-rated game to start off with. All games should award VPs, rated or not.

Again, the ratings page is subject to the approval and changes by the WSC. Why do you keep referring to it Bjorn's page?

Saladin · Post by **Saladin** » Thu Mar 11, 2004 8:53 am

Actually i don't really care about the actual rating points. I'm more of a statistics freak and because of that i want ALL game statistics to be collected for ALL games.

Now if people don't want to make the rating compulsary, maybe we can agree on the following Nick.

- You list your game as non rated, but you do keep track of who got ripped on what turn and by whom and who went QUIT. That way all the statistics will still contain all the games.

Post by **gm_al** » Thu Mar 11, 2004 11:22 am

Just to keep you all informed, Nick is saying Im "spamming the WSC with votes" and that he actually doesnt like me to have come up with proposal #20.

He will retract his offer to step down as chairman if I am the only candidate for it....

*lol* and all I had been doing was to offer to pick it up in case no one else would run as candidate.

I can assure you there will be ppl picking it up Nick. You may sleep quietly.

Saladin · Post by **Saladin** » Thu Mar 11, 2004 11:48 am

Al,

When is the new election due for the WSC?

Post by **ThinKing** » Thu Mar 11, 2004 12:59 pm

I am not in the WSC any more, but could 2/3 WSC members call for an "Emergency Election" for the position of WSC Chairman? If we could get Al (or anyone else who isnt Nick) installed as Chairman, then I think things would move along a lot quicker than they are doing.

As for Ratings;

Clan wars should NOT be rated.
Beginner groups should NOT be rated.
X-Games should NOT be rated (so Nick is happy all round

).

Apart from that, data from EVERY game should be recorded (even the Champs). That way we can play with the figures when we have enough of them. As Sal says, a rating system becomes worth less (but NOT worthless) if it only counts half the games.

Another budding Statistician

Post by **gm_al** » Thu Mar 11, 2004 1:03 pm

We will vote the new chairman early next week. I have heard of at least 2 candidates, possibly 3 right now. The more the better I think.

Maybe Nick is also stepping down from GMC ? We havent heard any wild suggestions and retracts of offers from him though yet. At least it would save us some time as we could do both elections in one swift swoop.

The next period starts on July 1st, at which point we will either confirm the WSC chairman or vote a new one. GMC elections are claimed to be "yearly", so my take is that this will happen next January.

Yours truly,

illi.... il.. lil... tera.. tate AL

Post by **Dameon** » Thu Mar 11, 2004 4:12 pm

First off, I am only stepping down if it means somebody who I feel is qualified would take the position. Out of the entire WSC, there's only about 2-3 people who I don't feel would do a good job, and Al is one of them. The last two votes he proposed are simply wastes of mailing list space, as there are no arguments about either of them. Nobody is going to use a shared RIP bonus; and nobody is going to object to GMs having to declare if their games are rated. One email asking for any objections to either of those things would have been more than sufficient.

Second, why the heck would I step down from the GMC? I have no intention of doing so, not do I see any reason to. And even if I do step down as WSC chair, I will remain on the WSC, it was never an issue about whether or not I could vote or say my piece. As for when GMC elections are, Al, they are the same time as the WSC ones- July 1st. All five spots will be open then.

Finally, if anybody else wants to keep track of ratings for my games, they are more than welcome to. I don't want to stop anybody if they feel it is important, I simply refuse to support a system I see as fatally flawed myself.