Members' Elimination Rules Discussion

[NickyJ]

Recently, we have been having issues over the rules. Because of this, a new set of rules has been made, and is up for discussion. Here is the new set:

The rules:
1. Quote the whole list.

2. You may vote only once per day in your time zone, and your votes must be separated by at least 12 hours.

3. Add +1 to one person, subtract -2 to another.

4. The person you upvote, bold and color GREEN or BLUE. If you dont do that then your vote will be ignored and not counted.

5. The person you downvote, bold and color RED. If you dont do that then your vote will be ignored and not counted.

6. You may not touch your own name.

7. Once there are 10 players left, the game enters sudden death; and you may not upvote anyone.

8. If your name is not on the list below, you can only +1 OR -1 a single player.

9. No spoilers. Any votes in buried spoilers (which means placing your votes in 1 or more spoiler) will not not be counted.

10. Votes in more than 1 Quote will not be counted.

11. You must have normal size. Votes in other sizes will be ignored and not counted.

12. If you dont follow those rules then don't post here.

What is your opinion of the rules? Do you want them to be implemented in the next game? Do you oppose them? Do you have any suggestions to make about them?

Let the people of Members' Elimination be heard!

 

[christos200]

I agree with these rules, since i created them , but i would like to hear and other people's opinion.

 

[Abaddon]

This is ********. If you really need rules 9-12 I feel sorry for you.

 

[christos200]

Have you saw the last 2 pages in the main thread? Anyway, i like to hear other people's opinions even if they dissagree with me.

 

[NickyJ]

This is ********. If you really need rules 9-12 I feel sorry for you.

What can be done? Take a look at what's been going on in the thread recently, and you'll see my predicament. By all means, if you have a solution, tell me. I'm at my wits end with how to deal with the trouble.

 

[Catharsis]

Have you tried reporting the offending posters for trolling?

You can't keep adding rules to cover every possible method of being annoying, that's infeasible.

 

[NickyJ]

Have you tried reporting the offending posters for trolling?

You can't keep adding rules to cover every possible method of being annoying, that's infeasible.

I tried. No response. At this point, I'm ready to hand of GMing to someone else. It's proving to be too stressful dealing with spamming, whining, and trying to curb it.

 

[christos200]

May i become the new GM?

 

[Abaddon]

Just keep reporting the posts, eventually a mod will step in.

 

[christos200]

I already reported one post but nothing happend.

 

[Abaddon]

I will be sorted shortly, trust me.

 

[SouthernKing]

The mods take a few days to process the volume of stuff they get. It will be taken care of soon.

That being said, I already stated that there isn't any good reason for the crap that has been going on. If there was, it would be fine; it isnt, its just spamming and trolling.

Spoiler :

And those things are best left to the professionals

 

[NickyJ]

Okay. Just wanted to be sure. And yes, I'm still waiting for more responses.

I'll try to stick with the GMing. But I can't guarantee whether I will still be the GM in the next game. (Take that news in your own way, whether it be good, bad, or ugly. )

But I do have an idea that I'd like to offer: Before the next thread is created, if anyone would like to take the job, they could offer their name up by a certain date. Then, a poll could be made so that the members can elect a GM. That way, there would be less resentment towards the GM if he took over without being chosen by popular consensus. What do you think?

 

[Skwink]

Just keep reporting the posts, eventually a mod will step in.

Why would mods step in?

 

[Sonereal]

If players are annoying players, then report them for trolling. Like I've stated before, a spam game shouldn't require much thought.

 

[Optical]

Okay. Just wanted to be sure. And yes, I'm still waiting for more responses.

I'll try to stick with the GMing. But I can't guarantee whether I will still be the GM in the next game. (Take that news in your own way, whether it be good, bad, or ugly. )

But I do have an idea that I'd like to offer: Before the next thread is created, if anyone would like to take the job, they could offer their name up by a certain date. Then, a poll could be made so that the members can elect a GM. That way, there would be less resentment towards the GM if he took over without being chosen by popular consensus. What do you think?

I'll put my name on that list.

How about saying that you have to submit your name before it gets down to 10 players left in the existing thread?

 

[Dhoomstriker]

How about saying that you have to submit your name before it gets down to 10 players left in the existing thread?

I'm not sure why... there's generally a bit of fanfare about the game when it ends, so you tend to get a lot of sign-ups at the last minute due to the game's publicity as it nears the end.

The last couple of rounds have proven that the game got started too early or that sign-ups weren't as publicized as they could have been, since there have been people who complained about missing the sign-up times.

Let's not try and "solve" a problem that doesn't exist by making an existing problem slightly worse.


That said, you'd be a good GM since you're a well-respected forumer... which takes nothing away from Abaddon or NickyJ, just that you'd be good at the job, too.

 

[Optical]

Sorry, I mean the GMing thing. Not the signups.

That was a bit of a confusing way to put it.

 

[Dhoomstriker]

Oh, my bad. I misinterpreted what you said.

I suppose that the voting for a GM deadline could be arbitrarily chosen, thus, chosing it based on the game-in-progress will serve to slightly hype the existing game, so sure, it sounds like a good way of cutting off GM submissions.

 

[NickyJ]

Sounds good. When should voting begin and end?

Also, I'm thinking that each GM will serve a two game term, after that, a reelection will be held. That way, we won't have to go through the hassle of holding elections after every game. In addition to this, if, for any reason, the elected GM will not be able to post the new thread, the runner up, would GM the next thread. What do you think?

As for the candidates, we have two so far: General Olaf and christos200.