...in Red's scenario, we're still at 7 teams. Not saying that we can't do it with 7, but it would certainly make more sense with 8.
ill, we're also going to need a ruling on Trick. If you're keeping him in despite our votes, I'll accept it and move on. But I know you've been reading the interplay of the debate, and everyone's had ample chance to vote (6 for, 0 against). At this point, any ruling is better than prolonging it.
I'm not prolonging the vote, 6 just doesn't constitute a majority, and I'm personally on the fence on the matter. Trickster does have a tendency to act out childishly (a lot), but he was also dependable last time I asked for him to take on a responsibility. However, I'm running this thing completely democratically so if the majority want Trickster to step down as a judge it will be.
Originally posted by illadelph12what's the number for majority?
I'm not prolonging the vote, 6 just doesn't constitute a majority, and I'm personally on the fence on the matter. Trickster does have a tendency to act out childishly (a lot), but he was also dependable last time I asked for him to take on a responsibility. However, I'm running this thing completely democratically so if the majority want Trickster to step down as a judge it will be.
There's something like 9 participants, and around that many judges. So I'd say around 9 would be 50%. Problem is, a lot of those people don't regularly follow these discussion threads. In past tourneys when the percentage for banning has been similarly high, a lot of people get through that should probably be banned because there simply aren't enough people that vote, either participants or judges.
I'll stand by 6 as being enough for a ban, because if a third of your tournament is upset by it, that should be enough to intervene. But I also defer to ill's decision, and understand his reasoning. I encourage others to vote, either for or against, Trick's ban. Please refer to the last few pages if you need to see the discussion surrounding it.
Along those lines, I like the decision-by-committee right now ill, but for the reasons stated above, once drafts start it might just be best for you to make decisions yourself after you've heard voices on both sides and maybe 1-2 judges' input. Otherwise, the drafts will turn into protracted bickering, and futile attempts to reach majority because not everyone follows such threads on a daily basis. We'll also be getting the "He should be 20 points! No, 25!" discussions in this tourney, since not everything will be a keep/ban scenario.
Originally posted by DigiMark007
We'll also be getting the "He should be 20 points! No, 25!" discussions in this tourney
I'm expecting a lot of that to happen.
So long as everyone is honest with themselves about how much their draft picks are likely to cost it shouldn't be a problem ... but there'll probably always be disagreement over the cost of one or two picks per round.
Originally posted by DigiMark007
There's something like 9 participants, and around that many judges. So I'd say around 9 would be 50%. Problem is, a lot of those people don't regularly follow these discussion threads. In past tourneys when the percentage for banning has been similarly high, a lot of people get through that should probably be banned because there simply aren't enough people that vote, either participants or judges.I'll stand by 6 as being enough for a ban, because if a third of your tournament is upset by it, that should be enough to intervene. But I also defer to ill's decision, and understand his reasoning. I encourage others to vote, either for or against, Trick's ban. Please refer to the last few pages if you need to see the discussion surrounding it.
Along those lines, I like the decision-by-committee right now ill, but for the reasons stated above, once drafts start it might just be best for you to make decisions yourself after you've heard voices on both sides and maybe 1-2 judges' input. Otherwise, the drafts will turn into protracted bickering, and futile attempts to reach majority because not everyone follows such threads on a daily basis. We'll also be getting the "He should be 20 points! No, 25!" discussions in this tourney, since not everything will be a keep/ban scenario.
I'm obviously for. He dropped out of my tourney after causing a mess in the drafting stage, and made me have to push the tourney back further to the point where I really had no internet access, almost killed the tourney if it wasn't for Newjak. Banning Trickster is Detrimental to this tourney's success frankly...
Originally posted by Dr Hackenbush
I'm obviously for. He dropped out of my tourney after causing a mess in the drafting stage, and made me have to push the tourney back further to the point where I really had no internet access, almost killed the tourney if it wasn't for Newjak. Banning Trickster is Detrimental to this tourney's success frankly...
Wait ... what?
😕
He buggered your tourney, so banning him from this one is a bad idea?
I think he meant NOT banning him would be detrimental.
I'll vote for. Which means it 8.
Sorry Trick, but I was in the midst of the tourney that never happened with both you and the guy you tried to take control from. You also have a habit of banning everyone and flaking on tournaments. You did have one good showing in Delphs tournament where you judged a lot, but one showing compared to the rest....well, I hope you do not take this personally, it is just in the interest of the tournament.
Originally posted by Dr Hackenbush
no, I'm in favor of banning him in this tourney... mhmm
But...
Originally posted by Dr Hackenbush
Banning Trickster is Detrimental to this tourney's success frankly...
Um ... do you know what detrimental means?
damaging; harmful
So your saying you want him banned ... but banning him will harm the tourneys success.
mhmmmhmmmhmm
Originally posted by Scoobless
But...Um ... do you know what detrimental means?
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/detrimental
So your saying you want him banned ... but banning him will harm the tourneys success.
mhmmmhmmmhmm
I forgot to add not, I've made typos before srug