Post by Lord Hastings on Aug 10, 2011 11:37:03 GMT -5
I agree with T-Rob on this one. Voting should be reserved for PPVs and special occasion, as is the case this month, or for situations like what happened at Battleground last year, when we had co-winners of a triple threat and had them face off in a revote on Synergy.
Thank you to everybody for their thoughts. I think this was a good discussion.
Post by andysavana on Aug 10, 2011 22:36:00 GMT -5
Voting should totally be done for title matches on Synergy.
You talk of differentiating shit?Are you saying a title match on the TV shows is the same quality as a PPV and that the only way to tell the difference is the vote count at the bottom?
Also for an efed the number one thing is that the participates decide the winner. Especially title matches which are important. I remember last year or so it was a three way tag team match for the titles and at that point I think me and declan's stories had gotten out of hand and I was losing a lot lol and he was going up. Well we won the vote and I can guarantee people were shocked higher up for me and Declan definitely could tell.
My point is. Without knowing I've sat back and watched undeserving people shoot up through the ranks based off ludicrous opinions by the people who decide the match decisions. Hell if I wanted I could come back under a name try just a bit harder than I do now and get some good feedback from people and there is a good chance I just blast through the ranks because this kind of logic of "This guy is really impressive for a new guy despite the guy who's been here longer still being better (though not so impressive)".
I've always though we need to increase the amount of people who decide the winners. Into some sort of a council. Two people leaves too little people with too much power.
on the bright side.
I really don't give much of a real fuck to lash out about any of this. I just write stoner promos about nothing
Post by Red Bull Icon on Aug 11, 2011 0:08:45 GMT -5
The problem Savana is that those same 'undeserving people' could still 'shoot up' solely because they're the next new thing regardless if it's a roster member or a green name that thinks it.
I would argue it might even be more possible on a voted on Synergy than ppv. If only because last time I checked, I mean read the rules instead of remembering from so long ago, ppv votes were to take into consideration all of a players promos/activity for that month. That's kinda hard to do second Synergy of the month. Real easy to pull off if you slap a handcuffing stip to the post and your opponent fumbles. Hell it's not that hard to do on a ppv if your opponent blows misses a stip or the roster thinks you missed it.
Your issue with how the greens decide is your issue.
Your idea of a council though I'm agaisnt. I think it'd just bog down the weekly show like votes bog down the ppv and shorten the available time to write. Plus there's no proof that 2 people are crooked so 3 is honest and 4 is wise and 5 is just divine.
Post by Jason Tacker on Aug 11, 2011 0:48:16 GMT -5
Maybe I'm about to give some fuel to the fire(or start a flame war in which case I apologize in advance), but Savana why give an opinion on something if you don't give a flying fuck about what happens around here?
I've always though we need to increase the amount of people who decide the winners. Into some sort of a council. Two people leaves too little people with too much power
but isn't there 3-4 who do the judging? It's at least 3 I think, with A-Kis being the tie-breaker or something like that.
And T-Rob, if NBK is up for it, then I'm cool with that. Unless you guys'd wanna start a new chapter or something and have someone else challenge NBK, then that's fine too
Post by andysavana on Aug 11, 2011 15:31:03 GMT -5
Tyvola: Well the rules aren't the constitution so we really wouldn't require a 3/4ths vote to change the rule to "Vote on how well that particular promo was for that show" now would we?
I suppose the real issue I have is that there are completely admitted subjective ratings being handed out. if a person doesn't contribute enough to the fed overall then I'd heard Robert's himself saying that person won't win as often. If the storyline calls for it then that person might not be as likely to win.
This is a writing contest or whatever you want to call it and the winners should be chosen objectively. Completely objectively.
as for you John: Because I feel like it homey.
To the all encompassing amounts of you: I'm aware of all these "perceived" problems but it doesn't bother me enough not to do what I do so its kind of whatever. Figured I'd throw out my two sense.
also if you had a vote I'd say a public vote would be best. All this hidden tomfoolery is ridiculous. I never agreed when P did it first so don't think this is randomly being felt. Yall just happen to be talking about it.
Post by Lord Hastings on Aug 11, 2011 17:01:22 GMT -5
There are a couple points I'd like to respond to and then I'm hoping we can move on from this subject, as the decision has been made that there will be no changes at this time.
For starters, Ty is exactly right about Synergies. I agree with him 100%.
I suppose the real issue I have is that there are completely admitted subjective ratings being handed out. if a person doesn't contribute enough to the fed overall then I'd heard Robert's himself saying that person won't win as often. If the storyline calls for it then that person might not be as likely to win.
This is a writing contest or whatever you want to call it and the winners should be chosen objectively. Completely objectively.
It is my subjective opinion that we have in fact been entirely objective when it comes to how winners have been selected. If you look at the list of World Champions since UGWC first came together, the names are as follows: Phrixus Deimos, Declan Prescott, Jet Somers, Travis Pierce, Tyvola, and myself. Of this list, you have people all over the spectrum of amount of contributions. Some write matches, others do not. Some provide feedback frequently, others rarely do. Some are a fountain of ideas, others are quieter. Clearly, in no case has that effected their ability to be successful.
I would take it a step further and suggest that every handler that has participated in UGWC for a consistant period of time has seen at least one of their characters win a championship as well as be spotlighted in a storyline. I would point at this as a tremendous example of the current system working.
also if you had a vote I'd say a public vote would be best. All this hidden tomfoolery is ridiculous. I never agreed when P did it first so don't think this is randomly being felt. Yall just happen to be talking about it.
There are a few reasons why I don't see this happening. Obviously we cannot have people post their votes, as it spoils the show. We could use public polls, but you can't lock them without revealing the results (spoiler) and you can't leave them open because people can vote late. We could post who voted for who with the results, but it's honestly not really something I want to waste time doing while I'm writing/compiling a PPV, and I'm sure T-Rob feels similarly. Bottom line, I think everybody knowing who voted for who also sets up possible arguments, fights, could bias future votes, create bad feelings, etc.
If anybody feels they have been slighted in the past by the system in place, I'd be happy to discuss that privately and listen to any concerns. Not to cut this off, but I think we've taken it about as far as it can go.
And to change the subject...any more volunteers for Synergy?