Post by Eden Morgan on Oct 1, 2014 20:26:43 GMT -5
It's a system. People are going to want to try to game it. That's just the nature of the beast. There is absolutely no way to completely "fix" something to the point where it can't be manipulated. Not saying we shouldn't try to iron out the major kinks and set some ground rules, but the nitpicking is just going to go on and on and on. There's always going to be some way that someone will figure out for it to be exploited. Just my two cents on the matter.
Also... fuck you, Wayne.
First Female World Champ (4x) First Female Grand Slam Champ Massive Melee winner 2013/14 High Roller's winner 2014 Cooperative Champ w/Zane Scott Cooperative Champ w/Gabriel Baal Cooperative Champ w/ Jet Somers Cooperative Champ w/ Donovan Hastings Cross-Hemisphere Champ, IYH 2016 Chaos Champ, BG 2017
>\/<: "Hey, now! Don't hate Wayne because your character is crap. It ain't his fault, and I tried to warn everyone about her. Maybe now motherfuckers will listen."
Thanks, Klaus. You're a real peach. Now we're in even MORE hot water for answering an OOC post IC and stirring the pot even more.
>\/<: "I was just trying to help!"
I know, dude. Just, try not to kick the poor girl when she's down.
>\/<: "Fuck that! That's the best time to kick someone. Besides, we've gotta pick on SOMEONE, and Ad graduated from that spot with that badass RP he posted this week."
That's true. The son of a bitch really knocked it out of the park, so he's earned the right to not have us be all "Fuck you, Ad" all the time.
Great. Now I've got Donnie encroaching on my OOC posts, too?
El Mucho Gordo: "Hey, I'm going to El Pollo Loco, any of you gringos want anything?"
It's a system. People are going to want to try to game it. That's just the nature of the beast. There is absolutely no way to completely "fix" something to the point where it can't be manipulated. Not saying we shouldn't try to iron out the major kinks and set some ground rules, but the nitpicking is just going to go on and on and on. There's always going to be some way that someone will figure out for it to be exploited. Just my two cents on the matter.
Post by DrunkenBuzzsaw on Oct 1, 2014 21:32:16 GMT -5
I fully intend on leaving my thoughts on the matter (as well as feedback on the ppv), but I've been sick as shit the last few days. Once I'm better, I'll bore all of you with my drivel.
2018 Hall of Fame Inductee OWF PDA Champion (1x) OWF Tag Champion (1x - w/Meyhu) 2015 Pool of Blood Co-Winner Chaos Champion (1x) Cooperative Champion (3x - 1 w/Jez; 1 w/Cyp; 1 w/Somers) 2013 "In Your Hands" Battle Royal winner 13 Title Reigns in career
I don't really think anyone is saying this happens all the time, we are just saying there are OBVIOUS ways to game it, and they need to be ironed out before some of us are willing to accept the new system as an improvement over the old. And although they may be the exception, gaming happened often enough that Steve saw the need to overhaul the system to make it more fair, right?
As Steve stated in the first post in this thread the original motivation was the Roulette tournament. When he described the idea of the tourney I suggested an out of 10 voting system, based on the fact there may be people with multiple characters on the show (I.e V & EMG, Jet & Gian etc) and it seemed like a fair way to show appreciation for that, alongside the fact we have a LOT of multiple-person matches where the current system wasn't really fit for purpose.
Steve obviously liked the idea and looked to spread it across all votes. Steve will correct me if I'm wrong but I don't think a culture of gamesmanship was behind this.
I'd agree that I, and maybe Steve but I can't speak for him, felt this was a fairer system, but not because of a proliferation of dodgy voting but because the old system, from my/our perspective, could be improved upon a great deal.
I also agree that the new system needs to be refined, that much has become clear.
Post by DrunkenBuzzsaw on Oct 2, 2014 13:09:22 GMT -5
The way I figure up votes is probably different than anyone else, but that's just because I like going against the grain, and doing shit differently. Basically, its akin to how I determine what to tip when I go out to eat.
I start with a base tip rate of 20%. It is up to the server whether or not he or she keeps that percentage, or whether they get less. The job they do for my family and I, how they interact with my kids, and how happy they seem to be serving us all comes into play. If they go above and beyond in all aspects, they get their 20%. If they falter in any area, I start deducting. Regardless of how bad they are though, I never go less than 10%, because tips are how they make a living...and I'm not a total douche.
I grade rps in a similar fashion (though I do not have different sets of criteria for PPVs and Synergies, because most likely if we are voting for a match during a Synergy, its probably a title match anyway). This is why unless there is just a complete lack of effort given, the lowest score I will give out is a 5. All rps starts at a 10...and it is up to the roleplayer to keep that 10. If the person did something that made me say whoa...kept my attention the entire time...all while simultaneously furthering their story as well as also focusing on their opponents and match, that person will keep their 10. Any deviation to the above will lose points.
How much said person loses is always subjective to my personal preference though, which is why attempting to come up with a base for modeling it after will be damn near fruitless. Because how much a Eden, Klaus, or Jet rp touches me...might not be the same for T-Robb, Steve, or Boolz. How awesome I think Holden did may differ from how his rp was perceived by AJ or Ad. This is why I think this new system is better than the old.
If Jet, Hastings, and Klaus are in a three way and you have four people voting (for shits and giggles...just go with it), Jet may get 2 votes, while the other 2 get one each. So in that instance, Jet would win. Going the other way, let's say the votes turned out like this:
Chad voted: Jet - 9; Klaus 8; Hastings - 7 Ad voted: Jet - 8.5; Klaus 8; Hastings - 7.5 Britt voted: Hastings - 9.5; jet - 8.5; Klaus 8 Danny voted: Klaus - 9; Hastings - 9; Jet - 7
The above votes would equal to this:
Jet - 33 Klaus - 33 Hastings - 33
Imagine the entire fed voted similarly in each instance, and say a title is on the line. If Hastings is defending, he would lose the strap with the old way of voting...but with there being a tie with the new way, he would retain in some manner (DQ, time limit, countout, etc). Which, to B's point of the champ being harder to dethrone actually coming into play with the new way, as opposed to the old.
So while yes, its obvious that some things can be tweaked so that everyone is onboard...for me, the newer voting system seems better.
Let's not forget though...all of us did have a couple weeks to voice our concerns regarding the new system...and the only person to say anything before the show was posted, was Wayne. Hindsite is 20/20, but a lot of these issues could have already been addressed, if UGWC handlers as a whole would have been proactive, instead of reactive.
As for the winner of the High Rollers match being given the option to immediately challenge, I have no issue with it...but I also didn't have a dog in the fight either. The only thing I will say on it is, if the High Rollers knew the option was on the table...both members of the title match should have been aware as well. But that's just my opinion.
2018 Hall of Fame Inductee OWF PDA Champion (1x) OWF Tag Champion (1x - w/Meyhu) 2015 Pool of Blood Co-Winner Chaos Champion (1x) Cooperative Champion (3x - 1 w/Jez; 1 w/Cyp; 1 w/Somers) 2013 "In Your Hands" Battle Royal winner 13 Title Reigns in career
If Jet, Hastings, and Klaus are in a three way and you have four people voting (for shits and giggles...just go with it), Jet may get 2 votes, while the other 2 get one each. So in that instance, Jet would win. Going the other way, let's say the votes turned out like this:
Chad voted: Jet - 9; Klaus 8; Hastings - 7 Ad voted: Jet - 8.5; Klaus 8; Hastings - 7.5 Britt voted: Hastings - 9.5; jet - 8.5; Klaus 8 Danny voted: Klaus - 9; Hastings - 9; Jet - 7
The above votes would equal to this:
Jet - 33 Klaus - 33 Hastings - 33
Imagine the entire fed voted similarly in each instance, and say a title is on the line. If Hastings is defending, he would lose the strap with the old way of voting...but with there being a tie with the new way, he would retain in some manner (DQ, time limit, countout, etc). Which, to B's point of the champ being harder to dethrone actually coming into play with the new way, as opposed to the old.
I'd like to support Chad's hypothetical situation with a real one. Under the old voting system, the Sin City main event would have resulted in a vote of 9-3. The rating results are obviously much closer, and I think significantly more reflective of how close it was, making it a more meaningful result.