New website up

[Urzahil1]

Why must you always be so antagonistic, (and in the case of Steve
Muller, insulting)? I don't remember playing with or against Steve
before, but such comments only serve to upset and annoy.

I don't personally take much stock in this particular 'Top 100' list,
but in spite of the NAME chosen for the subject line, there were plenty
of qualifiers put in the message stating that it wasn't meant to be a
definitive list, but rather just a comparison of numbers. And it did
raise the level of discussion on the board somewhat.

And as for the PRS in general, we've all heard the arguments for and
against (ad-nauseam).

Chill out, man! It's just a game.

Mike Mulka

From: Darrell Shimel
Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 11:29 AM
To: mepbmlist@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [mepbmlist] The Best Ever Middle Earth Play By Mail Top

100

···

-----Original Message-----
Players!

What I have done here is taken the Player Rating
System scores

It still bogles my mind that ANYONE could use PRS and
"best players" in the same thought.

PRS measures how much you play. The people in the most
games score the highest. Proof is that Clint, who
plays for free, is overall #1.

Steve Muller above Kevin Given.... What a hoot! Any
measure that doesn't put Kevin in the top 5 all time
wasn't worth the time it took to put it together, even
if it only took 10 seconds of effort.

I've been playing 10 years, and Kevin is head and
shoulders above anyone else I've ever played for or
against. Yet he's lists 80-something? I can't
beleive I've wasted this much time responding to this...

[Drukarzun1]

Darrell, I'm with you. All hail Kevin!!

Darrell Shimel <threeedgedsword35@yahoo.com> wrote:> What I have done here is taken the Player Rating

System scores

It still bogles my mind that ANYONE could use PRS and
"best players" in the same thought.

PRS measures how much you play. The people in the most
games score the highest. Proof is that Clint, who
plays for free, is overall #1.

Steve Muller above Kevin Given.... What a hoot! Any
measure that doesn't put Kevin in the top 5 all time
wasn't worth the time it took to put it together, even
if it only took 10 seconds of effort.

I've been playing 10 years, and Kevin is head and
shoulders above anyone else I've ever played for or
against. Yet he's lists 80-something? I can't
beleive I've wasted this much time responding to this...

···

______________________________________________________
Yahoo! for Good
Donate to the Hurricane Katrina relief effort.
http://store.yahoo.com/redcross-donate3/

Middle Earth PBM - hit reply to send to everyone
To Unsubscribe: http://www.yahoogroups.com
Website: http://www.MiddleEarthGames.com

SPONSORED LINKS
Computer role playing game Online role playing games Role playing games online Massive multiplayer online role playing games Star wars role playing game Wheel of time role playing game

---------------------------------
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS

    Visit your group "mepbmlist" on the web.
  
    To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
mepbmlist-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
  
    Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

---------------------------------

---------------------------------
Yahoo! for Good
Click here to donate to the Hurricane Katrina relief effort.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Drukarzun1]

Forget Dr. Given: All hail Smuller!

Urzahil <urzahil@darkfortress.us> wrote:Why must you always be so antagonistic, (and in the case of Steve
Muller, insulting)? I don't remember playing with or against Steve
before, but such comments only serve to upset and annoy.

I don't personally take much stock in this particular 'Top 100' list,
but in spite of the NAME chosen for the subject line, there were plenty
of qualifiers put in the message stating that it wasn't meant to be a
definitive list, but rather just a comparison of numbers. And it did
raise the level of discussion on the board somewhat.

And as for the PRS in general, we've all heard the arguments for and
against (ad-nauseam).

Chill out, man! It's just a game.

Mike Mulka

From: Darrell Shimel
Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 11:29 AM
To: mepbmlist@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [mepbmlist] The Best Ever Middle Earth Play By Mail Top

100

Players!

What I have done here is taken the Player Rating
System scores

It still bogles my mind that ANYONE could use PRS and
"best players" in the same thought.

PRS measures how much you play. The people in the most
games score the highest. Proof is that Clint, who
plays for free, is overall #1.

Steve Muller above Kevin Given.... What a hoot! Any
measure that doesn't put Kevin in the top 5 all time
wasn't worth the time it took to put it together, even
if it only took 10 seconds of effort.

I've been playing 10 years, and Kevin is head and
shoulders above anyone else I've ever played for or
against. Yet he's lists 80-something? I can't
beleive I've wasted this much time responding to this...

Middle Earth PBM - hit reply to send to everyone
To Unsubscribe: http://www.yahoogroups.com
Website: http://www.MiddleEarthGames.com

···

-----Original Message-----

---------------------------------
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS

    Visit your group "mepbmlist" on the web.
  
    To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
mepbmlist-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
  
    Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

---------------------------------

---------------------------------
Yahoo! for Good
Click here to donate to the Hurricane Katrina relief effort.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Nick_Barnes]

--- In mepbmlist@yahoogroups.com, "Benjamin M. Shushan" <bshushan@e...>
wrote:

The biggest problem with this list is it doesn't have any data from

the

pre-Harlequin/Middle Earth Games days. Some seriously good players

who

either aren't around much anymore or only play in grudge games are
missing from this list.

I don't know when they started ratings, but I can say that the score
tables certainly have nothing prior to September 2002 as far as I can
see otherwise I should appear somewhere, even if it is just on the
nation high scores.
Unfortunately I've been having some financial problems and have been
unable to offer Clint & Co any money for a while.
Oh well, maybe I'll be able to afford it next year.....

Nick.

[88_Noldo]

Intended to hit the delete button and hit the send button by accident. Sorry.
Ed

···

From: Drukarzun <drukarzun@yahoo.com>
Reply-To: mepbmlist@yahoogroups.com
To: mepbmlist@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [mepbmlist] The Best Ever Middle Earth Play By Mail Top 100 Players!
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2005 06:06:25 -0700 (PDT)

Speak up there Ed; couldn't hear ya.

Ovatha Easterling <ovatha88@hotmail.com> wrote:

>From: Tony & Janette <janton@ntlworld.com>
>Reply-To: mepbmlist@yahoogroups.com
>To: mepbmlist@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: [mepbmlist] The Best Ever Middle Earth Play By Mail Top 100
>Players!
>Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2005 19:20:14 +0100
>
>Hi All
>
>Woo...is this going to get some people going....
>
>What I have done here is taken the Player Rating System scores for all
>the 7 measures on the website:
>Valar (Chess Style), Maia (Experience), Istari (Nation Success), Best
>Enemy, Individual & Team players (votes) and Nazgul (Win percentage).
>Then I've given people points for their position on each list of 104
>players, 104 for 1st, 103 for 2nd, etc, to 1 for 104st.
>Then I've added them up. And shortened the list to the top 100.
>
>This gives a first cut of the best ever MEpbm players......ever.
>
> Player Points
>
> CLINT OLDRIDGE
> 101
>
> CLINT OLDRIDGE
> 92
>
> CLINT OLDRIDGE
> 104
>
> CLINT OLDRIDGE
> 95
>
> CLINT OLDRIDGE
> 103
>
> CLINT OLDRIDGE
> 99
>
> CLINT OLDRIDGE
> 84
>1 CLINT OLDRIDGE Total 678
>
> ANDREW JONES
> 103
>
> ANDREW JONES
> 101
>
> ANDREW JONES
> 98
>
> ANDREW JONES
> 82
>
> ANDREW JONES
> 66
>
> ANDREW JONES
> 60
>
> ANDREW JONES
> 42
>2 ANDREW JONES Total 552
>3
> RICARD PITARQUE
> 35
>
> RICARD PITARQUE
> 85
>
> RICARD PITARQUE
> 103
>
> RICARD PITARQUE
> 102
>
> RICARD PITARQUE
> 104
>
> RICARD PITARQUE
> 75
>3 RICARD PITARQUE Total 504
>
> LAURENCE TILLEY
> 55
>4
> LAURENCE TILLEY
> 84
>5
> LAURENCE TILLEY
> 81
>
> LAURENCE TILLEY
> 47
>
> LAURENCE TILLEY
> 71
>
> LAURENCE TILLEY
> 90
>
> LAURENCE TILLEY
> 65
>4 LAURENCE TILLEY Total 493
>
> ERNEST HAKEY
> 104
>
> ERNEST HAKEY
> 77
>6
> ERNEST HAKEY
> 94
>7
> ERNEST HAKEY
> 104
>
> ERNEST HAKEY
> 103
>5 ERNEST HAKEY Total 482
>
> MIKE SANKEY
> 99
>
> MIKE SANKEY
> 90
>
> MIKE SANKEY
> 97
>
> MIKE SANKEY
> 49
>
> MIKE SANKEY
> 56
>8
> MIKE SANKEY
> 90
>6 MIKE SANKEY Total 481
>
> SAM ROADS
> 98
>
> SAM ROADS
> 84
>
> SAM ROADS
> 26
>
> SAM ROADS
> 81
>
> SAM ROADS
> 88
>
> SAM ROADS
> 103
>7 SAM ROADS Total 480
>10
> JEPPE SKYTTE SPICKER
> 94
>11
> JEPPE SKYTTE SPICKER
> 99
>
> JEPPE SKYTTE SPICKER
> 89
>
> JEPPE SKYTTE SPICKER
> 93
>
> JEPPE SKYTTE SPICKER
> 104
>8 JEPPE SKYTTE SPICKER Total 479
>
> THOMAS KRISTIANSEN
> 87
>
> THOMAS KRISTIANSEN
> 91
>
> THOMAS KRISTIANSEN
> 104
>12
> THOMAS KRISTIANSEN
> 53
>13
> THOMAS KRISTIANSEN
> 57
>
> THOMAS KRISTIANSEN
> 86
>9 THOMAS KRISTIANSEN Total 478
>
> CHRIS GUISE
> 67
>
> CHRIS GUISE
> 103
>
> CHRIS GUISE
> 20
>
> CHRIS GUISE
> 98
>
> CHRIS GUISE
> 92
>14
> CHRIS GUISE
> 88
>10 CHRIS GUISE Total 468
>
> RANDALL BRADY
> 102
>
> RANDALL BRADY
> 98
>
> RANDALL BRADY
> 49
>
> RANDALL BRADY
> 75
>
> RANDALL BRADY
> 91
>11 RANDALL BRADY Total 415
>
> MIKE BARBER
> 91
>16
> MIKE BARBER
> 77
>17
> MIKE BARBER
> 38
>
> MIKE BARBER
> 75
>
> MIKE BARBER
> 91
>
> MIKE BARBER
> 39
>12 MIKE BARBER Total 411
>
> CHESLEY COUGHLIN
> 97
>
> CHESLEY COUGHLIN
> 81
>
> CHESLEY COUGHLIN
> 103
>18
> CHESLEY COUGHLIN
> 14
>19
> CHESLEY COUGHLIN
> 101
>13 CHESLEY COUGHLIN Total 396
>
> DAVID HOLT
> 71
>
> DAVID HOLT
> 93
>
> DAVID HOLT
> 51
>
> DAVID HOLT
> 83
>
> DAVID HOLT
> 80
>14 DAVID HOLT Total 378
>20
> GARY ASWEGAN
> 21
>21
> GARY ASWEGAN
> 97
>
> GARY ASWEGAN
> 10
>
> GARY ASWEGAN
> 85
>
> GARY ASWEGAN
> 79
>
> GARY ASWEGAN
> 73
>15 GARY ASWEGAN Total 365
>
> PERRY CARLSON
> 42
>
> PERRY CARLSON
> 79
>22
> PERRY CARLSON
> 102
>23
> PERRY CARLSON
> 83
>
> PERRY CARLSON
> 58
>16 PERRY CARLSON Total 364
>
> SIMON TVEDE
> 72
>
> SIMON TVEDE
> 82
>
> SIMON TVEDE
> 100
>
> SIMON TVEDE
> 62
>
> SIMON TVEDE
> 41
>17 SIMON TVEDE Total 357
>25
> JOHN BRIGGS
> 77
>
> JOHN BRIGGS
> 30
>
> JOHN BRIGGS
> 100
>
> JOHN BRIGGS
> 5
>
> JOHN BRIGGS
> 89
>
> JOHN BRIGGS
> 44
>18 JOHN BRIGGS Total 345
>
> LUDVIG KOCH HANSEN
> 42
>26
> LUDVIG KOCH HANSEN
> 83
>27
> LUDVIG KOCH HANSEN
> 78
>
> LUDVIG KOCH HANSEN
> 71
>
> LUDVIG KOCH HANSEN
> 70
>19 LUDVIG KOCH HANSEN Total 344
>
> TONY ACKROYD
> 85
>
> TONY ACKROYD
> 41
>
> TONY ACKROYD
> 24
>
> TONY ACKROYD
> 61
>28
> TONY ACKROYD
> 47
>29
> TONY ACKROYD
> 82
>20 TONY ACKROYD Total 340
>
> MATT ASHLEY
> 89
>
> MATT ASHLEY
> 101
>
> MATT ASHLEY
> 98
>
> MATT ASHLEY
> 43
>21 MATT ASHLEY Total 331
>
> MICHAEL WELSCH
> 80
>30
> MICHAEL WELSCH
> 83
>31
> MICHAEL WELSCH
> 95
>
> MICHAEL WELSCH
> 73
>22 MICHAEL WELSCH Total 331
>
> JERRY MELLERICK
> 16
>
> JERRY MELLERICK
> 46
>
> JERRY MELLERICK
> 25
>
> JERRY MELLERICK
> 99
>
> JERRY MELLERICK
> 101
>32
> JERRY MELLERICK
> 40
>23 JERRY MELLERICK Total 327
>
> HANS-HERMANN BRAUCH
> 41
>
> HANS-HERMANN BRAUCH
> 87
>
> HANS-HERMANN BRAUCH
> 23
>
> HANS-HERMANN BRAUCH
> 96
>
> HANS-HERMANN BRAUCH
> 78
>24 HANS-HERMANN BRAUCH Total 325
>
> RICHARD WILSON
> 96
>34
> RICHARD WILSON
> 80
>35
> RICHARD WILSON
> 69
>
> RICHARD WILSON
> 41
>
> RICHARD WILSON
> 30
>
> RICHARD WILSON
> 4
>25 RICHARD WILSON Total 320
>
> PHILLIP VOGEL
> 61
>
> PHILLIP VOGEL
> 102
>
> PHILLIP VOGEL
> 56
>36
> PHILLIP VOGEL
> 17
>37
> PHILLIP VOGEL
> 83
>26 PHILLIP VOGEL Total 319
>
> STEVEN MCABEE
> 55
>
> STEVEN MCABEE
> 100
>
> STEVEN MCABEE
> 76
>
> STEVEN MCABEE
> 65
>
> STEVEN MCABEE
> 23
>27 STEVEN MCABEE Total 319
>38
> STEVE MULLER
> 63
>39
> STEVE MULLER
> 86
>
> STEVE MULLER
> 97
>
> STEVE MULLER
> 10
>
> STEVE MULLER
> 53
>
> STEVE MULLER
> 5
>28 STEVE MULLER Total 314
>
> STEPHEN ALLEN
> 93
>
> STEPHEN ALLEN
> 57
>40
> STEPHEN ALLEN
> 43
>41
> STEPHEN ALLEN
> 86
>
> STEPHEN ALLEN
> 34
>29 STEPHEN ALLEN Total 313
>
> KIM ANDERSEN
> 62
>
> KIM ANDERSEN
> 64
>
> KIM ANDERSEN
> 101
>
> KIM ANDERSEN
> 77
>30 KIM ANDERSEN Total 304
>42
> BRENDAN MCGOLDRICK
> 78
>43
> BRENDAN MCGOLDRICK
> 65
>
> BRENDAN MCGOLDRICK
> 67
>
> BRENDAN MCGOLDRICK
> 28
>
> BRENDAN MCGOLDRICK
> 35
>
> BRENDAN MCGOLDRICK
> 20
>31 BRENDAN MCGOLDRICK Total 293
>
> CLIF WEATHERFORD
> 75
>
> CLIF WEATHERFORD
> 64
>44
> CLIF WEATHERFORD
> 87
>45
> CLIF WEATHERFORD
> 64
>32 CLIF WEATHERFORD Total 290
>
> TIM JONES
> 83
>
> TIM JONES
> 51
>
> TIM JONES
> 26
>
> TIM JONES
> 34
>
> TIM JONES
> 95
>33 TIM JONES Total 289
>46
> LEWIS MORTON
> 100
>47
> LEWIS MORTON
> 78
>
> LEWIS MORTON
> 102
>34 LEWIS MORTON Total 280
>
> JOSEPH HANIK
> 92
>
> JOSEPH HANIK
> 66
>
> JOSEPH HANIK
> 13
>
> JOSEPH HANIK
> 4
>
> JOSEPH HANIK
> 99
>35 JOSEPH HANIK Total 274
>49
> MICHAEL REISFELD
> 22
>
> MICHAEL REISFELD
> 99
>
> MICHAEL REISFELD
> 33
>
> MICHAEL REISFELD
> 74
>
> MICHAEL REISFELD
> 46
>36 MICHAEL REISFELD Total 274
>
> BENJAMIN VAN BUSKIRK
> 88
>
> BENJAMIN VAN BUSKIRK
> 26
>50
> BENJAMIN VAN BUSKIRK
> 64
>51
> BENJAMIN VAN BUSKIRK
> 94
>37 BENJAMIN VAN BUSKIRK Total 272
>
> KEVIN O'KEEFE
> 50
>
> KEVIN O'KEEFE
> 14
>
> KEVIN O'KEEFE
> 72
>
> KEVIN O'KEEFE
> 96
>
> KEVIN O'KEEFE
> 38
>38 KEVIN O'KEEFE Total 270
>52
> ULRIK BISGAARD
> 53
>53
> ULRIK BISGAARD
> 56
>
> ULRIK BISGAARD
> 74
>
> ULRIK BISGAARD
> 85
>39 ULRIK BISGAARD Total 268
>
> DAVID MURRAY
> 88
>
> DAVID MURRAY
> 35
>
> DAVID MURRAY
> 57
>
> DAVID MURRAY
> 84
>40 DAVID MURRAY Total 264
>55
> KEVIN BOND
> 89
>
> KEVIN BOND
> 36
>
> KEVIN BOND
> 69
>
> KEVIN BOND
> 70
>41 KEVIN BOND Total 264
>
> THOMAS PEDERSEN
> 49
>
> THOMAS PEDERSEN
> 20
>
> THOMAS PEDERSEN
> 68
>56
> THOMAS PEDERSEN
> 64
>57
> THOMAS PEDERSEN
> 62
>42 THOMAS PEDERSEN Total 263
>
> MICHAEL MULKA
> 99
>
> MICHAEL MULKA
> 62
>
> MICHAEL MULKA
> 95
>43 MICHAEL MULKA Total 256
>
> JOHN SEALS
> 104
>
> JOHN SEALS
> 38
>58
> JOHN SEALS
> 11
>59
> JOHN SEALS
> 100
>44 JOHN SEALS Total 253
>
> STEVE LATHAM
> 89
>
> STEVE LATHAM
> 51
>
> STEVE LATHAM
> 34
>
> STEVE LATHAM
> 23
>
> STEVE LATHAM
> 55
>45 STEVE LATHAM Total 252
>60
> JENS CHRISTIAN STORGAARD
> 67
>61
> JENS CHRISTIAN STORGAARD
> 58
>
> JENS CHRISTIAN STORGAARD
> 65
>
> JENS CHRISTIAN STORGAARD
> 61
>46 JENS CHRISTIAN STORGAARD Total 251
>
> PER BOVBJERG
> 90
>
> PER BOVBJERG
> 73
>
> PER BOVBJERG
> 87
>47 PER BOVBJERG Total 250
>62
> BRADFORD FISHER
> 17
>63
> BRADFORD FISHER
> 54
>
> BRADFORD FISHER
> 4
>
> BRADFORD FISHER
> 77
>
> BRADFORD FISHER
> 97
>48 BRADFORD FISHER Total 249
>
> DAVID CRANE
> 94
>
> DAVID CRANE
> 75
>
> DAVID CRANE
> 79
>49 DAVID CRANE Total 248
>65
> RICHARD FARRER
> 79
>
> RICHARD FARRER
> 71
>
> RICHARD FARRER
> 31
>
> RICHARD FARRER
> 64
>50 RICHARD FARRER Total 245
>
> MARC PINSONNEAULT
> 89
>
> MARC PINSONNEAULT
> 38
>
> MARC PINSONNEAULT
> 39
>66
> MARC PINSONNEAULT
> 74
>51 MARC PINSONNEAULT Total 240
>
> MATT ANDERSON
> 61
>
> MATT ANDERSON
> 25
>
> MATT ANDERSON
> 69
>
> MATT ANDERSON
> 85
>52 MATT ANDERSON Total 240
>
> BRAD BRUNET
> 24
>
> BRAD BRUNET
> 13
>68
> BRAD BRUNET
> 87
>69
> BRAD BRUNET
> 94
>
> BRAD BRUNET
> 19
>53 BRAD BRUNET Total 237
>
> PETER KESSLER
> 86
>
> PETER KESSLER
> 48
>
> PETER KESSLER
> 95
>
> PETER KESSLER
> 6
>54 PETER KESSLER Total 235
>70
> SCOTT MOYES
> 37
>71
> SCOTT MOYES
> 98
>
> SCOTT MOYES
> 44
>
> SCOTT MOYES
> 56
>55 SCOTT MOYES Total 235
>
> BRIAN HANSEN
> 86
>
> BRIAN HANSEN
> 65
>
> BRIAN HANSEN
> 78
>56 BRIAN HANSEN Total 229
>72
> PAUL SCHEEL
> 68
>73
> PAUL SCHEEL
> 15
>
> PAUL SCHEEL
> 67
>
> PAUL SCHEEL
> 77
>
> PAUL SCHEEL
> 1
>57 PAUL SCHEEL Total 228
>
> HARRY NIKOKAVOURAS
> 91
>
> HARRY NIKOKAVOURAS
> 92
>
> HARRY NIKOKAVOURAS
> 44
>58 HARRY NIKOKAVOURAS Total 227
>75
> DARREN BEYER
> 97
>
> DARREN BEYER
> 81
>
> DARREN BEYER
> 47
>59 DARREN BEYER Total 225
>
> MICHAEL KAMINE
> 28
>
> MICHAEL KAMINE
> 56
>
> MICHAEL KAMINE
> 31
>
> MICHAEL KAMINE
> 54
>76
> MICHAEL KAMINE
> 19
>77
> MICHAEL KAMINE
> 37
>60 MICHAEL KAMINE Total 225
>
> BRAD STEPHENS
> 46
>
> BRAD STEPHENS
> 93
>
> BRAD STEPHENS
> 72
>
> BRAD STEPHENS
> 13
>61 BRAD STEPHENS Total 224
>
> JASON VAFIADES
> 55
>78
> JASON VAFIADES
> 93
>79
> JASON VAFIADES
> 68
>
> JASON VAFIADES
> 8
>62 JASON VAFIADES Total 224
>
> MARK JEFFRIES
> 71
>
> MARK JEFFRIES
> 51
>
> MARK JEFFRIES
> 102
>63 MARK JEFFRIES Total 224
>
> FREDERICK YOUNG
> 96
>80
> FREDERICK YOUNG
> 79
>81
> FREDERICK YOUNG
> 48
>64 FREDERICK YOUNG Total 223
>
> BRADDEN JENISON
> 14
>
> BRADDEN JENISON
> 83
>
> BRADDEN JENISON
> 33
>
> BRADDEN JENISON
> 42
>
> BRADDEN JENISON
> 49
>65 BRADDEN JENISON Total 221
>82
> JOHN SIMPSON
> 57
>83
> JOHN SIMPSON
> 88
>
> JOHN SIMPSON
> 63
>
> JOHN SIMPSON
> 12
>66 JOHN SIMPSON Total 220
>
> JASON MELE
> 39
>
> JASON MELE
> 76
>
> JASON MELE
> 93
>67 JASON MELE Total 208
>84
> BRIAN THORSBRO
> 80
>85
> BRIAN THORSBRO
> 15
>
> BRIAN THORSBRO
> 17
>
> BRIAN THORSBRO
> 6
>
> BRIAN THORSBRO
> 89
>68 BRIAN THORSBRO Total 207
>
> BRETT HAVLIK
> 23
>
> BRETT HAVLIK
> 62
>
> BRETT HAVLIK
> 84
>86
> BRETT HAVLIK
> 7
>87
> BRETT HAVLIK
> 28
>69 BRETT HAVLIK Total 204
>
> BRIAN MARTIN
> 60
>
> BRIAN MARTIN
> 6
>
> BRIAN MARTIN
> 59
>
> BRIAN MARTIN
> 18
>
> BRIAN MARTIN
> 59
>70 BRIAN MARTIN Total 202
>88
> DARREN FRECHETTE
> 74
>89
> DARREN FRECHETTE
> 50
>
> DARREN FRECHETTE
> 78
>71 DARREN FRECHETTE Total 202
>
> THOMAS CRANE
> 2
>
> THOMAS CRANE
> 102
>
> THOMAS CRANE
> 52
>
> THOMAS CRANE
> 45
>72 THOMAS CRANE Total 201
>90
> WADE FROST
> 51
>91
> WADE FROST
> 53
>
> WADE FROST
> 21
>
> WADE FROST
> 76
>73 WADE FROST Total 201
>
> RON VALLI
> 43
>
> RON VALLI
> 30
>
> RON VALLI
> 17
>
> RON VALLI
> 27
>92
> RON VALLI
> 80
>74 RON VALLI Total 197
>
> BERND LUEHRSEN
> 96
>
> BERND LUEHRSEN
> 59
>
> BERND LUEHRSEN
> 41
>75 BERND LUEHRSEN Total 196
>
> GREG CLARKE
> 42
>
> GREG CLARKE
> 81
>
> GREG CLARKE
> 73
>76 GREG CLARKE Total 196
>95
> TONIA HARTOFYLAKA
> 39
>
> TONIA HARTOFYLAKA
> 86
>
> TONIA HARTOFYLAKA
> 66
>77 TONIA HARTOFYLAKA Total 191
>
> RICHARD MEHL
> 82
>
> RICHARD MEHL
> 44
>
> RICHARD MEHL
> 3
>
> RICHARD MEHL
> 61
>78 RICHARD MEHL Total 190
>97
> BEN SHUSHAN
> 100
>
> BEN SHUSHAN
> 28
>
> BEN SHUSHAN
> 61
>79 BEN SHUSHAN Total 189
>
> SIMON DUNSTERVILLE
> 45
>
> SIMON DUNSTERVILLE
> 94
>
> SIMON DUNSTERVILLE
> 49
>80 SIMON DUNSTERVILLE Total 188
>98
> MARK JAEDE
> 95
>99
> MARK JAEDE
> 31
>
> MARK JAEDE
> 58
>81 MARK JAEDE Total 184
>
> GARY HOOLEY
> 79
>
> GARY HOOLEY
> 98
>82 GARY HOOLEY Total 177
>
> PAUL BRANDON
> 101
>
> PAUL BRANDON
> 76
>83 PAUL BRANDON Total 177
>101
> R KEVIN GIVEN
> 34
>
> R KEVIN GIVEN
> 48
>
> R KEVIN GIVEN
> 29
>
> R KEVIN GIVEN
> 66
>84 R KEVIN GIVEN Total 177
>
> JAVIER MAQUA
> 41
>
> JAVIER MAQUA
> 62
>
> JAVIER MAQUA
> 38
>102
> JAVIER MAQUA
> 27
>103
> JAVIER MAQUA
> 2
>85 JAVIER MAQUA Total 170
>
> ADRIAN BEATTIE
> 40
>
> ADRIAN BEATTIE
> 39
>
> ADRIAN BEATTIE
> 90
>86 ADRIAN BEATTIE Total 169
>
> JEFF GLOVER
> 95
>
> JEFF GLOVER
> 42
>104
> JEFF GLOVER
> 32
>87 JEFF GLOVER Total 169
>
> CHRIS MCGOWAN
> 75
>
> CHRIS MCGOWAN
> 91
>88 CHRIS MCGOWAN Total 166
>
> ALAIN DEURWAERDER
> 68
>
> ALAIN DEURWAERDER
> 96
>89 ALAIN DEURWAERDER Total 164
>
> DARIN THIESSEN
> 40
>106
> DARIN THIESSEN
> 60
>107
> DARIN THIESSEN
> 63
>90 DARIN THIESSEN Total 163
>
> JOHN STRACHAN
> 33
>
> JOHN STRACHAN
> 76
>
> JOHN STRACHAN
> 53
>91 JOHN STRACHAN Total 162
>
> THOMAS KAMPMANN
> 59
>
> THOMAS KAMPMANN
> 76
>108
> THOMAS KAMPMANN
> 22
>109
> THOMAS KAMPMANN
> 3
>92 THOMAS KAMPMANN Total 160
>
> CHRIS HIND
> 53
>
> CHRIS HIND
> 39
>
> CHRIS HIND
> 52
>
> CHRIS HIND
> 14
>93 CHRIS HIND Total 158
>
> KEVIN BROWN
> 93
>110
> KEVIN BROWN
> 8
>111
> KEVIN BROWN
> 57
>94 KEVIN BROWN Total 158
>
> MARK STUCKEY
> 90
>
> MARK STUCKEY
> 68
>95 MARK STUCKEY Total 158
>
> RUNE RUNESEN
> 66
>
> RUNE RUNESEN
> 92
>96 RUNE RUNESEN Total 158
>112
> TOM FRANCIS
> 84
>113
> TOM FRANCIS
> 67
>
> TOM FRANCIS
> 7
>97 TOM FRANCIS Total 158
>
> ANJA KAEHLER
> 47
>
> ANJA KAEHLER
> 36
>
> ANJA KAEHLER
> 37
>
> ANJA KAEHLER
> 37
>98 ANJA KAEHLER Total 157
>114
> STEVEN PRINDEVILLE
> 70
>115
> STEVEN PRINDEVILLE
> 18
>
> STEVEN PRINDEVILLE
> 69
>99 STEVEN PRINDEVILLE Total 157
>
> JOHN STAGOLL
> 81
>
> JOHN STAGOLL
> 16
>
> JOHN STAGOLL
> 24
>
> JOHN STAGOLL
> 35
>100 JOHN STAGOLL Total 156
>
>Its probably not that reliable a list really, the voting lists are very
>subjective and a lot of people got the same number of votes, so should
>get the same number of points, but I haven't bothered to do that. Also
>some of the scores measure similar things. But its still a hell of a
>thing.
>
>Having produced this, the obvious thing to do is make the top 24 play
>each other. 1st & 4th & 5th etc play 2nd & 3rd and 6th & 7th, etc, but
>practically this is not going to happen, given that some people are in
>too many games, some aren't playing any more, some might not get on with
>each other any more, etc.
>So maybe its best to invite the top 100 to play in a game and take the
>first 24. Would this be the ultimate game of MEpbm? Discuss.
>
>Cheers
>
>Tony
>(lighting blue touch paper and standing well back)
>
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

Middle Earth PBM - hit reply to send to everyone
To Unsubscribe: http://www.yahoogroups.com
Website: http://www.MiddleEarthGames.com

---------------------------------
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS

    Visit your group "mepbmlist" on the web.

    To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
mepbmlist-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

    Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

---------------------------------

---------------------------------
Yahoo! for Good
Click here to donate to the Hurricane Katrina relief effort.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[1000rpm]

Thanks Darrell, I knew you wouldn't let me down!

And actually I think your argument is poor. Your 'proof' about Clint isn't correct, actually 12 people score above him in the Maia measure (experience - i.e. games played), so that isn't what is driving his position.
And his best position in the tables is 1st in Istari - the measure of nation success - not something affected by how much you play.

And I'm not sure I see the big issue. Ernie has the highest experience (Maia) rating, but he also has 19 best team player and 23 best individual player votes in the short time that those have been running. I don't think many people would object to having Ernie on their team (providing they have the time to read his emails....)

And the reason Kevin Given is lower on the list than Steve Muller is that he has no best team player or best individual player votes and only 1 best enemy vote. Not sure why that is - maybe he hasn't played many games since the council of the wise was brought in. Steve Muller has 6 best enemy votes, 4 best individual votes and 5 best team player votes, so there are definately people out there who rate him. Kevin does have a higher win ratio (78%) than Steve (57%), but neither is as good as Clint with 87% - another measure not affected by how many games you play.

PRS is definately not perfect, but as a team-leveller it is better than nothing.

Thanks for taking the time to reply!

Tony

Darrell Shimel wrote:

···

What I have done here is taken the Player Rating
System scores
   
It still bogles my mind that ANYONE could use PRS and
"best players" in the same thought.

PRS measures how much you play. The people in the most
games score the highest. Proof is that Clint, who
plays for free, is overall #1.

Steve Muller above Kevin Given.... What a hoot! Any
measure that doesn't put Kevin in the top 5 all time
wasn't worth the time it took to put it together, even
if it only took 10 seconds of effort.

I've been playing 10 years, and Kevin is head and
shoulders above anyone else I've ever played for or
against. Yet he's lists 80-something? I can't
beleive I've wasted this much time responding to this...

[DrakaraGM]

Many chuckles...I MAY have a SLIGHT tendency to type a LITTLE too much in my email missives...

I appreciate the fact that my name ended up relatively high on the list. I do have a sad confession to make though -- personally I don't fill out the voting sheets for the PRS. So I cannot complain about any positive or negative results that may find their way onto the lists. I'm glad my presence on a team is more appreciated than not, though.

-- Ernie III

···

-----Original Message-----
From: Tony & Janette <janton@ntlworld.com>
To: mepbmlist@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sun, 09 Oct 2005 20:48:11 +0100
Subject: Re: [mepbmlist] The Best Ever Middle Earth Play By Mail Top 100 Players!

Thanks Darrell, I knew you wouldn't let me down!

...
And I'm not sure I see the big issue. Ernie has the highest experience
(Maia) rating, but he also has 19 best team player and 23 best
individual player votes in the short time that those have been running.
I don't think many people would object to having Ernie on their team
(providing they have the time to read his emails....)

...

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Harlequin_Games1]

I do have a sad confession to make though -- personally I don't fill out the voting sheets for the PRS. So I cannot complain about any positive or negative results that may find their way onto the lists. I'm glad my presence on a team is more appreciated than not, though.

One minor change that has been proposed for the Council of the Wise is that you can only get votes if you vote. Encourages participation that way.

Thoughts?
Clint

[1000rpm]

As the new unofficial spokesman for PRS, I agree. I don't see why someone should opt out of giving other people votes and still get them themself. Sorry Ernie!

Tony

ME Games Ltd wrote:

···

I do have a sad confession to make though -- personally I don't fill out the voting sheets for the PRS. So I cannot complain about any positive or negative results that may find their way onto the lists. I'm glad my presence on a team is more appreciated than not, though.
   
One minor change that has been proposed for the Council of the Wise is that you can only get votes if you vote. Encourages participation that way.

Thoughts?
Clint

[Steve]

Freedom of choice sounds like a good reason to me.

I guess you need to change the name from PRS to "voting" PRS.

Make sure you put an asterisk by Ernie's name since he is non-voter.
Put a couple of asterisks by mine since I scheduled to appear before
Congress to testify about the rampant use of steroids in the MEPBM
community. Where is my damn needle?

Steven McAbee

PS Ernie your emails are a tad bit long like the Pope is a tad bit
Catholic -- Of course Ernie is the most knowledge player that I
ever played with and I generally just ask him instead of MEG should
I have a question.

PPS If you really want to get Ernie going tell him you are going to
build a port from scratch

As the new unofficial spokesman for PRS, I agree. I don't see why
someone should opt out of giving other people votes and still get

them

themself. Sorry Ernie!

Tony

ME Games Ltd wrote:

>> I do have a sad confession to make though -- personally I don't

fill out

>>the voting sheets for the PRS. So I cannot complain about any

positive

>>or negative results that may find their way onto the lists. I'm

glad my

>>presence on a team is more appreciated than not, though.
>>
>>
>
>One minor change that has been proposed for the Council of the

Wise is that

>you can only get votes if you vote. Encourages participation

that way.

···

--- In mepbmlist@yahoogroups.com, Tony & Janette <janton@n...> wrote:

>
>Thoughts?
>Clint
>
>
>

[DrakaraGM]

It wouldn't encourage my participation, but hey, if you want to have everyone rated and leave me off the list that is fine too. In my opinion, it would simply make the results less meaningful. I don't play for ratings, I don't much care about them anyway -- I get my enjoyment in-game and from individual game results both on a per-turn and end-of-game basis.

I don't fill out customer satisfaction surveys from my Saturn dealerships either -- but I do keep going back to the same couple places for maintenance -- I vote with my wallet. And my wallet has been fairly generous, I think.

-- Ernie III

···

-----Original Message-----
From: ME Games Ltd <me@MiddleEarthGames.com>
To: mepbmlist@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 16:28:24 +0100
Subject: Re: [mepbmlist] The Best Ever Middle Earth Play By Mail Top 100 Players!

I do have a sad confession to make though -- personally I don't fill out
the voting sheets for the PRS. So I cannot complain about any positive
or negative results that may find their way onto the lists. I'm glad my
presence on a team is more appreciated than not, though.

One minor change that has been proposed for the Council of the Wise is that
you can only get votes if you vote. Encourages participation that way.

Thoughts?
Clint

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[1000rpm]

But why don't you fill out the PRS voting forms?
Is it because you don't believe in the system? Or because you don't have time? Or something else?
They aren't for the company - they are for the other players - mainly your teammates.

DrakaraGM@aol.com wrote:

···

It wouldn't encourage my participation, but hey, if you want to have everyone rated and leave me off the list that is fine too. In my opinion, it would simply make the results less meaningful. I don't play for ratings, I don't much care about them anyway -- I get my enjoyment in-game and from individual game results both on a per-turn and end-of-game basis.

I don't fill out customer satisfaction surveys from my Saturn dealerships either -- but I do keep going back to the same couple places for maintenance -- I vote with my wallet. And my wallet has been fairly generous, I think.

-- Ernie III

-----Original Message-----
From: ME Games Ltd <me@MiddleEarthGames.com>
To: mepbmlist@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 16:28:24 +0100
Subject: Re: [mepbmlist] The Best Ever Middle Earth Play By Mail Top 100 Players!

I do have a sad confession to make though -- personally I don't fill out the voting sheets for the PRS. So I cannot complain about any positive or negative results that may find their way onto the lists. I'm glad my presence on a team is more appreciated than not, though.
   
One minor change that has been proposed for the Council of the Wise is that you can only get votes if you vote. Encourages participation that way.

Thoughts?
Clint

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Middle Earth PBM - hit reply to send to everyone
To Unsubscribe: http://www.yahoogroups.com
Website: http://www.MiddleEarthGames.com

Yahoo! Groups Links

[Urzahil1]

I personally agree with Clint's idea. If people refuse to participate,
then the results are even less meaningful than not allowing them to
receive votes would be. I'd rather have a rating system where only the
people who choose to participate are rated, rather than one where
someone who refuses to participate, (and hence makes the system less
meaningful), can still get votes from others.

Whether enacting the proposed restriction on receiving votes encourages
more players to send in their own votes or not, (and I think it would to
some degree), it seems rather unfair that someone who refuses to vote
should be able to get the benefit (however insubstantial) of receiving
someone else's vote.

That's just my personal opinion, of course.

Mike

From: ME Games Ltd <me@MiddleEarthGames.com>
To: mepbmlist@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 16:28:24 +0100
Subject: Re: [mepbmlist] The Best Ever Middle Earth Play By Mail Top

100

Players!

I do have a sad confession to make though -- personally I don't fill

out

the voting sheets for the PRS. So I cannot complain about any

positive

or negative results that may find their way onto the lists. I'm glad

my

presence on a team is more appreciated than not, though.

One minor change that has been proposed for the Council of the Wise is

that

···

-----Original Message-----
you can only get votes if you vote. Encourages participation that way.

Thoughts?
Clint

[DrakaraGM]

I choose not to vote. Leave it at that. -- Ernie III

···

-----Original Message-----
From: Tony & Janette <janton@ntlworld.com>
To: mepbmlist@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 22:47:25 +0100
Subject: Re: [mepbmlist] The Best Ever Middle Earth Play By Mail Top 100 Players!

But why don't you fill out the PRS voting forms?
Is it because you don't believe in the system? Or because you don't
have time? Or something else?
They aren't for the company - they are for the other players - mainly
your teammates.

DrakaraGM@aol.com wrote:

It wouldn't encourage my participation, but hey, if you want to have everyone

rated and leave me off the list that is fine too. In my opinion, it would
simply make the results less meaningful. I don't play for ratings, I don't much
care about them anyway -- I get my enjoyment in-game and from individual game
results both on a per-turn and end-of-game basis.

I don't fill out customer satisfaction surveys from my Saturn dealerships

either -- but I do keep going back to the same couple places for maintenance --
I vote with my wallet. And my wallet has been fairly generous, I think.

-- Ernie III

-----Original Message-----
From: ME Games Ltd <me@MiddleEarthGames.com>
To: mepbmlist@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 16:28:24 +0100
Subject: Re: [mepbmlist] The Best Ever Middle Earth Play By Mail Top 100

Players!

I do have a sad confession to make though -- personally I don't fill out
the voting sheets for the PRS. So I cannot complain about any positive
or negative results that may find their way onto the lists. I'm glad my
presence on a team is more appreciated than not, though.
   
One minor change that has been proposed for the Council of the Wise is that
you can only get votes if you vote. Encourages participation that way.

Thoughts?
Clint

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Middle Earth PBM - hit reply to send to everyone
To Unsubscribe: http://www.yahoogroups.com
Website: http://www.MiddleEarthGames.com

Yahoo! Groups Links

Middle Earth PBM - hit reply to send to everyone
To Unsubscribe: http://www.yahoogroups.com
Website: http://www.MiddleEarthGames.com

Yahoo! Groups Links

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[DrakaraGM]

I'm perfectly happy to be removed from any and all lists that involve voting.

Keep me on any lists that simply measure success in terms of old victory conditions, or nation placement, or whatever, that doesn't involve voting.

Though it would seem to be a lot more work to have to collect all the ballots, then invalidate any votes for a player who did not vote for that specific category, or whatever.

I was amused by the whole system when it came out, but not enthused, if you know what I mean. I did my best to remember the relevant data from my play of many nations for many years, in order to help Clint fit me somewhere in the scheme of things.

But I don't check the ratings, I glance at the emails when they come out and then dump them, and I don't check anyone's name against the lists when I find I am in a game with them. Basically, I don't pay any real attention to them.

Does that mean my play is NOT measurable equal to or superior to the play of those players who do vote? I don't think so. But I don't care, so whatever makes those who do care happy is fine with me.

-- Ernie III

···

-----Original Message-----
From: Urzahil <urzahil@darkfortress.us>
To: mepbmlist@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 18:13:27 -0500
Subject: [mepbmlist] RE: PRS votes

I personally agree with Clint's idea. If people refuse to participate,
then the results are even less meaningful than not allowing them to
receive votes would be. I'd rather have a rating system where only the
people who choose to participate are rated, rather than one where
someone who refuses to participate, (and hence makes the system less
meaningful), can still get votes from others.

Whether enacting the proposed restriction on receiving votes encourages
more players to send in their own votes or not, (and I think it would to
some degree), it seems rather unfair that someone who refuses to vote
should be able to get the benefit (however insubstantial) of receiving
someone else's vote.

That's just my personal opinion, of course.

Mike

-----Original Message-----
From: ME Games Ltd <me@MiddleEarthGames.com>
To: mepbmlist@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 16:28:24 +0100
Subject: Re: [mepbmlist] The Best Ever Middle Earth Play By Mail Top

100

Players!

I do have a sad confession to make though -- personally I don't fill

out

the voting sheets for the PRS. So I cannot complain about any

positive

or negative results that may find their way onto the lists. I'm glad

my

presence on a team is more appreciated than not, though.

One minor change that has been proposed for the Council of the Wise is

that

you can only get votes if you vote. Encourages participation that way.

Thoughts?
Clint

Middle Earth PBM - hit reply to send to everyone
To Unsubscribe: http://www.yahoogroups.com
Website: http://www.MiddleEarthGames.com

Yahoo! Groups Links

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[LGTilley1]

I strongly agree with the proposal. No form of listing or measure
will ever be truly accurate, but it is vitally important that any
that is used should be seen to be as fair as possible. Being
acknowledged by the praise of others, when you decline to acknowledge
others, is patently unfair.

[]
   Laurence G.Tilley http://www.lgtilley.freeserve.co.uk/

<http://www.buav.org/campaigns/primates/index.html>
Zero Option - end the use of primates in research

http://www.buav.org

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

···

At 16:28 10/10/2005, ME Games Ltd wrote:

> I do have a sad confession to make though -- personally I don't fill out
> the voting sheets for the PRS. So I cannot complain about any positive
> or negative results that may find their way onto the lists. I'm glad my
> presence on a team is more appreciated than not, though.

One minor change that has been proposed for the Council of the Wise is that
you can only get votes if you vote. Encourages participation that way.

[JCC]

Tried that. It's all or nothing.

JCC

···

--- DrakaraGM@aol.com wrote:

I'm perfectly happy to be removed from any and all
lists that involve voting.

Keep me on any lists that simply measure success in
terms of old victory conditions, or nation
placement, or whatever, that doesn't involve voting.

__________________________________
Yahoo! Music Unlimited
Access over 1 million songs. Try it free.
http://music.yahoo.com/unlimited/

[JCC]

But what about those of us that vote but choose not to
be a part of the lists?

JCC

···

--- Urzahil <urzahil@darkfortress.us> wrote:

I personally agree with Clint's idea. If people
refuse to participate,
then the results are even less meaningful than not
allowing them to
receive votes would be. I'd rather have a rating
system where only the
people who choose to participate are rated, rather
than one where
someone who refuses to participate, (and hence makes
the system less
meaningful), can still get votes from others.

Whether enacting the proposed restriction on
receiving votes encourages
more players to send in their own votes or not, (and
I think it would to
some degree), it seems rather unfair that someone
who refuses to vote
should be able to get the benefit (however
insubstantial) of receiving
someone else's vote.

That's just my personal opinion, of course.

Mike

>-----Original Message-----
>From: ME Games Ltd <me@MiddleEarthGames.com>
>To: mepbmlist@yahoogroups.com
>Sent: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 16:28:24 +0100
>Subject: Re: [mepbmlist] The Best Ever Middle Earth
Play By Mail Top
100
>Players!
>> I do have a sad confession to make though --
personally I don't fill
out
>> the voting sheets for the PRS. So I cannot
complain about any
positive
>> or negative results that may find their way onto
the lists. I'm glad
my
>> presence on a team is more appreciated than not,
though.
>
>One minor change that has been proposed for the
Council of the Wise is
that
>you can only get votes if you vote. Encourages
participation that way.
>
>Thoughts?
>Clint

__________________________________
Yahoo! Music Unlimited
Access over 1 million songs. Try it free.
http://music.yahoo.com/unlimited/

[88_Noldo]

Massage and manipulate the data enough and eventually you will get the results you want.
Ed Mills

···

From: "Urzahil" <urzahil@darkfortress.us>
Reply-To: mepbmlist@yahoogroups.com
To: <mepbmlist@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: [mepbmlist] RE: PRS votes
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 18:13:27 -0500

I personally agree with Clint's idea. If people refuse to participate,
then the results are even less meaningful than not allowing them to
receive votes would be. I'd rather have a rating system where only the
people who choose to participate are rated, rather than one where
someone who refuses to participate, (and hence makes the system less
meaningful), can still get votes from others.

Whether enacting the proposed restriction on receiving votes encourages
more players to send in their own votes or not, (and I think it would to
some degree), it seems rather unfair that someone who refuses to vote
should be able to get the benefit (however insubstantial) of receiving
someone else's vote.

That's just my personal opinion, of course.

Mike

>-----Original Message-----
>From: ME Games Ltd <me@MiddleEarthGames.com>
>To: mepbmlist@yahoogroups.com
>Sent: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 16:28:24 +0100
>Subject: Re: [mepbmlist] The Best Ever Middle Earth Play By Mail Top
100
>Players!
>> I do have a sad confession to make though -- personally I don't fill
out
>> the voting sheets for the PRS. So I cannot complain about any
positive
>> or negative results that may find their way onto the lists. I'm glad
my
>> presence on a team is more appreciated than not, though.
>
>One minor change that has been proposed for the Council of the Wise is
that
>you can only get votes if you vote. Encourages participation that way.
>
>Thoughts?
>Clint

[Urzahil1]

Um... I suppose that's a true statement. Not certain what it has to do
with my message, though. I was mainly talking about fairness and
reciprocal courtesy.

I did respond to a claim that allowing someone to receive votes without
casting them would result in more meaningful data than if the reverse
were true. (I disagreed with them, in fact.)

Mike

From: mepbmlist@yahoogroups.com [mailto:mepbmlist@yahoogroups.com] On
Behalf Of Ovatha Easterling
Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2005 9:01 AM
To: mepbmlist@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [mepbmlist] RE: PRS votes

Massage and manipulate the data enough and eventually you will get the
results you want.
Ed Mills

From: "Urzahil" <urzahil@darkfortress.us>
Reply-To: mepbmlist@yahoogroups.com
To: <mepbmlist@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: [mepbmlist] RE: PRS votes
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 18:13:27 -0500

I personally agree with Clint's idea. If people refuse to participate,
then the results are even less meaningful than not allowing them to
receive votes would be. I'd rather have a rating system where only the
people who choose to participate are rated, rather than one where
someone who refuses to participate, (and hence makes the system less
meaningful), can still get votes from others.

Whether enacting the proposed restriction on receiving votes

encourages

more players to send in their own votes or not, (and I think it would

to

···

-----Original Message-----

some degree), it seems rather unfair that someone who refuses to vote
should be able to get the benefit (however insubstantial) of receiving
someone else's vote.

That's just my personal opinion, of course.

Mike