Well, Mr. Shimel seems to have descended into a tantrum of name-calling
because his "arguments" haven't squashed the notion of a ratings system.
Clint NEVER said that this system would not be implemented if anyone
objected. He asked for input on what we felt was good or bad about it in
an attempt to make it better. I have not seen any postings by Clint that
implied he would scrap the very concept of a ratings system, (without
even attempting to see if it might work), if someone complained loudly
over and over and over again. In fact, he has said that he took Mr.
Shimel's input with everyone elses, and will use it in the final
determination of what to do in the end.
Clint has, (quite reasonably), stated that he would like to try
something new and see how it worked out, tweaking it (or scrapping it),
based on actual player experience with the new feature. He has asked for
our opinions on what might be the best approach, and has been nothing
but polite and patient while doing so. In return Mr. Shimel has falsely
accused him of "reacting violently" and "lying". (And interestingly
enough, Mr. Shimel seems to be the only one to accuse him of this.)
Darrell, you have added your opinion quite forcefully to the debate. You
have made your level of commitment to that opinion painfully clear time
and time again. You have stated unequivocally how the rest of the MePBM
player community WILL DEFINITELY react to these ratings, (despite your
lack of proof as to your prescient abilities), and that a large number
of MePBM players are dishonest and manipulative enough to certainly
succumb to the temptations of glory associated with a player ratings
sytem. You have done all this with what is quickly approaching a rude
and obnoxious level of fanatacism. Continuing on down this path will
likely not win you any converts to your point of view, so perhaps it is
time to accept that a player ratings system is probably going to be
attempted. Why not try to make it the best one possible by suggesting
how it might best avoid some of the pitfalls you are so concerned about.
("The best way to improve the system is to not use it." is obviously not
a constructive way of contributing to the discussion at this point.)
Your arguments seemed well thought-out and coherent, (at least in the
beginning), so why not put some thought into what would make a player
ratings system better. After all, your predictions of the downfall of
MePBM might not come true, and the player ratings system might end up
remaining a part of MePBM. Don't you want to be a part of crafting such
a system in case it survives?
Oh, and for those who care about such things, I'm one of those players
that some think won't benefit from a ratings system. I play occasionally
(2-4 games per year). I can't remember the last time I lifed a finger to
obtain one of my individual victory conditions. (In the two games I'm
in, I couldn't tell you what my IVCs are without looking.) I've placed
in a few games, but only a small minority. I've been on the winning side
as often as not. But even given all this, I would still like to at least
try a player ratings system.
<insert bullseye here>
Mike Mulka
···
-----Original Message-----
From: corsairs game 101 [mailto:corsairs101@hotmail.com]
Sent: Monday, September 16, 2002 10:56 PM
To: mepbmlist@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [mepbmlist] Re: Player Rating
>One basic concept that I am interested in is trust of the GMs. Over
>time we have attempted to build up a base of trust with the players
>about the methodology of the games we run. With that in mind I think
>that the Player Rating scheme is a good one
If you want to be tursted, then step one is to quit lieing
to us. You throw out an idea to discussion asking for input, but
you've already decided you are going to go with it.
What is that other English speaking company that runs this game? Damn,
there isn't one anymore.
How about a public vote. If we have to publically give our names to
have an opinion count, I think we should have to publically give a name
and vote to the whole list in order for the vote to count, majority
wins.
>So feedback on what would improve the system would be very useful.
The best way to improve the system is to not use it.
Darrell Shimel
The Germans appear to be running the game as a hobby, which is cool if you can do it - but my experience of the PBM market (and I have been a professional GM for coming up to 10 years now, and played games since I was 14) is that professional companies succeed - amateur ones cater to a small market and don't succeed otherwise.