Astryl Posted December 25, 2019 Share Posted December 25, 2019 No, stop trying to upend the will of the people. 1 Quote Queen of Chaos Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leonard J Crabs Posted December 25, 2019 Share Posted December 25, 2019 3 hours ago, Maia said: I don't mind have some competition with official awards. But with other unique way to choose the winners. Personally I would love to see a small group of experianced players who decide who should win this year. But with explanation why. In official votes doesn't really see it. It's my two cents. wow you actually unironically want a plutocracy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kalev60 Posted December 25, 2019 Share Posted December 25, 2019 Actual council/ top 50 AA leaders vote in addition to the popular vote would be great as it would highlight the bias in the popular vote because the members of the same AA vote for their AA stuff.... Quote Charlie Chaplin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadowthrone Posted December 25, 2019 Share Posted December 25, 2019 Expecting alliance leaders not to vote for their groups/ somehow are unbiased is also an assumption that's bound to fail. The present system is fairer than most other since it doesn't exclude folks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zei-Sakura Alsainn Posted December 26, 2019 Share Posted December 26, 2019 8 hours ago, Shadowthrone said: Expecting alliance leaders not to vote for their groups/ somehow are unbiased is also an assumption that's bound to fail. The present system is fairer than most other since it doesn't exclude folks. Sure, if it wasn't a system that promoted voter apathy. The United States, somewhat paradoxically, both combats and rolls over and gets stabbed by the issue. On the one hand, the Senate makes it non-pointless for small states to and their citizens to vote and have voices. On the other, the Electoral College literally promotes apathy in all but a handful of states. Any system of democracy which promotes voter apathy is, by definition, a bad system. Kastor's original idea earlier wasn't a bad starting off point, as it aimed to act similarly to the House of Reps vs the Senate in the US. One is wholly based on sheer popularity while the other intentionally levels the playing field by counting states (alliances) and not people. It will of course still be biased as all hell and will go whatever coalition has the most alliances, with offshores and training AAs and such being excluded. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadowthrone Posted December 26, 2019 Share Posted December 26, 2019 Which is why the system as this year and 2017 saw is good enough. Anything else by design is exclusionary or believed in some goodness and objective means of arriving at awards. Won’t happen. Awards are fun memey things that shouldn’t matter this much that folks spend countless hours trying to equivocate over. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zaurg Posted December 26, 2019 Share Posted December 26, 2019 (edited) The awards are fine and this is a bad thread. Thanks for coming to my Ted talk. Edited December 26, 2019 by Zaurg 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.