Tweet
Pete, I was refering to the rules, yes, but simply because I don't know how the ranking system works.
It is amazing how the ranking system changed but rules remained the same. I though you and Garry had changed a couple of rules
But when I said I want to see full rules from both I meant ranking system incuded
I distinguish in your posts an anxiety whether poeple will drop their games because of the rankings or lose their interest or fun because of them. Wow, I didn't know that the ratings had that power. People come here to play not to get rated. From my experience you have to ask a new player if he wants to be rated and not vice versa. Yes, sometimes people ask for it but most of them simply don't. And I am sure that even if they were not permitted to be rated they would surely stay afoot and continue playing their games with the same joy
Now the rankings stand to rate people above all and the rest after. That is what its name defines, it's in the dictionary
And you have the responsibility to ensure that people are equally and fairly rated. That's above all. The fun comes after. Because if the latter is your consern there are other ways to do that, more appropriate. What fun can I gain from poeple that can have unfairly high ranks even if I was one of them? 
I wonder... Either we make a ladder and rate people or make something else and have great fun.
Now can you explain to me how the hell Lung is on top of a game but goes down because of it as you mentioned above? Do you mean that he goes up slower than he would normally go if his opponents were tougher? Or do you mean that he actually loses because his opponents are weak?
For one thing I must admit that what I never liked in Quinns/Solver ranking system was the huge ups and downs
But favoring people playing more games in both systems (?) might not be fair at all. Not sure if this is true, simply from what I read from your posts, but perhaps a formula that would give a slight advantage for been rated in many games but fading out as more games you add could be more fair, maybe not sure yet
It is amazing how the ranking system changed but rules remained the same. I though you and Garry had changed a couple of rules
But when I said I want to see full rules from both I meant ranking system incuded I distinguish in your posts an anxiety whether poeple will drop their games because of the rankings or lose their interest or fun because of them. Wow, I didn't know that the ratings had that power. People come here to play not to get rated. From my experience you have to ask a new player if he wants to be rated and not vice versa. Yes, sometimes people ask for it but most of them simply don't. And I am sure that even if they were not permitted to be rated they would surely stay afoot and continue playing their games with the same joy
Now the rankings stand to rate people above all and the rest after. That is what its name defines, it's in the dictionary
And you have the responsibility to ensure that people are equally and fairly rated. That's above all. The fun comes after. Because if the latter is your consern there are other ways to do that, more appropriate. What fun can I gain from poeple that can have unfairly high ranks even if I was one of them? I wonder... Either we make a ladder and rate people or make something else and have great fun.Now can you explain to me how the hell Lung is on top of a game but goes down because of it as you mentioned above? Do you mean that he goes up slower than he would normally go if his opponents were tougher? Or do you mean that he actually loses because his opponents are weak?
For one thing I must admit that what I never liked in Quinns/Solver ranking system was the huge ups and downs
But favoring people playing more games in both systems (?) might not be fair at all. Not sure if this is true, simply from what I read from your posts, but perhaps a formula that would give a slight advantage for been rated in many games but fading out as more games you add could be more fair, maybe not sure yet
)
well, I been monitoring these posts and ya know, this is like a business meeting, "lets do this, lets form a committee to do this and report back" well, its been going on fer awhile now, no action, I would say this, not that i have any bearing on this matter, BUT
I think the collective whole as a community should resolve this, by a vote, Name entered, not annonymous, and do so quickly, within a week or so, then get back to playing. All this talent here, a few too many insults and prima-donna's attitudes, but getting past that, without offending those whom are heading it up, I believe the players, whom are the core and have been through the good and bad oughta have the governing decisions to set parameters, and then finalize it (Solver, my suggestion this is where you move in and take the lead) and have a vote. Lets all help Solver generate this scoring system move forward, not sit and spin the wheels, I gotta be honest , all this talent and expertise, this should not be that big of a deal. As for heated discussions, well, thats part of the old human makeup, pride and determination!
Comment