One general comment: I am massively against people calling for a revote because they don't like a given outcome.
I've edited this post, to make it polite, but I have tremendous dislike for that attitude.
To the extent that I have time or effort I will strongly and vigorously resist people who feel that "It's not exactly the way that I want it. I'm going to demand we vote and vote and vote until you change to match my preference."
If you have a critique of a poll's wording, or similar then that's a fine justification to see about repolling. But, absent a mechanical mistake?
I'm not really interested in running 15 polls until you've exhausted everyone else and get what you want.
That goes for
every issue. If you're not comfortable with compromising with the community as a whole you will find participation in this community difficult.
And, L4W isn't LEW or LEB. We respect them, and the tremendous contribution they make and continue to make for the community as a whole. But this is a different community playing a different edition of everybody's favorite game (with many overlapping members).
We may choose, as a community, to follow different paths. It's fine to talk about how you feel, but just insiting that people change to match what you want is not the sort of behavior we want to reward.
Also
I don't see the point of a re-vote to just having 6 or 12 months. If we look at the votes now 7 out of 11 picked 6 months or less months. I'd think people that picked the 3 months would just pick 6 months if 3 wasn't an option so 6 months would just win out again since only 4 people picked higher than 6 months.
This is exaclty the sort of analysis we do when dealing with a vote.
If you somehow jury rig the outcome so that you're prefered choice were to get the most votes (even though a significant majority is asking for something else)... we'll go with the majority.
We'd prefer a compromise, but I think you'll find that a position of "I don't want to compromise, I want it my way" isn't going to find much favor.
[d]--[/d]
stonegod said:
- I don't know when something has "passed" or "failed"
- I don't know where to go to (one place) to find all that has passed or failed. Couldn't find it on the wiki either.
Yeah. When the community was small this wasn't a problem to the degree that it seems to be now.
I think, at the time, we wanted people to feel like they could come back in a week or two and still have their vote "count". We -do- want people to come and share their opinions and be counted.
It's good that people get a chance to come and talk, to vent. etc.
If 20 new people came in and wanted to change something, what would we do? I guess it depends. It hasn't happened and a lot of the issues that people really want to talk about fall under the "reconsider in December" situation.
Either way we've grown and that means more typing for the judges.
We'll have a judge huddle and see if we can get official versions up.
[d]--[/d]
Halford said:
I'd like to be able to play with some of the higher level powers and be involved in higher level adventures myself. Some people don't like high level play and thats fine too. But I'd like to have the option.
In my book the higher desirability of DMing helps with this, as it helps ensure that new players are tempted to DM, hopefully meaning that there are enough games around to cater for new players.
I think, personally, that these are the key issues. I'm playing in two higher level games on the boards. It's rewarding and fun. There are certain aspects of being 1st level (few ecounter powers, one daily) that limit your choices. It's not terrible. But....
Velmont said:
What I wish with this system, is to reward DM without having a chance of abuse and show some kind of fairness toward the people who can't or don't want to DM.
To a certain degree I feel that this is an issue.
Personally, I've repeatedly attempted to add in other ways for people to get "extra xp". So it's not a DM vs Player issue.
They've been profoundly unpopular.
The current sitaution is a compromise situation.
Almost no one in the community would deliberately go out and pick this situation. It's a our best shot at what the community would like.
[d]--[/d]
On the other hand, if you feel like it's "unfair" that you character isn't as high a level as somebody else I think you've basically missed the point of PbP roleplaying.
Would your work on Rinaldo somehow be "devalued" because of what some other character does?
Can people play a character without developing them significantly for 10 levels?
Hint: Yes. Yes they can.
Level is level. A good character is a good character.
My person suggest would be that you should feel proud of your roleplaying for itself without being concerned about whether you're more or less powerful than some other character.