Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mark CMG" data-source="post: 729459" data-attributes="member: 10479">Re: Re: You should watch where you spitUnder the current system we know the top five products, and which single one was the most popular.  Under the change that Nicole proposes (and you seem to support), we'd know the top five products and which three were the most popular in descending order.GR is in a unique position, IMO, to want such a change.  They have some great products, no doubt about, in many of the categories, but seem feel that they can't yet topple WotC from the "most popular" spot.  In that spectrum being chosen as "second (or third) most popular" might certainly seem appealing but I do not think that this is a good idea at the expense of numbers four and five which you both seem to discount as even existing.Bottom line is that the nomination committee members are the only ones in the position to say what the five (or one, two, three or four) best products are and I think you should be less concerned about be the second (or third most popular) and pleased that there are five chances to be verified as best in the very large fields, even if where in that "best in field" isn't broken down by one through five.Remember, you're not asking the change to be made so that people who have full knowledge of all products are choosing you as second (or third), you're simply proposing that you can have the second (or third) best market penetration.</blockquote>