| |
BGonline.org Forums
Voting Criteria Survey
Posted By: Mr Majestyk In Response To: Responding to mtuhtan (Paul Weaver)
Date: Saturday, 26 May 2012, at 12:10 p.m.
IMO, there needs to be consensus regarding a more stringent voting criteria. One in which, one is better able to cast an informed vote. When I was trying to make up my mind who was going to be on my top 32 I had to decide for myself what criteria I was going to use to base ny decisions on. There were no classified guidelines to help me. What I did receive however, created information overload by posters here presenting their view point on a plethora of sub-topics pertaining to making an informed vote, who's won what and who's PR is lower than X etc.
The Giants List is a popularity contest simply because it lacks criteria rigorous enough to promote fairness, openness and accuracy.
Having said that, I don't agree with singling out high PR's as being undeserving of the top 64 is the right idea. These players may cash more than their PR would indicate because they might know how to play live tournament backgammon better than they are given credit for. Players who never leave their armchair and play online may not be as informed as someone who plays live and the reverse may also apply and probably does to some extent.
This being the case, both parties would benefit from a criteria that best fits and is suppose to do what it says on the tin.
Sadly, it does not. Now is the time to change it. If we fail to do so, we're all be having another giraffe in 2 years time at the expense of backgammon. Surely, we can't allow that to happen...can we?
NBM
| |
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.