22 May 10
I'd like to see a vote created to determine the popularity of the suggestion to make adjustments to the present clan scoring system. This vote should be a simple yes or no vote on whether or not adjustments should be made. Those permitted to vote should be all members of all active clans, one vote per member regardless of how many clans they are in.
The proposed changes are posted here: Thread 130155
and the rationale for why changes are need is posted at the top of page two of that same thread.
If in the popular vote, the yeses win, there would be further debate/refinement of the original suggestion until two or more variations have been determined at which point a final vote would be called for to determine the popularity of a single variation to be recommended by active clan members.
Whether you support the idea of clan scoring changes or oppose it, please join me in calling for this vote to help reach a conclusion to this matter and either help the issue move forward or put it to rest.
22 May 10
Originally posted by sbacatrec'd
I'd like to see a vote created to determine the popularity of the suggestion to make adjustments to the present clan scoring system. This vote should be a simple yes or no vote on whether or not adjustments should be made. Those permitted to vote should be all members of all active clans, one vote per member regardless of how many clans they are in.
The pr ...[text shortened]... elp reach a conclusion to this matter and either help the issue move forward or put it to rest.
22 May 10
Originally posted by ErekoseI like adramforall's model and strongly believe the process of clan challenges would be improved for all clan members if his model, with or without revisions, were adopted by RHP. Some posters in that thread think it's best to leave things as they are. I'd like to see a straight yes/no vote from clan members on whether changes are called for.
There's a lot of discussion in that thread, not all on topic. Which changes, specifically, would you like to vote on?
If yes, then let's use adramforall's model as a starting point for debate on a finalized model. If no, then leave things as they are. But in any case, let the clan members vote on the issue of change up or down.
Please disregard the off topic chatter and consider the possibility of changes to the scoring system that puts all clans on even footing on an annual basis for a revised accumulation of net points based on the scoring structure suggested by the OP in the referenced thread. Might that not inject more excitement and fun into the clan challenge process? But that's getting ahead of the first step I'm asking for in this thread. As step one, is there support for the possibility of change?
23 May 10
Originally posted by coquetteI agree, let's vote on whether to improve the current system or leave the way it is.
I'm recommending a vote on improvements or keeping the system the way that it is. I'd like to see changes in the clan system overall. Any vote that gets some changes happening would be good.
If there is a strong response on improving the current clan challenge system then we can work on the detailing the improvements. I really don't want to spend a lot of time working a series of system improvements and then find out it is no big deal for most of the clans members.
How about that, coquette and I actually agree on something🙂🙂🙂
my2sons
23 May 10
Originally posted by my2sonsRequesting a vote on "improving the current system or leave the way it is is" seems a bit silly!
I agree, let's vote on whether to improve the current system or leave the way it is.
If there is a strong response on improving the current clan challenge system then we can work on the detailing the improvements. I really don't want to spend a lot of time working a series of system improvements and then find out it is no big deal for most of the clans members.
How about that, coquette and I actually agree on something🙂🙂🙂
my2sons
Who in their right mind would to oppose "improving" something"? The devil as I see it, is in the detail. Let's have the proposed "improvements" precisely spelled out again, IN THIS FORUM and all related issues discussed fully to avoid ambiguities before suggesting a vote.
23 May 10
Originally posted by drdonI believe it was Amsterdamn in another thread who suggested that the first step is to find out if enough people really want change before going through all of the effort of working out the specifics. If the popular vote is no, then debating specifics becomes unnecessary.
Requesting a vote on "improving the current system or leave the way it is is" seems a bit silly!
Who in their right mind would to oppose "improving" something"? The devil as I see it, is in the detail. Let's have the proposed "improvements" precisely spelled out again, IN THIS FORUM and all related issues discussed fully to avoid ambiguities before suggesting a vote.
I agree with Who in their right mind would to oppose "improving" something"? But asking for confirmation before proceeding is the logical next step. If there really are only a few clans interested in change, this will prove it. If change really has popular support, asking for a vote hopefully brings more voices into the debate over the specifics and should lead to a stronger, more satisfying outcome.
23 May 10
Originally posted by sbacatI think you are right. I probably was putting the cart before the horse
I believe it was Amsterdamn in another thread who suggested that the first step is to find out if enough people really want change before going through all of the effort of working out the specifics. If the popular vote is no, then debating specifics becomes unnecessary.
I agree with [b]Who in their right mind would to oppose "improving" something"? Bu ...[text shortened]... es into the debate over the specifics and should lead to a stronger, more satisfying outcome.[/b]
23 May 10
Originally posted by ErekoseI think the main change is points being won/lost based on fairness of challenges issued, which is addressed in my proposed scoring system. "Sandbagging" type challenges do not gain as many points for the clan as "fair" challenges between similarly ranked players.
There's a lot of discussion in that thread, not all on topic. Which changes, specifically, would you like to vote on?
A tiered scoring range based on expected outcome would also, IMO, be fair. After all that the way it works in your ratings so why not in clan challenges.
I also believe that the system of awarding total points should be amended. A clan at present gets 20 points for winning a 10 man challenge regardless of whether they win 20-0 or 11-9.
There has been much discussion on the ranking system and I think it is ripe for a change.
I think the "total points won" over the lifetime of the clan should have no place in the overall rankings.
If anything I would prefer to see a table of clan positions for each year showing the position of each clan for each year ended 31st December 2004, 2005, 2006 etc. Clan Amsterdamn were the best performing clan last year however that effort is not really documented anywhere. They are only 5th in the all time total scores so their achievement in winning last year is lost.
- Joined
- 16 Feb 07
- Moves
- 27653
23 May 10
Originally posted by sbacatThe trouble is, there are some changes I'd vote for and others I disagree with. I think you can't avoid having at least some sort of strawman as an alternative, even if its not exactly what the final system would look like.
I believe it was Amsterdamn in another thread who suggested that the first step is to find out if enough people really want change before going through all of the effort of working out the specifics. If the popular vote is no, then debating specifics becomes unnecessary.
...
Any general question is bound to come up with the answer "Sure I'm OK with some sort of changes" and then you're back to having to put out something specific.
23 May 10
Originally posted by ErekoseJust want to make sure I'm understanding you correctly. You've read adramforall's proposed model and there are parts of it you'd support and other parts you wouldn't support? Or are there other changes you'd prefer that aren't mentioned?
The trouble is, there are some changes I'd vote for and others I disagree with. I think you can't avoid having at least some sort of strawman as an alternative, even if its not exactly what the final system would look like.
Any general question is bound to come up with the answer "Sure I'm OK with some sort of changes" and then you're back to having to put out something specific.
Is adramforall's model not the strawman you are asking for? If not, why do you think it is unsuitable for the purposes of a starting point for further discussion?
Are you saying it is safe to assume that the majority of clan members would vote yes when asked if they'd be in favor of some variation of the proposed changes?
- Joined
- 16 Feb 07
- Moves
- 27653
23 May 10
I haven't decided about Adamforall's model. I'm perfectly OK with a vote that's something like "Would we like to see the clan scoring system change to something like Adamforall's model", while not having all the details worked out.
I'm not OK with a vote on "Are we satisfied with the current clan scoring system?" or "Should we improve improve the current clan scoring system" without any sort of hint about what the changes would be. As was pointed out above, the answer to this is surely yes, as the current system has lots of weaknesses. Its not totally hopeless either (IMO), but I'm fairly certain you'd get a positive response to this sort of question, only to find out there's not a lot of agreement as to what to change to.
23 May 10
1 edit
Originally posted by ErekosePerfectly understandable and I agree with your phrasing of the vote. In some of the other Clan forum threads, there seemed to be a fair amount of back and forth over whether change was even called for and it makes sense (to me at least) to ask all clan members willing to vote if they think there's room for improvement. To some that seems like a question with an obvious answer, but in my experience, you always need to built consensus for change first, then begin building the design document, model it as much as possible, gently persuade the developer(s) to participate and fulfill the design, and then begin implementation.
I haven't decided about Adamforall's model. I'm perfectly OK with a vote that's something like "Would we like to see the clan scoring system change to something like Adamforall's model", while not having all the details worked out.
I'm not OK with a vote on "Are we satisfied with the current clan scoring system?" or "Should we improve improve the current uestion, only to find out there's not a lot of agreement as to what to change to.
To be sure, there are things missing from adramforall's model that I'd like to see added. Perhaps a cap on total number of clan members during a calendar year to block rotation or a cap on the total number of active challenges during any given month to discourage a more-is-always-better philosophy.
Others have said that meaningful change to the clan system can only come from RHP owners. I respectfully disagree. In every development project I've worked on, if the end users came to the developers and said 'We don't like this, fix it' the developers would look at each other and shrug. But when the end users said, 'We don't like this and here's a detailed plan to make something we believe will be significantly better' the developers were far more likely to respond positively knowing they were working toward a concrete goal that the end users had already bought into.
That's all this is.
Step one: Do you really want change/improvement? Yes!
Step two: State nature of change in detail. Commence lively discussion to that end.
I'm not saying this process will be easy or quickly done; things worthwhile rarely are. But I do think it's needed and I personally think clan challenges have the potential to be a lot more exciting and fun and fair.
23 May 10
My vote is to leave things as is. There's nothing wrong with the clan scoring system. The only problem is some clan leaders sneaking in sandbaggers against lower rated players which makes a unfair match up.
If anything there should just be a floor for clan challenge match ups. A person should not be able to be matched with a player in a clan challenge 300 points from their highest rating ever or something like that. Or a flag next to a person in a clan challenge sent indicating that this person is way underrated in this match up if they are 2 or 300 hundred points below their highest rating.
Otherwise everything should stay the same to I.