Voting on games adds a layer of wasted time.
Why not just stagger the start of games to every 7-10 days?
By then, more than half the players in a 13p game will be dead and ready for a new game.
Printable View
Voting on games adds a layer of wasted time.
Why not just stagger the start of games to every 7-10 days?
By then, more than half the players in a 13p game will be dead and ready for a new game.
No, that's not why it was labeled as anti-semetic by the ADL. It was labelled as anti-semetic because people were jokingly making Pepe have a Hitler mustache, just like basically every single other thing on the internet.
You should really do some research before spewing out CNN and Hillary Clinton talking points.
Exactly. If you throw Hitler 'stache on them, then yes... they're offensive... but everything is offensive if you put a Hitler 'stache on it.
Even Charlie Chaplin FeelsBadMan
Most of this post seems geared toward S-FMs, which I don't play very often, so take my thoughts with a grain of salt.
I think most of the ideas are good, but I disagree with the carrot/stick approach for hosts. Having played/hosted several games myself of every size (SFM, MFM, FM) I don't think there is any reason to further incentivize good hosting. When someone hosts a game on this site, they are volunteering their free time to something that can be very time consuming and stressful for no pay or compensation of any kind- they're not doing it for external incentives. They're doing it for the intrinsic value it has to them- they love the game and want to give a good game to their fellow FM players. When a host makes a mistake during a game (which, as Elixir said, happens to the best of us) they don't have an ulterior motive- they just fucked up. Because they're human and that's what humans do every now and then.
I wouldn't mind if we had some kind of host-appreciation mechanism because as I just said, hosting can be very demanding work and while people obviously do it for the love of the game, everyone likes it when they get praise for a job well done, so it's a nice way to thank the people who took time out of their busy schedules to give the rest of us a fun excuse to yell at people on the internet. But I don't think it's needed to encourage good hosting. I just think it's nice.
I also understand that FM hosts, just like players, are not created equal. I find that playing and hosting ability tend to go hand in hand. But just because someone is not the best player doesn't necessarily mean they should be prevented from hosting, so I think giving them an experienced co-host would be a good solution to this problem, as it allows them to host while providing a safety net to ensure the game will run smoothly. I can also see some edge cases where this could become a problem- if for example someone went through all the steps to host a game, found a co-host, etc. and then bailed and left the co-host to do everything (assuming no extenuating circumstances). In that case, I would say some kind of punishment (perhaps a timeout/ban from hosting) is warranted because that is a pretty crappy thing to do. But for simple hosting mistakes I don't think any punishment is needed, and I think adding co-hosts helps mitigate mistakes by providing a second set of eyes to look over things and correct errors before everything is finalized.
On an unrelated note, it was bugging me that there was a whole discussion about the Pepe meme being offensive/labeled Anti-Semetic by the ADL. This article should clear things up. It's from the ADL's site itself. TL;DR- They know the Pepe meme isn't inherently bigoted, but slap a Hitler 'stache on it and a "kill the jews" text bubble and now it's hate speech. And as to KlingonCelt's argument that the Trump supporters use it, therefore it's white supremacist- no. Trump and his supporters are fucking morons, and many of them are also bigots, but that's no reflection on Pepe- it's just a stupid meme which they happen to like. Now if Trump creates his own secret police force, starts a world war (a legit possibility tbh), puts minorities/political enemies in torture/death camps, and uses fucking Pepe as his insignia while he does it, THEN you can compare Pepe to the Swastika.
I don't have any major disagreements with anything Cryptonic has said.
The biggest thing seems to be a rolling vote might be tedious to see what game is next.
But can easily be done.
Also gets rid of problem of people over gamming themselves.
The vote/poll will be easy.
This is my idea so far:
- People submit complete setup to the queue.
- Around the start of the 3rd game of the 4-game series, a poll will be created with all the setups on the Queue.
- The poll will be a multi-vote poll where you get to choose your game 1 choice, your game 2 choice, and your game 3 choice.*
- After a few days (not too long), the poll will close and those 3 games will run.
- A fourth game will be selected from the queue by the FM Staff to run after those 3 games. The reasons for selection can be anything: It received a lot of votes, New Host, Interesting Theme, Interest Mechanics, Someone who hasn't hosted in long time, literally anything. We might even random it, but we won't reveal how we chose it.
- Around the start of the 3rd game, a new poll will open. Anyone who hosted a game in the previous 4 games will not be allowed to put a setup on the poll unless there are less than 4 setups.
*Depending on the site status, we might break the poll into a category of 2 small/1 large, or 2 large/1 small.
This encourages hosts who lose a poll to refine their setup for next time, or completely change it to try to win people over. The poll should be short and scarce enough that there should be no need to campaign.
This can change if there is more discussion on it, but so far no one really has anything to add/critique.
Also, I feel like no one really read my post. I included some stuff in there that I really thought people would question lmao
If a game isn't worthy to play, then don't vote for it.
If there aren't enough setups in the queue, then you play what you get lol
To expand on this, we have 8 unique hosts currently.
Half of those would be ran this poll. During that time, someone else has the ability to make a setup and put it in the queue. There may only be 5-6 in the next one, but people have that chance. Then a few people might make more, and the 4 who hosted from the original queue might put setups back in.
This is all open to discussion, though. Maybe a host can put setups in back to back?
I mean, I still want to give people fair chance and ability to host, but I do want people to put their best setups forward.
Dat censorship tho
experienced host and a co host is a must.
THE BUMP THO
DAT BUMP DOE
Bumppity Bump lets all do the hump.