Ladle 34: Voting Thread (CLOSED)

A place for threads related to tournaments and the like, and things related too.

Moderator: Light

Concord
Reverse Outside Corner Grinder
Posts: 1661
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2007 5:24 pm

Re: Ladle 34: Voting Thread (CLOSED)

Post by Concord »

owned wrote:If you aren't going to make any contribution to the thread and would rather just take shots at someone, I suggest you stop posting.
Speaking of ignoring people's posts...
Concord wrote:epsy: please restrain your modding and merging in threads that need proper documentation (like this one). It makes it impossible to know if something was suggested in the proper place at the proper time. I understand the desire for separation and clarity, but it becomes revisionist history in cases like these. Thanks.
User avatar
sinewav
Graphic Artist
Posts: 6472
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 3:37 am
Contact:

Re: Ladle 34: Voting Thread (CLOSED)

Post by sinewav »

MaZuffeR wrote:...there is no reason that a change to something between 2 and 0.75 would change gameplay in a different way.
In my personal opinion, I think even the change from 2.0 to 0.75 does little to change the game play in Fortress at all. From my viewpoint, holes are just "slightly" more challenging to get into, and it doesn't affect strategy whatsoever. (Strangely, I find 0.5m holes very challenging to get into. It's a big difference to me going from 0.75 to 0.5. Perhaps the reason has to do with my unstable connection, and the fact I suck. So I guess I can see if someone finds 0.75m holes significantly harder than 1.0m ones.)

You know, a few days before I made this voting thread, I contemplated bumping the discussion. But I didn't because no one seemed to really care. It looked like 2 camps: the players who wanted 'regular' holes, and the players who wanted smaller ones (but were impartial to the specifics, and thought the DS ones were fine). Even playing with you guys every day in DS Mega, no one seems all that concerned about holes.

So the lesson here, I think, is that we should bump the voting discussion threads regularly to stimulate conversation and make sure choices are clear. In the past, I remember posting formatted "voting selections" in those discussion threads, so I'll go back to doing that.
Concord
Reverse Outside Corner Grinder
Posts: 1661
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2007 5:24 pm

Re: Ladle 34: Voting Thread (CLOSED)

Post by Concord »

There are holes that used to exist that now do not. For example, two walls 1 meter apart. One used to be able to drive through both, now one cannot.
User avatar
sunny
Core Dumper
Posts: 169
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2005 1:12 pm

Re: Ladle 34: Voting Thread (CLOSED)

Post by sunny »

sinewav wrote:
BTW, that bit about your girlfriend saying "it's a good size" is a joke. In case you were wondering. You know, because when girls say "it's a good size" that means it's small. But I don't know this from personal experience, so I might be wrong. That's just what I hear. I mean, it's not like I've never talked about stuff like that with a girlfriend. It's just, usually their complaints are about how I'm mean and kind of a jerk to them, never about, you know, down there. In that area.

LOL!
User avatar
ItzAcid
Match Winner
Posts: 511
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2010 7:16 am
Location: I reside in your mind.
Contact:

Re: Ladle 34: Voting Thread (CLOSED)

Post by ItzAcid »

sinewav wrote:The other reason I chose not to include other sizes is simply "too many choices." That sounds funny to say, but here is a scenario: let's see what the vote would have looked like if I included every size mentioned...

Holes: unchanged (2.00) | 1.60 | 1.50 | 1.25 | 1.00 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 0.40 | no holes (0.00)

How easy do you think it would be to determine a clear winner from that lot? If you like, we can use this same list next quarter and see. It doesn't matter to me.
[

Hm...and the one more choice should be the one that you deem worthy? If your one more choice was added then it would be necessary to add the different options that others proposed. Until an exact number that represents a medium number is added, sine has no obligation to add the extra choice.
Won Tourneys/Competitions: WWG4 (Hmm, need more braggage like Durka)

Oo oO
User avatar
sinewav
Graphic Artist
Posts: 6472
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 3:37 am
Contact:

Re: Ladle 34: Voting Thread (CLOSED)

Post by sinewav »

<rant>
I know I've taken some heat about this 'voting', and I'm Ok with that. I'm not in charge of voting. However, I've kind of made it my self-appointed responsibility (the same way kyle would randomize teams and host the authorities, or DDMJ would compile/host the settings, or how Concord would edit the Challenge Board, and Z-Man records and plays admin, and epsy... well you get the point). These are all things are are important to Fortress in some way, and luckily we have enough volunteers. If someone wants to take this responsibility from me, that's totally cool. I don't mind at all. But, I remember we missed the last quarterly voting becuase I didn't do it, and no one covered for me. Plus, I kind of enjoy doing it, even if I take heat sometimes. It because I like all you people (most anyway) and I like the game, and I want it to be the best time for all.
</rant>
Gonzap
Shutout Match Winner
Posts: 916
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2008 3:08 pm

Re: Ladle 34: Voting Thread (CLOSED)

Post by Gonzap »

sinewav wrote:<rant>
I know I've taken some heat about this 'voting', and I'm Ok with that. I'm not in charge of voting. However, I've kind of made it my self-appointed responsibility (the same way kyle would randomize teams and host the authorities, or DDMJ would compile/host the settings, or how Concord would edit the Challenge Board, and Z-Man records and plays admin, and epsy... well you get the point). These are all things are are important to Fortress in some way, and luckily we have enough volunteers. If someone wants to take this responsibility from me, that's totally cool. I don't mind at all. But, I remember we missed the last quarterly voting becuase I didn't do it, and no one covered for me. Plus, I kind of enjoy doing it, even if I take heat sometimes. It because I like all you people (most anyway) and I like the game, and I want it to be the best time for all.
</rant>
/me cries.


nah we love u too sine ^^
Word
Reverse Adjust Outside Corner Grinder
Posts: 4310
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2009 6:13 pm

Re: Ladle 34: Voting Thread (CLOSED)

Post by Word »

suscribe :)

(i know it's only a gesture...I have nothing to complain about or to add to this topic except you guys are irreplaceable, and i know nobody else who could do it better or just as well)
User avatar
DDMJ
Reverse Outside Corner Grinder
Posts: 1882
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 12:15 am
Location: LA, CA, USA, NA
Contact:

Re: Ladle 34: Voting Thread (CLOSED)

Post by DDMJ »

Who's Britguy?
User avatar
sinewav
Graphic Artist
Posts: 6472
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 3:37 am
Contact:

Re: Ladle 34: Voting Thread (CLOSED)

Post by sinewav »

DDMJ wrote:Who's Britguy?
FOR3CAS7. The shoutcast guy, right?
Word
Reverse Adjust Outside Corner Grinder
Posts: 4310
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2009 6:13 pm

Re: Ladle 34: Voting Thread (CLOSED)

Post by Word »

yes
owned
Shutout Match Winner
Posts: 876
Joined: Sat Jun 09, 2007 11:01 pm

Re: Ladle 34: Voting Thread (CLOSED)

Post by owned »

Concord wrote:
owned wrote:If you aren't going to make any contribution to the thread and would rather just take shots at someone, I suggest you stop posting.
Speaking of ignoring people's posts...
Concord wrote:epsy: please restrain your modding and merging in threads that need proper documentation (like this one). It makes it impossible to know if something was suggested in the proper place at the proper time. I understand the desire for separation and clarity, but it becomes revisionist history in cases like these. Thanks.
Sine's post that I quoted has been in this topic since it was posted. I don't see how epsy's modding would make it any harder to understand "Feel free to trash this thread since the vote is over."
User avatar
Lackadaisical
Shutout Match Winner
Posts: 823
Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2003 4:58 pm
Location: Amsterdam, Netherlands
Contact:

Re: Ladle 34: Voting Thread (CLOSED)

Post by Lackadaisical »

I think conc was talking about the merging of some of the discussing sine/goody had (which happened prior to your post) with the Ladle 34 discussion thread.
owned
Shutout Match Winner
Posts: 876
Joined: Sat Jun 09, 2007 11:01 pm

Re: Ladle 34: Voting Thread (CLOSED)

Post by owned »

Lackadaisical wrote:I think conc was talking about the merging of some of the discussing sine/goody had (which happened prior to your post) with the Ladle 34 discussion thread.
But he was directly taking a shot at me. So the discussion that sine/goody had doesn't really play at all into his comment.
User avatar
Lackadaisical
Shutout Match Winner
Posts: 823
Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2003 4:58 pm
Location: Amsterdam, Netherlands
Contact:

Re: Ladle 34: Voting Thread (CLOSED)

Post by Lackadaisical »

nvm again, too tired to read
Post Reply