Ladle 34 Voting Discussion

[Concord]

I agree with Goody,

let us allow the dust to settle, before we start kicking up more.

[Mkay1]

I am sorry for interupting, but I don't think you should be able to change votes depending on how many people vote for it....

To me it sounds outrageous.
My logic, two diffrent ways

Suppose you are voting for a primary in the USA, or for the prime minister in England, you put on your ballat. I vote for Barack Obama, however if very few people vote for Barack, then please change my vote to Hillary Clinton.

This shows that you have a hidden agenda, not being an outlier in a poll. There will be outliers, so deal with it.

P.s. This is a mini satire.

My second idea in a short story, called Undecided Sammy
Mommy: Hey little Sammy, want to go to the ice cream shop.
Sammy: Yea, Yea, I would Love to (said exuberantly)!
(They enter the store)
Ice cream shop worker: Hey cuttie, what would you like?
Sammy: Ummm (she pauses), I want rocky road!
Ice cream shop worker: Ok, what cone would you like?
Sammy: Ummm, I want sprinkles, unless the minority of people choose that, in which case I would like Nuts.
Ice cream shop worker: (chuckles) You are correct, a lot of people like nuts, but not Sprinkles. (She scoops out the savory ice cream, after dipping the scooper in warm water. Then she diligently sprinkles nuts over the ice cream. When she is done with making the ice cream cone, she hands it over to the little girl)
Sammy: Yuck, I hate this! Nots are gross, I wish I had really got sprinkles. (*cries*)
Narrator: And that, is the story of Undecided Sammy

Hey people, think for yourselfs, not the majority.

[THEred]

rofl, so sammy wanted sprinkles, yet only got nuts because everyone else wanted NUTS on their ICE CREAM.?

interesting... sammy is a naughty girl.......

but changing your choice because of majority vote could be because they want to make sure if they dont get what they want, they can try to get something close to it.

[Mkay1]

Oh

Then disregard the post that I spent 30 min thinking about...

[owned]

I'm sorry sine, but those are horrible choices for hole sizes. While the most popular sizes are represented in your graph, why should the only options be the current size, and 1/3 of the current size?

There should at least be some intermediate length for people who think that .75 is too drastic a change.

[Phytotron]

Suppose you are voting for a primary in the USA, or for the prime minister in England, you put on your ballat. I vote for Barack Obama, however if very few people vote for Barack, then please change my vote to Hillary Clinton.

That's called Instant-runoff voting. And by the way, they don't vote for the Prime Minister directly. Read up.

[sinewav]

I'm sorry sine, but those are horrible choices for hole sizes.

Don't blame me. You brought up this same point in the discussion, and I agreed. But, no one matched our call for more clarification. No one posted any feedback from tests in the pickup servers. We're left to go with what we know works, which is what's been tested properly - 0.75m.

If you don't like the hole choice, choose "unchanged".

We can sort out the sizes next time.

[Olive]

I took the liberty of playing with the rules to spare me some 'editing' time.

[Olive]

Everybody Chill

Team Size: 7v7
Hole Size: Smaller (.75)

Quit posting your opinions on the options and state your vote clearly Bring up more ideas for discussion and editing after this ladle.

fixed.

[Goodygumdrops]

I'm sorry sine, but those are horrible choices for hole sizes.

We're left to go with what we know works, which is what's been tested properly - 0.75m.

a hole size between 2.0 (which we've been using for years) and 0.75 (which "we know works") might not work because it's untested, right?

[Olive]

Personally I find .75 too small, 1 - 1.25 would suit me better.

[sinewav]

a hole size between 2.0 (which we've been using for years) and 0.75 (which "we know works") might not work because it's untested, right?

Ok man, I see you're here to cause trouble and I'd like you to stop.

Yes, we can choose any number between 2.0 and 0.75. We can choose 1.95 or 0.8 for all I care (I'm not even playing in Ladles, I have no motive either way). But no hole setting other than 0.75 had the opportunity to be subject to community opinions like "OMG too small WTF!!!" and "These small holes rock!!!". Why, why, why would we choose an arbitrary value for a Ladle!?

The only other value any of us have experience with is 0.5 in Fortress Onslaught. But, since no one cared to argue for that value in the discussion thread, it's not here.

This is not the place for discussion. This is the place for making decisions. If you don't like change, vote against it. It's THAT SIMPLE.

Personally I find .75 too small, 1 - 1.25 would suit me better.

You're a little late to the party man. Can you stop with the posts? We've got your team's vote, thanks and good luck.

[Goodygumdrops]

a hole size between 2.0 (which we've been using for years) and 0.75 (which "we know works") might not work because it's untested, right?

Ok man, I see you're here to cause trouble and I'd like you to stop.

because i think that using a hole size which is between the two you offered might be a good idea, i must be causing trouble, right?

Why, why, why would we choose an arbitrary value for a Ladle!?

there's a lot of this going around

can someone tell me why it is so taboo to try, say, explosion radius 1.5 in the ladle?

there are 12 of these a year, and there's no money on the line

[sinewav]

because i think that using a hole size which is between the two you offered might be a good idea, i must be causing trouble, right?

Yes, because this is the voting thread. The place for you comments is the discussion thread, which you've already visited. Your continued comments are just making you look like more of an ignorant jerk, so keep it up as long as you want.

I, on the other hand, will not back down from moderating a thread I made, that exists for the good of the Fortress community. If you don't like the way this is going, get more involved and come up with a better solution - for next time.

Once again, I'll spell it out for the dense Tronners out there: This thread is for a team representative to cast a single vote regarding Ladle settings. If you are not voting, don't post. If you are voting, and don't like the new settings offered in this thread, vote for the old settings or don't vote at all.

[Goodygumdrops]

because i think that using a hole size which is between the two you offered might be a good idea, i must be causing trouble, right?

Yes, because this is the voting thread. The place for you comments is the discussion thread, which you've already visited. Your continued comments are just making you look like more of an ignorant jerk, so keep it up as long as you want.

I, on the other hand, will not back down from moderating a thread I made, that exists for the good of the Fortress community. If you don't like the way this is going, get more involved and come up with a better solution - for next time.

Once again, I'll spell it out for the dense Tronners out there: This thread is for a team representative to cast a single vote regarding Ladle settings. If you are not voting, don't post. If you are voting, and don't like the new settings offered in this thread, vote for the old settings or don't vote at all.

so just to clarify, if i disagree with you in a thread you started, i'm a dense ignorant jerk who is causing trouble?

and because you started the voting thread, you're the only one who can have a valid opinion on what the choices should be?