Policy Discussion: Invitationals

Post Post #25 (isolation #0) » Tue Jan 23, 2007 8:13 pm

I have no opinion on invitationals so long as its understood that I be allowed to issue the following statement:

"I will not take part in any "best player" invitationals, so don't nominate or invite me."

This is due to the fact I doubt the "best" player criteria will take into account certain preternatural abilities that some individuals on this forum possess.

Post Post #27 (isolation #1) » Tue Jan 23, 2007 9:24 pm

Well, certainly Point B of Mith's statement refers to a game of the best player, which is something I am almost sure does not include intangibles like the 11th Hour.

Post Post #38 (isolation #2) » Thu Jan 25, 2007 4:42 am

Yosarian2 wrote:Or one other thought; if we're going to have 3 mini-invitationals this year, we could just invite the 36 most active and
serious
players on mafiascum to be in them, 12 per game, I think that should include most of the really active players on the site; and then the big invitational can be drawn based on which players do best in those games.

Why do people always confuse being serious with being good?

Post Post #42 (isolation #3) » Thu Jan 25, 2007 7:03 am

Serious =/= Good. Thats a rookie mistake people make that doesn't translate.

Post Post #45 (isolation #4) » Thu Jan 25, 2007 7:25 am

I would say both are purposes of an invitational, just two different types. But I would bitch and moan, for example, if the "best player" invitational was based off of your latter definition, for sure, because thats not the best players, thats the people who have the most cliche play styles.

Post Post #68 (isolation #5) » Fri Jan 26, 2007 4:23 pm

Fiasco wrote:Doesn't take away my objections:

* People will pester their friends into voting for them
* The game will be filled with the most active friend-pesterers
and with players who are highly visible for the wrong reasons

* More potential for "ill will on the part of those who don't get in"; votes won't stay completely secret (personally I don't really care if I get to participate; I just would like to see games with exceptional-quality play)
* No potential to match a set of players to each other for playing style or whatever
* Voting and counting votes means unnecessary effort
* The average voter isn't as good at picking an interesting set of players as the average Anonymous Trusted Veteran

He is totally talking about me.

Post Post #69 (isolation #6) » Fri Jan 26, 2007 4:23 pm

Also, Shea, are in that WIFOM.net game?

Post Post #78 (isolation #7) » Thu Aug 30, 2007 6:14 pm

You left off someone of extreme importance named AniX from your list.