|
|
Post by LWPD on Apr 9, 2007 19:29:42 GMT -5
Open or Closed Ballots?
One of the main reasons I wanted to develop this project was to help create a comprehensive reference point on CotG characters and game editions that really don't get much discussion these days. There's just 'so much' to the history of CotG that some bits tend to get lost behind.
For that reason I'm partial to 'open ballots' because they would ideally help to provide a chronicle on each promoters 'best of the best' while allowing voters to 'walk us through' the time and era in the process. When multiplied out with many high quality contributions from those who know this game the best...such a process would provide the greatest amount of content to the project and in all likelihood yield the highest caliber of output upon completion.
I do however realize that some people 'may not vote' if they felt the effort required too much of them or if it required a process that made them feel uncomfortable. Since the goal is to gain as comprehensive of a gage of CotG history as possible...the benefits of open ballots as a mandatory requirement may come with the negative of turning some people off from the process....people who themselves may otherwise have made valuable contributions to the project.
With that in mind...what method of balloting do you prefer:
Mandatory open ballots...uniform secret ballots...or an allowance for both?
|
|
|
|
Post by steelthunder814 on Apr 9, 2007 19:30:58 GMT -5
allowance of both
|
|
|
|
Post by Matt on Apr 9, 2007 19:37:01 GMT -5
Either way is fine with me, so I'm not really sure how to vote.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dragon Breath on Apr 9, 2007 19:49:17 GMT -5
Open ballots.
I understand that the dice may make a wrestler like Colossus an unbeatable force in one Fed, and an underperforming choke artist in another. I intend to vote based solely on the wrestler's performance in my Fed, and I understand that others will vote differently, because they have had a different experience than me.
I would like to see not just a mandatory open ballot, but also make it mandatory to explain the basis of your vote. It could be something simple like:
Spike
Yes - he was a 1 X Galaxian Heavyweight Champion, 1 X IP Champion and 4 X Hardcore Champion in my Fed, and was consistently at the top of my singles rankings.
|
|
|
|
Post by Darth Turkish on Apr 9, 2007 20:08:02 GMT -5
Open ballots. I understand that the dice may make a wrestler like Colossus an unbeatable force in one Fed, and an underperforming choke artist in another. I intend to vote based solely on the wrestler's performance in my Fed, and I understand that others will vote differently, because they have had a different experience than me. I would like to see not just a mandatory open ballot, but also make it mandatory to explain the basis of your vote. It could be something simple like: Spike Yes - he was a 1 X Galaxian Heavyweight Champion, 1 X IP Champion and 4 X Hardcore Champion in my Fed, and was consistently at the top of my singles rankings. Exactly my thoughts!!! |
|
|
|
Post by Vidtek on Apr 9, 2007 20:25:28 GMT -5
I think we should alow for both. I am going under the assumtion that we would be using the board polls for the voting, and thus everyone only gets one vote. And if those who vote want to give the reasons they can, but if they don't they can still vote. Besides, just because Cyclopse is a multi time heavyweight champion in my fed (hypothetically speaking) doesn't make him HoF material.
Big Time
|
|
|
|
Post by steefposton on Apr 9, 2007 20:29:49 GMT -5
I know I'm pretty new to the boards, but I like the idea of everyone getting a voice and a chance to contribute/argue their case, while making an allowance for someone who'd like to vote and be involved without having to argue. I might vote for someone like Bounty Hunter to be voted in, but if he didn't, it wouldn't kill my day or make me want to write a thesis defending his selection. Someone like Spike though, a multi-time champion and consistantly at the top, I could see trying to make sure he gets included.
|
|
|
|
Post by mikefortune on Apr 9, 2007 21:46:57 GMT -5
I like Dragonbreath's idea of having to explain why you picked this wrestler. On the flipside I also could make something up to get my favourite wrestler in. Ghengis Khan was an 8 x GWF Champ.
There will be no perfect way to vote and make everyone happy so we should use what the majority of people vote for.
|
|
|
|
Post by Wildfire on Apr 9, 2007 21:52:56 GMT -5
I think it depends on what we're going for... if we want a true representation of what each indivual promoter thinks, the ballots should be secret. Otherwise, the votes that come before will influence how that vote.
I totally agree with LWPD that it would be good to have people's reasons and whatnot for posterity.
To that end, I would suggest a closed ballot, which can be posted after the voting is complete.
On the other hand, if we want it to be a community decision, then it should most definately be open. My concern would be that the discussion could get out of control, as things do around here sometimes.
Perhaps if we were to go with an open ballot, we could agree to simply state our case and vote, and open a separate thread for discussion. That way if people what other opinions they can have them, but they don't have to get them, and we will have the good historical record we're looking for.
|
|
|
|
Post by Darth Turkish on Apr 10, 2007 6:47:08 GMT -5
I really think that, for the most part., those whom we all kind of agree should be in the HoF (Chaos, Thantos, etc) will end up being there. I mean, Spike may have crapped the bed in my fed, but how many feds did he actually repeat the same success? From what I have read of other's feds, he has been more successful in other promoters feds, so He should be no problem to get inducted.
|
|
|
|
Post by GalactiKing on Apr 10, 2007 8:34:02 GMT -5
I think a combo would work best.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chewey on Apr 10, 2007 20:46:07 GMT -5
People who want to openly campaign for a guy who tore it up in their individual fed should be open to push for the guy. But other people may not want to subject themselves to criticism of not including so-and-so. So why bother forcing the issue?
Although I've stated on the record that I am going to be a pretty strict voter, if we are going with the 75% threshold. In my mind, there are very, very few people deserving of the status as a First Ballot Hall of Famer.
On the other hand, if Lord Nexus gets that 75% and I end up not voting for him (as I am leaning towards no, at least on the first ballot), I would gladly accept him as a member of the Hall. He just has to earn it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Eliath on Apr 11, 2007 16:26:06 GMT -5
Open ballots. I understand that the dice may make a wrestler like Colossus an unbeatable force in one Fed, and an underperforming choke artist in another. I intend to vote based solely on the wrestler's performance in my Fed, and I understand that others will vote differently, because they have had a different experience than me. I would like to see not just a mandatory open ballot, but also make it mandatory to explain the basis of your vote. It could be something simple like: Spike Yes - he was a 1 X Galaxian Heavyweight Champion, 1 X IP Champion and 4 X Hardcore Champion in my Fed, and was consistently at the top of my singles rankings. I agree with this entirely and would happily explain each of my votes. |
|
IPPON!!
