Very well Tommi. You seem to be impervious to both logic and
rationale, so let me make the following quite clear:
<p>
1) I can and do have the right to cancel votes at MARP, if I feel they
are either biased or in contradiction with MARP Rules. The exception,
is, of course, when a MARP Rule is subjected to vote. In any case, the
person polling the vote should have been involved in the debate over
the subject. All 6 players who voted for the #2 were part of the
debate, and have contacted me personally. GUess who didn't, and who
seems to be completely ignorant of the reasons why we didn't call a
vote in the first place.
<p>
2) Your vote can continue.
<p>
3) The results will not be ratified, in any way shape or form, and
will not be enforced by the Editors. Nor will the Editors involve
themselves in the vote.
<p>
4) Support for unlimited time by inserting quarters in pc_10 games is
at maybe 30% of the active voice of the community. For dip changes it
is around 80-90%. I think you can do the math.
<p>
Furthermore, let me thank you personally for forcing me to put down
the heavy hand in this situation. Everybody else was okay with waiting
a beta and then voting after the dips were listed. So maybe you can
explain to me, either here or in a personal e-mail, what is so
important about finishing SMB, a game that intelligent rodents and
probably some bacteria can beat without any problems.
<p>
If you have a problem with my status either as an Editor or as the
Rules Coordinator, by all means, post on it or contact another Editor.
I am responsible and accountable to the community, and the moment I'm
not, I'm out. As such, I have been granted certain rights and been
allowed to take temporary (ie: not permanent) measures in resolving
conflict. I will not even beg the question of what MARP would
currently be like if my, or the other Editors' positions, did not
exist, although I'm sure the topic will be raised again at some point.
<p>
MARP works under a set of guidelines that allows games to follow a
specific notion: one quarter, most skill. It has never been about
completion. It will never be about completion. It is not even always
about 'doing what the most players want.' If it were, we would very
likely have RLH still in T&F recordings. Feel like competing on that
Mr. Tiihonen? Or what about extra credits in Gauntlet? Why not? I'm
sure lots of players could sit and shoot ghosts for an hour.
<p>
Finally, if anyone else wants to protest over this matter, with a
decent reason as to why more quarters should be allowed, let me make
the procedure crystal clear.
<p>
1) You are challenging a rule at MARP (2a), not changing settings for
a game. As I said earlier, if you want to post a vote on those lines,
that's your right, and I will not interfere--I will participate.
Leading to 2...
<p>
2) Contact me before posting the vote, so any inconsistencies can be
worked out. Several players did this with the PC-10 quarters issue,
and seemed satisfied to agree to wait a beta. (although now I'm
wondering)
<p>
3) You must have a reason for the challenge. I would hope this would
seem obvious, but either Tommi has not been reading BBH's posts or has
just been ignoring the question.
<p>
Again, this is more than I wanted to say on this topic, but I don't
want it to seem like I'm making decisions out of thin air. Which is
what you seem to be doing, Mr. Tiihonen. Please, for the sake of
everyone involved in this argument, take some time and get informed.
<p>
Q.T.Quazar, MARP Rules Coordinator
--
qan@home.com