Due to a certain lack of voting for characters in the game, the Day's deadline will be postponed to something in the neighbourhood of 24 hours.
Now, to restate certain things that have been overlooked:
1. I have admitted that I was probably wrong to hide my Tolkien-based criteria for voting, and to just present the tallies.
Evidence:
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Formendacil
Okay, my criteria being in the dark is bit mysterious, and I can understand the criticism there. Very well, in the future if I stick to the Tolkien-based voting system, I'll analyse each and every vote in the open.
|
2. In the future, if I choose to continue to follow the Tolkien-based route, I shall make each and every vote's significance within this system open and public.
Evidence: see last quote.
3. My original reason for keeping the criteria secret was not to rig the game, but to avoid offending anyone who's vote might not have been counted- and to keep game discussion on which characters should have been voted off, NOT on whether or not I was correct in allowing/disallowing certain votes. My decision here may have been wrong, if so, I have already admitted that- and said I will change.
Evidence:
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Formendacil
The only reason I was keeping it in the dark was to avoid offending people's sensibilities as to whether or not I was being partial and counting votes to please myself.
So, if there are offended feelings in the future because I don't think your votes are reasoned, then I apologise in advance, but you brought it on yourselves.
|
4. Tolkien-based criteria.
Okay, this is a bit of a new topic, and the points I'm going to make haven't been made specifically by me.
To begin, the requirement to have a rationale for one's votes is not an idea that I came up with. This goes back to
Anguirel's game, and was an official rule of
Glirdan's. It was also a rule that I was not initially fond of, during those games- possibly because their enforcement of it was inconsistent. However, keeping in mind that this IS a Tolkien forum, and keeping in mind the idea that posts with some meat to them make for a better argument (and thus Survivor thread) than simple
++ My Candidate posts, I began to reconsider my opinions on it over the course of the games.
When I started my own game, I did not originally see a need to include the rule. I assumed that, more-or-less, most voters would include SOME rationale in their voting- and, if the rationale was to be rational, I assumed that it would Tolkien-related.
On about Day 3 (and research back on this thread will clear up exactly when it was), one of the voters from a previous game, possibly Anguirel (though I don't wish to name names in case I'm wrong), was irked at a lack of apparent reason behind someone's vote, and the issue came up in my mind.
That night/day, tallying up the votes, I too was irked at the apparent lack of reason behind some of the votes- and as the two "Tolkien-based" tallyings I have done thus far will show, quite a few votes are easily discounted on this point.
Although I held to the majority decision (a majority decision that I seem to recall disliking for some reason), I did post that I would be possibly changing the rules to require a Tolkien rationale for the votes.
The way I initially did this was done in such a way that I wasn't GUARANTEEING that I would only count Tolkien-based votes- but I might, so you'd better include a reason to be safe. My intention, at that time, was not to force you all to do more work, but to try and stimulate you all by non-forceful means into livening up debate.
However, as the voting progressed over the following days, the overall percentage of "unreasoned" votes didn't really change, and it possibly got worse. A few players asked me (SPM right here on the game thread), if I could be expected to start discounting votes. I replied "No" in all cases, but continued to mention it as a possibility for the future, not necessarily to be acted on.
Well, yesterday I acted on it. I gave plenty of warning, and I don't regret that I did.
Now, I do most sincerely and heartily regret the whole kaffuffle that it has caused. I apologise for keeping my decisions on which votes are eligible secret- clearly, I did not think it through as completely as I ought to have. I will admit to being quite pleased that it was Oropher that got the noose, and not Elrond, but I completely and absolutely deny the charges that I rigged the result. I tallied each vote that had a Tolkien rationale (in my human opinion, mind you). It was still your votes that I counted- and if the anti-Oropher camp had the majority in the keep-Tolkien-a-part-of-it spirit voting scheme that I had set up, then it was their majority that won the votes.
Two more Tolkien-reasoned (even if rather warped, distorted, or parodied in its logic) and Elrond would be gone, and not Oropher.
Again, I truly detest this whole situation that has come up. I regret that my actions made it so. But what has happened, has happened, and as Anguirel has pointed out, reversing my actions will only make things worse. If you want to "remedy" things, then I recommend that you all vote for Elrond today- and use something Tolkien wrote to back you up.
~Michael A. Joosten - Survivor: The Second Age Moderator~
P.S. To everybody who has supported me, misguided or not, my thanks. To know that I haven't made completely irrational, stupid, and egotistic decisions is appreciated.