Mafia Game Waiting List

[Blaze09]

VOTE FOR MMPR...CAUSE YOU KNOW YOU WANT TO!!!!!

Plus...you get to look at Kimberly

[RoyWill Rumble]

Fuck Mushroom Kingdom, Home Movies, cunts.

[C-MIL]

We need signatures, Will. Not people, just signatures.

[The Mask of Norro]

Don't bother putting Webcom IV on the voting list RW. I'm close enough to the front with my spot in the small games list anyway. Provided Catholocism doesn't take a month to finish or something and the UN game doesn't lag behind, I'm hoping things should move quick enough that I can run this thing before the end of March.

That... that would be ideal, at least. In any event, I'm second in line, so I doubt the poll would really benefit me all that much.

[Josh]

Yeah, I don't have to be on the poll, as only Criminal Minds is ahead of me.

You can include it if you like, but I have no real preference.

[Your Mom]

I didn't get added to the small game list. Did I do something wrong? Or was I just missed?

[Matt]

Did you specify the number of roles?

[-A-]

Did you remember eye of newt?

[Your Mom]

I did not specify. And I am out of eye of newt Let's try again!

Small Game: Main Event Mafia Mafia (10 players) *not ready*

[Ruki]

I demand Gogo finish AM3 so it can get the *ready* status

[Matt]

I demand Gogo finish AM3 so it can get the *ready* status

Haven't you learnt yet? Anime 3 is never going to run, it's merely on the list to taunt you.

[Ruki]

It makes me sad!

[oldskool]

I'm starting to think we should ditch the waiting list and just have a ready-to-go poll for all the slots. All the traditional games are ready, 2/3 of Small games are ready, half the large games and just under half of the mediums are ready to go.

Hell, the only excuse the ones that aren't ready have seems to be "they're far enough down the list that they have a few months before they need to be ready", aside from the obvious "just got on the list" ones.

Plus the polls are more fun anyway and it would eliminate bias towards small/medium games based on the fact that they finish sooner and the game runners farther down the list need that poll as often as possible to have a shot of running any time soon.

[Matt]

Not yet we don't... I've spent forever climbing that damn list and I'm nearly at the top now

[oldskool]

If your game's good we'll vote for it, butt-face.

[Ruki]

I like Oldskool's idea!

[-A-]

I'm starting to think we should ditch the waiting list and just have a ready-to-go poll for all the slots. All the traditional games are ready, 2/3 of Small games are ready, half the large games and just under half of the mediums are ready to go.

That's a reason for getting rid of Ready status though, isn't it? Not for getting rid of the list?

Hell, the only excuse the ones that aren't ready have seems to be "they're far enough down the list that they have a few months before they need to be ready", aside from the obvious "just got on the list" ones.

Well people are being silly then because RW has shown a willingness to bump un-Ready games down the list. I think a bigger problem is the fact that people say they're ready when they aren't (like Ace writing his PMs and deciding his game wasn't going to work after sign-ups had finished.) If you haven't finished preparing your game, it shouldn't be Ready.

Plus the polls are more fun anyway and it would eliminate bias towards small/medium games based on the fact that they finish sooner and the game runners farther down the list need that poll as often as possible to have a shot of running any time soon.

I think the point of the size breakdown has always been to try and control what's running at any given time rather than making sure that we play an exactly equal number of games of each side. I think it's more important that we have a good split of games at any one time than we play an equal number of each kind of game over a certain period of time.

I basically love the list as it stands in almost every way. I think that the Ready check is probably the weakest part of it because people will just Ready things for the sake of it without having finished the planning. The sentiment is right though, if people have their PMs written well in advance and sign-ups get opened just before a game finished then the turnover will be faster and we'll play more games. It also gives people an incentive to plan in advance and that can only help the design when you've got time to mull things over.

EDIT: If we ran all games based on a poll, you know that every game would be run by a big name, a person who relentless shills their game or a person with a great theme but not necessarily a good game (because that's all you can see on a poll.)

Edited March 3, 2009 by -A-

[RoyWill Rumble]

I'm starting to think we should ditch the waiting list and just have a ready-to-go poll for all the slots. All the traditional games are ready, 2/3 of Small games are ready, half the large games and just under half of the mediums are ready to go.

That's a reason for getting rid of Ready status though, isn't it? Not for getting rid of the list?

Hell, the only excuse the ones that aren't ready have seems to be "they're far enough down the list that they have a few months before they need to be ready", aside from the obvious "just got on the list" ones.

Well people are being silly then because RW has shown a willingness to bump un-Ready games down the list. I think a bigger problem is the fact that people say they're ready when they aren't (like Ace writing his PMs and deciding his game wasn't going to work after sign-ups had finished.) If you haven't finished preparing your game, it shouldn't be Ready.

Plus the polls are more fun anyway and it would eliminate bias towards small/medium games based on the fact that they finish sooner and the game runners farther down the list need that poll as often as possible to have a shot of running any time soon.

I think the point of the size breakdown has always been to try and control what's running at any given time rather than making sure that we play an exactly equal number of games of each side. I think it's more important that we have a good split of games at any one time than we play an equal number of each kind of game over a certain period of time.

I basically love the list as it stands in almost every way. I think that the Ready check is probably the weakest part of it because people will just Ready things for the sake of it without having finished the planning. The sentiment is right though, if people have their PMs written well in advance and sign-ups get opened just before a game finished then the turnover will be faster and we'll play more games. It also gives people an incentive to plan in advance and that can only help the design when you've got time to mull things over.

EDIT: If we ran all games based on a poll, you know that every game would be run by a big name, a person who relentless shills their game or a person with a great theme but not necessarily a good game (because that's all you can see on a poll.)

This. And I'm not just saying that because my games are and will be unpopular. If we have polls, there's an inherent risk in only a select few running games.

[TheRossWalker]

Not that there's anything wrong with it, but if we did polls all the time, we'd have a Sousa game every three weeks. I think it's better to leave things as they are.

[GoGo Yubari]

Not that there's anything wrong with it, but if we did polls all the time, we'd have a Sousa game every three weeks. I think it's better to leave things as they are.

Agreed. Other gamerunners aren't going to get the chance to actually run games and improve unless they have an incredibly geektacular concept if we make it all polls, it'll just be established names like Sousa, Ruki, and RW more often then not.