The required quorum for making changes to the Online Games Rules. — Tournament History

No ratings yet — be the first to rate!

Single choice Public votes

This poll is closed.

A simple majority of those who participated in the vote

37% 17 votes

2/3 of those who participated in the vote

26.1% 12 votes

3/4 of the votes from those who participated in the vote

37% 17 votes

1
2
3
Next
Last

Statistics

Registered: 6/12/2007 8:51 AM UTC

Posts: 1,832

12/1/2009 10:09 PM UTC #1

Auto-translated

I would like to hear the opinions of Heroes of Might and Magic players regarding the required number of votes needed to make changes to the World Rules.

1. Simple majority of those participating in the vote.
2. 2/3 of the votes.
3. 3/4 of the votes.
4. With experience: at least 1 game played per year before the vote.
5. With experience: at least 5 games played per year before the vote.
6. With experience: at least 10 games played per year before the vote.
7. With experience: at least 15 games played per year before the vote.
8. Experience is irrelevant.

For example:

1 and 4.

С истиной где-то рядом...

Лето 2010.

Statistics

Registered: 10/12/2008 4:33 PM UTC

Posts: 575

12/1/2009 10:14 PM UTC #2

Auto-translated

Option 3 and Option 7.

Statistics

Registered: 3/19/2009 5:58 PM UTC

Posts: 174

12/1/2009 10:19 PM UTC #3

Auto-translated

Psyche_7

The 3rd and 7th options

I agree completely.

Drink up, then I'll refill your glass...

Ты будешь жрать мир, или мир будет жрать тебя — в любом случае все о'кей, все идет по плану.

In reply to Psyche_7

Statistics

Registered: 10/12/2008 4:33 PM UTC

Posts: 575

12/1/2009 10:21 PM UTC #4

Auto-translated

Psyche_7

Options 3 and 6.

When I voted, option 6 had at least 15 games. And now it has 10... What's going on?

Maybe it would be better if everyone suggested a minimum number of games?

In reply to Psyche_7

Statistics

Registered: 6/12/2007 8:51 AM UTC

Posts: 1,832

12/1/2009 10:24 PM UTC #5

Auto-translated

Psyche_7

When I voted, the 6th option had at least 15 games. And now it's 10... What's going on?

I just looked at the table and realized that with such requests, the votes of many will not be counted.
Sorry if something is wrong...

My choice:
Options 3 and 8.

С истиной где-то рядом...

Лето 2010.

In reply to Дубровин Павел

Statistics

Registered: 10/12/2008 4:33 PM UTC

Posts: 575

12/1/2009 10:27 PM UTC #6

Auto-translated

Dubrovin Pavel

Yes, I just looked at the table and realized that with such requests, the votes of many will not be counted.
Sorry if something is wrong...

15 games is about 3-4 months of registration. That's fine.
In short, I'm in favor of a minimum of 15 games.

In reply to Psyche_7

Statistics

Registered: 6/12/2007 8:51 AM UTC

Posts: 1,832

12/1/2009 10:35 PM UTC #7

Auto-translated

Psyche_7

15 games is roughly 3-4 months of registration. That's reasonable.
So, I'm in favor of a minimum of 15 games.

Since you think it's necessary, alright, I'll bring this point back.
We have democracy here, you see... :smile02:

С истиной где-то рядом...

Лето 2010.

Statistics

Registered: 8/19/2007 11:16 AM UTC

Posts: 876

12/2/2009 5:34 AM UTC #8

Auto-translated

2 and 5 are quite enough to prove yourself and start relying on the rules.

ну это вообще всем аргамездец!© Kash
без авто:smile20:
Человек - игрушка Бога. Этому - то и надо следовать. Надо жить играя.
Платон.

Statistics

Registered: 8/18/2008 3:50 PM UTC

Posts: 1,127

12/2/2009 5:49 AM UTC #9

Auto-translated

2 and 6 answer options

2/3 is already a constitutional majority. I think that's enough.

В дикім полі

Statistics

Registered: 11/15/2008 9:53 PM UTC

Posts: 2,497

12/2/2009 6:22 AM UTC #10

Auto-translated

And 2/3 or 3/4 of what? If it's based on the number of voters, then I'm against it, but if it's based on the total number of active players (we need to consider this), then I'm for it. I think 10 games is a reasonable threshold.

Всем удачи ! И Морали !

Statistics

Registered: 3/18/2008 7:49 PM UTC

Posts: 3,172

12/2/2009 6:32 AM UTC #11

Auto-translated

2 vbn: (or any other moderator)
There are a lot of topics and polls on the forum right now regarding changes to the rules, and it's overwhelming. Even if changes are introduced, there's a high probability of missing them. Please create another topic that will contain these changes, and only the CHANGES should be in it, with all other posts being deleted!

Даже если вас съели - у вас два выхода:smile19:

Зима 2011-12.

In reply to Wlk777

Statistics

Registered: 11/14/2007 8:15 AM UTC

Posts: 1,493

12/2/2009 6:38 AM UTC #12

Auto-translated

Wlk777

And 2/3 or 3/4 of what? If it's based on the number of voters, then I'm against it, but if it's based on the total number of active players (we need to think about this), then I'm for it. 10 games seem like a reasonable threshold.

You're being harsh, sir. Where else would such a high threshold be set? Only in African democracies, where the president is in power for life and gets at least 90% of the vote each time. If a person doesn't vote, they might not be for it, but they definitely aren't against it. So, it should be based on the number of voters, but there needs to be a minimum number for the election to be considered valid. :D

In reply to PReDS

Statistics

Registered: 4/6/2008 3:16 PM UTC

Posts: 474

12/2/2009 6:43 AM UTC #13

Auto-translated

PReDS

We need a minimum number of votes for the changes to be considered valid. :D

I completely agree.
I'm for 2/3 and a minimum of 10 votes in favor of the change. Experience doesn't matter, although I think I've played 15 games myself.

Discord 5884

In reply to PReDS

Statistics

Registered: 11/15/2008 9:53 PM UTC

Posts: 2,497

12/2/2009 6:45 AM UTC #14

Auto-translated

PReDS

You're being harsh, my friend. Where else would they set such a high bar? Perhaps only in African democracies, where the president is in power for life and consistently gets at least 90% of the vote. If someone doesn't vote, they might not be for it, but they definitely aren't against it. So, it should be based only on those who voted, but there needs to be a minimum threshold for the election to be considered valid. :D

I think changes to the rules are a serious matter, as people will have to play by them. It's a shame the thread with Loy's post about the example of banning Inferno was deleted. So, I'll say this myself: some people might simply not notice the thread with the poll, some might be away, and as a result, we might get a rule change that is supported by only 20-30% of active players? I'm against this; the idea that if a person doesn't vote, they're not against it – I don't agree with that. IMHO.

Всем удачи ! И Морали !