Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Boards.ie Voting History Discussion

  • 20-04-2014 06:20PM
    #1
    ctrl-alt-delete
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,092 ✭✭✭✭


    Trying to keep the other thread just for posting the actual vote outcomes and such.

    Obviously we can discuss each individual vote on each vote thread in future as we have done so far.

    I am of the opinion we are having too many votes :pac:

    For instance we have voted on the Login rule twice now, with the outcome on both occasions being to reduce it to 21 days, yet we still have another thread and vote going on it again that has not expired yet.

    Anyways, with Mac only being able to change 2 rules once a season we can discuss what should take priority here for next season and also how we feel the current changes have affected the game.

    What does everyone or anyone think?


«13

Comments

  • #2
    tommycahir
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,591 ✭✭✭tommycahir


    Any chance you can have a status for each rule in the other thread along the lines of

    Status : Implemented \ On backlog for implementation

    Just that it is somewhat confusing when reading the current status when there are multiple entries on the same rule eg the login timeframe..

    Also would be useful if there was a simple table showing the status of each one.


  • #3
    ctrl-alt-delete
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,092 ✭✭✭✭ctrl-alt-delete


    tommycahir wrote: »
    Any chance you can have a status for each rule in the other thread along the lines of

    Status : Implemented \ On backlog for implementation

    Just that it is somewhat confusing when reading the current status when there are multiple entries on the same rule eg the login timeframe..

    Also would be useful if there was a simple table showing the status of each one.

    There is a status in the other thread showing as best I can what has been the outcome, but it is confusing because it has been confusing.

    I started it to try and highlight how many times we have voted so far and to try and get a discussion going on what needs to be voted on and how we decide which votes do get acted upon.

    The login one is extremely confusing, and for me the current vote is pointless because we have a 21 day vote passed on backlog.

    It was not implemented because Mac could only change two which ended up being the SMFA monitoring and the buying from unmanaged option.

    I just don't like the idea of polls going up and time being wasted when we don't know if they can ever be acted upon especially when some changes have been under the headings of trials.

    Hence we need to discuss how the current changes have gone?, are we going to want to change the trial one back?, how many does that leave free to change come the end of this season?, have we any left to change as a result of that ?and if so what one do we change? and even what version of the login one would we go with?

    It is very confusing at the moment!


  • #4
    KERSPLAT!
    Closed Accounts Posts: 31,152 ✭✭✭✭KERSPLAT!


    Well the most recent login one wasn't for a change but to see how people feel about it, that's all


  • #5
    GT_TDI_150
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,917 ✭✭✭✭GT_TDI_150


    Brilliant work.

    Might be worth linking this in your opening post in the 'log' topic and getting the 'log' topic sticky_fied?


  • #6
    hufpc8w3adnk65
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,158 ✭✭✭✭hufpc8w3adnk65


    Stop me if I'm wrong lads


    Was it 21 days we voted too have the log in changed too (so lads going on 2 weeks holidays without golf membership wouldn't be removed?


    also transfer monitoring will remain off for all of next season after the cock up at the start of this one.


    No squad caps (impossible too implement now)

    1 club change a season per manager

    If your taking a leave of absence from the game for any reason ( no need too tell anyone why ) but just pop up a post here or on sm saying you've shït too do and will be back soon as you can.



    Buying from unmanaged clubs too remain off next season as it did work straight away either due too in game glitch



    As allways this isn't gospel, it's our game We all will decide


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    ctrl-alt-delete
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,092 ✭✭✭✭ctrl-alt-delete


    MrMac84 wrote: »
    Stop me if I'm wrong lads


    Was it 21 days we voted too have the log in changed too (so lads going on 2 weeks holidays without golf membership wouldn't be removed?


    also transfer monitoring will remain off for all of next season after the cock up at the start of this one.


    No squad caps (impossible too implement now)

    1 club change a season per manager

    If your taking a leave of absence from the game for any reason ( no need too tell anyone why ) but just pop up a post here or on sm saying you've shït too do and will be back soon as you can.



    Buying from unmanaged clubs too remain off next season as it did work straight away either due too in game glitch



    As allways this isn't gospel, it's our game We all will decide

    Yeah 21 days was the vote outcome for the login.

    With monitoring and buying from unmanaged remaining unchanged that leaves one option open for possible change, but that is not to say anything needs to be changed.

    Can I ask Mac is the minimum post and registration time that was voted on a rule now? We just need an official line on it.


  • #8
    hufpc8w3adnk65
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,158 ✭✭✭✭hufpc8w3adnk65


    ctrl-alt-delete wrote: »
    Yeah 21 days was the vote outcome for the login.

    With monitoring and buying from unmanaged remaining unchanged that leaves one option open for possible change, but that is not to say anything needs to be changed.

    Can I ask Mac is the minimum post and registration time that was voted on a rule now? We just need an official line on it.
    As in the minimum amount of posts on boards?


  • #9
    ctrl-alt-delete
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,092 ✭✭✭✭ctrl-alt-delete


    MrMac84 wrote: »
    As in the minimum amount of posts on boards?

    Yeah the vote ended in favour of new managers having to be registered on boards for min of a month and have a min of 50 posts.

    Just wondering if it is a rule now?


  • #10
    KERSPLAT!
    Closed Accounts Posts: 31,152 ✭✭✭✭KERSPLAT!


    Sounds good, should act as a deterrent for people multi accounting :)


  • #11
    hufpc8w3adnk65
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,158 ✭✭✭✭hufpc8w3adnk65


    Can I ask lads do they think that there is multi accounts in our world? Also would this not deter people from joining in the first place? Also just so ye know any new members too boards who "find" our thread I have a mod or admin do a ip scan of the new person and all existing players too see if there is a match


  • Advertisement
  • #12
    KERSPLAT!
    Closed Accounts Posts: 31,152 ✭✭✭✭KERSPLAT!


    MrMac84 wrote: »
    Can I ask lads do they think that there is multi accounts in our world? Also would this not deter people from joining in the first place? Also just so ye know any new members too boards who "find" our thread I have a mod or admin do a ip scan of the new person and all existing players too see if there is a match

    Yes


  • #13
    hufpc8w3adnk65
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,158 ✭✭✭✭hufpc8w3adnk65


    KERSPLAT! wrote: »
    Yes

    Yes what?


  • #14
    KERSPLAT!
    Closed Accounts Posts: 31,152 ✭✭✭✭KERSPLAT!


    Do I think there is multi accounting, yes I do.


  • #15
    hufpc8w3adnk65
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,158 ✭✭✭✭hufpc8w3adnk65


    KERSPLAT! wrote: »
    Do I think there is multi accounting, yes I do.

    Have you asked a mod too look into it or reported it on sm?


  • #16
    GT_TDI_150
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,917 ✭✭✭✭GT_TDI_150


    Seaneh wrote: »
    I think it's a sad indication of the short sightedness of some of the game world players that there have been some brilliant examples of why monitoring needs to be on and so few people have bothered to vote, and even sadder that of those who have voted, 13 have voted to leave it off.

    I consciously haven't voted yet ...

    I voted to leave it on last time round ...

    I'll vote in due time ... or I may not ...


  • #17
    Seaneh
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 18,300 ✭✭✭✭Seaneh


    GT_TDI_150 wrote: »
    I consciously haven't voted yet ...

    I voted to leave it on last time round ...

    I'll vote in due time ... or I may not ...

    I probably jumpped the gun timing wise as well, this early in the season it's kind of irrelevant as implementing it would be so far away.


  • #18
    PerrinV2
    Moderators, Computer Games Moderators Posts: 6,340 Mod ✭✭✭✭PerrinV2


    GT_TDI_150 wrote: »
    I consciously haven't voted yet ...

    I voted to leave it on last time round ...

    I'll vote in due time ... or I may not ...
    Same.
    Deadline for the vote is the 28th,whats the rush?


  • #19
    Seaneh
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 18,300 ✭✭✭✭Seaneh


    PerrinV2 wrote: »
    Same.
    Deadline for the vote is the 28th,whats the rush?

    I thought I could only make a poll 1 month long for some reason, totally my fault.


  • #20
    GT_TDI_150
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,917 ✭✭✭✭GT_TDI_150


    I'll throw this out there ....

    ANYONE THAT VOTED ALREADY BUT WANTS TO CHANGE add your detail below:

    Name | initial vote | new vote
    ||

    this should give an indication on whether this vote is a dud or people are happy with the vote cast even in light of examples give.


  • #21
    Al Capwned
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,721 ✭✭✭Al Capwned


    Yaaay - a table in a poll thread.....
    The perfect storm!

    :pac:


  • Advertisement
  • #22
    KERSPLAT!
    Closed Accounts Posts: 31,152 ✭✭✭✭KERSPLAT!


    GT_TDI_150 wrote: »
    I'll throw this out there ....

    ANYONE THAT VOTED ALREADY BUT WANTS TO CHANGE add your detail below:

    Name | initial vote | new vote
    ||

    this should give an indication on whether this vote is a dud or people are happy with the vote cast even in light of examples give.

    That's not really the point. I don't think there's any need for more messing about. If the vote stays as is, I'm happy to leave it off


  • #23
    pepper180
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 992 ✭✭✭pepper180


    Allowed change your vote!!!

    Dear mother of God...


  • #24
    KERSPLAT!
    Closed Accounts Posts: 31,152 ✭✭✭✭KERSPLAT!


    Still time for others to cast their votes. I wish Mac would have sent a GW PM about the two votes to get a better consensus of what people want


  • #25
    GT_TDI_150
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,917 ✭✭✭✭GT_TDI_150


    KERSPLAT! wrote: »
    Still time for others to cast their votes. I wish Mac would have sent a GW PM about the two votes to get a better consensus of what people want

    surely, with a boards league that wasalways meant to be for boards posters, a month is long enough for them to see the poll here if indeed they are posting / reading here.


  • #26
    KERSPLAT!
    Closed Accounts Posts: 31,152 ✭✭✭✭KERSPLAT!


    GT_TDI_150 wrote: »
    surely, with a boards league that wasalways meant to be for boards posters, a month is long enough for them to see the poll here if indeed they are posting / reading here.

    And if they aren't posting here or reading? They're in the league either way so they should get a vote. I'm not saying this because I think the 'turn it on side will get more votes' it's more, like I said, to get a better consensus of what the people in the league want, not just what the people of boards want


  • #27
    Al Capwned
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,721 ✭✭✭Al Capwned


    Obviously a lot different for other game worlds, but the rules of this GW specifically say
    Only members of www.boards.ie can take over clubs here!

    __

    Personally, I think that as a stipulation of joining this league was that you had to be a member of boards, anyone that doesn't see these threads, and therefore doesn't vote is in hard luck....


  • #28
    KERSPLAT!
    Closed Accounts Posts: 31,152 ✭✭✭✭KERSPLAT!


    Then why are mails sent about manager positions? Sure if they posted here they'd see them?

    It's OK for one agenda but not another?

    As for your point on them being members, someone can be a member and not post or read the threads, they are still members of the GW


  • #29
    Al Capwned
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,721 ✭✭✭Al Capwned


    KERSPLAT! wrote: »
    Then why are mails sent about manager positions? Sure if they posted here they'd see them?

    It's OK for one agenda but not another?

    As for your point on them being members, someone can be a member and not post or read the threads, they are still members of the GW

    It's not an agenda. It's my opinion.

    Yes, people can be members and not post or read, but if the main prohibiting factor preventing anyone from joining the GW in the first place is that they must be boards.ie members, and they had to post in the forum to gain access, surely those people can keep an eye in here too.

    Actually I think that the main appeal of the game is the fact that this forum exists - I wouldn't play if it was solely on soccermanager.com.

    Like i said, just my opinion, and you obviously have a different one. That's fine too.


  • #30
    Iago
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,639 ✭✭✭Iago


    KERSPLAT! wrote: »
    Then why are mails sent about manager positions? Sure if they posted here they'd see them?

    It's OK for one agenda but not another?

    As for your point on them being members, someone can be a member and not post or read the threads, they are still members of the GW

    I do agree with this, although we're on opposing sides on the debate, the more managers who vote the better.

    I do wonder if you would be quite so keen if the Yes vote was ahead though :D


  • Advertisement
  • #31
    Al Capwned
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,721 ✭✭✭Al Capwned


    Just to add, I've no problems with the GW mails being sent by the way.
    Everyone in the GW is entitled to a vote, and if it helps to get a better 'turnout', well that has to be a good thing.

    My point still stands, though it's a boards.ie league, if people ignore this forum they will miss out. Take the sale of "The Ten" for example, or the Valencia auction - people that don't read or post on here wouldn't have known what was happening..


Advertisement