Extending the freeze? (Part 3 of less games per ranking period)

[superaielman]

Seems like most everyone's in favor of lowering rankings for at least a while, and the topic of conversation was about extending the freeze. Anyway, pretty obvious poll. If the freeze votes outnumber ending the freeze, we can run a third poll if need be.

---

See the last topic for my thoughts, pretty much.

[Yakumo]

Well, looks like we're moving the discussion here, so I'll just quote what I was going to respond to from the other topic.

The point is to have a topic to discuss these things and do them while following the processes for it that we have layed down and followed before that has always been open to everyone and anyone can feel free to come in and look at it.  If you have it as just a discussion point then it makes it that, a discussion, which is hard for people to butt into.

By making it part of the standard DL process you make it open.

Edit - And if you are going to just hold them up as token gestures and all that shit.  Fuck it all and put someone in charge.  If all this shit is just pointless flair and garbage there is no damned point to it.

What Gref said. Ignoring that things can change in the two or so months till rankings open, we have the ranking topics for that reason.

and actually, I think this poll's settled, we're going down to two games per period for now.  Going to make a topic for extending the freeze in a sec.

What is seriously that different between what we're doing now, discussing the viability of ranking something, and what we do when we open a ranking period, which is... following a process we set down to discuss the viability of something for ranking?  The only difference is we put that little blurb in the bonus section asking for ideas and thus make it obvious to the casual fan voting on the site that we're about to rank.  If you're that worried about that, then someone should put a note on the main page with a link to these topics so people know something's going on and can chime in if they want to.  Otherwise, I seriously don't see why this is supposed to be any harder for people to get their points into than the ranking topics themselves.  Either way, they still have to "butt into" a discussion that the site regulars are having.

[superaielman]

Because no one's besides the hardcore board members are going to seriously care about a topic bantering around ranks several months before the ranking period opens. Same with linking to it on site or trying to get feedback for anything but actual rankings.  I don't mind a topic like that at all, it's just not at all a replacement for an actual ranking period.

I really don't disagree with a lot of what you're hitting at- the games we have are weak, yeah- but I don't think extra time's going to help them or the site at all.  Neither option is especially good, but between having two slots and most people having reservations about the future games we shouldn't have any serious misranks.

[SageAcrin]

I'm currently considering what I support, although one period looks good to me right now; There's potential for the mass of borderline ideas to become usable with a push and it's not like our votes are going to go much farther down because of one season. (If there's much farther down to go.) I can't see any real downside to this and I can see potential decent upside considering the herd-of-borderliners that is our ranking potential pool.

As a random note; Considering the discussion in the other topic, the very vehemant and vocal anti-freeze sentiment, which in general didn't just apply to one year of it, but it as a concept...maybe we should start rethinking the idea of freezes at all?

Certainly, the points against it have always been good. We do have normal topics for this, and if the belief is that we can hash it out there these days, there's never a need for a freeze at any point, it's an obsolete concept.

[superaielman]

There's nothing wrong with the concept of freezes. It's wonderful to have breaks in rankings, and I don't think anyone's going to argue that the three we've had haven't been very good for the group. Just with anything, if you take it too far it backfires. I'm very sympathetic to people who don't think much is ready to rank, I.. just don't think the benefits of an extended freeze outweigh keeping one of the most important parts of the site shut down all the way to the end of this year.

[SageAcrin]

I'm still waiting to hear why an extended freeze is more negative than any freeze, though.

It's a matter of months either way; Won't it cause a reduction of interest from externals and internals alike, regardless of how long it is? Aren't the downsides the precise same? And hasn't it been argued as completely unecessary as long as people are responsible, in effect?

The effects may be cumulative, effectively, but that doesn't mean that freezes in general don't have negative side effects.

[superaielman]

We started freezes in the first place to give the staff a break from the work and a chance for the group to take a breather on rankings, which had gotten nasty. They work perfectly for what they are, which is.. well, see above. Also gives is a chance to have new games come out and prepare other ones for ranking. That all said, new games are the lifeblood of the DL. Look at all the arguments DDS has generated in it's brief time in the DL. It draws voters in and is something different from the same old, same old. Of course we have to consider drawing, writers, etc etc when ranking, but you know all that. Freezing just lets us balance things in between ranking games and waiting for games to get ready.

I'm arguly fairly seriously on this because I really don't think it's to our benefit to leave the process closed down for another period. This was an exceptionally long ranking freeze, both for length and other considerations (That time we took off early this year). Getting moving and getting something new- I'm assuming we'll rank at least a FW in the next few periods- should help increase interest in the site and help keep things fresher.

Like with anything, it's all about moderation.

[SageAcrin]

There's almost no "work" involved in rankings, which consist of A: A Bio(Which, currently, are getting remade pretty much after any large gap when new people get in anyways, I believe, rendering it more or less the same difference either way.), and B: Finding art(Which, admitably, is a decent amount of work in some cases, but in others even I can find it; See P3, where I actually found some along the lines of a minute of looking. Variable issue.). Regardless, the work is still there in both cases regardless of if a freeze is done or not, it merely puts it off. (Assuming the game was a good ranking idea anyways, at any rate.)

Ranking arguments have always been nasty. I don't think a freeze will ever change that, only not ranking sensative-subject games like Pokemon, KH, FF1, SD3, FE-series, etc.

(Now, booting. That's an issue that tends to get emotional enough for time to lend less anger. People are rarely pissed about ranking things in that set of varied issues, and if they are, it's pretty consistant anger; Booting, on the other hand, gives people more time to watch the game do horrendously poorly, which is often the case on booted games. Being realistic and not wanting a favorite to get chain-robbed has it's impact. But we've never had consistant booting periods to start with, which...is an interesting point, anyways, considering we have a tradition of ranking periods.)

Again, if we're all so mature that we can handle iffy ranking ideas right now, we'll never need freezes to give games time. We can simply do that by not voting them in. Skipping a ranking period saves some time, but judging by arguments I've heard so far, this is a minor issue to many people.

And none of those are still reasons that an extended period is any better or any worse than ever freezing at all. If it's about moderation, then, indeed, a standard ranking period, where people can pick and choose as little or as much as they want as good ranks, is indeed the best way to go. After all, we're responsible enough to. Right?

[Grefter]

Vocal minority?  There was like 5 people talking in that topic.  Minority my balls.  That was exactly what I was talking about with a small group deciding on issues in a state where people aren't going to butt in.  And yes they have to "butt" into conversation in a ranking topic, but the topic is there for that specific reason, there is a standard response format you can use, you don't HAVE to take part in the discussion, where as discussion is the only thing these topics have had.

You can't go and say the people that are for openning up the ranking are afraid of freezes are a fucking anti-freeze sentiment or some bullshit like that.  The most vocal ones were Super and I, you know people that strongly supported every single freeze we have had so far and I would say we are both pleased with the results of the first one we had (note we both supported and even posted topics that got the ball rolling on the topic) and aren't exactly all BURN THE WITCHES about this one either.  It has served a good purpose, time has passed.  There is an extent to it though.

It isn't about whether or not we are responsible enough, it is about whether or not it is the right thing to do by voters as a whole.  Reopenning the process to them with it having been on hold for a year IS the right thing to do when we even have some IRC regulars who haven't been around long enough to have done a ranking I believe.

You know -exactly- what the first thing people do when they get into voting and start nomming.  Why isn't this guy ranked, what about this guy?  Shit like that.  People have come and never had a chance to even make a case for it and see how the process works and understand the reason the DL roster is the way it is.

Do I ultimately think we can get through this without ranking at least one probably highly questionable idea that will have me going berko and verbally assaulting someone?  No.  Do I think it is worth it and the right thing to do?  Yes.

[Meeplelard]

You know -exactly- what the first thing people do when they get into voting and start nomming.  Why isn't this guy ranked, what about this guy?  Shit like that.  People have come and never had a chance to even make a case for it and see how the process works and understand the reason the DL roster is the way it is.

THIS is the main point to holding rankings, and why we can't just keep extending the freeze.  We've been on a freeze long enough, we have to open the proccess and show some effort.  That's why.  As was noted, extend it one session now...what's to stop up from extending it another session then, and keep going and...oh shit! 3 years passed and we have nothing ranked, or even worse, WE DIDN'T LET THINGS HAVE A CHANCE.

You have to put an end to these things.  Yes, things might not be ready...but if they truly aren't, they'll be shot down in the second phase.

But that's side tracking.  Point is, as I noted with some real life and Internet Friends who are outsiders from the DL (though this was a while back, point still stands), they were asking "Is this guy ranked?" or "What? How come this game isn't ranked?" etc.

People WANT to see their favorites, or at least, someone who represents a favorite game of theres.  Didn't someone say they came to the DL cause they saw someone like Morte get ranked?  The point is, fresh blood, be it an FW, full game, partial game, what have you, helps.  If there are no good ideas, and nothing gets ranked, at least showing effort into the process  is better than nothing.  And then casuals, if they really want something, can even come in and voice their opinion.

Face it, there's no benefit from extending the freeze longer at this stage.  Its been on for a while.  Extending it further can only hurt things.  We need to start ranking session up again.  Trying to say "we still don't have any great ideas, lets extend it!" is not the way to go about it.

Don't have much else to add that hasn't been said already.  The point is, we've held off long enough, holding off even longer either:
A. Will make people slowly lose interest.
B. Make us hold off LONGER potentially as whose to stop us from doing the same thing 5 months from now or whatever?
C. Is not friendly for newcomers who are getting into more contemporary RPGs (in fairness, a lot of the DL isn't getting into the truly new stuff, but that's an aside.)

Unless we open that potential for new stuff in the DL, nothing is ever going to change.  Change of some kind, even if its just ONE FW, is needed every now and then.

[Luther Lansfeld]

Voting to extend the freeze, but it looks like it's not going to happen.

[superaielman]

Looks like rankings are staying open. Thanks to everyone who voted.