ATD 2013: Should teams get points for GMs contributions to assassination threads?

[seventieslord]

Lots to think about here. Lots of these points overlap, I should mention

1. There's only so much that needs to be said. I often pass on writing an assassination because I have nothing new to offer. If everyone was writing an assassination on every team, there would be so much overlap in points that actually finding new and salient points would be like finding a needle in a hay stack.

I agree there’s only so much that needs to be said.

You also don’t need to say anything remarkably revolutionary. If one team says my defense sucks, and then you do too, then that strengthens that same point.

My proposal was to limit the bonus points to 3, meaning there’s be no incentive beyond 6 reviews, so in an ideal world everyone would do 6 reviews (that wouldn’t happen, but let’s say) and therefore everyone would also receive about 6 reviews. There would be no “everyone was writing an assassination on every teamâ€, as you said.

I don’t know about you, but I would LOVE to get six reviews instead of just the usual one from our resident workhorse. Even if they all said similar things.

2. If everyone writes an assassination, then it isn't just a time commitment to write, but also to read. No one likes knowing their 30 minutes work was a waste of time and many GMs will scan or not read at all, which means that good points will be missed and not properly discussed because they are missed.

This is a good point. Too many reviews means too much to read. I don’t write things for nothing. I want my words to be read. When I’m reading the assassination thread, I usually read the “good†ones (you know who you are) , the ones about my own team (obviously) and scan the others for points worth responding to.

That said, I can guarantee that at the very least, the team being reviewed will read them. And that’s the most important part. No words will go unread.

3. The more assassinations, the harder it is to respond to each one. Lets not forget that the dedication of time is not just writing an assassination, it is responding too. And just like writing an assassination, responding takes more time than merely the typing time, it requires that the GM take the time to properly think out their replies and in many instances research their replies.

True.

But, it should also be said, replying is not an obligation. You can take the criticism to heart and be ready to address it in the playoffs.

4. GMs being forced to pump out assassinations is not fun, this whole process is fun. It's a game, not a job, we should never lose sight of that fact.

That’s the great part about it. No one is being forced to do anything. 6 assassinations is not that hard, and at half a point each, it would not make or break anyone, and for 90% of teams it would not affect their spot in the standings. Some will treat it like the assignment that’s worth just 2% of the class and not bother handing it in, and that’s their right. Those who do “hand it in†would have an ever-so-slightly higher chance of finishing higher, but in all likelihood the ranking will be dependent on who did better in the other 98% of the class.

5. Everyone has a different personality. Some may get a lot more from simply reading an absorbing assassinations, and that is a form of participation in and of itself. A system of rewarding people for writing assassinations rewards those who's personality has them derive pleasure from writing assassinations, while in the long run discouraging GMs who find it tedious from participating in the first place.

There is no perfect response to this, other than the fact that a maximum of three points has been shown to have zero effect on most teams in the standings. So if people don’t want to do it, just don’t.

I think that the framework I provided is a happy medium between the current (wild west style with a bunch of guys getting reviews without doing any themselves, and a few people doing the vast majority of the work with no reward), and the opposite (Nazi-style forced reviews)

6. If the assassinations thread is filled with everyone's opinions in full detail, it will provide a road map to how voting will play out, removing the suspense, surprise and mystery from the playoff process.

It wouldn’t be “everyoneâ€, just the approximately 6 (most likely fewer) people who reviewed each team.

7. There is already so much to the process that rewards GMs who enjoy long drawn out debates and research. The system greatly rewards those who have the time and desire to dedicate their time and mental resources to the ATD. Given how these long drawn out debates drain the momentum out of the ATD, it is clear that we should not be trying to increase the prominence and reward for debate. This plays into the personality type argument, the more systems like this we have in place, the more we encourage one group to gain joy from the ATD and the more we discourage all other groups from enjoying the process.

This is an expansion of what I said to VI this morning. Effort leads to a greater chance of victory. There’s a certain percentage of your success that is a direct result of effort, while the rest is simply the team you drafted. The bonus points for doing reviews would fall into the former category, but they’re really just a drop in the bucket of the “effort†side of things.

So, in summary, this is a game, this is supposed to be fun. We should be setting in place rules that make the ATD fun for as many different people as possible, not as few as possible.

Of course. But discussing and debating is fun. We all agree on that, right? If no one’s sharing their opinions and backing them up, what do we have? I see nothing wrong with attempting to foster further discussion and debate.

The divisional review threads are an awesome idea, regardless. We take a week to duke it out for each playoff series, why not for the regular season?

 

[markrander87]

Soooo. No bonus points and separate threads for division assassinations.

What's next on the agenda?

 

[nik jr]

i mostly agree with nalyd's big post. i think have always done at least 1 assassination, but most often the reason i don't do more is that someone has already made most of the points i planned.