World Championships

[cataracs]

The ingame poll had 58 participants, which is good enough.



Option 3 is elimintae, guess 3 doesn't make sense anyway.

Option 1 shouldn't have been in the poll aswell? It was just for curiosity if people want a change. Since it's less than 30% I suppose we do want a change.

That leaves us with the 2 or 4 times a year options. Any more thoughts about it?
Main answer should be from admins, if 4 are a pain to program then we'll just go with two for now?

[flockmastoR]

The ingame poll had 58 participants, which is good enough.



Option 3 is elimintae, guess 3 doesn't make sense anyway.

Option 1 shouldn't have been in the poll aswell? It was just for curiosity if people want a change. Since it's less than 30% I suppose we do want a change.

That leaves us with the 2 or 4 times a year options. Any more thoughts about it?
Main answer should be from admins, if 4 are a pain to program then we'll just go with two for now?

The only statistics you can trust are those you falsified yourself

[Gipfelstuermer]

Main answer should be from admins, if 4 are a pain to program then we'll just go with two for now?

Easy to program by now. Thanks to Alk

With the survey result, it makes sense to go for 2x a year though.

Also, imagine to be the real World Champion and then you lose the jersey because of some stupid fantasy WC. So I think Fantasy WC should only take place if the real World Champion has already retired (which is true right now).

[flockmastoR]

to be more serious:

just slightly over 1/3 of the people want more than 2 per year.
~64% want 1-2 per year

but funny conclusions you draw from the results eliminating a 16/58 results while keeping a 15/58. You can just say you dont like the result and don't give a shit about it. But don't pretend the result of your follow up poll will be somewhat meaningful.

[Hansa]

Main answer should be from admins, if 4 are a pain to program then we'll just go with two for now?

Easy to program by now. Thanks to Alk

With the survey result, it makes sense to go for 2x a year though.

Also, imagine to be the real World Champion and then you lose the jersey because of some stupid fantasy WC. So I think Fantasy WC should only take place if the real World Champion has already retired (which is true right now).

I voted for 1, but with that reasoning i think a 2nd one everytime after the current WC retired is fine.

[cataracs]

The ingame poll had 58 participants, which is good enough.



Option 3 is elimintae, guess 3 doesn't make sense anyway.

Option 1 shouldn't have been in the poll aswell? It was just for curiosity if people want a change. Since it's less than 30% I suppose we do want a change.

That leaves us with the 2 or 4 times a year options. Any more thoughts about it?
Main answer should be from admins, if 4 are a pain to program then we'll just go with two for now?

The only statistics you can trust are those you falsified yourself

I'm very confident my logic is correct. If it was a 1 or 2 poll, most if not all who voted for 3-4 would vote 2.

[flockmastoR]

The ingame poll had 58 participants, which is good enough.



Option 3 is elimintae, guess 3 doesn't make sense anyway.

Option 1 shouldn't have been in the poll aswell? It was just for curiosity if people want a change. Since it's less than 30% I suppose we do want a change.

That leaves us with the 2 or 4 times a year options. Any more thoughts about it?
Main answer should be from admins, if 4 are a pain to program then we'll just go with two for now?

The only statistics you can trust are those you falsified yourself

I'm very confident my logic is correct. If it was a 1 or 2 poll, most if not all who voted for 3-4 would vote 2.

While you usually need strong arguments to change the status quo, you just kill the option to keep the status quo and keep one option for changing it the most, while this option has less votes than keeping the status quo.

For me the result would mean to either make it twice, or stick to as it is. But I guess Gip will draw his own conclusions

[cataracs]

The ingame poll had 58 participants, which is good enough.



Option 3 is elimintae, guess 3 doesn't make sense anyway.

Option 1 shouldn't have been in the poll aswell? It was just for curiosity if people want a change. Since it's less than 30% I suppose we do want a change.

That leaves us with the 2 or 4 times a year options. Any more thoughts about it?
Main answer should be from admins, if 4 are a pain to program then we'll just go with two for now?

The only statistics you can trust are those you falsified yourself

I'm very confident my logic is correct. If it was a 1 or 2 poll, most if not all who voted for 3-4 would vote 2.

While you usually need strong arguments to change the status quo, you just kill the option to keep the status quo and keep one option for changing it the most, while this option has less votes than keeping the status quo.

For me the result would mean to either make it twice, or stick to as it is. But I guess Gip will draw his own conclusions

The topic was made to hear opinions, not discuss mine.