|
I agree. I don't understand why the blatantly false rantings of one guy seems to cause any consideration of changes in the site, particularly when they will change -nothing-. Achaea and Aardwolf will continue to do our little dance at the top of the rankings. The site will get slightly less traffic, causing the site to be worth slightly less to both Synozeer and the listed muds.
Synozeer: There are thousands (I don't know how many, but I assume it's thousands) of people who come here every day to vote or read the forums or whatever. So far there seem to be almost nobody that has piped up saying they think the rules need changing. Why does a rant, particularly one that is based on completely false accusations, carry any weight whatosever?
I just fail to see the motivation in changing the site's rules I guess when the impact will be negligible. And really, if there IS a mud out there that is spamming people every 30 seconds with reminders to vote until they do, I'd say it's a pretty #### good mud if they can manage to retain a single player in the face of that kind of irritation.
I think you should decide whether the site is supposed to be a traffic exchange (which is how its set up) or whether it's genuinely supposed to rate muds (in which case I wish you the best of luck in such a quixotic enterprise.) Assuming it's the former (and all signs certainly point to that), to whose benefit is it to make increasingly restrictive rules on voting practices? Traffic is traffic and the only people I ever see complaining about voting practices are an insignificant percentage (far less than 1%) of the site's users.
Again, I don't really care personally about this rule change as it's not going to change the placement of our muds. It just seems like the more rules you have, the more time someone has to spend listening to accusations that mud X is breaking rule Y, and then investigating such. *shrug*
--matt
|