I support Desc's system.

I vote neither.

i vote desc, i guess

I'll go with Fyre's but I'll place an even stronger vote that this will be dead before New Years but efforts at getting the ball rolling on something interesting get bonus points.

With all due respect to both Fyrestorm and Descyphal (and believe me, I do respect the hell out of both of them) and all the work they put into their respective ranking systems, I'm going to have to go with Wile on this one and vote neither.

My reason is this; to me keeping track of all the numbers and points always seemed a bit unnecessary, to me. When I first joined Open Mic, back when it was a thread in the Music Forum, we didn't have any kind of rankings system, yet everybody knew who the hot emcees were. And even when we did get a sub-forum, people battled because they wanted to, because it was fun. And the beginners were taken under the wing of the more experienced and they got better and they became the contenders to beat. And it was obvious by their improvement in what they were writing, as well as by the numbers of their wins opposed to losses, where they stood as battlers in this forum. They didn't need a ranking of 20.5 for the month of August and a rank of 21.725 for the month of September to know that they were good. Likewise, newcomers didn't need a ranking of 9.375 to know they needed improvement. I favor Wile's idea of a system based on Wins/Losses as well as King of the Hill and separate tournaments to decide who gets the belts.

quote Dutch Samurai

With all due respect to both Fyrestorm and Descyphal (and believe me, I do respect the hell out of both of them) and all the work they put into their respective ranking systems, I'm going to have to go with Wile on this one and vote neither.

My reason is this; to me keeping track of all the numbers and points always seemed a bit unnecessary, to me. When I first joined Open Mic, back when it was a thread in the Music Forum, we didn't have any kind of rankings system, yet everybody knew who the hot emcees were. And even when we did get a sub-forum, people battled because they wanted to, because it was fun. And the beginners were taken under the wing of the more experienced and they got better and they became the contenders to beat. And it was obvious by their improvement in what they were writing, as well as by the numbers of their wins opposed to losses, where they stood as battlers in this forum. They didn't need a ranking of 20.5 for the month of August and a rank of 21.725 for the month of September to know that they were good. Likewise, newcomers didn't need a ranking of 9.375 to know they needed improvement. I favor Wile's idea of a system based on Wins/Losses as well as King of the Hill and separate tournaments to decide who gets the belts.

I was just about to vote on the Desc. system until I read that...

Dutch made a great point and has successfully converted me. So I'm going to have to go with Wile.

I did like Descyphal's though. The only problem I personally had with it is the 4 month thing for averaging. That seems a little long. I think 2 months would work better because it would be more frequent updates and emcees can get a better idea of where they stand sooner.

Battles don't happen very often in here anymore so it's not like there's going to be a ton of updating at all. There's only about 10 active emcee's battling in here. lol.

neither.

Neither, and I support Wile's system (which, if I'm right, isn't that just the original system we had?).

Open Mic's downfall began when we tried to overcomplicate everything. Just have a ladder, and let people climb that ladder by beating other people. No math, no calculations, just whip or get whipped.

Well the votes are in and the poll is now closed. I wanna thank all of the people that participated, I really didn't expect such a big or quick response, I'm grateful to you all for making the effort.

The final count stands a 3 for the current system, 7 for the other points-based system, and 11 for neither of these and something else instead. Since that's over 50% of the votes, the outcome is obvious.

I'll close this thread now, and we can take discussion back over to the feedback thread. Thanks once more to everybody for contributing.