vpFREE2 Forums

2008 Nominees for vpFREE Hall of Fame

#1

Mac McClellan wrote:

... From the standpoint of sampling and statistics this appears to be a
sub-optimal way to select an inductee. It seems to me that quite a
few years might pass without anyone being admitted to the HOF. If
that's the goal I suppose it's more understandable, but still runs
the risk of failing to select a deserving person ...

The goal is to induct all worthy, deserving nominees.
We'll consider adjusting the inductee qualification rules
in future years if it seems appropriate.

vpFREE Administrator

#2

I do not think we should downgrade the 50%. In fact that is very low. The core sure things are in and from now on a high standard is required. We don't want to cheapen the honor of membership!

···

--- On Mon, 9/29/08, vpFREE Administrator <vp_free@yahoo.com> wrote:
From: vpFREE Administrator <vp_free@yahoo.com>
Subject: [vpFREE] Re: 2008 Nominees for vpFREE Hall of Fame
To: vpFREE@Yahoogroups.com
Date: Monday, September 29, 2008, 11:08 AM

            Mac McClellan wrote:

... From the standpoint of sampling and statistics this appears to be a

sub-optimal way to select an inductee. It seems to me that quite a

few years might pass without anyone being admitted to the HOF. If

that's the goal I suppose it's more understandable, but still runs

the risk of failing to select a deserving person ...

The goal is to induct all worthy, deserving nominees.

We'll consider adjusting the inductee qualification rules

in future years if it seems appropriate.

vpFREE Administrator

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

#3

I am taking bets and giving odds of 100 to 1 that there will be no inductee this year with the 50% of vote required unless one, or both, of two things happen. Let people see the results of their vote after voting, and/or have a very handed effort to get people to vote for one particular person by posting many times that only one person deserves the honor. If you read it enought times, it must be true, right? Tom Ski is deserving but so are several others on the list that have been around as long or longer, or done as much or more for VP. I have been playing VP since 1980 and have seen them all become experts, some much better than others. I have voted, but not for Tom Ski this year.

Bob.

kellypkjoe wrote:

···

I do not think we should downgrade the 50%. In fact that is very low. The core sure things are in and from now on a high standard is required. We don't want to cheapen the honor of membership!

--- On Mon, 9/29/08, vpFREE Administrator <vp_free@yahoo.com> wrote:
From: vpFREE Administrator <vp_free@yahoo.com>
Subject: [vpFREE] Re: 2008 Nominees for vpFREE Hall of Fame
To: vpFREE@Yahoogroups.com
Date: Monday, September 29, 2008, 11:08 AM

#4

I really don't understand this reaction to the 59% rule. A Hall of Fame membership should be difficult to obtain. We do not want to cheapen the honor. Actually 50% is a low number. I would be happier if it required at least 60-70% and we could vote for more than one person. 70% with voting for 3 eligible nominees sounds fine for me.

If you look at the present membership it is comprised of truly deserving candidates, Not to require at least 50% will certainly eventually lead to cheapening the honor.

FromSommerSommer - Top of the World Coins <NL7HT@barrow.com>

···

--- On Mon, 9/29/08, Bob SommerSommer - Top of the World Coins <NL7HT@barrow.com> wrote:
Subject:vpFREEvpFREE] Re: 2008 NomineevpFREEvpFREE Hall of Fame
To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
Date: Monday, September 29, 2008, 9:46 PM

            I am taking bets and giving odds of 100 to 1 that there will be no

inductee this year with the 50% of vote required unless one, or both, of

two things happen. Let people see the results of their vote after

voting, and/or have a very handed effort to get people to vote for one

particular person by posting many times that only one person deserves

the honor. If you read it enought times, it must be true, right? Tom

Ski is deserving but so are several others on the list that have been

around as long or longer, or done as much or more for VP. I have been

playing VP since 1980 and have seen them all become experts, some much

better than others. I have voted, but not for Tom Ski this year.

Bob.

kellypkjoe wrote:

I do not think we should downgrade the 50%. In fact that is very low. The core sure things are in and from now on a high standard is required. We don't want to cheapen the honor of membership!

--- On Mon, 9/29/08, vpFREE Administrator <vp_free@yahoo. com> wrote:

From: vpFREE Administrator <vp_free@yahoo. com>

Subject: [vpFREE] Re: 2008 Nominees for vpFREE Hall of Fame

To: vpFREE@Yahoogroups. com

Date: Monday, September 29, 2008, 11:08 AM

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

#5

The larger the number of candidates, the less the likelyhood one will receive 50%. Maybe the field should be shortened or maybe intense lobbying will prevail!!

REB

···

--- On Mon, 9/29/08, kellypkjoe <kellypkjoe@yahoo.com> wrote:

From: kellypkjoe <kellypkjoe@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [vpFREE] Re: 2008 Nominees for vpFREE Hall of Fame
To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
Date: Monday, September 29, 2008, 2:53 PM

I do not think we should downgrade the 50%. In fact that is very low. The core sure things are in and from now on a high standard is required. We don't want to cheapen the honor of membership!

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

#6

The larger the number of candidates, the less the likelyhood one will

receive 50%. Maybe the field should be shortened or maybe intense
lobbying will prevail!!

REB

Perhaps there could be a pre-vote poll with all the candidates listed,
kind of like a primary election I guess, and then the top 3 or 4 go
into the final vote, then the 50% (or 60% or whatever) rule kicks in
for the finals.

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Richard Boozer <reboozer@...> wrote: