Dukasaur wrote:WILLIAMS5232 wrote:the data has been skewed and no longer agrees with all the work ive put onto it until hat point. so, other than defending my position on that,
The data has been corrected. I've conclusively demonstrated to you using clear examples that the current system of counting is perfectly in line with how things have always been counted. If you continue this juvenile game of putting your fingers in your ear and saying "I can't hear you" then I can't help you.
you say corrected, i say skewed.
really, your conclusive clear examples boils down to this'
player a) joins game, deadbeats, loses/gains +/-20 points
player b) joins game, deadbeats, loses/gains 0 points.
you acknowledge both players should be allowed to sit on the scoreboard that is designated to rank players based on the amount of points that was risked. even thoough player b risks no points, he should be allowed to sit on the scoreboard.
ok, thats great. you have a point. except i think it's not a good point. you however think you have found the cure to cancer with this vision.
i think, only "player a" should be allowed to be ranked on the scoreboard. since points were risked. "player b" should be over there where he used to be before the books were cooked. no one noticed. no one cared.
scenario games, guide games, and bot games do not require a player to risk points,
the score board is there to show your rank in relation to how many points were lost/gained by risking them in games.
you should not be listed on this scoreboard if no points were risked.
you say "it's fine, we want as many players as possible on the scoreboard so i don't care what it takes to get them there."
i say, "it's not cool to put players on the scoreboard that played a game that did not allow them to win/lose points. they should only be counted if they put points up to win/lose."
you act like i'm an idiot or a baby with my fingers in my ears for not agreeing with you.
i can't help to feel the same about you.
.
..Long Live The Stars and Bars.......
[/quote
