RealGM Top 100 LIST- 2014

[penbeast0]

OK, no change in time.

[D Nice]

Yeah go ahead and strike me from the voter panel. I was pretty enthused at the beginning but there's a bit too much intellectual dishonesty and not enough quality controls to ensure productive discourse all the way through. KG getting a 4th place vote(s) was kind of a smack in the face (and insulting to the sport). For me to dedicate 1-2 hours per thread (at least) after working 10-12 hour days I need to feel like that commitment is worth it and the project stopped feeling like that after the 3rd thread.

Selfishly I do still think there are a lot of awesome nuggets sprinkled throughout the discourse and will definitely be leisure reading over the course of the summer. I do feel a little bad but I don't think losing 1 voter is make or break (turnout has been sub 85% from what I've seen), and with my schedule it was probably a bit unrealistic to ever assume I could invest enough of myself to actually (consistently) add worthwhile posts anywho.

[Baller2014]

While we're updating, Elgee is a Celtics fan apparently, and Andrewww is a Lakers fan.

[penbeast0]

I am adding ElGee to our voting list; I didn't see him on it but he has been providing quality posts and has a long solid history on this board.

[colts18]

I am adding ElGee to our voting list; I didn't see him on it but he has been providing quality posts and has a long solid history on this board.

You have to add in Shaqattack. He is by far the best poster on the PC.

[penbeast0]

Has he been involved in this project? I've been having good discussions with him elsewhere but don't remember him here.

[colts18]

Has he been involved in this project? I've been having good discussions with him elsewhere but don't remember him here.

I haven't seen him in the top 100 threads, but you should invite him and give him a voting slot. I haven't seen a post yet from him that is of poor quality.

[andrewww]

Has he been involved in this project? I've been having good discussions with him elsewhere but don't remember him here.

ElGee and ThaRegul8r are both solid posters who contribute to the discussion consistenly me thinks.

[kayess]

I'm still following the project intently, but I've been too busy lately to make my own case instead of looking over the entire thread and allowing myself to be swayed one way or the other.

Apologies for this. I hope nobody thought I was in it just to vote Jordan 1st/Kareem 2nd lol.

[sp6r=underrated]

There is a lot of high quality information in the threads but I'm reluctant to read them recently. The last few days it has really devolved into the come at me bro attitude that really harmed the 2011 lists. There is a lot information in those threads as well but the constant negativity makes it unpleasant to read.

[colts18]

post removed

[sp6r=underrated]

post removed -- it would create the exact situation you want to stop

[andrewww]

Me thinks that the senior mods on our boards may consider re-evaluate the screeing process for future projects. I can sense a convincing amount of personal bias of some posters on this project already. This is getting in the way of legitimate discussion and voting with an objective view. It seems like a popularity contest/witch hunt for some posters. PM me if any mod wishes to discuss this further perhaps.

[Notanoob]

I am a Pistons fan.

[Reservoirdawgs]

Me thinks that the senior mods on our boards may consider re-evaluate the screeing process for future projects. I can sense a convincing amount of personal bias of some posters on this project already. This is getting in the way of legitimate discussion and voting with an objective view. It seems like a popularity contest/witch hunt for some posters. PM me if any mod wishes to discuss this further perhaps.

This is an unfortunate aspect of sports, where bias and emotions get the best of people that it can be hard to be objective because people are trying to trump up their own player while bashing another. Since people value different things (team success for some, peaks for others, raw stats, advanced stats, portability, etc) it can occasionally lead to muddled or confused arguments. While it's obvious that some posters have an agenda, I've actually been very impressed by the level of discourse from many of the threads. There have been a lot of intelligent and well-argued points (some of which goes against my own opinion and thinking) and I would say that the personal bias of some posters are largely in the minority.

A stricter screening process was suggested but ultimately rejected because A) who decides what the screening aspect should be? and B) Penbeast wanted it to be representative of the Real GM PC Board. I was personally arguing for a very strict screening process but I can't fault Penbeast for doing it the way he did, and so far (seven votes in) it looks like my fears of witch-hunting and popularity contests have so far not been as dire as I initially thought.

[penbeast0]

Please do not make "preemptive runoff votes." I am not going back past the start of the runoff looking for these in the future so please don't do this in the future.

And be sure to put analysis with your votes; again, for the sake of counting the votes, I don't want to be making judgement calls as to whether previous posts actually made your case for the person you were voting for.

[ceiling raiser]

Please do not make "preemptive runoff votes." I am not going back past the start of the runoff looking for these in the future so please don't do this in the future.

And be sure to put analysis with your votes; again, for the sake of counting the votes, I don't want to be making judgement calls as to whether previous posts actually made your case for the person you were voting for.

Apologies, I won't do so again.

[Doctor MJ]

Please do not make "preemptive runoff votes." I am not going back past the start of the runoff looking for these in the future so please don't do this in the future.

And be sure to put analysis with your votes; again, for the sake of counting the votes, I don't want to be making judgement calls as to whether previous posts actually made your case for the person you were voting for.

Sorry for the confusion. Let me just clarify what my understanding is what you wanted me to do:

-There is only a vote and a runoff vote.
-No runoff votes should be posted before an official runoff is announced.
-If due to real life stuff you're late to the party and decide to vote for someone other than your top choice because you want to vote for someone with a realistic chance to win that's fine, but spare us the "preemptve" stuff and just call it a vote.

Ya?

[Doctor MJ]

Yeah go ahead and strike me from the voter panel. I was pretty enthused at the beginning but there's a bit too much intellectual dishonesty and not enough quality controls to ensure productive discourse all the way through. KG getting a 4th place vote(s) was kind of a smack in the face (and insulting to the sport). For me to dedicate 1-2 hours per thread (at least) after working 10-12 hour days I need to feel like that commitment is worth it and the project stopped feeling like that after the 3rd thread.

As the dude who gave KG the 4th place vote, this really bums me out.

Whatever you think of me, know that I have a reverence for the sport and that I've spent an obscene amount of time working to make sense of it for that reason.

[penbeast0]

Please do not make "preemptive runoff votes." I am not going back past the start of the runoff looking for these in the future so please don't do this in the future.

And be sure to put analysis with your votes; again, for the sake of counting the votes, I don't want to be making judgement calls as to whether previous posts actually made your case for the person you were voting for.

Sorry for the confusion. Let me just clarify what my understanding is what you wanted me to do:

-There is only a vote and a runoff vote.
-No runoff votes should be posted before an official runoff is announced.
-If due to real life stuff you're late to the party and decide to vote for someone other than your top choice because you want to vote for someone with a realistic chance to win that's fine, but spare us the "preemptve" stuff and just call it a vote.

Ya?

Ya