From: bathurst@noaapmel.gov (Bill Bathurst)
Subject: Re: more:  ladder proposal and kevin's flame
Organization: NOAA/PMEL, Sand Point Way, Seattle, WA
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 20:27:46 GMT

In article <By6MA8.6oq.2@cs.cmu.edu> hill@norman.VI.RI.CMU.EDU (Robert Hill) writes:

   Kevin writes
   > Greetings all,
   > [ flame of inlcouncil deleted for space]
   > *Flame Off*

Kevin is usually off base.  He is a fouth space scum.  His idea of helping
people get better is by ridiculing them via messages to ALL.  He has no
respect in my book.

   Most of this is quite factual.  Very few INL council votes have been  
   discussed on rec.games.netrek before the vote.  I hope to change that.

But, in this instance it is not true.  I have posted asking people for 
scheduling suggestings.  I still have all the replies sent to me.  
The majority of responses I got from my posting about scheduling was that 
people were not in favor of ladder system.  The main concern
of people was that good, high quality INL games were scheduled.  That should
be our scheduling goal.

   You were off on some things.  The inl council isn't polarized into a  
   UCB/CMU debate camp.  Some things I side with tom on...some things I do  
   not. 

This is true.  The Council has many different voices.  All old, experienced
netrek people.  But, there are the definitely representatives of CMU and 
Berkeley.
 
	Everyone on the council pretty much has their own opinions.   
   However, any proposal that I have made has caused strict oppostion from  
   tom regardless of what it is.  

I am not so sure of this.  Most votes have passed unanimously.

			I think that either a)  he thinks that I am  
   dumb b)  he genuinely disagrees with the (admittedly few) proposals that I  
   have made or c)  he has some anti-cmu histeria which forces him to be  
   paranoid about how CMU teams can get ahead by my proposal.  I honestly  
   think it is c, and i'm pretty sick of it.

I think it is more like 95% (b) and 5% (c) where he thinks CMU is being
egocentrical.  That is my interpretation.

   > people?  You may miss things or not think of alternatives.  I'm not 
   > gov. and throw your weight around to try to change it.  I personally 

   I don't think that we miss much.  Perhaps discussion should be made about  
   who is on the INL council?  Feel free to post who you feel should comprise  
   the council.  It *IS* about time we set up some guidelines on who is on  
   it.  Please distinguish that thread from this one.

This is fine.  I don't have a problem with it.

   PLEASE understand that this thread is not about tom, kevin, me, the  
   inlcouncil or anyone else.  The idea of this thread is to determine  
   whether or not people out there think that a ladder system is workable.  

I have had a difficult time trying to figure out a fair way to make the ladder
work.  There are a lot of problems with it.  I have worked with Rob on trying 
to figure it out.  I think it has to be more defined before it will fly.

I am personally in favor of the longer schedule, teams being ranked and 
scheduling based on rank.  I just thought I would give Rob the benefit of
the doubt since have played a scheduled league so far.  Hopefully people 
will give meaningfull suggestions instead of lousy, abusive flames that do
little good in getting the job/issue settled.

Azusa
--
Bill Bathurst				Internet:	bathurst@noaapmel.gov 
NOAA/PMEL				Phone:		(206) 526-6205