I think you have fantastic ideas. Part of the issue is the guys who have been here the longest. The guys with the most knowledge on how to write and therefore vote on a battle. The guys who you really want to have in the FVC are at the point where it's like asking Hitori Hanzo to spend his free time critiquing, rating, and suggesting how to improve walmart cutlery. You can either get a bunch of hungry dudes eager to prove themselves to leave a lot of votes with an inflated sense of importance, or you can get a bunch of vets who have tasted and been the chefs behind the finest filets, and feed them a bunch of value meals and ask them to respond passionately to the experience.
Maybe have to FVC groups. A group of hungry less experienced voters. They have 1 or 2 vp. Their goal is activity. Vote on as much as possible. Say what you think. Do what you mean. Just vote. Whether its fundamentally right or wrong is less important. State your opinion, vote as you see fit.
Another group is more seasoned. Bets who may lack the
Drive to vote but certainly have the credentials. Their vote Carries weight. They may be rare, but you can damn well be sure its calculated. Maybe these are on more high profile battles. Maybe they sometimes peruse the lower ranked opens but they have a higher vp and its cuz they know their shit.
As I think on it, this makes the most sense. FVC has never been super successful, this might be the thing.
|