[REZN]

There are a few potential fixes in regard to voting.

1.) Removing the rating system(1-10) alleviates the amount of complaints about "unfair" votes, based on the bias of the perception of one's skill. A simple thumbs up on the winner's side will cut these types of complaints, probably by half or more(in my opinion.)

2.) A character limit. Another of the biggest complaints is the use of "fv vb" or other similarly non-explained votes. 150 character minimum alleviates this in part, as it forces people to explain their rationale(and makes those who aren't much easier to find.)

3.) In regard to "rules," for voting, this is a more difficult question to approach. Because you can't really tell a person what to think, or how to feel about a battle. You can define some aspects which should be prioritized. Such as requiring a critical explanation of your vote. But, outside of that, voting is subjective. And people will vote for battles based on different factors. The RULES I would put into place, are as follows(and freankly, similar to the current)

3a.) All votes must be explained via the comments section critically and respectfully.

3b.) Members of the same crew cannot vote on each other's battles.

3c.) Voting links may only be shared in the allotted threads(this has the capacity to limit the notion of "buddy voting.)

And those are the only three strict rules I would enforce in regard to voting. That's it. Voting's not difficult. Restricting it too much has the potential of being counterproductive to the goal of facilitating it.

[REZN]

There are a few potential fixes in regard to voting.

1.) Removing the rating system(1-10) alleviates the amount of complaints about "unfair" votes, based on the bias of the perception of one's skill. A simple thumbs up on the winner's side will cut these types of complaints, probably by half or more(in my opinion.)

2.) A character limit. Another of the biggest complaints is the use of "fv vb" or other similarly non-explained votes. 150 character minimum alleviates this in part, as it forces people to explain their rationale(and makes those who aren't much easier to find.)

3.) In regard to "rules," for voting, this is a more difficult question to approach. Because you can't really tell a person what to think, or how to feel about a battle. You can define some aspects which should be prioritized. Such as requiring a critical explanation of your vote. But, outside of that, voting is subjective. And people will vote for battles based on different factors. The RULES I would put into place, are as follows(and freankly, similar to the current)

3a.) All votes must be explained via the comments section critically and respectfully.

3b.) Members of the same crew cannot vote on each other's battles.

3c.) Voting links may only be shared in the allotted threads(this has the capacity to limit the notion of "buddy voting.)

And those are the only three strict rules I would enforce in regard to voting. That's it. Voting's not difficult. Restricting it too much has the potential of being counterproductive to the goal of facilitating it.