/tnt/ - Tournaments & Events

This board is for hosting tournaments and other organized competitions, be it either events, contests, or anything where a winner must be determined through votes or otherwise. Just for this board, image duplicates are enabled and the bump limits are set extra high. Roleplaying is encouraged, unless event hosts ask otherwise.


File posting was rewritten, please post in the support thread if you experience any bugs.
Please consider donating! Thanks!

Thread stats: 124 posts, 19 files (19 image(s))

Replying to /tnt/69004
Options
No.69004
Voter base IQ discussionAnonymous
image:170011769791.jpg(61kB , 720x874 , 5f5ea71acf92860fa8a3405af668bdd3.jpg)
Some discussion was brought up about this in the Queen /v/ 2023 tournament, and I wanted to make a thread here as it was fun to think about.
Which tournament voter base has the highest IQ?
Majority of the Queen threads held the belief that King had the dumbest voters, their evidence for this was King voters accepting and voting in favor of the loser bracket. This then led to some anons jokingly, or unjokingly, stating that /co/ voters were actually smarter than /v/ voters for voting against a loser bracket. Then evidence was thrown around saying actually Ms. /co/ has dumb voters due to not having good winners. Which was countered by some saying that due to Ms. /co/ having the most strategic voting out of any tournament, and at times having 8 different simultaneous layers of false flagging at play that Ms. /co/ has actually the smartest voters.
How would you rank each voter base in terms of intelligence?
No.69008
Anonymous
Replies:>>69010
>>69004
>and at times having 8 different simultaneous layers of false flagging at play that Ms. /co/ has actually the smartest voters.
Ms. /co/'s falseflagging only works because of NSA's stupidity. Anyway, considering Queen gave King the whitelist and King gave them the Loser's Bracket as well as both not knowing what a video game is with what they approved on the whitelist, I think they are equally slow.
No.69009
Anonymous
I voted in all the tournaments. This means I'm simultaneously the smartest and dumbest voter alive.
No.69010
Anonymous
Replies:>>69035
>>69008
The whitelist Queen approved around a year ago is not the same to the one we have now.
No.69023
Anonymous
image:170014953290.jpg(87kB , 1300x957 , TF2DevMan.jpg)
>>69004
Everyone is fucking retarded; the voters, the hosts, the mods, literally everyone.
No.69035
Anonymous
Replies:>>69036
>>69010
They still voted back in everyone this year.
No.69036
Anonymous
Replies:>>69040
>>69035
The hosts never showed us the stats, right?
No.69037
Anonymous
Replies:>>69038
image:170015682853.jpg(99kB , 484x400 , FqL13LKWYAAlI4x.jpg)
>>69004
Isn't a roleplayer of one of the Mr. /co/ reps a straight up doctor? That basically already puts Mr. /co/ leagues above every tournament.
No.69038
Anonymous
>>69037
you’re probably thinking of the John Silver anon who’s a psychologist, which honestly makes perfect sense
No.69039
Anonymous
Replies:>>69040
The thing with both the whitelist and loser's bracket is that voting stupidly is only part of it. Incompetent hosts and people wanting to adding new rules to a popularity contest on a Mongolian basket-weaving forum also have to do with it.
No.69040
Anonymous
>>69039
This. I was gonna question what actually brought loser's bracket up in the first place. I wasn't around for KoV 2022 so i don't know if a lot of people were asking for it. I do know that it came up occasionally among other rulefagging and added stipulations over the years in /co/ but it was never close to the most debated. Shit like 256 bracket and E8 debate got more attention. But suddenly, out of nowhere, NSA said loser's bracket was gonna be a question and tried to sneakily force in through during voting.
Which by the way reminds me as >>69036 points out the actual numbers for the last round of rule voting was never released and it's very likely NSA just added together options again for the loser's bracket, to say nothing of the whitelist. But it looks like we may be stuck with this stuff now.
No.69041
Anonymous
i fucking hate NSA
No.69042
Anonymous
>>69040
It wasn't that major in Ko/v/ last year from what I can remember. There was a much bigger push for a 256 bracket, but it got ignored by the hosts in favor of allowing non-vidya characters and losers bracket instead.
No.69043
Anonymous
Replies:>>69050
i hatefuck NSA
No.69044
Anonymous
Replies:>>69045
>>69040
>>69042
I try to give the benefit of the doubt, but that's so shady.
No.69045
Anonymous
image:170016145248.gif(74kB , 240x244 , 1667261315973.gif)
>>69040
>>69042
>>69044
>I was gonna question what actually brought loser's bracket up in the first place
Loser's bracket was at no point a big topic of discussion or a demanded alternative (at least before this year). I went back to read the archives and, by the looks of it, NSA first and only put it up to vote during the Ko/v/ finals because a single anon asked him.

https://arch.b4k.co/v/thread/621414796/#621421251
>Possible to vote on a losers bracket for next years tourney?
>NSA: No, that's just for the host to have the option of adding if possible. It's not guaranteed to happen. /v/ mods are notably laxxer than /co/. So it might be possible. I'll keep it in the back pocket to shake things up next year. I'll put a vote in just to see if people are interested in it happening as an option.

https://arch.b4k.co/v/thread/621424694/#q621426881
>Would you be open to a loser's bracket? This is not guaranteed to be done.
>-Yes
>-No

https://arch.b4k.co/v/thread/621434984/#q621435694
>NSA: A loser's bracket just means they can battle the other losers and try to battle the undefeated winner in a grand finale It's actually called a double elimination bracket. It adds on one more day to voting. Unless I alter it a bit.
>A losers bracket would help keep people around for longer since their pick might still come back.

https://arch.b4k.co/v/thread/621447445/#q621449042
>NSA: This will encourage characters who lose to compete against other losers and have the chance to recompete in the grand finals. This will help balance the randomization in the brackets, and there might even be an underdog upset. This is not guaranteed to be done next year and is up to host discretion.

Emphasis on "balance the randomization in the brackets". While this not how the final form question would end being worded, it's a quite a Freudian slip coming from NSA.
No.69046
Anonymous
>>69045
It sounds like NSA went with it because he personally liked that suggestion rather than because it was something a lot of people wanted
No.69047
Anonymous
Replies:>>69051
>>69045
>>69046
>It sounds like NSA went with it because he personally liked that suggestion rather than because it was something a lot of people wanted
Which would be the same case with last ms. /co/. In fact the one or few anons bringing it up at all is possibly him.
No.69050
Anonymous
>>69043
We know, King Kong. You don't need to brag about it.
No.69051
Anonymous
Replies:>>69052
image:170016390998.gif(5kB , 150x150 , fatotsuki.gif)
>>69046
>>69047
I think all this does is but confirm two things anyone smart enough already knew or at least suspected: one, that double elimination mostly exists as a rather clumsy band-aid to the potential drawbacks randomized seeding can represent (see: Madotsuki vs Shantae); and two, that the loser's bracket of this Queen of /v/ was specifically set up to facilitate a "miracle comeback" - not necessarily in favor of SHODAN, Ammy, Mado, Alice, or anybody else who fell into LB through the tourney, no: but for the orchestrated narrative of a 'comeback' underdog through the losers' bracket.
No.69052
Anonymous
>>69051
NSA last ms. /co/ openly rejected the idea that tourneys are popularity contest (said it was for OC and finding new stuff or some shit). All these rule measures pretty clearly favorite keeping up thread engagement above all else. Between that and raw voting data being hidden every round the jokes about tourneys being like booked wrestling promotions may be truer than most think.
No.69053
Anonymous
Replies:>>69087
>>69052
As a campaigner, I hate this. We need to get rid of NSA.
No.69054
Anonymous
>>69052
if NSA wanted to increase engagement he’d step down as host
No.69056
Anonymous
>>69052
NSA can go fuck himself.
No.69059
Anonymous
>>69052
>the jokes about tourneys being like booked wrestling promotions may be truer than most think.
Those wrestling streams someone did for Queen and King last year feel more legitimate than the tournaments at this point
No.69087
Anonymous
image:170018158266.png(356kB , 680x573 , 190340.png)
>>69053
No.69089
Anonymous
Replies:>>69361
>>69087
/tnt/ likes to complain
No.69102
Anonymous
>>69087
Every new host that we've gotten doesn't seem to want to coup nsa
No.69114
Anonymous
>>69087
A lot don't know how to host. That's why we keep begging for new hosts instead of taking the job ourselves. There's also the fear of thread deletion because you have to talk with mods before you do these tournaments and most don't know what to say without pissing them off.
No.69115
Anonymous
>>69087
It's a thankless job.
No.69118
Anonymous
image:170018475757.jpg(45kB , 694x693 , 1E2073D0-77C7-4BC4-956B-8BF7701E9C83.jpeg)
>>69087
NSA even as a practical host is really subpar.
It takes him about an hour or more to create and post the results which means hours wasted on what could’ve potentially be some result changing votes.

Statsanon literally created and posted results within minutes.
No.69122
Anonymous
Replies:>>69195
>>69118
That's because Stats presumably didn't check for rigging, which is reasonable as it's essentially guesswork.
No.69126
Anonymous
Replies:>>69195
>>69118
taking time to check the votes is fine, people just need to stop losing their shit over every minor happening.
No.69140
Anonymous
Replies:>>69195
>>69118
It's that or we just ignore rigging
No.69181
Anonymous
>>69087
There's been a history of certain nefarious autists sneaking in multiple times and trying to hijack, leading to natural distrust of newcomers. Plus NSA apparently has a vetting process and its up to him who runs the tourney as he talks to mods. So that alongside being a thankless and super autistic task, it's not so simple as just going 'okay now I will host the /co/ or /v/.'
No.69195
Anonymous
Replies:>>69255
>>69122
>>69126
>>69140
Stats had specific programs that did most of the work for him in the sheets and google forms. That's why he could create and post results within minutes.
No.69197
Anonymous
>>69040
>it's very likely NSA just added together options again for the loser's bracket, to say nothing of the whitelist. But it looks like we may be stuck with this stuff now.
oh my fucking god you're right
that would explain so much
No.69222
Anonymous
I’ll maintain that /v/ is dumber than /co/, not that /co/ is smart by any means. It’s just that /v/ is so retarded trying to have an on topic discussion there is almost impossible.
No.69255
Anonymous
>>69195
No one ever actually figured that out. If he had programs why wouldn't he release them at any point?
No.69256
Anonymous
>>69045
>one more day
>drawn out by two
Just adds that the whole losers' finals was a mistake.
No.69260
Anonymous
Replies:>>69281
>>69255
He did use programs and just didn't foresee other people hosting I guess
https://desuarchive.org/co/search/text/python/username/stats%20anon/type/posts/order/asc/
No.69263
Anonymous
Replies:>>69909
>>69255
He probably would've if his life wasn't unfortunately cut short before he had the chance to release them
God have mercy on Statsanon's soul
No.69281
Anonymous
image:170022245130.jpg(290kB , 747x769 , D1B3B8A7-1976-4455-9CD4-F648A1889CC3.jpeg)
>>69260
I hate how competent he sounds compared to our current hosts.
No.69361
Anonymous
>>69089
Fitting anons from /co/ and /v/.
No.69790
Anonymous
image:170057029907.jpg(69kB , 1255x212 , co & v.jpg)
No.69827
Anonymous
>>69004
This next King /v/ will decide where everyone should rank.
No.69909
Anonymous
>>69263
Was there ever actual any concrete evidence he died? He could’ve just flat out left for all I know
No.70194
Anonymous
I want to kill NSA.
No.70195
Anonymous
>>70194
Based
No.70200
Anonymous
image:170093947176.jpg(30kB , 452x640 , Garcian Smith.jpg)
>>70194
Get in line. I got first dibs on him.
No.76716
Anonymous
So, do we still believe King /v/ has the dumbest voters?
No.76722
Anonymous
>>76716
Yes. Whitelist characters still made the main bracket with no campaigning and some series got some pretty terrible reps.
No.76726
Anonymous
>>76716
No, it's just /v/ in general.
No.76727
Anonymous
>>76716
bejitabro btw
No.76728
Anonymous
Replies:>>76741
>>76716
I'm still firm in my statement about King having the most predictable winners. At least this year the competition didn't feel as uneven as in 2022, but I knew Grimm was going to be the champion by the middle of quarterfinals.
No.76729
Anonymous
>>69004
Mr. /co/ >>> Ms. /co/ >>>>>>>> Queen /v/ > King /v/

Note, this is talking about the overall intelligence, not how good the tournament quality is. Ms. /co/ despite being seething and full of spite at least know what type of priorities have on what to vote for. Queen I've thought were on somewhat even level with Ms. /co/ but I realized this year the muzzle drawing that, no, we are actually working with actual imbeciles.

Mr. /co/ never really goes into any pointless drama like how Eggmanfags and Wariofags lost their shit because someone just implied they could lose.
No.76732
Anonymous
>>76716
Absolutely
No.76735
Anonymous
>>76716
King /v/ has the biggest silent majority problem during the early rounds while having the winners completely circumvent that
No.76738
Anonymous
>>76729
You give Mr. /co/ voters too much credit, don't forget when they voted Shrek over Bugs because they actually fell for the Bugs tranny falseflagger
No.76739
Anonymous
>>76738
I voted for Shrek because I love the movies slightly more than Looney Tunes and Bugs is far from my favorite Looney Tune.
No.76740
Anonymous
Replies:>>76743
>>76738
I don't think Bugs lost to Shrek because of that.
No.76741
Anonymous
>>76728
I think I might be complaining too much when I say this, but can we please get a King that isn't another humanoid rpg, japanese action-adventure, or combination of the two character from the 2000s onwards that's a schizo or literally me next year? Garland technically predates that, but no one was voting for that version. Even Mr's non-human villain streak at least has decade and genre variety.
No.76742
Anonymous
Replies:>>76749
image:170311421155.png(19kB , 800x779 , Spoiler image)
>>76741
Next year.
No.76743
Anonymous
Replies:>>76745
>>76740
It was by 8 votes, I can guarantee you at least 8 retards saw those posts and refused to vote for Bugs due to thinking his supporters are trannies
No.76744
Anonymous
>>76729
Also /v/ never seems to think about the actual implications of the rule stuff they vote for. /v/ in general seems to have much less grasp and debate on meta than /co/,for better or worse.
No.76745
Anonymous
Replies:>>76750
>>76743
Bugs also lost to another Shrek character this year. I think he really isn't that strong of a competitor.
No.76746
Anonymous
>>76744
/v/ is filled with off-topic funposters, they don't think about anything.
No.76747
Anonymous
>>76741
I want to see another proper villain become champion of King of /v/, the only one at the moment is Armstrong. I think the more narrative angle of the tournament makes it way too easy to root againts antagonistic characters in general. I see the term 'heel' thrown around during Ko/v/ a lot, but such thing isn't common during Mr. /co/ at all.
No.76748
Anonymous
>>76738
Last year? I remember people moreso getting a laugh out of that than anything, not to mention Monarch was the one getting more direct flack that round. Shrek is one of the strongest candidates yet to make Elite Eight, and just this year only lost to SpongeBob by 15 votes despite his more vocal campaign. If this was a more niche pick or a fluke I'd get the concern, but not with Shrek. You just know that Grim would have killed either anyways.
No.76749
Anonymous
image:170311457520.gif(2.90MB , 640x358 , 1667365008614.gif)
>>76742
I don't blame the Red Pikmin for this, but no Olimar and Louie was a tragedy.
No.76750
Anonymous
>>76745
>I think he really isn't that strong of a competitor.
Shrek is the only non-elite thus far to take down Bugs, and as mentioned it was close. I think Bugs was done in being mostly silent against a relatively vocal campaign, not much else to be said. It was still a close match.
No.76751
Anonymous
Replies:>>76752
>>76749
The Pikmin justified being in this year with its funny OC and campaign. It was a joke pick, yes, but people were actually in on it. I know Pikmin 4 will be more distant, but I do hope at least one of the captains does qualify next year.
No.76752
Anonymous
>>76751
I hope I can do a strong enough OC push in Qualifiers next year to get Olimar and Louie in. Louie is the character I wanted to campaign the most for in King, but I love Olimar too.
No.76753
Anonymous
>>76749
Yeah, that was unfortunate.
Red Pikmin was still my #1 Pikmin pick, though.
No.76754
Anonymous
Replies:>>76799
image:170311576949.png(8kB , 550x81 , 1file.png)
>>76744
>/v/ in general seems to have much less grasp and debate on meta than /co/
/v/ had a lot, and I mean A LOT of trouble grasping what strategic voting/metagaming is when introduced to the concept this year, despite some anons admiting to actively participate in it.
No.76756
Anonymous
it seems like it's very easy to gaslight /v/irgins in queen and king. it's a shame since i don't care about the others.
No.76757
Anonymous
Replies:>>76760
>>76741
The Batter and Jack aren't even schizos; the former is mostly fanon speculation, and the latter was only ever included in some of the 2021 alliance pictures based on guesswork from his appearance in the trailers. Grimm is the first real instance of a character with a deranged personality winning and having that reflected in his campaign, and even then he is a character with little dialogue entirely driven by the choice given from the player.
No.76758
Anonymous
Replies:>>76764
>>76741
I don't want the schizo aspect holding characters back. I want Jacket and Isaac to be winners and I don't want them being held back by vague connections to past winners
No.76760
Anonymous
>>76757
They still got pushed heavily by the alliance. Batter is the mascot of it.
No.76762
Anonymous
>>76760
Batter, yes. Garland? Not at all.
No.76764
Anonymous
Replies:>>76770
>>76758
I think >>76741 is kind of a retarded post anyways, you shouldn't be basing what winner you want off some arbitrary list of generalized traits. For example I like Dante because he's a cool character not because I autistically sort him into my preferred traits of "human, japanese action game, masculine, non-schizo".
Just pick what you like faggot don't go "oh we can't have ANOTHER humanoid, 95% of the winners are already humanoids they're all literally the same, and we already have two winners whose names start with R so i refuse to vote for any more R characters"
No.76766
Anonymous
Replies:>>76769
>>76760
Garland won by himself. But Batter definitely did get carried by the alliance. Funny, since in-character Batter would just kill them all immediately.
No.76769
Anonymous
Replies:>>76792
>>76766
Not really no, he never killed Zacharie. He would only kill them if they get in the way.
No.76770
Anonymous
>>76764
The traits on their own aren't the issue, and the characters do have more to them beyond a surface level. The issue is that we keep falling into almost the exact same two combinations of traits, with Garland in the middle. Of course there's character misinterpretations, like some say Batter, but those misinterpretations still have a strong impact on campaigning and effect votes. I'm not just going to vote against characters that fall into what I described, but I would like to see something more different next year.
No.76788
Anonymous
Replies:>>76790
Let's be honest, how many characters in King of /v/ do you think are both distinct enough from previous winners and championship contenders?
No.76790
Anonymous
Replies:>>76793
>>76788
I really wanted Rayman to win this year. He felt really distinct while also being a character with a fun legacy and series of games. I'm glad he made it to E8 on his first year, but I hope he keeps succeeding in 2025
No.76792
Anonymous
Replies:>>76795
>>76769
Zacharie isn't dead, since he not only doesn't attack him, but isn't attacking anyone. 85% of "schizo alliance" Batter would attack. And he would 100% attack Grimm
No.76793
Anonymous
>>76790
If I were to guess, his performance will be much worse next time.
No.76795
Anonymous
Replies:>>76796
>>76792
>Zacharie isn't dead, since he not only doesn't attack him, but isn't attacking anyone
That's the thing in alliance. They're helping him reach his goal, so there's no point in attacking them.
Also this is pointless anyway because most of the characters in the tourney wouldn't be friends with each other.
No.76796
Anonymous
image:170316669901.png(208kB , 1000x1000 , [booru.plus]+queenkingv2687.png)
>>76795
Having Batter act OOC is a tournament tradition at this point.
(pic unrelated. we know for a fact he is not a catfag)
No.76799
Anonymous
>>76754
What's extra stupid about that is that John was up against the top fucking seed in round 4, so if he could've beaten Edgeworth, he could've beaten Raiden.
No.76807
Anonymous
>>76729
didn't Queen vote in the Elite 8 and winner series limit? that's quite literally the dumbest rule added
No.76808
Anonymous
image:170317720954.jpg(25kB , 924x590 , 1699316869084926.jpg)
>>76738
Note that the bar isn't that high to begin with.
No.76809
Anonymous
>>76807
That rule was solely added to fuck with Touhoufags from /jp/, which kinda worked on the short term because they couldn't just nominate the next big girl there and make her winner.
But now phase has faded and the rule now exclusively works as a way to fuck up with series who do well in general.
No.76810
Anonymous
Replies:>>76817
image:170317758868.png(37kB , 677x354 , kill NSA.png)
>>76807
The vote on those rules was very unclear, confusing, and presented in an awful way in general. What NSA did in essence was the same bullshit he pulled at the end of Miss /co/ 2023 with the loser's bracket vote.
No.76817
Anonymous
Replies:>>76819
>>76810
>1,418 voters
god this shit was so blatantly rigged in retrospect.
No.76819
Anonymous
Replies:>>76820
>>76817
Queen and King have been consistently hitting those numbers for years. Only this year King suffered a massive drop in votes.
No.76820
Anonymous
image:170318116219.png(1,000kB , 1202x1080 , h5zfk4putx3c1.png)
>>76819
Probably because the voting poll is not in the OP but in the fucking anchor.
Literally what's the fucking point?
Is this to prevent rigging? Literally what stops me from Ctrl+c and pasting the poll in some discord. How the fuck does it do anything other than disorient people from voting?

Who the fuck brought the idea to use the anchor for the voting polls?
No.76822
Anonymous
>>76820
Queen didn’t have this problem even with the voting poll in the anchor.
Its not like people could directly vote from the catalog in the past, anyway.
No.76827
Anonymous
>>76820
It's not an anti-rigging measure it's an anti-silent majority measure
The idea is to get people to actually visit the thread to vote and maybe look at the OC while they're at it, instead of just using the link from the catalog and never interacting with the thread at all. Whether or not you like it, evidently it works since even though the voter count goes down the amount of posters stays the same.
No.76828
Anonymous
Replies:>>76839
Guys people could never vote from the catalog even before the hosts started putting the link in the anchor.
No.76839
Anonymous
Replies:>>76840
>>76828
You can on the page view. These threads are almost always bumped to the first page.
No.76840
Anonymous
Replies:>>76852
>>76839
It’s still not the reason behind the lower vote count in King.
No.76850
Anonymous
Next time we should just have the voting link in the OP and nothing else. Even the OP image should just be the voting link every time so literally no one can miss it. That's how you get votes.
No.76851
Anonymous
Replies:>>76871
>>76827
This is actually a bad thing because it also filters new people into getting into these things.
Yes, it is a bad fucking thing to keep the same retarded faggots into these tournaments because we legitimately start to turn into a circlejerk. We're already becoming into one, if there isn't fresh set of people who gain interest in these tournaments it is through the polls.

I have always said this but Silent Majority is a necessary evil.
No.76852
Anonymous
Replies:>>76858
>>76840
No, we would have still lost a decent amount of votes from moving the link to the anchor. I've seen a few people come into the threads over the past year saying they don't know where to vote, so there were likely a lot of silentfags that didn't even bother. That still doesn't explain why Nyarly's votes were so low since he had a vocal meme presence and people who don't even like Persona like me were still voting for him. If anything, moving the link should have been in his favor since more of the vote was being controlled by active posters.
No.76853
Anonymous
Replies:>>76855
People don't realize that the security questions probably actually filter people sometimes. Not everyone sticks around to see Bejita post the answer later.
No.76855
Anonymous
image:170319788490.jpg(148kB , 736x1308 , 287f36c662083139080ded010c594396.jpg)
>>76853
>*Sips drink*
No.76858
Anonymous
image:170319921954.jpg(113kB , 576x733 , 1687870184675631.jpg)
>>76852
anon, the silent majority doesn't participate in the threads. they just vote and fuck off until the next round. letting them in doesn't make the threads any less of a circlejerk, it just changes what demographic is jerking circularly.
i'd even argue that the silent majority is MORE of a circlejerk than the regular posters. you've got a good chance to gain support in the threads if you make OC and actively participate. if you're not already one of the silent majority's darlings, they're never going to give a shit about you.
No.76869
Anonymous
Replies:>>76871
>>76858
>anon, the silent majority doesn't participate in the threads. they just vote and fuck off until the next round.
That was my point. The votes would drop because they wouldn't bother asking for the poll if they couldn't find it. Nothing else you said even relates to my post.
No.76871
Anonymous
>>76869
shit, i replied to the wrong post.
>>76858 was meant for >>76851
No.76872
Anonymous
Voting link should be in the OP.
No.76883
Anonymous
Voting Link should not be in the OP or the OC Anchor.
No.76950
Anonymous
No one should be voting Link. He never does anything.
No.76970
Anonymous
No one should ever vote for Link
No.77238
Anonymous
Replies:>>77247
I never agreed with linking the poll in the anchor cause it's not supposed to be in the hosts place to encourage "anti-silent" measures anyways. Tourney's aren't ultimately supposed to be OC and campaigner competitions/generals. But NSA really likes thread activity-oriented rules and it's another thing he implemented cause one anon said it in the thread. NSA apparently being a drawfag campaigner makes a lot of sense now.
No.77247
Anonymous
Replies:>>77250
>>77238
I don’t even care if NSA turns out to be a drawfag, that's just one more thing added to the pile of reasons to not be trustworthy of his word. He has proven to be an utterly unreliable host and I want him to step down.
No.77250
Anonymous
Replies:>>77399
>>77247
It wouldn't be "his" word anymore.
No.77257
Anonymous
Replies:>>77260
>>76827
I couldn't fucking believe something like this would work, since the anchor is usually the first post anyway + it always gets the most (you)s so I thought putting it there not only wouldn't change a thing, but also possibly make it even more noticeable as the link already wasn't visible from the catalog and people had to enter threads to vote... but I was wrong. There was actually someone so retarded that he couldn't find it and was asking for help in the thread. Even though I am one I have to agree that king /v/ voters really are the dumbest.
No.77260
Anonymous
>>77257
People were asking in /co/ too.
No.77399
Anonymous
Replies:>>78710
>>77250
What, because NSA is actually a woman?
No.78710
Anonymous
>>77399
needs correcting
No.79217
Anonymous
Replies:>>79223
>>76858
>i'd even argue that the silent majority is MORE of a circlejerk than the regular posters. you've got a good chance to gain support in the threads if you make OC and actively participate. if you're not already one of the silent majority's darlings, they're never going to give a shit about you.
That's how majority vs. minority always works. The majority's tastes coincide because of outside factors, not because of them communicating on something and forming a localized culture. The latter is what's called a circlejerk.
No.79223
Anonymous
>>79217
way to completely miss the point
campaignfag favorites rise and fall, but the silent majority continually votes for the same characters every single year. they don't engage with the threads, they're not open to the possibility of voting for someone new. that's what makes it circlejerk-y.