Recommend
64 
 Thumb up
 Hide
191 Posts
1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5  Next »  [8] | 

BoardGameGeek» Forums » Gaming Related » General Gaming

Subject: Unofficial BGG Hall of Fame - FINAL VOTING rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: HallOfFame [+] [View All]
BGG Hall of Fame

The Internet
msg tools
mb
Hey folks. It has been a long journey to this point, but here are the final nominees for the Unofficial BGG Hall of Fame.

You can see all the nominees in an easy to view GeekList. Discussion and debate is encouraged there.

Previous threads:
Initial Discussion Thread
Logistics Polls
Nomination Thread

All BGG users are eligible to vote. The standard for induction is "noteworthiness and historical significance."

A game must achieve 75% of Yes votes (disregarding abstentions) to be inducted into this inaugural class. Please abstain if you don't feel qualified to judge a game.

Please note that we plan to induct games once a year, so games that are not inducted this year will have another chance next year.

We suggest voting Yes to 12-15 games. If everyone does this, then it will likely lead to 7-10 inductees. (EDIT: This is merely a suggestion. Feel free to ignore this suggestion.)

Voting will close automatically on Wednesday, December 22.

Poll
Should the following games be inducted into the Unofficial BGG Hall of Fame?
  Yes No Abstain Vote Count
1829 / 1830: Railways & Robber Barons 30.6% (193) 28.7% (181) 40.7% (257) 631
Acquire 57.7% (373) 20.1% (130) 22.3% (144) 647
Axis & Allies 52.8% (353) 32.3% (216) 14.8% (99) 668
Backgammon 44.6% (286) 42.3% (271) 13.1% (84) 641
Carcassonne 61.6% (403) 29.2% (191) 9.2% (60) 654
Chess 73.5% (492) 21.7% (145) 4.8% (32) 669
Civilization 46.9% (298) 32.2% (205) 20.9% (133) 636
Clue 35.1% (227) 56.7% (366) 8.2% (53) 646
Cosmic Encounter 46.8% (301) 35.1% (226) 18.0% (116) 643
Sky Runner 1.2% (7) 58.8% (354) 40.0% (241) 602
Go 59.5% (388) 24.4% (159) 16.1% (105) 652
El Grande 39.8% (253) 35.1% (223) 25.2% (160) 636
Die Macher 27.9% (175) 38.0% (238) 34.1% (214) 627
Magic: The Gathering 62.4% (409) 27.5% (180) 10.1% (66) 655
Monopoly 51.1% (338) 44.6% (295) 4.4% (29) 662
Ra 23.7% (147) 52.0% (323) 24.3% (151) 621
Risk 57.1% (380) 37.0% (246) 5.9% (39) 665
Scrabble 55.7% (362) 36.8% (239) 7.5% (49) 650
Catan 84.0% (561) 11.2% (75) 4.8% (32) 668
Squad Leader / Advanced Squad Leader 48.6% (319) 29.3% (192) 22.1% (145) 656
Tigris & Euphrates 37.8% (241) 39.0% (249) 23.2% (148) 638
Trivial Pursuit 32.5% (214) 60.3% (397) 7.1% (47) 658
Total Voters 731
This poll is now closed.   731 answers
Poll created by BGG Hall of Fame
Closes: Wed Dec 22, 2010 6:00 am


Also, please subscribe to this user to stay up to date with all uHoF happenings! Low traffic!
13 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Rishi A.
United States
Alexandria
Virginia
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Due to a typo, one game got missed from the above list. I apologize profusely for the error. And Sky Runner is not actually a nominee.

Poll
Should the following be inducted into the Unofficial BGG Hall of Fame?
  Yes No Abstain Vote Count
Diplomacy 68.5% (368) 19.9% (107) 11.5% (62) 537
Total Voters 537
This poll is now closed.   537 answers
Poll created by Rishi
Closes: Wed Dec 22, 2010 6:00 am
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Rishi A.
United States
Alexandria
Virginia
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
So, the percentage required for induction in the Hall of Fame will be changed to 2/3. I realize that some people don't like this idea, but the fact is that the 75% number is too high. Also, I think it's a lesser evil to slightly lower the percentage this year than to lower the percentage next year. Having inconsistent standards from year to year will not sit right with a lot of people, including myself.

A lot of the arguments for changing the percentage are summed up in Larry Levy's excellent post here.

Don't think of it as changing the rules mid-stream. This is the first year we did this, so I think of it as a playtest. Since the numbers didn't work, we adjusted them. The situation is also analogous to the founding of the Sumo/Counter HoF (also a games HoF open to general voting). They originally said the inaugural class would be ten games. After seeing the voting, they decided to expand the selection to fourteen games to be sure to include Go and Bridge.

This makes the inaugural class:

Acquire
Carcassonne
Chess
Diplomacy
Go
Magic: The Gathering
The Settlers of Catan

All in all, a fine group of games. For the curious, if the standards had stayed at 75%, the only inducted games would be Chess, Diplomacy and The Settlers of Catan.

I will put up a Hall of Fame GeekList in the next week or two. It will be closed to comments, but I will solicit a short introduction to each game from someone in the BGG community. I will probably look at stats like ratings and logged plays to determine who to ask for a statement.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dexter Solen
msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Need to Get the Vote Out!
7 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Marc Edmondson
United States
Missouri
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
BGG Hall of Fame wrote:
If everyone does this, then it will likely lead to 7-10 inductees.


At the time of my voting, looks like only 3 inductees . . .
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Carl Bussema
United States
Lansing
Michigan
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
So I'm supposed to vote for half of these games to go into the hall of fame? That seems... exceptionally high. Realistically, that means I picked about 2-3 games I had played and thought weren't HOF worthy, and voted the rest I had played in, and then abstained on the rest. I think this list needed more nominees or we should have been instructed to vote for fewer games, simply so there's more meaningful choices.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Richard Morris
Scotland
Harrogate
North Yorkshire
flag msg tools
designer
Join the BGG Folding @Home Team !!
badge
This user had more :gg: than sense
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
InfoCynic wrote:
So I'm supposed to vote for half of these games to go into the hall of fame? That seems... exceptionally high. Realistically, that means I picked about 2-3 games I had played and thought weren't HOF worthy, and voted the rest I had played in, and then abstained on the rest. I think this list needed more nominees or we should have been instructed to vote for fewer games, simply so there's more meaningful choices.


I know it is Rishi's poll, but I strongly feel that you should simply ignore him on this.

Given the criterion: "noteworthiness and historical significance", you should consider each game listed, and place your vote accordingly. If you think it is not expecially noteworthy, and has no particular historical significance, say no. Etc. If you end up voting "Yes" to them all - terrific. If 21 get a "no" from you, then that is terrific too, as long as it genuinely represents your views. But to think that you must vote yes to a couple extra games just to get into his 12-15 is patently nonsense, IMHO. Indeed it renders the exercise completely worthless in my eyes.
7 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Philip Newman
United States
Richardson
Texas
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Milkman Cometh wrote:
BGG Hall of Fame wrote:
If everyone does this, then it will likely lead to 7-10 inductees.


At the time of my voting, looks like only 3 inductees . . .


There are 3 above 75% as a percentage of the total votes, but as of my votes there are 5 above the threshold only counting yes/no votes. (And 6 more above 65%, so it's possible we could end up in that 7-10 range by the time voting is done.)
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Geeky McGeekface
United States
Manassas
Virginia
flag msg tools
designer
badge
It's the World Series! Will the Dodgers, this year's winningest team, win their first championship in 29 years? Or will the Astros win their first Series EVER?
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
InfoCynic wrote:
I think this list needed more nominees or we should have been instructed to vote for fewer games, simply so there's more meaningful choices.

In retrospect, I think more nominees should have been included. Trying to get a larger batch of games into the Hall on the first election is a worthwhile goal (since the time period being covered is so much larger than it will be in subsequent elections). But rather than instructing people to vote for a lot of games (which, as you point out, gives the exercise a peculiar feel), it probably would have been better to have about 40 or so nominees. That way, I can vote for the same dozen games, but it's less than a third of the nominees, as opposed to more than half now.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Geeky McGeekface
United States
Manassas
Virginia
flag msg tools
designer
badge
It's the World Series! Will the Dodgers, this year's winningest team, win their first championship in 29 years? Or will the Astros win their first Series EVER?
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
AnnuverScotinExile wrote:
To think that you must vote yes to a couple extra games just to get into his 12-15 is patently nonsense, IMHO. Indeed it renders the exercise completely worthless in my eyes.

That's fine if you have strong feelings which games belong in the Hall and which don't, Richard. But I don't, since all of the nominees are reasonable choices. Obviously, I feel stronger about some than others, but it's not obvious where to draw the line. If we had a backlog of earlier entries to give me a feel for what threshold of greatness we're looking for, I could better judge my vote, but for the first election, that information isn't available. So setting a goal of 7-10 inductees (and subsequently 12-15 votes) is helpful to me. As I mentioned above, it would have felt better if there were more nominees, but the guidelines are still useful to me.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Stephen Miller
United Kingdom
Newport
Gwent
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Larry Levy wrote:
AnnuverScotinExile wrote:
To think that you must vote yes to a couple extra games just to get into his 12-15 is patently nonsense, IMHO. Indeed it renders the exercise completely worthless in my eyes.

That's fine if you have strong feelings which games belong in the Hall and which don't, Richard. But I don't, since all of the nominees are reasonable choices. Obviously, I feel stronger about some than others, but it's not obvious where to draw the line. If we had a backlog of earlier entries to give me a feel for what threshold of greatness we're looking for, I could better judge my vote, but for the first election, that information isn't available. So setting a goal of 7-10 inductees (and subsequently 12-15 votes) is helpful to me. As I mentioned above, it would have felt better if there were more nominees, but the guidelines are still useful to me.


Curiously, of the 20, the 'natural' amount I was able to vote yes for (some I didn't think were worthy, others I didn't know so abstained) was within that range.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Geeky McGeekface
United States
Manassas
Virginia
flag msg tools
designer
badge
It's the World Series! Will the Dodgers, this year's winningest team, win their first championship in 29 years? Or will the Astros win their first Series EVER?
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
mith wrote:
There are 3 above 75% as a percentage of the total votes, but as of my votes there are 5 above the threshold only counting yes/no votes. (And 6 more above 65%, so it's possible we could end up in that 7-10 range by the time voting is done.)

I don't know. As of this hour, there's 4 above the threshold (which essentially requires that there be three times as many "Yes" votes as "No" votes) and one of those just barely makes it. There's only 2 other games with as much as twice as many Yes than No votes (and only one of those is even close to reaching 75%). So we're most likely looking at 3-4 inductees if we maintain the same rules. I suspect that the varied nature of the typical BGG user will make a three quarters consensus a difficult goal to meet.

Maybe it's too late in the game to change the ground rules, but I'm wondering if a goal of two-thirds of the non-abstained votes is a more realistic threshold. Right now, 6 games meet that standard, with 3 other ones that are right on the cusp. Just something to think about. After all, we knew going in that the biggest problem with percentage voting was that we didn't know which percentage was the appropriate one.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Richard Morris
Scotland
Harrogate
North Yorkshire
flag msg tools
designer
Join the BGG Folding @Home Team !!
badge
This user had more :gg: than sense
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Larry Levy wrote:
AnnuverScotinExile wrote:
To think that you must vote yes to a couple extra games just to get into his 12-15 is patently nonsense, IMHO. Indeed it renders the exercise completely worthless in my eyes.

That's fine if you have strong feelings which games belong in the Hall and which don't, Richard. But I don't, since all of the nominees are reasonable choices. Obviously, I feel stronger about some than others, but it's not obvious where to draw the line. If we had a backlog of earlier entries to give me a feel for what threshold of greatness we're looking for, I could better judge my vote, but for the first election, that information isn't available. So setting a goal of 7-10 inductees (and subsequently 12-15 votes) is helpful to me. As I mentioned above, it would have felt better if there were more nominees, but the guidelines are still useful to me.


I disagree

Those you feel should definitely be in, vote yes. Those that you feel should definitely be not in, vote no. Where you are not sure, abstain.

IMHO, there should be no reference to quotas at all, because that implies that someone already knows the answer about how many games are good enough to get in from this list. I am not interested in a HoF where admission is other than strictly on merit by comparison with all other games. A quota-driven system does not give that, and ends up with a HoF which I would ignore as irrelevant.

Eventually, if this ever reaches some sort of steady state, we will have a list of 'already inducted games' that we will be able to use as some sort of reference point to make decisions about whether a game is 'good enough' easier to make. Then, I posit, you will feel more comfortable about where to draw the line, and will have a much lower proportion of abstentions. However, if you use a different method to decide how to vote now, compared to how you will vote in the future, then it risks games getting in now that would not have got in on that better method in the future. And that would be bad. You may get the opposite - games not getting in this time that 'should be in'. Those are much less of an issue to me, since there has been a promise of some sort of (ie not defined at all) process that will allow a game to be nominated more than once. So we could correct such errors in the future. But we cannot correct the 'in, but should not be in' errors, so we need to prevent them from happening in the first place.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Richard Morris
Scotland
Harrogate
North Yorkshire
flag msg tools
designer
Join the BGG Folding @Home Team !!
badge
This user had more :gg: than sense
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Gizensha wrote:
Larry Levy wrote:
AnnuverScotinExile wrote:
To think that you must vote yes to a couple extra games just to get into his 12-15 is patently nonsense, IMHO. Indeed it renders the exercise completely worthless in my eyes.

That's fine if you have strong feelings which games belong in the Hall and which don't, Richard. But I don't, since all of the nominees are reasonable choices. Obviously, I feel stronger about some than others, but it's not obvious where to draw the line. If we had a backlog of earlier entries to give me a feel for what threshold of greatness we're looking for, I could better judge my vote, but for the first election, that information isn't available. So setting a goal of 7-10 inductees (and subsequently 12-15 votes) is helpful to me. As I mentioned above, it would have felt better if there were more nominees, but the guidelines are still useful to me.


Curiously, of the 20, the 'natural' amount I was able to vote yes for (some I didn't think were worthy, others I didn't know so abstained) was within that range.


... and I think it was Rishi's expectation that that should be true for most of us. And I think it may well be. Which is terrific. It is not, however, any grounds for voting 'yes' to a game you are unsure about just to get up the that level of yes votes, or to vote 'no' for a game where your natural response was 'yes' because you have 'too many'.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Stephen Miller
United Kingdom
Newport
Gwent
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
AnnuverScotinExile wrote:
Gizensha wrote:
Larry Levy wrote:
AnnuverScotinExile wrote:
To think that you must vote yes to a couple extra games just to get into his 12-15 is patently nonsense, IMHO. Indeed it renders the exercise completely worthless in my eyes.

That's fine if you have strong feelings which games belong in the Hall and which don't, Richard. But I don't, since all of the nominees are reasonable choices. Obviously, I feel stronger about some than others, but it's not obvious where to draw the line. If we had a backlog of earlier entries to give me a feel for what threshold of greatness we're looking for, I could better judge my vote, but for the first election, that information isn't available. So setting a goal of 7-10 inductees (and subsequently 12-15 votes) is helpful to me. As I mentioned above, it would have felt better if there were more nominees, but the guidelines are still useful to me.


Curiously, of the 20, the 'natural' amount I was able to vote yes for (some I didn't think were worthy, others I didn't know so abstained) was within that range.


... and I think it was Rishi's expectation that that should be true for most of us. And I think it may well be. Which is terrific. It is not, however, any grounds for voting 'yes' to a game you are unsure about just to get up the that level of yes votes, or to vote 'no' for a game where your natural response was 'yes' because you have 'too many'.


I'd agree with that - And also note that some of these I might be willing to say yes to in some years time but don't feel they deserve to be in the inaugeral set.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Richard Morris
Scotland
Harrogate
North Yorkshire
flag msg tools
designer
Join the BGG Folding @Home Team !!
badge
This user had more :gg: than sense
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Larry Levy wrote:
mith wrote:
There are 3 above 75% as a percentage of the total votes, but as of my votes there are 5 above the threshold only counting yes/no votes. (And 6 more above 65%, so it's possible we could end up in that 7-10 range by the time voting is done.)

I don't know. As of this hour, there's 4 above the threshold (which essentially requires that there be three times as many "Yes" votes as "No" votes) and one of those just barely makes it. There's only 2 other games with as much as twice as many Yes than No votes (and only one of those is even close to reaching 75%). So we're most likely looking at 3-4 inductees if we maintain the same rules. I suspect that the varied nature of the typical BGG user will make a three quarters consensus a difficult goal to meet.

Maybe it's too late in the game to change the ground rules, but I'm wondering if a goal of two-thirds of the non-abstained votes is a more realistic threshold. Right now, 6 games meet that standard, with 3 other ones that are right on the cusp. Just something to think about. After all, we knew going in that the biggest problem with percentage voting was that we didn't know which percentage was the appropriate one.


I think that it is quite possible that there may be a change of ground rules. Rishi is not stupid, and this has been discussed at length, and he went in to this with his eyes open, knowing that it might not go as expected. The 75% number was pretty much 'plucked out of the air', and nobody knows what the 'right' number is. Personally, I am very surprised at some of the votes. It would appear that the concensus of the users that have voted thus far is for a far different interpretation of "noteworthiness and historical significance" than mine. Ho hum.

Anyway, one of the more interesting bottom lines, to me, anyway, is that it seems absurd to suggest that the number of games that meet a "noteworthiness and historical significance" criterion is as few as 5, even if we have lopped off the last 10 years of games. If there are genuinely only 5 we think of as being good enough, we might as well close down the HoF now, as it will be tiny.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kevin Brown
United States
Macon
Georgia
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
AnnuverScotinExile wrote:
The 75% number was pretty much 'plucked out of the air', and nobody knows what the 'right' number is.


I think he based it on the Major League Baseball HOF voting, which requires 75% affirmative to be inducted.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Richard Morris
Scotland
Harrogate
North Yorkshire
flag msg tools
designer
Join the BGG Folding @Home Team !!
badge
This user had more :gg: than sense
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
pilight wrote:
AnnuverScotinExile wrote:
The 75% number was pretty much 'plucked out of the air', and nobody knows what the 'right' number is.


I think he based it on the Major League Baseball HOF voting, which requires 75% affirmative to be inducted.


But that (as he, and we know) is very different. The voters are not just any old joe soap from off the streets, but a group that are designated as 'experts'. Here we have anyone who cares enough to click is allowed to vote, and abstentions are ignored.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Max Maloney
United States
Portland
Oregon
flag msg tools
badge
"If trees could scream, would we be so cavalier about cutting them down? We might, if they screamed all the time, for no good reason." -Jack Handey
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I think that if Magic doesn't get in, we already know this thing is worthless.
7 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kevin Brown
United States
Macon
Georgia
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
AnnuverScotinExile wrote:
pilight wrote:
AnnuverScotinExile wrote:
The 75% number was pretty much 'plucked out of the air', and nobody knows what the 'right' number is.


I think he based it on the Major League Baseball HOF voting, which requires 75% affirmative to be inducted.


But that (as he, and we know) is very different. The voters are not just any old joe soap from off the streets, but a group that are designated as 'experts'. Here we have anyone who cares enough to click is allowed to vote, and abstentions are ignored.


Abstentions on individual nominees are not ignored in MLB HOF voting. Each voter gets a list of eligible nominees and may vote for up to 10 to be inducted. If a nominee appears on 75% of returned ballots, the player is inducted. Leaving someone off a ballot is the same as voting no.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Wow, if monopoly actually gets in........that would make this entire thing a laughing-stock. That game goes against everything this website stands for. This is supposed to be the BGG Hall of Fame, not the mass market Wal-Mart hall of fame.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Richard Morris
Scotland
Harrogate
North Yorkshire
flag msg tools
designer
Join the BGG Folding @Home Team !!
badge
This user had more :gg: than sense
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Zaphod wrote:
Wow, if monopoly actually gets in........that would make this entire thing a laughing-stock. That game goes against everything this website stands for. This is supposed to be the BGG Hall of Fame, not the mass market Wal-Mart hall of fame.


Wow if Monopoly does not get in, that would make this entire thing a laughing-stock. A site that proports to be the fount of all knowledge about board games omitting from its hall of fame a game which, no matter how bad it is by modern standards, was (and to a certain extent still is) board gaming to many people.

-----------

Which just goes to show how difficult it will be to get a HoF that we can all accept as being 'sensible' and 'representative'.
16 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Yours Truly,
United States
Raleigh
North Carolina
flag msg tools
badge
There must have been a moment at the beginning, where we could have said no. Somehow we missed it. Well, we'll know better next time.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Zaphod wrote:
Wow, if monopoly actually gets in........that would make this entire thing a laughing-stock. That game goes against everything this website stands for. This is supposed to be the BGG Hall of Fame, not the mass market Wal-Mart hall of fame.


Considering it's at 58% right now I don't think there's a chance of getting to 75% w/200 votes already. Percentages might change a little but not a lot w/this many votes already cast.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
AnnuverScotinExile wrote:
Zaphod wrote:
Wow, if monopoly actually gets in........that would make this entire thing a laughing-stock. That game goes against everything this website stands for. This is supposed to be the BGG Hall of Fame, not the mass market Wal-Mart hall of fame.


Wow if Monopoly does not get in, that would make this entire thing a laughing-stock. A site that proports to be the fount of all knowledge about board games omitting from its hall of fame a game which, no matter how bad it is by modern standards, was (and to a certain extent still is) board gaming to many people.

-----------

Which just goes to show how difficult it will be to get a HoF that we can all accept as being 'sensible' and 'representative'.


Historical significance to BGG and its members should be the criteria, not historical significance to culture in general. Otherwise, why call it the "BGG" hall of fame?
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Rishi A.
United States
Alexandria
Virginia
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
The suggestion of voting for 12-15 is just that: a suggestion. You can take this advice or ignore it.

But, for the record, here's how I arrived at that suggestion:

To make the math simple, let's say the list had 20 games and people voted yes, on average, 15 games. That means that games on the list would average 75%, and so, likely, ten games would be above that threshold and ten games would be below it. So, 10 inductees.

I didn't pick 75% out of the air. There were logistics polls that determined that most people supported more than a 75% threshold. I chose 75% as the median percentage listed on the poll. Personally, if I picked a number out of thin air, I would have picked 60%.

As of this morning (didn't run the numbers right now), most people are ignoring the 12-15 games suggestion. The average number of Yes votes per voter was 10.5 games.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5  Next »  [8] | 
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.