Hey, how come when I suggested the same thing, you disagreed with me, but you said that Nejanimb made a good point?eyeball138 wrote:Although I'm not going to purposely kill the game by not choosing a next assassinator, if the game dies on it's own, if too many people lose interest for any reason, the games will be over. Right, now, a lot of people are really worked up, and I won't be choosing an assassinator for about the next week or two. You make a good point Nejanimb, if people still want to play, they should, however, if another problem arises in the next game, it would be mayhem, and I'd expect the game to be over for good.
If the game manages to continue, the EOOTA probably will be changed. Basically, other ideas are being considered such as elections for 3-4 people, a google group for better communication between the EOOTA, leaving all administrative power with the previous assassinator, or disbanding the EOOTA all together.
Anyway, I just say we do away with the EOOTA, and let everyone make decisions. This game is too insignificant to warrant all this trouble for voting in people, using a google group, etc.
The next assassinators just have to be responsible enough to use prudence when they add new rules, so theyre not making ridiculous changes. If theyre not, then how about the officers make a vote, majority rules? That seems like the easiest way.







