Game 4 Move 5 Forum 5-4

[roadkillbooks]

blitzxz got a 4-2 and hit while bringing in 2 pieces.  We no rolled 5-4.  We are white.  The match is blitzxz 2 - 1 Forum.  blitzxz has the cube at 2. Time for vote.

[ah_clem]

Spoiler

If we had a builder in range, I'd be happy to hit loose on the 4. But with no builder in around to cover I'm hesitant to hit loose and then hope to roll a 7,9 or 11.  That said, we have a solid board and he has nothing in that dept, so exchanging hits is favored.  And by putting a second checker on the roof we keep him off balance.

Our blitz is running out of steam, but I think we need to play on with that theme.

The other options give him a chance to recover - there's a double shot at our blot on the eight, and the only move to protect it is the yucky 8/3.

Making an anchor now may seem desirable, but with four spread blots in his homeboard we should anchor soon enough.  And if the blitz succeeds, we won't need to.

So, despite being a bit timid about it, bar/20 8/4*.

[close]

[roadkillbooks]

its 6-1 on the voting so im moving this along.  Blitzxz rolled a 61 and enetered one from the bar.

[ah_clem]

its 6-1 on the voting so im moving this along. 

FWIW, my rule of thumb was to move it along as soon as an option obtained a 5-vote lead.  We've got that, so I agree it's time.

[diane]

FWIW, my rule of thumb was to move it along as soon as an option obtained a 5-vote lead.  We've got that, so I agree it's time.

I am really uncomfortable with this rapid moving along business....If it gets to a 5 lead vote in 30 mins...people in other time zones dont get to play...I know their vote may not change anything, but there is no fun in even considering a 'moved along poll' - after all, the next roll is almost always there, influencing your choice of move, even subconciously.

So, is this about us all getting a chance to play, think about what move we would make and learn...or about playing a quick game without considering other viewpoints or options - because we might as well go to fibs for the latter!!

[dorbel]

Diane is correct. We should have a minimum voting period that is strictly adhered to. Moving on when the voting has a preset majority is technically wrong. In scientific terms this is called optional stopping, i.e. you have decided to run an experiment a set number of times or for a set period, but before it has run its course, you decide that you dont need to finish. People do this with rollouts, setting the bot for 1296 trials, but stopping after 300 because one play has a clear lead.
Even if early stopping were scientifically valid, we should still remember that fibs is a worldwide community and let everybody play! 24 hours is reasonable I think.
To be fair in this instance hitting is clearly right IMO, but let's not be in a rush another time eh?

[ah_clem]

I can't say I have strong feelings about it and I'm Ok with a policy of always letting the vote run the full 24 hours (or whatever period we settle on.)  But here's my reasoning why it makes sense to call it early sometimes:

1) As moderator, part of the job is to "next" certain obvious moves.  But since I'm not that strong of a player, I don't always have the confidence to "next" a particular move.  When I think it's a next but I'm not sure, I put it out to a vote, and if it obtains an overwhelming unanimous vote (say, 5-0) I move the match along.  Call this proceedure a "delayed next".  I think it's reasonable to allow a "delayed next".

2) Over the last month, we've consistently gotten between 6 and 8 votes total for each poll.  There were a couple of polls in early January that garnered 10 votes, but other than those the max has been 8.  With an electorate of 8, a 5 vote lead would seem to be dispositive.  That's why 5 was my rule of thumb.  Of course, if participation increases, that number would have to increase as well.

3) Practical considerations of timing sometimes favor an early call.  For instance, I've found myself and the box online with a few hours to go in the vote. If I call the vote early I can give the box his roll, let him make his move, and put up a new position.  But if I wait  til the end of the voting period, it may be another full day before I get back to the site, make the move, put up the box's move, wait for him to get back to us with his move, and then get back to the site myself to put up the next poll.

The counter-argument would be that people are feeling shut out of the process, and we should respect that.  There's a balance to be struck between making sure everyone gets a chance to play and wasting time by letting a poll sit around well past the time when it's been decided.

So, my preference would be to let the facilitator use his or her judgment and not adopt rigid inflexible rules.  But some rough guidelines might not be a bad idea.  And hopefully folks will feel free to express their preferences so that we can work towards making this fun and accomodating to everyone.

At the risk of "micromanaging" rkb, my opinion is that calling the recent cube decision after only 8 hours and a vote of 3-1 was too rash.  But calling this vote after 20 hours with a vote of 6-1 is perfectly reasonable.