Telepath

I am happy with the conclusion and the developers looking into these problems. By the way: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_(Internet) I find it informative to read Ask me of Present Perfect Tense and I won't have an idea.

I had already written why I replied here, it is not because I loved your politician wannabe behaviour and then backing it up with childish insults. It is you who makes it look like there is no option more reasonable than giving everyone the same chance based on the same formula. You aren't suggesting to give everyone something, it is just a possibility. That is why it will only get worse as more servers get opened, as even that small possibility will be miniaturized by then. You'd think if I believed that server sequencing was based entirely on release date formula, I wouldn't be this offended by your constant propaganda posts. Even if this is true, I don't see how randomizing everything is the best damn solution there is. I have been playing the same since a long time, I have seen servers switch positions. I did not claim that servers are sequenced on popularity, I said that is what they should be based on initially. I countered your fantasy of: With my thoughts on the current system, followed with what I thought would happen in a randomized one: I have plenty of reasons to believe "Problem.1" is a lie. I have no reason to believe it could be true, since you (as the original poster) have done nothing solid to back up any of your statements, yet alone that one in particular. I didn't come here to zealously defend that problem.1 is a lie, I have come here to point out how you make anything that doesn't fit with your ideas wrong. The only wrong thing in these two topics is what you are suggesting to fix what you believe is a problem. As for your third paragraph, I see you want to drive your subtle misguidings away from the topic, and cover it entirely with my incredibility. I am no more credible than you, who claims everything that doesn't suit with him are "false arguments", though he himself has shown nothing of value. As for your oh so subtle poll misguiding, it is true! You can't expect any casual voter to choose unfairness, backed with some random bull**** (i.e serverlist setup takes longer because non-existant servers aren't deleted). Speaking of relevance, I for one only apploud the relation of those problems which are believed to be existant (by you, I don't know on what proof you are basing those claims). I also apploud that you noticed how it would break the time-space continuum if someone could vote for both unfair (lol) listing, and lagged serverlist. Why on earth did you post a damn poll? You need some "dominating numbers of democracy" to back up your lack of self-confidence and ever-lack of proof, is that it? As for my false (lol) arguments and accusations. I have accused you because you didn't make a fair poll (as covered), anyone with half a brain can see it. My argument is that you are misguiding everyone with the claim of "nothing better can be done than randomizing the serverlist", and that is wrong. As for being nice to everyone, yeah, you are being nice to the current dominance who vote for you, but on the other hand you only try to personalize your countered arguments (the fact that randomizing could only be funny rather than perhaps a better rating system). I know what "Democracy" stands for, you either were not aware that I claimed your idea of "randomizing" is corrupt, pointless on long term and baseless, or you are contradicting with yourself. As I said, your idea doesn't give anyone anything (except it makes the established servers lose), but a chance. Let's get to your fifth paragraph (I don't bother much with quoting). I will assume you missed the words "I think" in the previous paragraph of mine. You'd think that I wouldn't shout something random and put it up against your fantasy, but you'd rather make it look like "these communists never do their homework". Nowhere in my post have I directly claimed that servers are based on "popularity". I don't know about that, that is how I think it is, or should be. When I said that "More active servers are on top", I did not mention that could be based on release date. Before you bastardilize my words to misguide and personalize my argument of "Randomization is wrong, rating based on popularity is better", give me a proof about anything you have written. When I was talking about the current playerbase (which I am a part of), even though those people have already found their favourite servers it is still the most likely that they will influence the empty servers with unique modes, in the current system. This will not notably change in the event of "random serverlist" because experienced players will know how to scroll through and customize the serverlist sorting. The "difference" you are talking about is so small and gets only worse in the long run. As more servers start, this "benefit" of equalization will always get worse. I will try to make it better for your argument. Let's consider that the community is constantly growing with new players (I don't believe growth is this big yet, do you?). Some servers will get lucky and receive positive hits to their population, but then they will be handicapped by the ever-increasing amounts of other servers. On the other hand, since all servers are equal, you are actually at a loss as you keep labouring your unique gamemode which deserves more players. You claim that there is a benefit in your thoughts, yet I see nothing more than a simple formula which equalizes everyone in the chance of getting the first-timers in the game. The current players who don't want to try something new won't look around, those who get bored of their well populated server will, so for them it is the same with a random system. Even for newcomers, it is common sense to join the most populated, i.e "old" server (they can scroll). It is common sense to orientate especially newcomers to the most populated servers. My "beneficial thoughts" are, as you may have guessed, initial sorting of servers (that which affects newcomers) should be based on how popular the server is. This could be based on averages on a longer time or only the current. This way, labour in scripting actually gets a reward rather than a mere "chance" which only keeps getting worse as the population grows. You constantly try to make your rivals look like they're not sure of what they are talking about, yet you are the one who is unaware of what you are suggesting. EQUALIZATION DOES NOT AUTOMATICALLY MEAN "FAIR". You can't think better than anything that counters your argument has got to be false, wrong, irrevelant. This is also obvious from your stupid poll, not just I, anyone could make their own version if it was this simple.

Here I was rambling through the forums and these two topics cracked me up (more accurately, it was their original poster). Good thing that I finally managed to fill the registration form. My purpose is not offending anyone here, but all that you (OP) have written here can only be called "funny", if anything. More active servers are on top. They have better gamemodes. They have a base playerbase. How do you gain an advantage over that? You make an unique mode and advertise it well. With that taken care of there is no reason for you to not to become a popular server. If you are unable to do that, might as well not host a new server and complain because it is empty. In any event, it is very esteemed of you to utilize this serverlist scanning delay into that poll of yours. Really nice setup you got there, since there is no way in hell one could ask for both a non-randomized serverlist and reduced server scanning delay. May I also add that voters who do not share opinion with you have to confess that they sympathize despotism? Irony coming from someone who posts a one-sided poll about a "problem", to the Suggestions section of the forum. Now let me get to the "solution", that is the most well-thought of all. Since it is impossible for the new servers with creative and intriguing gamemodes to receive new players who never bother searching for something different, you think it is fair and reasonable to give those new servers the number of servers/servers per page*2 chance to receive fresh players (this is a very optimistic calculation, even then). Those fresh players (talking about people who are new to the game) new servers receive are at the expense of the well-established servers that used to be pretty popular (not some time after the anti-discrimination hammer). Owners of all servers, notably the new servers are happy since their chance to grow is based on the same formula. In short, democracy has come to the MTA:SA server list. Note; I did not make up all this, you did. Here you will see what I think about the current system, followed by a democratic one. Don't ask me for facts as my thoughts are based on what I understand from common sense. Not that you haven't failed enough with both being the original poster and giving a solid proof about anything you had written. Yes, it is mainly the OPs who give proof, not the commenters. Servers are sequenced upon how active/popular they have been on a long term. Players choose servers based on number of players, gamemode and pingtime. Players scroll through the servers (they are aware that there are more servers than what is initially shown). Some people do search for a new, better gamemode. People should not host new servers if they are going to host the cloned/slightly modified gamemode. The only reasonable time to host a new server is when you have something you think is truly unique and will contribute to the community. Even then you should not expect users to find their way themselves, you should let people know how awesome your gamemode is (post information/screenshots about your scripts). Depending on your karma and gamemode, you will eventually (less than a month? More than a month? No one knows) become a popular server. Just like growing up, it takes time. Randomizing the server list will not affect the current playerbase. All except fresh players will know where to play on and where to not. New players will join servers more randomly. Popular servers with well-laboured gamemodes will give their potential fresh blood to random servers with **** gamemodes. The new, empty servers which deserve new players will not benefit much since all servers are equal. It will be harder to start and learn the game with a better experience, since high ranking servers with interesting gamemodes are god knows where. Here is the interesting part, server hosters who have decent gamemodes will find themselves handicapped because of this equalization they voted for. Your ideas of equalizing everyones chances may have been claimed as a sign of goodwill but only in communism everyone gets the same bread regardless of how much they have worked. While desirable in theory, equalization could have never been implemented without corruption. It is common sense that popular servers are rather higher on the list, it is not discrimination that empty servers with **** gamemodes are lower. Give me a proof about anything you have written before questioning my common sense. Here you got my reason. I would go off-topic about your narrow "this is irrevelant! that is irrevelant!" or "non factual (lol) argument Count.1" tactics but so much for a single post. Note: No, I don't own a server. I wouldn't want my work to have the same place as a half-done clone in the long run, which is why I posted this.