[OmegaZero_Alpha]

I was on the server a few days ago and this moron kept going on about how our mapvote is fundamentally flawed and therefore we should reform it to fit the needs of the community. I was in complete shock about this because I found that his statement was completely irrelevent and that he really didn't know what he was talking about.

according to Arrow's impossibility theorem, in order to revise our voting system, we would have to have the outcomes flexible in order to better fit the needs of individual users, which would require some awesome map-splicing utillity that (in order to work properly) would take hundreds of supercomputers to run, hundreds more to make the maps good.

He argued that according to Independence of irrelevant alternatives (IIA), we should calculate our mapvote-selection in order to provide a medium in which the two popular maps selected have a lot in common. I told him that he was a moron and that he should just nominate his favorite map and not go all philosophical whenever his map doesn't get picked... but that is just me.

[Retribution]

ok i admit that kids was crazy
but in his deffence i blibe that the slection of the map should be based apon the mojority of just those who vote, and there should be infact a sperat option to keep current map, this way it weeds out those who don't care what the next map would be, thus following "Howe's law of those who don't voice there opinon don't have one"

[OmegaZero_Alpha]

My favorite part about it was that he actually thought that there was technology available to fuse maps together, or he expects us to make a map that is a combination of two other ones (not just two maps in one gamespace, but a perfectly balanced map with all of the features of the two selected)