Re: The Playoffs! -- Rules of Engagement

I have to confess, needlessly complex rules are intriguing to me as well, despite the fact that I'm not much of a gamer because I tend to get confused by the needlessly complex rules and would rather just read a book. But, I think I'll be able to track these just fine.

I like what you have proposed such far, but have one modification and one suggestion.

Modification: (referring to #4/#5): I want to keep as much as possible online, so I think we should post when we have made choices and not. Let's communicate through the blog alone--otherwise, this turn-based posting is good.

Suggestion: If we come to a stalemate, I propose that the each has to write up an overview of the idea that they don't like as much, and what changes they would make to it to make it better than the post they are arguing for. This can, of course, include adding the plot of the post they are arguing for to the one they don't like as much, so long as it includes or is strongly based on the idea they are modifying--so this may become a compromise, or may spark an idea that draws from one or either, but is superior. Then, we vote again on these hybrid-wildcard versions. If this yields no clear favorite, then I suggest we declare stalemate on this round and move on to the next. We will come back and revisit the stalemate when we are through the next series of rounds.