Single Comment

I think what Robert and George are arguing for is: quantity with quality. Whereas, Fergus, Roberto, Greg and Michael are arguing for is: quality with quantity. :-) <p>My point is that CVP is by its very nature a self-governing body. I think any conscientious game developer is concerned about quality. <p>The editors are also concerned about quality, but also concerned about an open forum -- as much as possible, hence quantity. We strive for quality in the description of the games, more so than in inspecting games for flaws, etc. A few games, not many, are not posted, because they are incomplete or not internally logical in their description (then the inventor is asked to clarify). Besides that, the CVP community must be the judge. (There is also the question of practicality -- who would do the laborious work of testing and under what criteria, without slowing CVP to a grinding halt? That's killing the chicken that lays the golden eggs!) <p>In fact, the CVP community does judge quality. This thread proves my point. The rating system is one measure, so are comments. Contests are another great venue. Only the best games get selected for Recognized Variants and tournaments. Some of the best games are programmed in Zillions of Games. One of the best measures of quality is the Game Courier: only the best games get played, hence the importance of making presets available. (A cursory look reveals that the most popular variants are FRC and Shogi.) <p>That is why this Comments forum is so valuable -- it allows the CVP community to discuss and discern the important question of the quality of the game itself, from its many aspects. And this occurs in the most efficient way possible: in the marketplace of ideas.