Derby Dead Pool 2008

[maryportfuncity 10,013]

Conjoined twins is an interesting one. Since the 16 age limit more or less rules out conjoined twins ending up dead in the aftermath of a separation operation the only ones likely to count are adults, still conjoined, who would - most likely - both die around the same time. I guess a formerly conjoined twin could die but on the basis of once having been part of such a pair I'm struggling to see any surviving former conjoined twin famous enough for obit qualification, even by means of a tabloid filler story.

 

Or am I wrong, like?

[Octopus of Odstock 1,855]

So can I expect an email on 1st December say? I'm not the only one who doesn't trust him as far as I could throw him. I'm just being more vocal about it.

 

Because, if I'm to be honest, I don't trust you either, Windsor. There are people on here I do trust & would be happy to name my potential team, but not you - you've never given me reason to even like you, let alone trust you.

 

Anyway, I have given you (and everyone else) 14 names on there already - don't see anyone else doing that.

 

Besides, if you're not even entering, why should it matter to you at all?

 

Also, if all you can do is badmouth me from the start without even giving me a chance to even run the DDP, then not only I am not very likely to give you my trust, but I am more than likely not to even give a f**k about you.

 

Having said all that, you are still more than welcome to enter a team, you won't be banned in any shape or form & I hope you do well & beat all the "cheating bastards", including myself, apparently.

 

I started this thread now, well in advance, so you could all have a say about where you wanted the DDP to go & what you wanted to see changed. On this thread, you have been the only one that has been snide & unconstructive, when you have had a golden opportunity to put your point across. It's a shame you have somewhat squandered that opportunity thus far & simply resorted to personal attacks.

 

Finally, it's the Derby Dead Pool, not the OOO Dead Pool. I'm hardly changing a thing & if I am, I'm getting players approval first. If that offends you so much, so be it. I haven't got time to spend sending PM's to people who can't even be civil.

[Godot 148]

Goodness me, this is more like Reservoir Dogs than the Derby Dead Pool.

[Paul Bearer 5,645]

Is Kayser Soze in the building? Fer fox sake it's only a bit of harmless fun. (Unless your a pass by ranter)

[Guest Sour Grapes]

So can I expect an email on 1st December say? I'm not the only one who doesn't trust him as far as I could throw him. I'm just being more vocal about it.

 

Because, if I'm to be honest, I don't trust you either, Windsor. There are people on here I do trust & would be happy to name my potential team, but not you - you've never given me reason to even like you, let alone trust you.

 

Anyway, I have given you (and everyone else) 14 names on there already - don't see anyone else doing that.

 

Besides, if you're not even entering, why should it matter to you at all?

 

Also, if all you can do is badmouth me from the start without even giving me a chance to even run the DDP, then not only I am not very likely to give you my trust, but I am more than likely not to even give a f**k about you.

 

Having said all that, you are still more than welcome to enter a team, you won't be banned in any shape or form & I hope you do well & beat all the "cheating bastards", including myself, apparently.

 

I started this thread now, well in advance, so you could all have a say about where you wanted the DDP to go & what you wanted to see changed. On this thread, you have been the only one that has been snide & unconstructive, when you have had a golden opportunity to put your point across. It's a shame you have somewhat squandered that opportunity thus far & simply resorted to personal attacks.

 

Finally, it's the Derby Dead Pool, not the OOO Dead Pool. I'm hardly changing a thing & if I am, I'm getting players approval first. If that offends you so much, so be it. I haven't got time to spend sending PM's to people who can't even be civil.

 

I have offered you the opportunity to outdo some of your harsher critics, myself included, and you have thrown it back in my face.

Good luck with your deadpool.

 

Can't wait to see some of the 'Unique Picks' which spring up. Like the Mayor of some pishy little Welsh village who will get his obit on the BBC local pages or something. We all like to reward 'hard work'...

 

To hell with you all. Have fun now.

[Guest Sour Grapes]

BTW, I'm surprised no one has asked me about my involvement in the recent Fraserborough fisting scandal. It was a set up. I had no idea he was a police officer.

[Lard Bazaar 3,687]

BTW, I'm surprised no one has asked me about my involvement in the recent Fraserborough fisting scandal. It was a set up. I had no idea he was a police officer.

 

Hang on a minute - surely you of all people know it's spelt Fraserburgh? Are we being hoodwinked by an imposter?

[Rotten Ali 599]

Well, well. The Rude Kid & Siefried Baboon are passing OoO the Derby Dead Pool. First may I say very well done to the pair of them for all their hard effort. Hope they both will still submit a team into the '08 DDP. Next may I say well done OoO for taking over the reigns. Its a big job and I think you best employ the only 1 team per player and some how give a truly theam team an extra point per hit.

I've not much to add to the other posts on this thread but the 16/18 age limit is quite contensus and may I plump for a sugestion of a minimum 17 years of age in 2008 and change again in 2009 to be the 18 years of age minimum. This would see no new person sucked into the Josie Grove situation that could not have been picked for this years pool.

As I've said in the past, how about a one person limit on capital punishment per team? As for wallpaper - I say make it look as grim as possible - Wayne Hemingway does some fine stuff that looks well drab and doure.

Best of Luck for 2008 OoO - you will need it!

[football_fan 41]

I think a one person on death row limit per team is a good compromise, although my preference is for them not to be allowed as candidates. Personally, I would like to see the minimum age raised to 18, but 16 is fine. I had advocated for CNN as an obituary source, but I think the New York Times will work as well.

 

Regarding the change in the running of the DDP, as I said before, OOO is a very good choice and it will be in good hands with him at the helm. He has a very impeccable reputation, is very well organized and is a great source of knowledge when it comes to candidates, so I do not have any problems with him both uploading the teams and entering his own team in the competition. In my view, OOO should not be required to reveal his team beforehand, and if I was him, I would not have posted any of my potential choices.

 

I am looking forward to DDP 2008 with great anticipation, as I am sure that there will be many good teams out there and the competition will be very stiff. Especially when it comes to the top positions of the leaderboard.

 

Regards,

 

ff

[themaninblack 2,112]

I think a one person on death row limit per team is a good compromise, although my preference is for them not to be allowed as candidates. Personally, I would like to see the minimum age raised to 18, but 16 is fine. I had advocated for CNN as an obituary source, but I think the New York Times will work as well.

 

Regarding the change in the running of the DDP, as I said before, OOO is a very good choice and it will be in good hands with him at the helm. He has a very impeccable reputation, is very well organized and is a great source of knowledge when it comes to candidates, so I do not have any problems with him both uploading the teams and entering his own team in the competition. In my view, OOO should not be required to reveal his team beforehand, and if I was him, I would not have posted any of my potential choices.

 

I am looking forward to DDP 2008 with great anticipation, as I am sure that there will be many good teams out there and the competition will be very stiff. Especially when it comes to the top positions of the leaderboard.

 

Regards,

 

ff

 

Going for the Hat-trick eh?

[Banshees Scream 107]

So Triple O has made some valid points not to say how rational he has been throughout the whole situation. I really don't think the sharing of his selections was mandatory 'in so many words' but if anything it was hard truth of 'I'm running DDP as an organizer' and I'm not running it as anything else. I think all is in it's place besides what is going down as far as those predetermined candidates go.

[Octopus of Odstock 1,855]

Firstly, thanks FF & RA for your support:-

 

The final three/four decisions have been made after further discussion away from DL & going by what both the majority preferred, or in some cases worked best.

 

 

Team Entry Limits

Regarding one entry only - there is a way for me to enforce it, but it's long-winded & somewhat "nanny-state-esque". So, I'll appeal to everyone's honesty to try & stick to one team, but will not be draconian if it eventually happens that there are two teams an entry (Ones on behalf of a relative/spouse are fine) but if someone enters multiple teams on one entry with no good reason, I'll ask them to choose only one team.

 

Age Limit

The majority - and it is very close - prefer it as it is. I think the Grove issue was pretty freakish. 16 yr olds are old enough to smoke, have sex, work etc etc & I think the lines between 16 & 18 is a lot less than before - so minimum age will be 16. It will be reviewed next year if we have a repeat of young Josie's plight.

 

Executions

CP's idea of no jokers on the executionee was an excellent one, but is quite difficult to set up with codes etc. So, this is the following compromise:

 

If the candidate has a execution date already, then they will not be allowed. For example, John Spirko, who is scheduled to be executed on the 24th January 2008 in Ohio, would not be allowed.

The "Al-Majid three"? At the moment, they would be allowed. However, if they were handed over & execution would take place within 30 days of that handover, then I would class that as an execution date & they would then not be allowed.

The Bali Bombers? Fine, as they have no set execution date. Likewise Shoko Asahara.

 

I think it's a decent compromise given the varied feelings about it.

 

Obituaries

I've been doing some research here.

I have looked at ALL the New York Times obituaries for the past month. 90% of them got an obituary/UK press mention that would qualify this year in the DDP as a hit. The Guardian is covering so many American names, that it is a pretty safe bet that they will cover almost anything that is covered by CNN/BBC or NY Times.

 

So, although the obituaries will stay the same after all - I don't actually think the potential candidate pool will be hit that much. Any notable global candidate normally gets an obit in one of the 4 UK broadsheets & the BBC & Guardian cover most of the Americans.

The Canadian & Australian press seem to be the ones not covered so well, so that's worth noting - indeed, a lot of the List of the Lost are from those areas.

Ultimately, if they're famous enough, they'll get an obit.

 

 

 

 

I hope that clarifies things for everybody. I have tried my best to compromise as much as possible & hope these decisions will not put anyone off. I will be doing more preparation behind the scenes for 2008 & hopefully I will put the entry form & introduction e-mail for 2008 pretty soon.

 

Thanks again,

OoO

[Banshees Scream 107]

The "Al-Majid three"? At the moment, they would be allowed. However, if they were handed over & execution would take place within 30 days of that handover, then I would class that as an execution date & they would then not be allowed.

The Bali Bombers? Fine, as they have no set execution date. Likewise Shoko Asahara.

 

But isn't it obvious that the Bali Bombers - Chemical Ali - and all the other chemical testing\terroristic clowns will eventually be executed next year? Is it not obvious? My question is: How many of these clowns do you know that actually have their dates available? It's never that obvious.

 

So it's a weak compromise because at the show down of what matters it's not about announcement it's about outcome. When they hung Saddam Hussein everybody found that out ... a few days before. It never takes that long. It's there and then.

 

Triple O

 

If you want an idea about how to set the execution rules I think 'one individual on death row per team' is the solution. It allows and it defies, it balances the game. This would be the most effective strategy because minimizing value might take more time. One possible execution candidate a team eliminates the Noose approach, which I can only expect a increase in teams like that.

[Octopus of Odstock 1,855]

But isn't it obvious that the Bali Bombers - Chemical Ali - and all the other chemical testing\terroristic clowns will eventually be executed next year? Is it not obvious?

 

Well, no, not quite.

 

Indonesia may remove the death penalty altogether, whilst one, maybe two of the Al-Majid three may not be executed at all. I've effectively removed any US death row candidates & the Iraqis surely can't have many more people they can execute.

 

There is a lot of people who feel that the execution rule should either stay as it is or even been more lenient (ie It DOES count as an unnatural death)!

 

Mind you, your suggestion of one per team is reasonable. I am prepared to hold fire & to put this one to a vote/debate to everyone over the next few days:-

 

 

Would you prefer a maximum of one executionee per team?

 

or my earlier proposal that pre-defined date executionees be banned?

[Banshees Scream 107]

Mind you, your suggestion of one per team is reasonable. I am prepared to hold fire & to put this one to a vote/debate to everyone over the next few days:-

Would you prefer a maximum of one executionee per team?

or my earlier proposal that pre-defined date executionees be banned?

 

If all the Bali Bombers are executed in January for example that would amount to 1\3 of Meet Your Maker's score as it stands now - not even counting the possibility of Ali Ghufron being your Joker for example.

 

One individual per team (as FF said) is balanced and this way it eliminates the possibility of a Noose approach. It's problematic to only exclude announced executions because more executions go unannounced then they go announced. I think this plan works out for everybody and as far as 'predetermined death dates go' I say ban them all the way home. As far as placing Chemical Ali as your Joker? (That is all up to you) I wouldn't see that as a significant factor if only one candidate set for execution is allowed.

 

Reasonable? I think it makes sense.

[Guest tdf]

Thanks all for your feedback so far, and please continue to vent your spleen or air your thoughts - it's most useful.

 

A quick update & and also an inkling of where I'm at at the moment:-

 

Executions

This one is still open - there's some very good points about either a lack of obits, or indeed, a lack of death - I think if pushed for a decision right now - a reduction of points or, as CP said, a ban on placing a joker on an executionee is more likely than a complete ban. But that's before I put the question to a wider scale.

I think the one thing I am wary of is a repeat of the Barzan/Bandar problem if the "Al-Majid three" aren't executed by year's end. If they are killed, or reprieved, then it's a bit more of guesswork than assured points.

 

Famous for being Famous

Good points by everybody - I've decided there won't be any restrictions on the level of famousness - so relatives of famous people or obscure "In the news" type people like Ainscow - fine. No qualifying articles or likewise needed. Ultimately, they may not get an obit anyway. Godot, people picking WWI veterans are hampered anyway, either by a lack of obits, or a lack of points.

 

Age Limits

Again, still open. Still likely to stick to 16 at this time - again, this is probably going to go to the wider DDP audience.

 

Amount of subs

Because of restrictions beyond my control, this will have to stay at 1, I'm afraid. Ultimately, if more picks die, I'll e-mail the relevant parties. I think last year was a bit freakish anyway.

 

Team Entry Limits

I'm veering towards (and would like) one player - one team. But I do want to see Theme Teams - I think they provide a bit of colour into it. Hopefully we can still have both. TMIB, I think giving extra points for dead picks on theme teams starts to confuse me with scoring and there could be argument about what a "theme team" is, so I don't think that option is going to be taken up - but thanks for suggesting it, I hadn't considered that.

 

Obituary Requirements

The third one that will go to a wider audience. All of you have made good points. Personally, I think that the BBC in itself covers a huge amount of potential picks & the rest supplement the less populist but still famous (ie WW2 heroes, civil servants, politicians etc.), so the need for CNN is perhaps lessened, because of the BBC. I'm still ruminating on this one.

 

Unique Picks

I can confirm it will now be 3 points for a unique pick, instead of 1, after it was proved workable. So get unique-pick spotting now!

 

Scoring System

Good suggestions, TMIB, thanks again. But Bank Holidays are a bone of contention as Scotland, Ireland, and of course the USA, Canada, Australia etc all get different bank holidays off!! New Year's Day though... hmm.. maybe.

One thing I can confirm though, is the current scoring brackets & current bonuses (unatural deaths, double points for joker) will remain.

 

 

 

So I hope that clears at least three points up - further feedback on the other three is welcome & will continue & soon I'll confirm what, if any, rule changes will affect the 2008 (and onwards) DDP.

Executions - If a pick still alive at pool end that picks potential points should be deducted from the team's score.

 

Just a thought..

ok how about a big penalty for a no show? Like loss of all points for any no show 9just to put people off picking them.

[Twelvetrees 10]

There is a lot of people who feel that the execution rule should either stay as it is or even been more lenient (ie It DOES count as an unnatural death)!

 

Mind you, your suggestion of one per team is reasonable. I am prepared to hold fire & to put this one to a vote/debate to everyone over the next few days:-

 

 

Would you prefer a maximum of one executionee per team?

 

or my earlier proposal that pre-defined date executionees be banned?

 

 

There is a difference between having a set date and being under sentence of death as per my earlier suggestion. This could still be an option. People still on trial or between trial and sentencing could still be allowed.

 

Regarding the rule in general, you probably guess that my feeling is that selecting people on death row, whilst not cheating, does remove some of the element of chance from the game.

 

I guess it depends on whether you want to win at all costs or just enjoy the ride.

 

Anyway, OoO, whatever you decide, it will not be from lack of thought and discussion, and thank you for being prepared to consult and listen.

[Rotten Ali 599]

I think a one person on death row limit per team is a good compromise, although my preference is for them not to be allowed as candidates. Personally, I would like to see the minimum age raised to 18, but 16 is fine. I had advocated for CNN as an obituary source, but I think the New York Times will work as well.

 

Regarding the change in the running of the DDP, as I said before, OOO is a very good choice and it will be in good hands with him at the helm. He has a very impeccable reputation, is very well organized and is a great source of knowledge when it comes to candidates, so I do not have any problems with him both uploading the teams and entering his own team in the competition. In my view, OOO should not be required to reveal his team beforehand, and if I was him, I would not have posted any of my potential choices.

 

I am looking forward to DDP 2008 with great anticipation, as I am sure that there will be many good teams out there and the competition will be very stiff. Especially when it comes to the top positions of the leaderboard.

 

Regards,

 

ff

 

Going for the Hat-trick eh?

 

Hay, this years not finished, and who knows what may happen yet?

 

PS. Since both FF & Banshees are also saying lets have no capital punishment picks then I would support that stance too. So for me its 0 or 1 without conditions.

[DevonDeathTrip 2,288]

OoO, I'm really not too sure about your death penalty compromise and I vote that condemned candidates should be banned altogether. In my view, the positives of doing this far outweigh the negatives.

 

At a push I might agree to one candidate, but I dread getting in to a situation where someone wins the DDP by picking The Bali Bombers, the condemned Iraqis, Shoko Asahara and the 6 members of the Bali 9 heroin smuggling gang who have lost all their appeals against execution (who lest we forget are all in their early 20s, thereby insuring a large amount of DDP points). Indonesia and Japan don't announce execution dates anyway.

 

I know I picked the Bali Bombers this year, but that was only as a carefully weighed riposte to all those who had selected Saddam's henchmen and Josie Grove.

 

Maybe we should have a DL poll on the subject?

 

Anyway good luck with your mission, I know the DDP is in safe hands.

[Canadian Paul 93]

Wait, so no New York Times? Why out of all my suggestions did you pick THAT one to go with, right after I found the perfect joker candidate too (and no, it wasn't Dr. Terminal Cancer Murder either).

 

Nevertheless, after I get over that, I think otherwise everything looks to be good and I can hardly wait to submit my (now slightly modified) team! I'm sure you will make this the best year yet OoO!

[Octopus of Odstock 1,855]

Wait, so no New York Times? Why out of all my suggestions did you pick THAT one to go with, right after I found the perfect joker candidate too (and no, it wasn't Dr. Terminal Cancer Murder either).

 

Oops, sorry, CP. But the Guardian AP feed will probably pick it up anyway...

 

 

FF & Banshees suggestion is by far & away the most popular thus far, but I'll confirm that shortly. Tomorrow evening, I shall put the final touches to the preparation for next year, and then - all being well - I shall aim to get the competition running proper by this time next week at the latest as long as all the quirks & chinks are ironed out.

[Godot 148]

I am looking forward to DDP 2008 with great anticipation, as I am sure that there will be many good teams out there and the competition will be very stiff. Especially when it comes to the top positions of the leaderboard.

I should say so.

[Godot 148]

I'm dismayed, however, that the 16 age limit has not been revised to 18. I can't see any good reason for keeping it at 16 other than "not enough people called for a change." Why should anyone want to list a 16-year-old? This is one rule that stinks. It taints the competition for me.

[Banshees Scream 107]

And Godot bitches about it right. I'm making my rise this year in DDP and rules such as sixteen year olds being tolerated are unprofessional. But ... of course ... we must not forget .... that .... it is ...... unlikely their will be anybody that age that takes the ticket and cashes it in so it's not such a big deal when the curtain drops.

[Handrejka 1,840]

And Godot bitches about it right. I'm making my rise this year in DDP and rules such as sixteen year olds being tolerated are unprofessional. But ... of course ... we must not forget .... that .... it is ...... unlikely their will be anybody that age that takes the ticket and cashes it in so it's not such a big deal when the curtain drops.

 

What do you mean unprofessional? DDP is not a business

 

OoO when you say you'll get the competition running proper next week, do you mean that's when you'll be accepting entries from or that's when DDP 2008 starts?