Jump to content


- - - - -

Rule change proposal for DeathList


20 replies to this topic

Poll: Should we introduce replacements during the year for the dead? (34 member(s) have cast votes)

Should we introduce replacements during the year for the dead?

You cannot see the results of the poll until you have voted. Please login and cast your vote to see the results of this poll.
Vote Guests cannot vote

#1 Grim Reaper

    Post-Twunt

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,239 posts

Posted 14 January 2004 - 08:23 PM

Not that Im feeling guilty about the omission of Patrick Moore this year due an "admin" error, but how about we nominate a reserve who instantly replaces any dead celebrities in the DeathList 50 and therefore at all times we have 50 people alive on the list?

The forum now has a strong pool of DeathList talent so it can be used to select the new joiner. We pretty much have to have a reserve standing by at all times so they can be quickly brought into play when we have a success. Obviously at the moment Patrick Moore is itching to get on the list.

The small downside is that there should be an improvement in the number of successes achieved compared to the existing rules - but frankly we need all the help we can get get near last years performance.

#2 Guest_Nycki B_*

  • Guests

Posted 15 January 2004 - 02:38 AM

Simon Wiesenthal is already dead according to your 1999 deathlist

#3 Grim Reaper

    Post-Twunt

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,239 posts

Posted 15 January 2004 - 10:38 AM

Youre right - Simon Weisenthal appears to have a glitch re 1999 - Ill get our technical team onto it right away!

#4 Billy the squid

    Morbid interest

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 5 posts

Posted 15 January 2004 - 01:21 PM

The list is grand the way it is

you can be sure that many people died last year that were not on the list but that is the whole point of it you pick the fifty most likely people to die during a particular year and if you get it right well and good and if you dont well thats just the way it is.

#5 Cowboy Ronnie

    I Need To Get A Life!

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,994 posts

Posted 15 January 2004 - 04:30 PM

Agreed, you shouldn't be allowed to add someone after the start of the year just because someone else already on the list has gone clog-popping. If news comes out that so and so has just weeks to live, and the crack research team wasn't aware of it when compiling the list, then tough. Plus, one shouldn't be allowed to make up the rules as one goes along. Only the Bush administration can do that!!

#6 little sister

    Hatchet man

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 33 posts

Posted 15 January 2004 - 04:30 PM

How about we all say "there there, never mind, admin errors happen - we're all only human after all" and you leave it exactly as it is....................

love and kisses

little sister

#7 Catherine

    Hatchet man

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 20 posts

Posted 15 January 2004 - 06:34 PM

I don't like this proposal. It ain't broke, so why fix it? Even if it was just to improve on last years result, it wouldn't be a fair comparison. If you want to spice up Deathlist, take Stayin Alive's idea and start some betting on who'll be the next to go. BTW I think this will be a successful year as there are lots of people on it who have lived longer than anyone expected but are sure to go soon - Princess Alice is a 100% definite for this year. The number of years she's survived despite poor health in her 90's is astounding.

#8 BirdieNumNums

    Hatchet man

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 20 posts

Posted 19 January 2004 - 06:55 AM

nah, leave it how it is, thats the fun of it isn't it? :)

#9 Gravedigger

    Morbid interest

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 10 posts

Posted 21 January 2004 - 11:35 PM

The element of skill is picking people who will die, months before they do.

A change like this would just mean that celebrities that inconsiderately announce they're about to snuff it mid-year get added in for easy points!

#10 Grim Reaper

    Post-Twunt

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,239 posts

Posted 21 January 2004 - 11:53 PM

OK then - let me just recount those votes...looks like the proposed rule change is overwhelmingly defeated. I guess the idea was just a little too progressive.

The rules stand as they are now then.

#11 Mr Stats

    Sniper

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 111 posts

Posted 22 January 2004 - 06:05 AM

Dear Reaper

I take exception to the implication that just because we all voted against your idea it means we not "progressive".

Maybe we voted against it because it was daft.

Eh? Eh? Eh?

Mr Stats

#12 Grim Reaper

    Post-Twunt

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,239 posts

Posted 22 January 2004 - 11:02 PM

OK Mr Stats - keep your hair on :)

I dont think I made the case very well - clearly there's a debate to be had over a beer sometime.

I remain convinced there's a way to make DeathList a little more interactive throughout the long death year - maybe it could be in the form of a single monthly nomination from each forum member for a celeb on the list who's going to expire in the next month. I'll give it some more thought...

#13 papalazaroo

    Morbid interest

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 11 posts

Posted 23 January 2004 - 12:43 AM

We use this site for our workplace gambling fun, adding extra people adds more money to our winning pot and keeps the celebrity death race ongoing through out the year. 14 winners last year but the pot dwindled by 14. also perhaps you could use the first six deaths of 2004 as the lotto numbers. who needs horses!!!!!!! :)

#14 Gravedigger

    Morbid interest

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 10 posts

Posted 24 January 2004 - 01:47 PM

I guess by it's very nature any deathlist is going to be a slow business... Unless people go out and start speeding up the process, but that would be kind of cheating!

I can't think of any really well known deaths since the start of the year, so adding extra names or changing the scoring probably wouldn't make a lot difference.

But I suppose you could try a 2nd smaller experimental list of people aged under 80, a men/women only list or a small list excluding some other characteristic that people here think would increase the likelyhood of contestants dropping dead in the next year.

More analysis from Mr Stats would be very interesting too.

#15 Mr Stats

    Sniper

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 111 posts

Posted 26 January 2004 - 12:51 PM

What analysis would you like to see.

#16 Cowboy Ronnie

    I Need To Get A Life!

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,994 posts

Posted 28 January 2004 - 11:47 AM

Yawn, forget the analysis. How about having forum participants enter their own, say, 10 person mini-lists. Points would be scored a) by e.g. 10 points for each person's number 1 ranking down to 1 for the number 10 ranking (i.e. the "Stiffs" method), or :) 1 point for the difference between the decedent's age and 100 when he/she dies (therefore rendering the likes of Princess Alice as worthless as is their inclusion on the main list), or c) some other method that no doubt the smart arses on this forum can come up with.

To add further spice (or should that be spite?), any names submitted would have to pass a fame test which would require endorsement by a minimum number of forum participants, or some other officially-recognized group.

We could then have monthly or quarterly winners, or just score updates. This would also allow for the generation of some new names which may have been inadvertently missed for the 2004 DL 50.

#17 The Yeti

    Assassin

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 766 posts

Posted 20 February 2004 - 09:44 PM

I like the idea of a Personal Preference Of Coffin Warmers. Say 5 or 10 off. Then we can boast at how glass half empty some of us were right to be :P

Or a Young Rock & Film Star Potentials list - those under say 40 in the movie or pop game - they also seem fairly regular visitors. ;)
life, n : the whim of several billion cells to be with you for a while.

Dodo deado, Dodi deado, Di deado, Dando deado ... Surely Dido's looking dodgy ?

Despite the high cost of living, it still seems popular.

#18 Guest_Wax Beans_*

  • Guests

Posted 23 February 2012 - 11:23 PM

View PostGrim Reaper, on 14 January 2004 - 08:23 PM, said:

Not that Im feeling guilty about the omission of Patrick Moore this year due an "admin" error, but how about we nominate a reserve who instantly replaces any dead celebrities in the DeathList 50 and therefore at all times we have 50 people alive on the list?

The forum now has a strong pool of DeathList talent so it can be used to select the new joiner. We pretty much have to have a reserve standing by at all times so they can be quickly brought into play when we have a success. Obviously at the moment Patrick Moore is itching to get on the list.

The small downside is that there should be an improvement in the number of successes achieved compared to the existing rules - but frankly we need all the help we can get get near last years performance.
Oh this would be such a grand idea if only it could be implemented. Do keep working on it and let us know when it's ready for launch.

#19 maryportfuncity

    Dedicated Cumbrian Corpse Hound, or summat

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,157 posts

Posted 24 February 2012 - 10:50 AM

Nah, dead pooling is generally the business of putting up, shutting up and hoping you haven't fucked up too badly.

I mean, if we started tweaking the rules like this where would it end? What if our picks had themselves voluntarily frozen to minimal pulse, what if the relatives of our winning picks forced their lifeless bodies back onto life support until 31 December, what if...
Posted Image


Maryport is a disappointment for which there is no cure, but the annual Deathrace thread hereabouts provides welcome distraction.

#20 Damon Killian

    You b*****d! Drop dead!

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,251 posts

Posted 24 February 2012 - 02:50 PM

I like the proposal for the change. It might encourage people to visit more often because the odds of there being a hit has improved
We Are The 45%




Reply to this topic



  


1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users