I'll make a poll with a few options in it

I'm not in ASR now due to lack of time. Even when I expect to find time, I would expect to be stuck in Delta forever. Honestly, I don't think there's anything wrong with that. The ASR would just be a good place for me to get some games to take seriously.

Now, a few days later, the highest placed player in Alpha with a negative record is you in 5th place. In the entire league there are only two players with a negative record that currently occupy a promotion slot. do you have any statistics on how that has played out in the past? I think that that would be more relevant that a "contrived" example.

Another question is who would benefit by a rules change and what would that benefit mean to the structure of the league? Is it that stronger players who would otherwise be beaten out by "hyperactive" weaker players would be able to promote easier? Wouldn't that make the classes more homogenous in the long term? Seems undesirable.

I know that I presented an opposite view before entering the league, but now that I'm in it, I see it's main function as being to provide a good learning environment for the most players possible, and the current system seems to be doing that quite well. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

_________________
Patience, grasshopper.

Yes, I agree, and I feel very guilty about being 5th, as I think I should be demoted this month, my record has sucked! I don't think this is likely to be an issue for people promoting unreasonably, as there are always strong + active players in a class, but there are a number of people displaying aggravation that people aren't being demoted with incredibly weak records. I didn't feel particularly strongly either way before, however, my personal experiences have changed things:

Now, I am slightly in favour of a change purely because I feel guilty about my record putting me in the top half of the class, as I think it shouldn't. I've found myself playing games "just because", which is against the spirit of the league. My first 3 games were played with a high fever because I didn't want to fall behind in the first week of the class, but they were all epic disasters. The majority of the games I've played have been either tired, between midnight and 2am, or in a tabbed window at work, because I haven't had a great deal of time to play this month, I've just been too busy in the "normal" part of the evening. Some games I've taken on knowing I'll lose but thinking "Ah well, it's all points!" - I should be taking on expected losses as serious games with the intent of learning and having, in effect, a teaching game, but actually the point reward has been enough just to play regardless of how tired I am or how I'm feeling.

More activity is a core tenet of the ASR, but "junk games" aren't supposed to be. Ok, I'm guilty here of being a hypocrite by advocating the league and then playing games without the seriousness they deserve, but the reward system sure made it tempting to do so. If the limit system proposed were adopted, I'd currently be on 13 points, and to get more, I'd need to win games. That will encourage me to take the games more seriously, and encourage me to seek out weaker players for wins (an advantage for them RE: teaching as well, because I always offer to review properly), so that I can enjoy my games against stronger players for learning. I will then make the most of those games against stronger people, because I won't be getting an endless supply of points for those losses, so finishing quickly to play the next one has no reward.

This is only my perspective, and it's one I've only really formed over the last few weeks, but I am steadily becoming of the opinion that the current system encourages junk losses for the sake of simply fitting games in, even if only a minority use it for this.