gf, my quick answer is, "I guess,sure." They only come into play when we have ties in the voting. To post a
Tie-Break Watchdog's opinion on every player in every episode serves what purpose? To do so would imply that there was something special or superior in
the Vis, Tone, and Rating posters. That would truly be elitist and more importantly not true.
Tie-Breaks are simply that: a panel with the job of breaking a tie. A more useful change would be to mark tie-breaks in the ratings chart to show that the decision was borderline for the group as a whole.
Here is where personal watchdogs served a good purpose. We had someone voting on the tie-break other than the same four watchdogs we are now. It added an extra opinion to the mix from someone who could claim actual credentials for casting a vote for that particular player.
I would prefer tie-breaks be identified with an * or some-such rather than in separate posts.
Tie-Breaks are simply that: a panel with the job of breaking a tie. A more useful change would be to mark tie-breaks in the ratings chart to show that the decision was borderline for the group as a whole.
Here is where personal watchdogs served a good purpose. We had someone voting on the tie-break other than the same four watchdogs we are now. It added an extra opinion to the mix from someone who could claim actual credentials for casting a vote for that particular player.
I would prefer tie-breaks be identified with an * or some-such rather than in separate posts.
