>> ^HadouKen24:
I don't know what's nerdier.
Those guys... or the fact that I just know I could take them.
I mean, seriously. No defense at all. No thrusts to speak of. And apparently no sense of the strategic value of whacking the other dude's arm or legs off. (When that one dude raises his arms to strike? Perfect time to go for those arms. They're defenseless.)
Not to mention their horrible footwork or unbalanced, unpracticed swings.


alright..dude.. We're talking a fun tournament.

No thrusts, because if you thrust with a sword at a guy with a suit of armour, you'll most likely penetrate the armour and wound them. Yes, that' strategic, as is cutting off arms and legs. But again, remember. THIS. IS. NOT. FOR. REALY.

it's a game, it's not thunderdome. Both participants will walk out, limbs intact.

Don't act so tough about swordsmanship over a movie where they were probably told "No blows to the unarmoured arms, or legs, and no thrusts"

Nope. Mad Max: Beyond Thunderdome. The Bourne Supremacy BMW chase is a close second, but nothing beats assless chaps and a hockey mask with an army of craaazzy Aussies bearing down on a train full of kids and a single shotgun.

There's only one way to settle this... THUNDERDOME!

I think the only way to solve this is Thunderdome! Two men enter. One man exits. Grimm steps into the Dome followed shortly by MarineGunrock! Who will rise the victor? Place your bets!

Seriously though, in your analogy, Grimm, it's not that the 40 nay votes don't subtract from the 60 yay votes, but rather it subtracts from the percentage spread, which is the maximum 100 votes. In other words, 60 out of 100 votes conveniently translating to a 60% majority vote. I don't think a percentage spread of votes cast would be a terrible thing to show on the video's page. Up top you could show 20 upvotes out of a total 40 votes cast would show that half of the people liked the video and half did not.

The current system works on a vote-to-vote system that can cancel votes, and I get that you think that is unfair, because you'd rather see a percentage spread showing the true upvotes compared to total votes. The problem is getting the video out of the unsifted ranks, at that point, because having the video just receive ten upvotes would decrease the site's ability to police video quality (which is what the site is founded on: quality control). Negating other's votes seems to be the system to keep lower quality videos out of the sifted ranks. Do you have an alternate solution for that, Grimm, that you think could work better? I think everyone would like to hear it.

So... no Thunderdome? That sucks. In any event, the debunking facts don't convince me, no matter how interesting. It's just too compelling.

There's only one way to settle this. THUNDERDOME!

:-P