Reconvening a week later...
We opened with an invitation to discuss anything we had come up with. Only Wolverine had come up with two central ideas, and a third consideration. First she introduced the notion of a network of organisers, something like the developers of Armagetron, but more to do with faciliating the self-organising that players may do on their own. Second, dang there is no record of it on the chat since we were talking... perhaps something to do with authenticating players and teams... I hope Wolverine can remind me... oops. Her final contribution was quite sad... but it something sadly all too realistic. She couldn't handle the abuse. As we all know, the fortress can be pretty intimidating... blood starts pumping... nearing the 100 mark in a good match... the launch becomes important... and noobs enter and frustrations can run very high... and then of course there is the young-male rough-and-tumble play. My response to this is why I would like to emphasise team-play. If you are in a team of supporting players, then whatever the opposition say is whatever the opposition say. If we manage to organise teamplay, that is, teams we want to play in, then this should avoid many of the frustrations which players experience regularly.
Here's the thoughts I came up with before the meeting:
a wiki with sections with alternative briefly described solutions each with own page all defined positively with discussion occuring on the forum sections like the money aspect: credit simulation with no money actually involved, as test run percentage dispersal organising the event: times and servers all prebooked self-organised in real time throughout evening practicalities of event: a round every 1/2hour give 1000 player 128 teams 3 hours with 64 simultaneous games in first 1/2hour 1/2 should give time for practice, familiarise with server, 2 practice rounds v opposition, and best of 5 perhaps server solution: copy cat of fixed cvs fortress settings ping-solution board: to equate teams (solved by diff teams self-organising) or some automated thing trusted server for later-games TOC the entire project: tricky set initial aim for ideal, future proofed solutions attempt to do transition tree for 3 month competition: 100 players invite constructive solutions; just like developers for game itself; perhaps borrow language: trunk etc 1month test to see what problems are etc but the basic model should be runable: trontastic name? trontastic armagetronad armagetron extras: language: grind, rubber, etc, new word for brake, slang: eg zing, word for slipstream etc
And that's pretty much what the wiki looks like. The others liked the idea, and we agreed to dissemble the group, and everyone is invited to edit the wiki as they see fit.
Again, thanks to Maz, Wolv, and Ghab for their input. My basic understanding is that we each of us have something to contribute; my blindness is one area is compensated for the vision by another. Just like a good team.