Bidding rules debate

[markmadras]

OK, lets hear from everybody and get some votes in.

We will see how the votes go and then we can discuss what to do next, bid limits, etc.

[ioncorpse]

There were such debates in the past. A lot of wise things were said. But the result was - stay as is.
We tried different aproaches but all failed...

[rob]

I don't think rules and limits are the way to go, there are already to many rules and limits in the real world...
Best I can think of is to ask the pro's to keep the bidding low to reasonable for the first 24 hours to give newbies a chance to join.

[markmadras]

That has also been tried but, has now failed.

[markmadras]

EDIT I have added another option to the poll to allow the host to set his own bid limits for a trial period then we could see how well this might work in practice.

[rob]

Ofcourse the host can always set extra rules so if he decides on some form of biddingrule that's his choice.

[DaveLloyd180]

Sorry - Crossed in post
Please see my comments in DROP in the A League.
(I'm not ignoring you )
Dave.

[decsystem10]

Bidding does affect the play, and early outrageous bids certainly turn one off - when "i'll just have a quick go" comes back with 1700 and the first bid "nice'n'easy" is 3200.
As is said above, it has been much debated.
In the end, it is clear that the keen players all enjoy the bidding war, and its the keen ones who are playing and keeping it going. As Andrew++ pointed out, its only delaying the inevitable anyway.

I don't like bidding, but I'm certain its an integral part of the game at the moment, and it should just be left alone.
[unless and until you start an N league with no bids and no superplayers (cf MarkM) *enters loop in perpetual motion* ]