Why does the proposed Player Rating System have to have both positives and negatives? In a sport based on honour and respect, those that we would deem to be positive qualities (integrity, honesty, respect) are to be expected as a bare minimum, not rewarded as if they were something extra special.
No, I think the best way to implement such as system would be "negatives only" - players who say that they will show up and actually do aren't heroes, they're just living up to the minimum respect and responsibility that is required of them.
Those who say they'll show and then on a rare occasion bail without a reasonable excuse or some forewarning to organizers should be given a chance to redeem themselves - because face it, sometimes real life takes precedence at the last moment.
Those who chronically bail should be encouraged to find elsewhere to play, and if they've stiffed a few organizers in the past, that knowledge may help someone else who's about to get stiffed in the future.
I don't see this as a bad idea. People should be held accountable for their actions and words (or lack thereof).
As an aside, Spleen, I feel the need to add that I'm disappointed and somewhat offended that you would generalize that teammates on the larger, more established teams would take advantage of such a system:
"after every game, all the Salamander Army players ( for example, or Wolfpack, or Bad Karma, etc ) would go and give each other positive ratings, so we'd each get +5 per game, plus all of our regular buddies on the teams we play with".
I don't know about the majority of Ontario or Quebec, but that's not the way myself or my teammates operate out West, and I know my boys out East wouldn't do that, either. Again, maybe this spawns from the concept that integrity and personal honor are something to be rewarded, not expected as a normal behaviour. I can only assume that your comment was made to address the concern potential abuses of the system, and not assume that everyone on an established team would automatically choose to abuse it.
Originally Posted by TokyoSeven
That was a very bad move on your behalf. Sort of like cutting off your foot for money, but not getting the money first and then letting the person with the money run away.
Originally Posted by MadMorbius
Liberals rely on emotion. Conservatives rely on evidence, and the Socialists rely on everyone else.