y2ktors wrote:Infidel, the thing about adding more options is that they won't necessarily be better options than what we have on the board.americaninfidel wrote:I agree with Spade and Odogg; none of the options is very compelling, and four is likely too few at this point. I'm inclined to throw a vote to Iverson, but I don't feel strongly about it.
Maybe not, but at this point, so many players are so close that only having 4 options makes it less accurate. One of the players not listed may of won the vote. So why not expand the selections to ......maybe 8? The more options the better at this point.
With only 4 options, most posters are voting for one of the current options.........just to vote, and not because they actually like the selection. With more options, more posters would like their votes a little more.
I don't see a downside with having more options.