Comments by GlennOverby

The minor tweaks I added should answer your questions.  (Yes, you can
spread out your official suggestions.  Yes, you can make a split
nomination for a piece.)

Thanks for asking!

The way I'll organize the polling...

On January 1, I'll mail to each entrant the list in one of the categories,
determined at random.  Each entrant has till the end of the month to
return a list of votes *in order of preference* in that category, voting
for as many or as few as desired.  At the end of the month, or when all
eligible entrants have voted, a Condorcet preferential voting method will
be used to pick a winner, which is then posted to the main page.

Entries close for a category when voting starts.  (In the case of the
first rules vote, they re-open after the ballot because there's still one
more rule to pick.)

If you have entered in any category, you may vote in every category, at
the proper time.

On February 1, the process repeats, for a different category.  Rules will
be voted on twice, each piece-type only once, during the first seven
months.  After seven votes, we have a variant.

A xebec is a small three-masted ship with both square and triangular sails.
 One of my dictionaries suggests derivation from Arabic via French
chebec.

I don't know if the usage is archaic or inappropriate, but I have seen
'Oberstecher' equated to Overtaker in descriptions of an old German card
game (the name of the three of trumps in Karnõffel).

As for the Dragon and Murray Lion, I don't know if either has a customary
German name, but Hund strikes me as potentially appropriate for either
move.

I'd like to see the list when it is done.  :)

I would certainly be willing to help judge under the conditions Hans
describes (11 games in first round, 6 in finals, no judge evaluates any
group including their own design at any time).  It seems the best way to
manage the rather large field.

For the newly-opened 43 squares contest I have gone to a two-round
preferential voting system, as the task is getting quite large for one or
two judges.  This contest was also originally slated for voting, so a jury
of the public is a reasonable return to what Fergus originally conceived.

The key in answering Daniel's question is that the King may be left en
prise--you don't have to move out of check.  So any time a King is
'checked' but not 'mated' by traditional rules, that King could be lost by
simply failing/forgetting/declining to protect it.

There are some mild tactical potentials as well, since the capture of a
vulnerable King is mandatory...

I'm as much in the dark as Ken is...I play a few games there (ItsYourTurn),
and have had no trouble until this extended outage.  If I hear anything
reliable I'll mention it here.

Glenn Overby
Editor

My usefulness is limited, since I have two entries in my last contest
before joining the editorial staff.  But I'll judge other games as long as
I am eligible.

I confirm Ken's statement...with the added note that those of us who play
fast (28-hour) tournaments saw every game time out.  :(

Robert's idea makes sense.  As each rule/piece is adopted, it supersedes
any previously adopted proposal to the extent of any conflict.

When it's all over I expect to edit the whole as a consistent rule set in
any case (standardizing description formats, clarifying conflicts, etc.).

I have designs in Groups B and C, and am a credited playtester on a game in
Group A.  A simple playtest credit would not ordinarily keep me from
judging, but given my multiple status as a new editor of the CVP and an
entrant as well I am being extra-cautious.  I have notified Hans that I
cannot judge.

But the system seems reasonable to me.