Sid Meier said:
I wanna be GM
The choice lies by bin and me. Important are:
-excact knowledge of the rules and also no whining about them (which would rather disqualify Sterk after the first game, he didn't know the crusading rules and was complaining about them)
-the effort you put into the game (Sterk qualifies here very strongly since he created a new thread, as well as making one in the EU2 forum. Varyar shows quite some effort now)
-being generally just, if there is a problem, don't only think of your own good etc. This point goes to Varyar IMO.
-reliability, how sure can we be you are there the next game, will you tell if you can play or not, will you just drop and leave chaos without real reason etc. I go with Varyar here too, mainly since Sterk didn't show up in another game I was in without telling at all.
Generally I would go with Varyar. Other than that, personally of course Kujy, but I think his effort in the game is not more than an average player would do. And personally I would be against Sterk, but still he does very good work. Lurken has of course also quite an impact, but he plays the superpower in the game, and that makes his actings as an objective GM questionable.
But it's totally bin's choice. This game is no real democracy, and I think as it was bin's idea and his game he should say who get's GM.
Kujy said:
Won't see me next Sunday either.
Me neither. I will not be at home, and one reason to quit playing regurarily was the day and time every second weekend, so to say the one next week.