[Alan T]

Voting on it would probably just turn it into a popularity contest of sorts and I'm not sure how healthy it would end up being for the community. I personally think people should only host games if they are going to actually participate in other people's games, but like Barkeep mentioned some people have talents that lead more to hosting then playing in the games.

In the end, I don't know if this is something you can/should enforce. It is everyone's community and if they aren't into it anymore it will fizzle out as it probably should. If they care enough about it, then games will continue.

One big misconception I have seen is people who say you need 15-20 people for a good WW game. As long as you have 6-8 people you can have a WW game that is just fine.

Here are the suggestions I can think of on the top of my head:

1) Limit the games to only two a month to help fight off the burnout factor. You can have one be the simple game and one a complex game if you want.

2) Get rid of the GM signup list. Simply have the people in the previous game volunteer to host the next one. Then that game's GM, or Barkeep as forum moderator randomly picks from that group to run the next one.

3) We just run the games with as many or few sign up as we get. You don't need to have 30 people for a fun game. You just need to have enthusiastic players (which we have been lacking at times of late due to burnout/holidays/etc).