Guru system overhaul and improvements - something random, for now

[silentProtest]

Hey, Im not frequenting the forum too much, but Im sure it is talked too death already - but still the guru system... is bad (family friendly platform... so no curses, I guess , even if they describe it far better.)

It would be nice to have a shared summary of issues. general ones and board game (genre) specific ones. Also It would be nice to have a summary of plausible fixes to the whole or specific problems.

But I just wanted to state that the above things seems too lack, or be compact/useful for review and building up upon. And I wanted to suggest a low effort increment semi-fix to the system. --Note: I do not see disadvantages there compared to current system, but point them out if you do!

make an elo cut for people that can be guru. since each game is different, make it the top 1-5% elo players (dependent on: how big playerbase) , or maybe even 0.1-10% (it is easier if you have numbers, to check if that makes sense). What I mean by cut, is this version of it: Only while you are making that cut, your games are counting towards games played, to be considered later for guru.

Out of the top of my head it doesnt adress multiple issues, the biggest 2 being - frequency of games doesnt measure understanding of the game; games have expansions that change it to an almost different game, and not only for competitive play (Catan Knights & Cities, 7wonders duel Agora+Pantheon, comes to mind)

Edit: I'll just collect more ideas here, from the posts below.
- ability to decline guru status
- percentile elo limit, for games counted towards being guru
-
-
-

[Hervor]

I agree that the guru system needs word, but I think, selecting purely the top x% of elo players is not a solution.
From my understanding, gurus are mainly there to vote on the arena format. Which means, gurus should actually play in arena mode.

I for example do not like arena mode and very rarely play it (sometimes I play one game, to see if I have changed my mind, but always switch back to normal).
Under the current system I was made a guru for Machiavelli a couple of years ago, because back then I played that game very actively. I did absolutely nothing with my guru powers. Someone else would have been better.
Under your proposed system I might be made a guru for a different game because my elo is high enough. I would still be a bad choice.

As someone who has no horse in the race: why not make the winners of the current arena season the gurus for the next season?

Also, please implement a way to reject the appointment to guru status.

[silentProtest]

From my understanding, gurus are mainly there to vote on the arena format. Which means, gurus should actually play in arena mode.
------------------
As someone who has no horse in the race: why not make the winners of the current arena season the gurus for the next season?
-----------------
Also, please implement a way to reject the appointment to guru status.

Because there is a possibility that a format gets locked, if there are more than one very distinct versions of it, like catan and 7wd, like explained above, it's not a good solution, to count only arena games. (Talking about your first 2 points)
Right now there is also a bias to the quickest versions(time/game), and the most basic ones(playerbase). And that will , most likely, be still the case after my purposed fix; But there is a higher chance that people voting, actually are familiar with the alternatives - which is a good thing, when voting on stuff, if you ask me

Also, if you dont mind, Ill edit my top post to include your idea, declining guru status^^