The fuss here is simple: there are way too many leaderboard points up for grabs and the lion's share of points go to a few players. There is too big a point disparity between 1st & 2nd place. No points for 4th+, etc. Reread my PRS thread for more... Whenever a new release comes out, everyone races around to see who can play the most games and get most 10 pointers. Also, within a release, an unusually high number of games will be CLONES which gives further advantage to players that have already mastered those games. This approach rewards on QUANTITY which is wrong!! Points should be given out based on the QUALITY of recordings, not how quickly people put up crappy scores.(posted 9345 days ago)Unfortunately, it is my belief that the current leaderboard emphasizes quantity and the experimental percentage system would somewhat reward for quality. That is why I came up with a formula to strikes a balance between the two. However, in e-mails with Zwaxy, he did not understand this point and hence it didn't show up in the experimental page. Fine, afterall this is his site. The PRS formula gives points for both quality and quantity, and my earlier tests showed that it didn't shake up the standings at the very top too much. Most of the significant changes occured in the middle the pack. However, if I had to choose between the current leaderboard system and percentage based scoring: Percentage scoring is much more reflective as to what's really going on here.