# Greatest American elimination game (game thread)

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/greatest-american-elimination-game-game-thread/528423>\
**Category:** The Game Room\
**Created:** [February 10, 2010, 3:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/greatest-american-elimination-game-game-thread/528423 "2010-02-10T15:08:30Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 654

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\
**Post date:** [April 2, 2010, 6:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/greatest-american-elimination-game-game-thread/528423/654 "2010-04-02T06:47:34Z")

</div>

> [@Curtis LeMay](#):
>
> I would like to start an Elimination Game for the 100 most influential people (as determined by Michael Hart’s book) with perhaps additions.

Let me recommend again that the Game use Hart’s criteria with little or no change. It might seem good to replace “influence” with “positive influence” to get rid of Hitler, but where would one draw the line? The voting on Muhammed would no longer reflect his influence, but rather a comparison of Islamic Golden Age “goodness” versus modern jihadist “badness.” The question of Constantine’s influence is interesting, but disappears if the debate focusses on whether Christianization was good or bad. The vote on James Watt would be affected by quasi-Ludditism. These all might be interesting debates, but if one were to let them dominate the _Hart’s List Elimination Game_ one wonders why bother to start with Hart’s List in the first place?

---

_[View the full topic](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/greatest-american-elimination-game-game-thread/528423)._