Well, *I* think they're under-represented:http://www.icehousegames.org/wiki/index.php?Category:Dexterity
(Guessing at URL--the wiki is not responding; Mike?)
I think about half of them are my games. ;)
I suppose the Fall one *will* have to be open, eh? Probably for the best, if the class jumps in--some of the more "esoteric" design restrictions could be tough on a new designer. Plus, having 30ish games within a particular restriction would be... kind of over-doing it, unless it was a VERY broad restriction (e.g. "must use dice or a chess board").
Glad to see that the Condorcet Method would have gotten the same results, if not as "close" for second place. But I believe we switch to the scoring method because, in "corner" cases, CRP can be manipulable in ways that scoring can't (due to the 50% requirement). I am not a balloting method expert (or even hobbiest) but I trust those on this list who devote time to the math and logic.
Plus, I can actually DO the calcs without trusting to code that I barely can read, so I (at least) am happier to be able to do the math myself. Likewise, it's trivial for others to check my (well, Google Spreadshet's) math, too, so it's more transparent.
We'll stick with it for now, unless someone can make a cogent (and coherent) argument that another method is supertor in terms of usability, accuracy of general opinion, and transparency. Keep in mind that it's easier to get judges if it's just "rate from one to 10" than if it's "rank from highest to lowest, and if you want a tie then rank the tieing games the same rank." (Yes, it's trivial to turn a 1-10 score into rankings--but it's a step I have to do.)
All-in-all, a successful comp... IF folks finish up the games and get them onto What Can I Play? and Existing Games. (Well, when the site's back up.)