Would the World Championship be better if draws didn't count?  The winner would be whoever made it to 6 or 8 wins first.  Should that be a general feature of match play as opposed to tournament play?

I certainly would prefer this idea. I would like to add a maximum number off games. Lets say 20. If after 20 games nobody has won -x- games then the side with the most wins has won. If drawn, then the one who won the first game wins. If 20 draws, the defender retains his title.

What about that?

-edit-

Another possible tiebreak system is most wins with black.

I think after 1984 the potentially long matches are what lead to the 24 game matches which are still shrinking.  Doing the most wins in a limited game set (whether 24 or 20)  is what Fischer gave up the title for, since then the winner of the first game can play for draws.  That's really no different than the current system.   I'd rather see the wins only format, maybe with a rule change or two to subvert the computer based opening theory.