Moderator: Community Team
First of all, if high ranks are actually great players because of intelligence it won't be difficult for them to avoid losing points since they'll easily be able to follow the rules.FabledIntegral wrote:Dumb idea - first of all it would affect high ranks significantly more because it's that much harder to gain a set number of points.
Secondly, the forums and ingame should be completely separate. Ranking is supposed to be an indication of skill, all you're doing is underinflating players scores, so that they have an easier time taking points from others to gain back what they lost and will cause other players to underestimate another's potential.
jbrettlip wrote:You say "actually" as though my ideas usually aren't!
yeti_c wrote:jbrettlip wrote:You say "actually" as though my ideas usually aren't!
I don't think you've come up with any other ideas...
But you're probably looked upon in the forum as generally someone that doesn't help...
(Please don't take this the wrong way)
So I'm happy that you're trying to change that with some very positive input.
C.
Not making a direct response to that, but thought I'd quote it as I enjoyed it.jbrettlip wrote:OK, I am still a sarcastic jerk, but I do like the site to continue to improve.
jbrettlip wrote:yeti_c wrote:jbrettlip wrote:You say "actually" as though my ideas usually aren't!
I don't think you've come up with any other ideas...
But you're probably looked upon in the forum as generally someone that doesn't help...
(Please don't take this the wrong way)
So I'm happy that you're trying to change that with some very positive input.
C.
Well I didn't want to tell anyone, but I was suffering from scurvy. It had turned me into a real sarcastic person. But then I stated eating more citrus (see avatar) and my scurvy has gone away! I am a new person now.
OK, I am still a sarcastic jerk, but I do like the site to continue to improve.
trapyoung wrote:how about we start making posts that are offensive and use yeti's point system to calculate how many points to dock [hypothetically]![]()
who wants to start?
InkL0sed wrote:Yeti = -1 point.
trapyoung wrote:InkL0sed wrote:Yeti -= 1 point.
hmm.. my feelings were hurt about 1 point worth, it's effective, i like it!
trapyoung wrote:how about medals for forum trolling/spamming/cursing/racism instead? that would definitely keep games & forum use separate.
cicero wrote:First of all, if high ranks are actually great players because of intelligence it won't be difficult for them to avoid losing points since they'll easily be able to follow the rules.FabledIntegral wrote:Dumb idea - first of all it would affect high ranks significantly more because it's that much harder to gain a set number of points.
Secondly, the forums and ingame should be completely separate. Ranking is supposed to be an indication of skill, all you're doing is underinflating players scores, so that they have an easier time taking points from others to gain back what they lost and will cause other players to underestimate another's potential.
Secondly ... with the bold part I agree in principle. Though if the rules were simple to understand - like yeti's illustrative example - I don't see why there should be any reason for concern. Great players have nothing to fear unless they have no social graces. In which case keeping out of the forums altogether would be a reasonable solution for all. As for the part after the bold ... it all gets a bit circular - the more points you lose to a measure like this the more you'll gain next time you win a game; which I can see is what you've said. But since ranks are influenced by much more than just skill (I am actually brilliant at this game I just choose to play a lot of 8 player World 2.1) any concern over people misreading someone's skill because of their score being out by a 100 points or so is irrelevant. There are many other factors which already make ranks a poor guide to true skill. This one would have no great effect in the medium to long term.
Thirdly - one we haven't mentioned for a while - I like this as a creative way to address points inflation.
Be assured Fabled I certainly wasn't insinuating anything about you. It was a throwaway remark based on my own, probably inaccurate, belief that I should be more than a sergeant 1st class which is all I've ever achieved.FabledIntegral wrote:I got to major status playing ONLY world 2.1 sequential flat rate/no cards, so I would consider myself quite decent at this game as well. I'm still in a few, now they are escalating however, and they do drop my score down (because I'm now above Major overall but still around Major level on world 2.1), but I still play them nonetheless. So I hope you weren't insinuating anything.
In a soccer game (and I'm guessing plenty of other sports too) you can be sent off for verbally abusing the referee ... not because you play badly. Nonetheless that verbal outburst of "attitude" is punished in a way that will remove your "skill" from the team and likely result in points lost. J P McEnroe - former tennis player - used to frequently lose points in a game because of his attitude to opponents and officials.FabledIntegral wrote:It would have no effect on the long term agreed. However is that to say we should ignore the short term? People are always more concerned with the now than the later. And the fact that you would affect what is considered to be someone's "skill" by their "attitude," is laughable.
And the point of this thread is that there is a line between banter and abuse. If I understand you correctly as to what an "F bomb" is, then I'd suggest that outside Flame Wars it's not considered banter but abuse.FabledIntegral wrote:Social grace? Whatever... I let off an "F bomb" in the forums frequently - forums are widely known as places of social banter. To much BS policing is done on this site.
cicero wrote:Be assured Fabled I certainly wasn't insinuating anything about you. It was a throwaway remark based on my own, probably inaccurate, belief that I should be more than a sergeant 1st class which is all I've ever achieved.FabledIntegral wrote:I got to major status playing ONLY world 2.1 sequential flat rate/no cards, so I would consider myself quite decent at this game as well. I'm still in a few, now they are escalating however, and they do drop my score down (because I'm now above Major overall but still around Major level on world 2.1), but I still play them nonetheless. So I hope you weren't insinuating anything.In a soccer game (and I'm guessing plenty of other sports too) you can be sent off for verbally abusing the referee ... not because you play badly. Nonetheless that verbal outburst of "attitude" is punished in a way that will remove your "skill" from the team and likely result in points lost. J P McEnroe - former tennis player - used to frequently lose points in a game because of his attitude to opponents and officials.FabledIntegral wrote:It would have no effect on the long term agreed. However is that to say we should ignore the short term? People are always more concerned with the now than the later. And the fact that you would affect what is considered to be someone's "skill" by their "attitude," is laughable.And the point of this thread is that there is a line between banter and abuse. If I understand you correctly as to what an "F bomb" is, then I'd suggest that outside Flame Wars it's not considered banter but abuse.FabledIntegral wrote:Social grace? Whatever... I let off an "F bomb" in the forums frequently - forums are widely known as places of social banter. To much BS policing is done on this site.
In the end though I think I agree with you that this is not going to fly. No matter how well or consistently it was applied it would still make the site look like a pettily policed state. I believe that good and consistent use of the existing tools for addressing those who deliberately or mistakenly cross the line between banter and abuse will maintain the nature and freedom of the site we know and love (or tolerate as some would have it).
Return to Archived Suggestions
Users browsing this forum: No registered users