Conquer Club

In order to help the mods police forums, and avoid what happened here last weekend, why can't mods/admins give "trolling" tickets that cost points? Spam up the forum and lose a rank. It happens in the army (demotions for bad behavior). It would be for the serial offenders, cursing, racist remarks etc.

Consider it like a speeding ticket. Docked 100 points for racism. thoughts?

That is actually a really good idea...

-100 for racism
-50 for trolling
-5 for spam
-1 for swearing

C.

You say "actually" as though my ideas usually aren't! I think it would change some of the actions of the higher ranked guys that just attack people because they have been here longer.

I love it altough i would get lotz of -

i always brake the rule somehow, and im not even trying to do that.

If we had some sort of automated system, it sounds like an interesting idea...but it would need to be automated most definitely. I'm not sure such exists for phpBB.


--Andy

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

jbrettlip wrote:OK, I am still a sarcastic jerk, but I do like the site to continue to improve.

Not making a direct response to that, but thought I'd quote it as I enjoyed it.

Actual reason for post: Perhaps change the subject line of the thread to something more meaningful/specific ?

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.

He he he!!! Sarcasm is always amusing... just less of the jerk stuff yeah?!

Anyways - back on topic...

So - Any discussion on the "punishments" that I posted?

C.

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?

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?

f*ck off!

C.

Yeti --;

InkL0sed wrote:Yeti = -1 point.

hmm.. my feelings were hurt about 1 point worth, it's effective, i like it!

trapyoung wrote:

InkL0sed wrote:Yeti -= 1 point.

hmm.. my feelings were hurt about 1 point worth, it's effective, i like it!

Dammit, I didn't edit in time. Ah well.

Come on! I'll be on 1 point on the first day. Simply because the mods don't see things from my perspective.

It isn't meant to be that subjective. Look at some of the locked down threads. There were racial slurs, cursing and everything in those. I, who incidentally was warned for trolling and flaming this weekend, did not partake in any of that. I was guilty of snide comments. Those would still be warnable by th emods, but they are much more subjective.

Basically if someone goes on a tirade calling people names, docking them 100 points isn't a big deal. THe points are arbitrary anyway, but at least there would be a penalty to the person.

how about medals for forum trolling/spamming/cursing/racism instead? that would definitely keep games & forum use separate.

trapyoung wrote:how about medals for forum trolling/spamming/cursing/racism instead? that would definitely keep games & forum use separate.

Nah - people would see that as a good medal to gain...

Hey look at me - I've got Spam, Troll & Curse - and haven't been banned yet?!

C.

well instead of the 'user doesn't exist' page how about a big medal that says "BANNED" and in smaller print it says what for, that would be prestigious but still bans.

cicero wrote:

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

That sort of sounds like the "mark cheaters" thread, just in this case, for forums.

However, the differance is that people who post racist and such comments on the forum KNOW they are not following the rules and either don't care or (more likely) WANT the attention. Marking people as cheaters makes sense because you can avoid games with them, but in this case... banning/ignorins is probably a much better option.

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.

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: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.

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: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.

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.

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 ).

cicero wrote:

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.

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: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.

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: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.

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.

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 ).

Then it would have to be monitored in game - not in the forums. That's like taking away points for what someone says in a press conference rather in game. I still say it's a dumb idea overall.