Moderator: Community Team

Not a new trend, just now people can get away with it. In the past when you came upon a repeat offender deadbeat with a very low rating, you would foe and avoid. Now we can't afford to foe anyone because there are so few players on site. Bad behaviour is tolerated as playing with a quitter is better than playing with no one at all.Lindax wrote:is it the newest trend to simply deadbeat when you're losing in a speed game?
Whether it is or not, it's bloody annoying!
Lx

BoganGod wrote:Not a new trend, just now people can get away with it. In the past when you came upon a repeat offender deadbeat with a very low rating, you would foe and avoid. Now we can't afford to foe anyone because there are so few players on site. Bad behaviour is tolerated as playing with a quitter is better than playing with no one at all.Lindax wrote:is it the newest trend to simply deadbeat when you're losing in a speed game?
Whether it is or not, it's bloody annoying!
Lx
I play with myself all the time.ronc8649 wrote:BoganGod wrote:Not a new trend, just now people can get away with it. In the past when you came upon a repeat offender deadbeat with a very low rating, you would foe and avoid. Now we can't afford to foe anyone because there are so few players on site. Bad behaviour is tolerated as playing with a quitter is better than playing with no one at all.Lindax wrote:is it the newest trend to simply deadbeat when you're losing in a speed game?
Whether it is or not, it's bloody annoying!
Lx
couldnt have said it better
Army of GOD wrote:This thread is now about my large penis

Could have been avoided with a resign buttonLindax wrote:is it the newest trend to simply deadbeat when you're losing in a speed game?
so could untold abuses to the game... but go ahead and keep beating that drum...-Jésus noirMetsfanmax wrote:Could have been avoided with a resign buttonLindax wrote:is it the newest trend to simply deadbeat when you're losing in a speed game?

Pretty sure this is the only website I've ever heard of that refuses to allow people to stop playing a game, and actually penalizes people who do, because of potential "abuses."owenshooter wrote:so could untold abuses to the game... but go ahead and keep beating that drum...-Jésus noirMetsfanmax wrote:Could have been avoided with a resign buttonLindax wrote:is it the newest trend to simply deadbeat when you're losing in a speed game?

Or, like on this site, you may find every owner has felt that the feature would create more issues than resolutions... and that is more than 1 or 2 in a million...-Jésus noirKaskavel wrote:you may find 1 or 2 people in a million to support you, probably some people who just learned how to move the pieces of course.

It's true that 3 is bigger than 2. But I'd point out that the current owner doesn't believe that it would create more issues on the game level than it resolves; it didn't happen under the current administration because the vast majority of the staff were opposed to it on principle. So really it's just 2.owenshooter wrote:Or, like on this site, you may find every owner has felt that the feature would create more issues than resolutions... and that is more than 1 or 2 in a million...-Jésus noirKaskavel wrote:you may find 1 or 2 people in a million to support you, probably some people who just learned how to move the pieces of course.
until it is changed by Big Wham, that counts as 3... sorry... he owns the site... if he truly believed in it, he would change it... sooo, three...-Jésus noirMetsfanmax wrote:It's true that 3 is bigger than 2. But I'd point out that the current owner doesn't believe that it would create more issues on the game level than it resolves; it didn't happen under the current administration because the vast majority of the staff were opposed to it on principle. So really it's just 2.owenshooter wrote:Or, like on this site, you may find every owner has felt that the feature would create more issues than resolutions... and that is more than 1 or 2 in a million...-Jésus noirKaskavel wrote:you may find 1 or 2 people in a million to support you, probably some people who just learned how to move the pieces of course.

bw didn't really believe in it, it wasn't a personal crusade for him, he just agreed that it was a decent idea worth testing out. But the staff didn't even want to test it out.owenshooter wrote:until it is changed by Big Wham, that counts as 3... sorry... he owns the site... if he truly believed in it, he would change it... sooo, three...-Jésus noirMetsfanmax wrote:It's true that 3 is bigger than 2. But I'd point out that the current owner doesn't believe that it would create more issues on the game level than it resolves; it didn't happen under the current administration because the vast majority of the staff were opposed to it on principle. So really it's just 2.owenshooter wrote:Or, like on this site, you may find every owner has felt that the feature would create more issues than resolutions... and that is more than 1 or 2 in a million...-Jésus noirKaskavel wrote:you may find 1 or 2 people in a million to support you, probably some people who just learned how to move the pieces of course.
No, because these discussions did not happen in public.p.s.-can you please link me where he publicly stated that he does not believe a surrender button would do more harm than good? THANK YOU!!!
soooo, you have no proof of it, therefore, you can't really speak of it. that is called speaking out of school. sooo, it still stands that every site owner has agreed with those of us that believe a "surrender" button would be too easily abused and detrimental to the site. Thank you, no further questions, you may take your seat back in the gallery... the black jesus has spoken...-Jésus noirsMetsfanmax wrote:No, because these discussions did not happen in public.

I can't provide you proof of it because I am no longer a member of staff, and even if I was, those specific discussions are confidential and don't leave the staff forums, so there's no reason for you to see them. But it's not like I'm getting this information secondhand. When I was Suggestions lead, I asked bw if we could insert a resign button. He said he thought it was OK and worth giving a shot. When I informed the rest of the staff that this is what I wanted to do, almost all of them were quite strongly opposed to it, at which point the administration decided it wasn't worth the tension. (This situation was one of the major reasons why I decided to leave the team.) Unless you think I'm straight out lying about what happened while I was on staff (and I am sure any staff member who was there at the time would back me up), then quit it.owenshooter wrote:soooo, you have no proof of it, therefore, you can't really speak of it. that is called speaking out of school. sooo, it still stands that every site owner has agreed with those of us that believe a "surrender" button would be too easily abused and detrimental to the site. Thank you, no further questions, you may take your seat back in the gallery... the black jesus has spoken...-Jésus noirsMetsfanmax wrote:No, because these discussions did not happen in public.
p.s.-you literally spoke FOR the owner of the site, who has never publicly stated that. so uncool... not cool to speak for someone as if it is from a place of authority, especially when it hasn't been publicly stated... just a little life lesson for you to carry forward with you, from this day on...
i wouldn't pay for premium again, that's for sure... but hey, as long as these guys aren't inconvenienced on massive maps with lame/boring settings, it's all good... hive? trench? SERIOUSLY?! who would do that? that is a year long commitment at minimum... anyway, it will never happen... never, ever, ever... and i will bet anyone lifetime premium that it will never happen. why? the owner would get SLAUGHTERED by freemiums just playing non-stop... it will never happen... and keep comparing it to chess, resign is in the RULES of chess, it's not in the rules of CC or RISK... the black jesus has spoken...-Jésus noirDoomYoshi wrote:It's a bullshit idea. 70% of users are freemiums. They get 4 games. A resign button gives unlimited games.

Enlight me how freemium would start playing unlimited?owenshooter wrote:i wouldn't pay for premium again, that's for sure... but hey, as long as these guys aren't inconvenienced on massive maps with lame/boring settings, it's all good... hive? trench? SERIOUSLY?! who would do that? that is a year long commitment at minimum... anyway, it will never happen... never, ever, ever... and i will bet anyone lifetime premium that it will never happen. why? the owner would get SLAUGHTERED by freemiums just playing non-stop... it will never happen... and keep comparing it to chess, resign is in the RULES of chess, it's not in the rules of CC or RISK... the black jesus has spoken...-Jésus noirDoomYoshi wrote:It's a bullshit idea. 70% of users are freemiums. They get 4 games. A resign button gives unlimited games.
Yes, we're trying to put it in the rules of CC like it is in the rules of every single other game out there (most of which are vastly more successful than Risk).owenshooter wrote: and keep comparing it to chess, resign is in the RULES of chess, it's not in the rules of CC or RISK... the black jesus has spoken...-Jésus noir