• Blitz Shadow Player
  • Caius
  • redboot
  • Rules
  • Chain of Command
  • Members
  • Supported Ladders & Games
  • Downloads
Forums
Proposal for guidelines for reporting incomplete games - Printable Version

+- Forums (https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards)
+-- Forum: The Firing Line (https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/forumdisplay.php?fid=1)
+--- Forum: Tiller Operational Campaigns (https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/forumdisplay.php?fid=11)
+--- Thread: Proposal for guidelines for reporting incomplete games (/showthread.php?tid=74460)

Pages: 1 2 3 4


RE: Proposal for guidelines for reporting incomplete games - typhoon - 02-27-2021

I may be about to drift a little off topic if so apologies in advance. Whilst I would be one of the first to say we have the best club around for our hobby. It is becoming noticeable that the majority seem to feel that change of any sort is not a good thing for the Blitz. This may be so it's very hard to tell yet to me to keep at the top something must evolve some things will get better and some things worst but is change itself such a bad thing. Either way interesting thread lots of talk which is never a bad thing and the poll has given everyone a hint of where opinion lies.


RE: Proposal for guidelines for reporting incomplete games - Green - 02-27-2021

(02-27-2021, 02:11 AM)typhoon Wrote: I may be about to drift a little off topic if so apologies in advance. Whilst I would be one of the first to say we have the best club around for our hobby. It is becoming noticeable that the majority seem to feel that change of any sort is not a good thing for the Blitz. This may be so it's very hard to tell yet to me to keep at the top something must evolve some things will get better and some things worst but is change itself such a bad thing. Either way interesting thread lots of talk which is never a bad thing and the poll has given everyone a hint of where opinion lies.

If someone is unaffected by a problem, it is natural not to want change. But I think in this case, part of the problem may be a misunderstanding of what is being suggested. People seem to think it is about catching cheats or having rules imposed upon them.

As I see it, it is about having a suggested approach that people can use, if they wish, rather than forcing them to come to their own conclusions about what is right or wrong. Having a guideline makes things easier, not harder. It is about guidance, not enforcement.

Currently, if I am playing a campaign and my opponent surrenders after x turns, do I report it? Some will say 'yes', some will say 'no', some will say 'I want to do whatever is appropriate but I do not know what that is'. And some will say that 'none of this matters to me'. All can be equally valid points of view, whether x is 10 or 50. No one has to be trying to cheat.

I have not reported a number of campaigns that were not played to a conclusion and I suspect this is quite common. Personally, I would rather not be required to make that decision. But if someone feels they do not need any guidelines, for whatever reason, then they are free to adopt whatever approach they want. 

By voting 'no', people are saying that not only do they not need guidelines themselves, but that no one else needs them. I doubt this is what they really intend.


RE: Proposal for guidelines for reporting incomplete games - phoenix - 02-27-2021

But you can make those kind of guidelines for yourself (and any playing partner who agrees) right now, Green. I'm not sure why you need anyone else to make them, if they are really take-them-or-leave-them - why not just implement any guidelines you like (assuming your playing partner will agree) - what's the difference?


RE: Proposal for guidelines for reporting incomplete games - Green - 02-27-2021

(02-27-2021, 08:14 AM)phoenix Wrote: But you can make those kind of guidelines for yourself (and any playing partner who agrees) right now, Green. I'm not sure why you need anyone else to make them, if they are really take-them-or-leave-them - why not just implement any guidelines you like (assuming your playing partner will agree) - what's the difference?

Why should players have to come to an agreement regarding these things? A guideline would often remove the need for this as most players would probably be happy to conform to the norm. If either or both were not happy then you have the status quo and they could agree something else between them. But the net result is less hassle, more consistent reporting overall and better stats.

Having a guideline causes no hardship for anyone not interested in it but it is handy for those like me that would rather not be faced with these decisions. So the question is not 'why?', but 'why not?'. If the current situation of having no guideline is better for the community as a whole, then I would like to hear the reasons why. As I see it, some would like a guideline and others would not be affected either way. So rather than me constantly defending my position, it is the arguments for not changing that we need to hear.


RE: Proposal for guidelines for reporting incomplete games - phoenix - 02-27-2021

You mean, Green, it's more hassle to say to a prospective opponent - 'I would like X rule on reporting, do you agree?' than to say 'I would like to use the X rule on reporting found 'here' (in the forum) - do you agree?' In both cases you say it has to be agreed. The second case is actually more cumbersome.

The reason you want a forum rule is that you want it to have some kind of normative force, otherwise there really is no point and you might as well agree your own rules. So there is to be some kind of idea of 'conforming to the norm' as you say. So it's a rule, and if it really were purely advisory it wouldn't achieve what you want. That's the whole point, because what you want to achieve is that the actual ratings - the results of the reporting - change so as to better reflect something you think ought to be reflected and which you think isn't properly reflected. You don't just want fairness (as you conceive it) between you and your opponent, but across the whole board, hence the need for a rule for everyone.

There have been arguments put against it, above in this thread, already. And arguments for it (the preceding paragraph is actually the argument for it). But I don't think - to say one last thing - that you should discount the view that some may have (me, for instance) that more rules are not desirable per se. As I argued above, it's meant to be an amusement, not something so serious as in need of rules to make sure the ladder - for those who use it - accurately reflects skill levels etc. Everything that the rule is meant to deal with has already been being dealt with for many years informally, between the players. I don't see why that can't continue, why the forum can't continue operating on trust and goodwill.

Fun discussion, anyway.....

As a postscript, one of the reasons when playing Napoleonic games that I prefer to get opponents from this board rather than the specific Nappy board (the NWS) is that that board is a much 'heavier' structure with all sorts of rules and behaviours which, for me (not everyone) make it a bit harder to just simply find an opponent, play a game and report it if someone wants that. It's one of the great things about this place that it is simple and free of clutter. It does what it says it does, with the minimum fuss. I think that probably attracts people here.

It's also clear from the small numbers doing the vote that most people don't really care about this - much more than the numbers who vote that they don't care. I actually am also someone who doesn't care much, but the reason I'm voting against and joining in this discussion now is that it can happen that things change gradually into things you no longer want or like if you allow rules to be put through by the minority who want a rule change, who are naturally more exercised about the issue and more inclined to argue their case and be bothered about it. So it's good if some opposition is felt, I think, from the silent majority. Because what is really going on here is that a very small minority of users care about an issue that the vast majority don't care about - and that's not a good basis on which to put through a change. The voting figures should be read that way, perhaps - there are (at the moment) 10 people who care at all about this, and all the other users don't really care....


RE: Proposal for guidelines for reporting incomplete games - Kool Kat - 02-27-2021

(02-27-2021, 08:42 PM)phoenix Wrote: You mean, Green, it's more hassle to say to a prospective opponent - 'I would like X rule on reporting, do you agree?' than to say 'I would like to use the X rule on reporting found 'here' (in the forum) - do you agree?' In both cases you say it has to be agreed. The second case is actually more cumbersome.

The reason you want a forum rule is that you want it to have some kind of normative force, otherwise there really is no point and you might as well agree your own rules. So there is to be some kind of idea of 'conforming to the norm' as you say. So it's a rule, and if it really were purely advisory it wouldn't achieve what you want. That's the whole point, because what you want to achieve is that the actual ratings - the results of the reporting - change so as to better reflect something you think ought to be reflected and which you think isn't properly reflected. You don't just want fairness (as you conceive it) between you and your opponent, but across the whole board, hence the need for a rule for everyone.

There have been arguments put against it, above in this thread, already. And arguments for it (the preceding paragraph is actually the argument for it). But I don't think - to say one last thing - that you should discount the view that some may have (me, for instance) that more rules are not desirable per se. As I argued above, it's meant to be an amusement, not something so serious as in need of rules to make sure the ladder - for those who use it - accurately reflects skill levels etc. Everything that the rule is meant to deal with has already been being dealt with for many years informally, between the players. I don't see why that can't continue, why the forum can't continue operating on trust and goodwill.

Fun discussion, anyway.....

As a postscript, one of the reasons when playing Napoleonic games that I prefer to get opponents from this board rather than the specific Nappy board (the NWS) is that that board is a much 'heavier' structure with all sorts of rules and behaviours which, for me (not everyone) make it a bit harder to just simply find an opponent, play a game and report it if someone wants that. It's one of the great things about this place that it is simple and free of clutter. It does what it says it does, with the minimum fuss. I think that probably attracts people here.

It's also clear from the small numbers doing the vote that most people don't really care about this - much more than the numbers who vote that they don't care. I actually am also someone who doesn't care much, but the reason I'm voting against and joining in this discussion now is that it can happen that things change gradually into things you no longer want or like if you allow rules to be put through by the minority who want a rule change, who are naturally more exercised about the issue and more inclined to argue their case and be bothered about it. So it's good if some opposition is felt, I think, from the silent majority. Because what is really going on here is that a very small minority of users care about an issue that the vast majority don't care about - and that's not a good basis on which to put through a change. The voting figures should be read that way, perhaps - there are (at the moment) 10 people who care at all about this, and all the other users don't really care....

Gent:  Smoke7


The original proposal was for "informal guidelines" - NOT the introduction of binding rules.

Players are free to adopt the informal guidelines or reject them as they desire. There are no club penalties for either using them or not using them.

The use of informal guidelines is not new to the Blitz since they are baked into our club's "Rules of Engagement" and found in the "Important Threads" Forum sections.

For example; "Discontinuing a Game and Missing Opponents" (Rule #6) and "Message Boards / Forum Conduct" (Rule #8) contain informal guidelines within their respective rules sections. In the "Important Threads" section of this Forum, there are numerous threads that give guidelines and suggestions on what Optional Rules to use. Now the FWWC Optional Rules guidelines uses the more forceful phrase "should use", but again these are guidelines only - not binding rules.

Players who voted "No" in the poll continue to substitute "rules" for "informal guidelines" in their defenses and make the erroneous statements that this proposal would be enforced and made mandatory. Nobody who supports the introduction of guidelines is advocating rules and mandatory enforcement. 

Players are free to adopt, reject or ignore these informal guidelines as they desire. 

The reason we are having this debate is because the poll numbers are much closer then you publicly acknowledge. Discard the "I don't care either way" voters since they would support use of informal guidelines or not. Then you admit you don't care much either and suddenly there is essentially a statistical tie (at the moment) between players who don't want informal guidelines and those players who support them. The Silent Majority does not care and remains "silent" and there you have it.

Again, why not introduce informal guidelines that are NOT rules and are NOT mandatory as a tool and guideline for players who desire such help?
      


RE: Proposal for guidelines for reporting incomplete games - typhoon - 02-28-2021

At the beginning when I did the poll I voted for no preference it did not mater. I was more interested in the point system than the data base (which makes Greens position far nobler than mine). I haver enjoyed over the years watching the win loss record and the points accumulate never getting anywhere near the top on a yearly ladder but enjoying none the less.    Yet is has always felt wrong to take full points for a hardly played campaign yet also wrong to get nothing at all for the effort. The guideline would address that issue for me at least selfish perhaps. Also I might add if we have a ladder which is deemed competitive on a yearly basis and also a lifetime basis should that not have guidelines or dare I say it rules that is the nature of competition and a league in the first place. Also those that have no desire for it can just ignore the guide all together and continue on as they are though to me that goes against playing on a ladder.