|
Post by Random on Oct 30, 2006 18:22:17 GMT -5
Believe it or not my post is not biased. I mean anyone who did as was done and posted as so I would have the same problem with...
|
|
|
Post by MMV on Oct 30, 2006 18:22:31 GMT -5
HEY, ME TOO!! (I blame the navy, you?)
|
|
|
Post by Tony on Oct 30, 2006 18:35:45 GMT -5
good call imo, you never gonna please everyone!
And its such a small thing why do people get so worked up about something so trivial? Its even worst when the people getting worked up were not in the game.
It kinda reminds me of the token (gay?) guy that goes to the womens rights protests.
|
|
|
Post by Random on Oct 30, 2006 18:41:56 GMT -5
Well lets see here... A reason to be all worked up... Maybe it is the fact that this here decision is setting a precidence.... I myself do not understand how some people can say that this would not be a problem. But most of the ones who are in favor of this decision are the ones who are reletively new. But to each their own.
And yes MMV that is my reason as well..
|
|
|
Post by notagoodname on Oct 30, 2006 18:43:11 GMT -5
Nah this controversy rocks, i've never seen the boards so active.
Now to generate some controversy on the strategy forum in order to lure them there to discuss strategy....
|
|
|
Post by tommynt on Oct 30, 2006 18:44:17 GMT -5
Ya dudes another post to delete, i m bored.
The truth is that ladder admins support unsportyness and nazi callers - face it
|
|
|
Post by Tony on Oct 30, 2006 18:47:38 GMT -5
dont you guys think its unspsortmanlike to relaod because somsone is taking to long on his turns?
Maybe on paper the ruling seems wrong, but if you take a step back and look at the bigger picture i think the ruling is just!
EDIT:: Its one of those things you do on a situation by situation basis, it has not set a precidence.
EDIT2:: lets move on IMO, whats done is done!
|
|
|
Post by Random on Oct 30, 2006 18:51:54 GMT -5
It is not that he took to long on his turns, as I am sure they tried to say something to him in game. But he had left so there for with in their rights reloaded. It is not that he left the game and did not take his turn. It is that he did those things, bragged about it, insulted all the players, and the Admins rewarded him. No wonder his head is the 8th wonder of the world.
|
|
|
Post by Canucksoldier on Oct 30, 2006 18:54:13 GMT -5
Well lets see here... A reason to be all worked up... Maybe it is the fact that this here decision is setting a precidence.... I myself do not understand how some people can say that this would not be a problem. But most of the ones who are in favor of this decision are the ones who are reletively new. But to each their own. And yes MMV that is my reason as well.. Blu this is not setting a precedent, it is saying that we are not prepared to break the rules because on this occasion it is popular in some sections of the ladder. The precedent that is set is that in the FUTURE going afk for long periods of time will not be tolerated under the sportsmenship rules, and will be dealt with on a case by case basis as required and judged by the cases merits. Given that "evidence" for being afk will always be circumstantial this is the best that we can do. CS
|
|
|
Post by Bantams on Oct 30, 2006 19:09:01 GMT -5
Maybe if you suspect someone as AFK you can do a reload and wait for him 10minutes in the lobby and if he fails to return he reports to all as per the normal ladder rules
Also as a further punishment on providing screenshots you could reset a Players stats should this happen in the future
so everyone please remember to get screenshots of any future games when someone goes afk for ages and send them to the admins
[C4PHelper]Bantams
|
|
|
Post by MookieNJ on Oct 30, 2006 19:17:43 GMT -5
Why is this such a big deal that requires so much debate when there's an insanely easy (although slightly dishonest) solution? Just drop from the game, say you can't rejoin, and ask for a reload. I doubt that anyone is going to question you, and if Player X doesn't show up for the reload after 10 minutes you can move on without him or her. Do we really need to spend any more of our time on this drama?
|
|
|
Post by mrgametheory on Oct 30, 2006 19:30:20 GMT -5
Ok MGT, Just because I've ruled in your favour doesn't mean you get to fan the flames any more. Understood?
CS
|
|
|
Post by tommynt on Oct 30, 2006 19:33:30 GMT -5
mgt u r not middle of civ world, this discussion is far less about u then about admin actions in general
|
|
|
Post by Random on Oct 30, 2006 19:37:50 GMT -5
Blu i didn't delete MGT's post for no reason, and he has been verbally warned, let it be.
CS
Yet another reason to act. This guy is still mocking you all as Admins, as well as the rest of the ladder.. I do not find pleasure stewing the the sewage this "Member" keeps swilling.
|
|
|
Post by mrgametheory on Oct 30, 2006 20:10:20 GMT -5
I am not mocking admins I am mocking the players who are sacrificing the right decision for the moral one. Sadly Rawls doesn't exist in this world and we are forced to be utilitarians. You people need to accept that this was the first time this happened and a tuff decision needed to be made which had to be based off rules. As it stood players are not allowed to discuss in a CTON anything related to specific players actions in a game. There were no rules against automating a civ for a given amount of time. There is a rule about re hosting a game without all players agreeing. Thats what it comes down to, this is just one issue and people shouldn't go on insulting admins for making this tuff decision. Especially insulting CS is pretty pathetic, especially after the sacrifices they make in time and the truth which you all know that all of the admins are nice guys and are just. We should be moving past this and evolve. Lets Unite!!! Not Fight!!!
|
|
|
Post by Random on Oct 30, 2006 20:36:27 GMT -5
Now lip service... But I will let it be... As to post above ... GFY
|
|
|
Post by MMV on Oct 30, 2006 21:42:46 GMT -5
yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada yada someone, somewhere, actually cares what you have to say mgt, you can paint houses for 10 years and no one will ever call you a house-painter you can fish for 10 years and no one will ever call you a fisherman you can build houses for 10 years and no one will ever call you a carpenter but - bite the big one a SINGLE time, and you've got THAT title for life. you opened this forum thread to brag about it; you continually used this thread to make sure we all would know about it - YOU GOT IT ! ! !
|
|
|
Post by Necrominousss on Oct 30, 2006 22:38:01 GMT -5
Let me see if I have this straight. Some seem to think it would be a time saver to drop, let all wait for you awhile to rejoin. Then fake you can't re-enter the game, when or if one of the players uses C4F, and request reload. Then wait 10 minutes at least, and relaunch the game just to get rid of a player who is using up the entire time and may be AFK. Makes sense to me. That should keep the games rolling along.
EDIT
The decision was sound and the players involve shouldn't matter. It seems that if it was a player some were friendly with the ruling would be OK.
Why can't you go AFK and where do you draw the line as to want is important enough to warrant it. What if someone needed to go afk to walk the dog or smoke a cigarette of how bout breast feed the baby or give their grandmother medication. Going afk is acceptable and trying to draw a line in the sand as what is an acceptable reason and how long is an acceptable time will be different depending on the person judging the situation.
|
|
|
Post by MookieNJ on Oct 30, 2006 22:49:21 GMT -5
Let me see if I have this straight. Some seem to think it would be a time saver to drop, let all wait for you awhile to rejoin. Then fake you can't re-enter the game, when or if one of the players uses C4F, and request reload. Then wait 10 minutes at least, and relaunch the game just to get rid of a player who is using up the entire time and may be AFK. Makes sense to me. That should keep the games rolling along. I never said it was a time saver, personally I think this whole issue is stupid. I just made a suggestion to those who are taking the whole AFK thing very seriously that there is an easy work-around to the alledged problem.
|
|
|
Post by smatt834 on Oct 30, 2006 23:48:58 GMT -5
Well this thread finally got me back typing in the forums. That could be good or bad i suppose depending on the expiration date of your milk. Anyway, I just wanted to say that in general we should most assuredly keep an eye on the actions of those chosen to make decisions for us, regardless of wether they were chosen democratically or not. In this particular case the Admins can plainly see where most ladderites who bother to post stand on the issue. Its an enormous disagreement with giving MGT the reports, and I have staked my tent in this camp as well. Unfortunately, the decision has been made. If we are good little Machiavellians, we would know that a ruler/king who changes his mind on his decrees, will be seen by the peeps as being weak and unstable, and therefore no good to them anymore and loyalty will shift to a different ruler/admin or prospective future ruler. We do not need instability such as this in the ladder admins either IMO, and its seems hard to argue the future bads will not outweigh the present goods if they flip flopped on their decision. In a ladder cton from my understanding, there is a general no chat rule, and a specific NO POLITICAL CHAT rule, i.e. no secret deals, alliances, locations of resources or military units or cities and the numerous other ways chatting can gain you advantages. It seems evident to me that any reasonable civ 4 player is gonna notice if his neighbor goes completely inactive. The inactive player isn't responding to the reasonable players units moving around the inactive players units, and then the inactive doesn't answer when all you do is PM HIM TO ASK IF HE"S THERE, which is followed by no response. What does one then do? Playing civ4 online is very procedural. Drops, splits, non-connectivity from xml cache, freezes, lags, and just about every other hoot-n-anny you can manifest. When these things happen most players know that there is a particular procedure for fixing the particular problem, like the host drop fix. There are also procedures for reporting, non-reports, cheating, picking teams, and others. What then should the procedure be for a reasonable civ4 player who finds himself in a situation similar to this? Alerting other players to the inactivity of another player may violate the the no politics rule, however, pausing the game and calling for a reload of the current save and waiting for ten minutes for the AFK player to get his bum in the game is not a deliberate attempt to break the rule. In fact, in a multiplayer game where people want to actually PLAY against people, it seems fair and expected to vote for a reload. Going AFK in a cut-throat game such as this one is your own risk. You forfeit your 'player rights' when you leave your place of residence in the middle of a ladder game to go stuff your face. On the other hand, its also true that if your neighbor goes AFK and 10 turns later you notice, and he isn't responding to your repeated are u there message, it would be really easy to just go crush him. It would be freakin blast too! Id laugh all the way to 100% science!! Lets play some civ now you girls.
|
|