Jump to content


Photo

Disconnecter Punishment Plan Questions


  • Please log in to reply
90 replies to this topic

Poll: Disconnecter Punishment Plan Questions (45 member(s) have cast votes)

If we proceed with a trial of the system described below, the penalty for disconnecting should be

  1. A rating deduction (12 votes [26.67%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 26.67%

  2. A temporary ban (17 votes [37.78%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 37.78%

  3. Neither. There shouldn't be a penalty. (16 votes [35.56%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 35.56%

If the per-incident penalty is a rating deduction, it should be

  1. 25 points (33 votes [73.33%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 73.33%

  2. 50 points (4 votes [8.89%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 8.89%

  3. 75 points (1 votes [2.22%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 2.22%

  4. 100 points (7 votes [15.56%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 15.56%

If the per-incident penalty is a temporary ban, it should be

  1. One day (26 votes [57.78%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 57.78%

  2. One week (14 votes [31.11%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 31.11%

  3. Two weeks (1 votes [2.22%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 2.22%

  4. One month (4 votes [8.89%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 8.89%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#1 GaryLShelton

GaryLShelton

    Marshal

  • Moderators
  • 4,448 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Miner

Posted 05 June 2015 - 02:31 PM

The MT would like to consider testing a new system to penalize players who disconnect from their games and force their opponents to wait 2:30 to gain their victories. Since we don't want to unfairly punish unintentional disconnects we plan to only look at cases in which a player disconnected immediately after losing an important piece. This is strong evidence that the disconnect was intentional and can be verified with one screenshot.

Please give your opinion in the poll above on what you think the appropriate penalty should be for this offense. Note that the first question gives the option for choosing that you think we should not punish intentional disconnecters. However, no matter which option you choose for this question, we still want you to give your opinion to both the 2nd and 3rd ones about the harshness of the penalties if we proceed with a trial. Even if you pick points or a ban, we would like you to answer the degree of penalty in the other method. The more opinions the better.

This poll will stay open for three months. If a trial is undertaken, it will begin September 8th.

Thank you,

The Moderator Team:
The Prof, Napoleon 1er, Lonello, GaryLShelton, Midnightguy, and gPet0.
  • NTactical-Reboot and Fairway like this

The complete GS&F Rules can be found here: http://forum.strateg...rum-rules-2016/

Draw Refusal Rules, specifically, can be read here: http://forum.strateg...604#entry339604

#2 sevenseas

sevenseas

    Major

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,037 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 05 June 2015 - 02:53 PM

It should be a 25pt rating deduction from the second incident onwards. A deduction for the first incident may be a bit harsh in my opinion.


I play as Sevenseas & Don't Cry

#3 NTactical-Reboot

NTactical-Reboot

    Bomb

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 67 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Miner

Posted 05 June 2015 - 05:47 PM

I very much like and encourage the intention of MT (and maybe TC in future occasions?) to consult public opinion of the community prior to making decisions or introducing features/tournaments. Thumbs up to MT!  ^_^

 

Personally, I favor a 1 or 2 day ban at 2nd offense; and increasing penalties (also taking rating deductions into account) from subsequent offenses onwards; with a reset of the counter every few months or so.


  • cflag, Cannan and ITSA Trap like this

- NTactical

MSc in Computer Science, track Software Technology, specialisation in Algorithms and Web Information Systems, Delft University of Technology, Big Stratego fan  :D


#4 Kernel Mustard

Kernel Mustard

    Sergeant

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 436 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 05 June 2015 - 06:04 PM

Some people actually use disconnect to try and beat their opponent. When I'm down on my buffer sometimes players will disconnect and reconnect later on hoping I lose my buffer time.


  • Cannan and donald.mallard like this

The earth is a flat plane:  https://www.youtube....dLUm8Db&index=2 Psalm 19:4 - 6, Rev 7:1


#5 Cannan

Cannan

    Bomb

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 61 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Sergeant

Posted 05 June 2015 - 08:28 PM

I doubt the MT would take the time to enforce these rules and the deduction, though.


I was surprised when playing a game to find the opponent's flag in the front row. I would think guarded by bombs in the back row would make more sense.


#6 Midnightguy

Midnightguy

    Colonel

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,752 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Colonel

Posted 05 June 2015 - 09:04 PM

This is just a poll to get a feel for what the site feels about disconnectors.  Once we get our data collected, then we'll decide on what course of action we will take.  


  • rtg45 likes this

#7 papillon

papillon

    Sergeant

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 425 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Captain

Posted 05 June 2015 - 10:57 PM

I would show support for an automated system of some sort. I can offer some (perhaps) interesting ideas if there is remotely any traction for this by admin.

 

With all the disconnectors out there, and there are manymanymany, the sheer volume of crap you guys would have to deal with would take up too much of your and admin's time, no matter how easy it is to identify them (supposing a screenshot showing something like "XXX's marshal failed to capture YYY's bomb" with the dc notice is sufficient). 

 

I also think it would add a lot clutter to the forum, if these dc's would all need to be posted here. That thread would be super more massive than the current 'losers' topic.

 

 

On a tangential issue (feel free to delete or move of course), I think having to post all miscreant behavior in the forum helps perpetuate a generally negative tone. I'd prefer if that could be done offline, with the accuser and accusee informed by MT of a case via PM or something, and then perhaps a public list of infractions once a week or so. When I see screenshots of offensive behavior, for instance, well, now I and the Internet are getting abused too instead of just the one player. (Curiosity...it's too entertaining to ignore.) And the file links don't seem to get pulled off the site, so future forum visitors continue to get peeks. Draw refusals are interesting for members to learn from, but the whining about cases drags. And if it's not a draw refusal, the accused still gets stained here in the forum while the case is decided by MT (and the judgment comes late enough that we've already forgotten what happened).

 

2 cents, more if you like.


  • Kernel Mustard likes this

#8 Midnightguy

Midnightguy

    Colonel

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,752 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Colonel

Posted 06 June 2015 - 03:02 AM

I would show support for an automated system of some sort. I can offer some (perhaps) interesting ideas if there is remotely any traction for this by admin.

 

We are hoping when a update to the game takes place, there would be some automatic system to take care of quitters.  However, for now we are taking a poll to see what people think and if we were to take up on the matter, what could we do with the current program.



#9 GaryLShelton

GaryLShelton

    Marshal

  • Moderators
  • 4,448 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Miner

Posted 06 June 2015 - 04:45 AM

I very much like and encourage the intention of MT (and maybe TC in future occasions?) to consult public opinion of the community prior to making decisions or introducing features/tournaments. Thumbs up to MT! ^_^

Personally, I favor a 1 or 2 day ban at 2nd offense; and increasing penalties (also taking rating deductions into account) from subsequent offenses onwards; with a reset of the counter every few months or so.


NTactical, thank you for the positive feedback. One of the things that has been discussed in very great depth on the site are various plans to address this disconnect issue. One big factor in the hesitance of the MT to take action on any of them has always been the amount of work involved. Record-keeping is the biggie. The magic of the current thinking is that there will be no record-keeping because every single time the violation occurs, the same penalty will apply. We don't want to wait until the second infraction, for example, because now we have to begin keeping tabs on everyone who has a first one. We're just going to be fair and equal about it and at the same time save a lot of headache for ourselves. The event happens, the punishment follows. Every time. Whether this still makes for a workload that is too horrendous on us is what a trial would bear out or not.

I hope that the community takes into account the work involved for everyone in deciding their vote in the poll above. We the MT will have a certain amount of time invested in each case, yes, but so will the person reporting the disconnect, and let's not forget the admins who will apply the penalties. If the penalty is too light, it will not be fair to these groups. There will be a range of opinions on what the proper penalty is. My personal opinion is that we should hammer hard. After all, it will tend to decrease the workload. :)

EDIT: Also, please keep in mind that in the world of multiple aliases switching to another account temporarily is a simple matter.

Edited by GaryLShelton, 06 June 2015 - 02:30 PM.


The complete GS&F Rules can be found here: http://forum.strateg...rum-rules-2016/

Draw Refusal Rules, specifically, can be read here: http://forum.strateg...604#entry339604

#10 GaryLShelton

GaryLShelton

    Marshal

  • Moderators
  • 4,448 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Miner

Posted 06 June 2015 - 05:04 AM

Ah, finally solid proof that Symmetric and NTactical are two different people! Symmetric is clearly more hardnosed than NTactical. :)
  • SymmeTric likes this

The complete GS&F Rules can be found here: http://forum.strateg...rum-rules-2016/

Draw Refusal Rules, specifically, can be read here: http://forum.strateg...604#entry339604

#11 cflag

cflag

    Lieutenant

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 712 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Miner

Posted 06 June 2015 - 02:10 PM

If the per-incident penalty is a temporary ban, it should be

This question needs more options.

I vote 1 week because there is no option 3-4 days

Anyway a very  good topic



#12 maxroelofs

maxroelofs

    Major

  • Dutch Tournament Manager
  • 1,042 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 06 June 2015 - 02:39 PM

Ah, finally solid proof that Symmetric and NTactical are two different people! Symmetric is clearly more hardnosed than NTactical. :)

 

What do you mean? I met both of them, so I was quite sure. ;)


  • NTactical-Reboot and SymmeTric like this
To watch stratego videos: https://www.youtube....HOHXWONQMsVcOLA

#13 Nortrom

Nortrom

    Captain

  • WC Online Team
  • 865 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 06 June 2015 - 03:24 PM

"we plan to only look at cases in which a player disconnected immediately after losing an important piece. This is strong evidence that the disconnect was intentional and can be verified with one screenshot. "

 

1) How about players that d/c being down 5 power pieces?

2) There shouldn't be a punishment after for first offense, as it might have been an unfortunate coincidence, it would be better to punish players who often tend to d/c when behind, if someone d/cs in march, and then has another d/c in november, it would be pretty lame to punish as it could have been an unlucky coincidence.


"Rock is overpowered, paper is fine" - scissors

 

Follow the 3rd Online World Championship: http://forum.strateg...d-championship/


#14 Lonello

Lonello

    General

  • Moderators
  • 2,020 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Marshal

Posted 06 June 2015 - 06:04 PM

What do you mean? I met both of them, so I was quite sure. ;)

 

He must be just kidding :rolleyes: B) :lol: :ph34r:


Lo

#15 GaryLShelton

GaryLShelton

    Marshal

  • Moderators
  • 4,448 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Miner

Posted 07 June 2015 - 03:36 AM

Nortrom, at this time we are planning to limit our judgments to those cases where the white writing at the bottom of the game screen shows a very important piece for that time of the game has been lost just prior to the disconnect. The chances of this being accidental at that moment are slim. If we are shown a screenshot with the disconnect window counting down and the white writing showing the immediate loss of an important piece, we will judge it an intentional disconnect and issue the penalty. We will not often punish an innocent party.

Now, if someone waits until the white writing disappears and then disconnects, we will not be able to rule against them, that is true. We are not claiming to have a foolproof plan with a sophisticated framework to judge all cases by. Our goal here is to help pass the word to press the Flag button to as many players as possible. Most disconnecters, we feel, will be caught by our simple plan because they disconnect suddenly and without forethought--they will not purposely circumvent the snare we've set up, though, of course, some will, naturally. A trial will show the facts.

An interesting thing comes into play with the white writing. There is a difference in how it acts between the game as played on a PC and that played on an android or iPad. I have an android tablet and can say that the white writing remains until the next attack by either player. However, for those on a PC the white writing disappears with the very next move by either player. Maybe someone with an iPad will confirm the habits of the white writing on their device. But no matter, we will hopefully educate a lot of players about the Flag button in this process.

The complete GS&F Rules can be found here: http://forum.strateg...rum-rules-2016/

Draw Refusal Rules, specifically, can be read here: http://forum.strateg...604#entry339604

#16 Mitthunder

Mitthunder

    Scout

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 132 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Silver Lieutenant

Posted 07 June 2015 - 08:53 PM

Really?! Disconnecting is the same thing as clicking the surrender button, waiting a few mins for your victory is no big deal.

No matter how small the chance for accidental disconnection, the chance is there and this is simply too harsh and not worth the effort.


  • NTactical-Reboot likes this

#17 sevenseas

sevenseas

    Major

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,037 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 07 June 2015 - 09:24 PM

Really?! Disconnecting is the same thing as clicking the surrender button, waiting a few mins for your victory is no big deal.

No matter how small the chance for accidental disconnection, the chance is there and this is simply too harsh and not worth the effort.

 

It IS a big deal, it's unsportsmanlike


I play as Sevenseas & Don't Cry

#18 Kernel Mustard

Kernel Mustard

    Sergeant

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 436 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 07 June 2015 - 09:46 PM

Papillon made some nice points up there.

The earth is a flat plane:  https://www.youtube....dLUm8Db&index=2 Psalm 19:4 - 6, Rev 7:1


#19 GaryLShelton

GaryLShelton

    Marshal

  • Moderators
  • 4,448 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Miner

Posted 08 June 2015 - 02:06 AM

For me the worst part about the disconnecting experience is not only the rude waiting I am forced to go through, but the fact that I must wait attentively since the disconnecter can and often has, against me, come back on to see if I'm paying attention. It is the cheapest of cheating techniques at that point. They make one move. I make a move, and then they disconnect again.

So it's not like one can go to the bathroom once he's been disconnected upon.
  • Kernel Mustard likes this

The complete GS&F Rules can be found here: http://forum.strateg...rum-rules-2016/

Draw Refusal Rules, specifically, can be read here: http://forum.strateg...604#entry339604

#20 tobermoryx

tobermoryx

    Captain

  • Moderators
  • 863 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Spy

Posted 08 June 2015 - 04:28 AM

Disconnecting instead of surrendering is certainly poor game etiquette , but i wouldn't see this as a priority here.

 

There are basically 5* ways a player can annoy their opponent in a mean spirited way , and i'd rank them as following...

 

1. Draw refusal -This is just a nightmare to be involved with . Also for anyone to be punished for this their opponent has to very carefully follow a procedure for documenting and reporting it which many people find difficult (though rules are necessary of course) . Once this is done the moderators have a lot of work analyzing the case and even then may be criticized by the parties involved. An auto draw bringing this to an end would be the best single improvement i'd say.

2. Taking the full 6 minutes - to the last second - to set up - This is done purely to irritate the opponent before the game even starts .Obviously nothing against the rules so nothing can be done.

3. Abusive chat . I'm not particulary bothered by this myself but could understand people may consider this the no.1 problem, especially if their children play here.

4. Letting the buffer run down from 5:00 to 0:00 when they can't win - This takes twice as long as the disx loser option .

5 .Disconnecting instead of surrendering - This is 2 and half minutes, which is not so long to wait and watch (though yes shouldn't have to wait at all) .  I think these people are punished enough by the thread where their disconnections (as well as elements of their strategy/set up) are posted for all to see. I think the disconnectors are mostly angry with themselves mainly so it is not calculated like the other 4 things in the list .

 

*lottoing Marshals, shuffling and taking a long time to move are just things that are part of a player's approach to the game and are not legitimate things to complain about.

 

The reason i voted for a week ban (if there must be a ban) rather than a day , is that , when i look in the recently met section , the players who disconnected on me often haven't played a game since 2 or 3 days later , so if they got a day ban they would just come back 3 days later unaware they'd been banned at all. (they might get an email i suppose , but i don't think a valid email is even necessary to have an account)

 

Also , without wanting to make any proposal to deal with bad behaviour sound futile , while it is so easy to set up another account , is there any point in banning anyone for anything ?

 

Despite this critical sounding post i'd like to say the people who give up their time to deal with these issues - which is appreciated - should of course go forward and prioritize whatever they see fit (having taken on board other suggestions as they doubtless do ) so good luck with their project. .


  • Lonello, The Prof and General Eshe like this




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users