Jump to content


Photo

Public Discussion on Increased Penalties for DC


  • Please log in to reply
110 replies to this topic

#1 GaryLShelton

GaryLShelton

    Flagbearer

  • Moderators
  • 6,200 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Lieutenant

Posted 24 January 2019 - 07:53 PM

With the undertaking of DC and other enforcements this past year the MT approached the issue with caution for the expected but unknown increase in workload. To limit record-keeping we employed a uniform penalty and that helped. However, we now have an idea of the workload involved and are considering changing to a more aggressive penalty schedule if enough people want that.

This discussion topic is opened to gauge whether enough people want that, and maybe a good understanding on how severe people want the DC penalty to be.

Some examples we might switch to (feel free to suggest others) could be one of the following penalty schedules for DC. Note that a PB is not included at this time in any of the three. Let us know if you desire that option as well. But just to be clear--a "Reset" means both the w/l stats go to 0-0 AND the ELO also goes to 100 so it's indeed pretty severe. A PB is similar in these effects but of course forces a new account to be opened, whereas a Reset doesn't kill the original account.

Currently the penalty for DC is 50 points EVERY TIME. Nothing ever ramps up. It's completely uniform.
__________

Option 1)
DC Penalty Schedule:[mostly uniform]
1st offense: 75 points
2nd offense: 75 points
3rd offense: 75 points
4th offense: 75 points
5th offense on: Reset

Option 2)
DC Penalty Schedule:[mostly uniform]
1st offense: 100 points
2nd offense: 100 points
3rd offense: 100 points
4th offense: 100 points
5th offense on: Reset

Option 3)
DC Penalty Schedule:[non-uniform]
1st offense: 50 points
2nd offense: 50 points
3rd offense: 75 points
4th offense: 75 points
5th offense on: Reset

Option 4)
DC Penalty Schedule:[non-uniform]
1st offense: 50 points
2nd offense: 50 points
3rd offense: 100 points
4th offense: 100 points
5th offense on: Reset

Option 5)
DC Penalty Schedule:[non-uniform]
1st offense: 75 points
2nd offense: 75 points
3rd offense: 100 points
4th offense: 100 points
5th offense on: Reset

i77rs4m.jpg

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...931#entry468931


#2 Nortrom

Nortrom

    General

  • WC Online Team
  • 2,572 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 24 January 2019 - 08:02 PM

For me the most important thing is that I don't want MT having to keep track of amount of disconnects. It is, compared to some other abuses, a very minor infringement that will ruin someone's ELO score.
 
An other option we mentioned within the MT, was just upgrading the penalty to 75 or 100 without the possibility of a reset.
 
Last but not least, the option of applying a reset whenever the MT feels a player has been found guilty too many times of DC. This will be a subjective decision however.

  • Lord Invader likes this

"Rock is overpowered, paper is fine" - scissors

See this thread for live gaming updates

See this thread my blog posts


#3 UnladenSwallow

UnladenSwallow

    Scout

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 148 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Silver Captain

Posted 24 January 2019 - 08:29 PM

preference is either what we have now, or option 3. -75 too harsh for first time offense. 


  • rgillis783 and Lord Invader like this

#4 Napoleon 1er

Napoleon 1er

    General

  • Honorary members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,786 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum General

Posted 24 January 2019 - 10:42 PM

from the 5 options proposed my vote would go for option 4 but if i could put my 2 cents in there i would propose following scheme:

 

Option 6)
DC Penalty Schedule:[non-uniform]
1st offense: 50 points 
2nd offense: 75 points
3rd offense: 100 points
4th offense: Reset 

 

and then i tend to agree that it is not MT task to keep track of the offenses. So the plaintiff shall raise the claim directly for the offense level he want to claim for. Without indication of offense level MT can go systematically for 50 points reduction but if a plaintiff can bring evidence that a player has already been convicted earlier in the last 12 months for DC he shall paste the link to that earlier case or cases. Example:

airmail has been convicted once forfirst level offense DC and got 50 points reduction

later on same or another plaintiff is reporting again airmail forsecond level offense DC and brings evidence that he has already been convicted earlier => MT shall convict him with 75 points rediuction

again later on during following 12 months a new claim is raised against airmail for DC and the plaintiff brings evidence of the 2 earlier conviction => MT shall convict him with 100 points reduction

then again later on another player reports airmail for DC but does not realize nor bring evidence that he has already been convicted earlier => MT can either convict him with 50 points (if MT does not remember the earlier convictions) or with reset (if MT has remembered the old convictions and is raising 1 level by themselves)

some time later again another claim against airmail, claim posted with evidence of the 4 earlier cases => MT shall convict him with reset


Edited by Napoleon 1er, 24 January 2019 - 10:43 PM.

If you don't know where you go ... you have a lot of chance to arrive elsewhere ...

#5 tobermoryx

tobermoryx

    Major

  • Honorary members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,290 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Bronze Spy

Posted 24 January 2019 - 11:13 PM

I wouldn't apply any penalties at all.

Players disconnecting has never bothered me in the slightest.
  • UnladenSwallow likes this

#6 Fairway

Fairway

    Marshal

  • Moderators
  • 3,067 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Captain

Posted 25 January 2019 - 12:48 AM

Quite frankly anything more than 10 points is way too harsh a punishment for disonnecting in my opinion. I would simply make it 10 points per disconnect. None of the "1st time x points, 2nd time X points, 3rd time ban, etc", just a uniform deduction per disconnection. To reset someone's account for 5 disconnects is ludicrous.

 

Even though I think 50 points is too much, the current system of a uniform punishment is working just fine right now.


WINNER of the first ever Astros Stratego Series! :D

#7 TheOptician

TheOptician

    Marshal

  • Tournament Manager
  • 3,392 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 25 January 2019 - 08:57 AM

I wouldn't apply any penalties at all.

Players disconnecting has never bothered me in the slightest.


Same. Give yourselves some down time MT.

There may only be a 0.01% chance that admin manage to make improvements on this site (from a 5 year list compiled by the community) but even so I don’t think that probability is improved by sending a weekly barrage of minor points adjustments for trivial offences.

#8 GaryLShelton

GaryLShelton

    Flagbearer

  • Moderators
  • 6,200 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Lieutenant

Posted 25 January 2019 - 09:13 AM

There is clearly a wide range of opinions. That's good. Hope to hear more.

As for it being a trivial offense, I would only comment that the original topic (Hall of Shame) was opened for over 3 years and even though unpinned for the final year or so managed to always stay at the top of the topic list in GD. Players from bronze spies to Hielco were always plentiful to post their disconnect events. Perhaps this doesn't totally invalidate a "trivial" label, there was certainly an abundance of angst caused by the offense then as well as now.

i77rs4m.jpg

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...931#entry468931


#9 Nortrom

Nortrom

    General

  • WC Online Team
  • 2,572 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 25 January 2019 - 11:01 AM

Same. Give yourselves some down time MT.

There may only be a 0.01% chance that admin manage to make improvements on this site (from a 5 year list compiled by the community) but even so I don’t think that probability is improved by sending a weekly barrage of minor points adjustments for trivial offences.

The things we can do, we like to do. Educating players how to behave during (and after..) a game is one of them. Buffer time abuse, by letting the clock run down from 5 minutes to 0 is basically two disconnects in amount of time wasted. Yet, this is more frowned upon.

 

I personally see someone disconnecting as a bit of a middlefinger towards the opponent. I think, but may be wrong, that many others feel this way too.

 

@ Napoleon's proposal: That could work.. but I'm not sure if we should require members to be looking for how many times someone has DCed. 

 

Personally, I feel the easiest way is to keep the same sanction for each guilty verdict on DC / ATW.

 

It somewhat surprises me some feel 50 points is too much already. Didn't expect that.


"Rock is overpowered, paper is fine" - scissors

See this thread for live gaming updates

See this thread my blog posts


#10 rgillis783

rgillis783

    Lieutenant

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 747 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Sergeant

Posted 25 January 2019 - 04:13 PM

I have waited a day before putting my own thoughts out in post. I feel that the DC rule has been nice, I don't care to just sit there because some player lost a top piece to me or a bomb. With that said I was chatting with a PB player yesterday to get their thoughts on it. Yes, chatted -- I try to keep communications open -- to most. Their  thought was yes lose some pts. but no ban. They also thought the reset was harsh. Taking those sentiments into consideration with my like of US post early in this discussion I would lean to option 3  -- With the reset being left up to MT not automatic.My feeling is DC is not OK but not the worst offence. If I had an original idea it would be this. 

 

1--25 pt

2--50 pt

3--75 pt

4--100 pt

5-- reset at MT discretion if MT wants they could just keep handing out 100 pt this leaves wiggle room-- which I like  ;)

 

My reasoning is this. I played a German fellow the other day-- Dude had huge lead but was still playing defense. They had one or two disconnects in match. As always I requested they stop it. They responded kindly stating they were on a train and " it (wifi) was spotty". I mentioned they were reported before for disconnect by an MT member. They seemed surprised and apologized for any in convenience. I loved it --manners--honesty and good game play. I responded that they should snatch flag before they hit another dead zone on train. They got two moves in before-- Disconnect ! The Lynx did not pounce and this rat got away with win. Prime example of an honest disconnect. I only recall one or two case of a player coming back into forum to ague against ---give their side of why the disconnect happened.


Edited by rgillis783, 25 January 2019 - 04:14 PM.


#11 astros

astros

    Stratego TM

  • NASF Committee
  • 867 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Lieutenant

Posted 25 January 2019 - 04:42 PM

Don't care, just don't disconnect
I'm in love with Stacy's mom.

#12 rgillis783

rgillis783

    Lieutenant

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 747 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Sergeant

Posted 25 January 2019 - 05:10 PM

So, leave things as they are?  Increase penalty or decrease penalty ? Don't disconnect solid advice.  

Don't care, just don't disconnect



#13 KissMyCookie

KissMyCookie

    Major

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,149 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Spy

Posted 25 January 2019 - 05:49 PM

The MT has kindly afforded this matter for discussion, and there appear to be those who are in favor of a penalty for DC and those who are not. MT has also asked to find a way where they do not have to burden themselves with extra work in an effort to keep "tabs" on chronic offenders.

 

I don’t think that probability is improved by sending a weekly barrage of minor points adjustments for trivial offences.

 

Admin and Jumbo have done absolutely nothing to indicate even a remote interest in making improvements at this site in all of the time I have been here–and those who have been here longer than I have told me that the few improvements they made (programmed a fix for single chase), that was the last thing they did and not to expect more. Thus, the concern that small reports for trivial offenses may hamper a chance at more important improvements seems almost moot.

 

I wouldn't apply any penalties at all.
Players disconnecting has never bothered me in the slightest.

 

It reads that this player would not apply penalties because the offense does not bother him. That's fair, but as disconnects do not bother this player, and "same" for TheOptician, then it shouldn't matter if the MT is deducting points as a penalty from disconnectors–this process was activated in an effort to dissuade players from disconnecting, so what I would be interested in knowing is if this has yielded some results. I have to believe that when a mid-level gold player has disconnected enough times, and finds their account knocked down to bronze, it may dawn on them that this is what they may expect to happen by continuing a poor practice of disconnecting.

 

As for all of these options being tossed about, I do not see a point in escalating the penalty for chronic offenses. Unless there is a player who is doing this repeatedly in large number (manages to disconnect with six different forum members as a random example), then I believe the forum members would know and would gather to make a case with the MT to impose a specific penalty, and in that case, a complete reset. This scenario seems rather unlikely to me.

 

Don't care, just don't disconnect

 

Yes, exactly...players should not disconnect. I do care more about this matter than astros, but it really does not bother me so much either, as I often must laugh about it, but my reasons for reporting is that we need data and statistics to determine if this program is having any kind of effect.

 

I do not see any reason to change the 50 point penalty meted out to disconnectors by imposing some sort of record keeping and escalation...it is superfluous, unnecessarily complicated, and a waste of time. The MT already has enough to do, and until there is a glimmer of hope that Admin and Jumbo want to have a discussion about very limited improvements to the programming, then I see no reason why this program should be considered in any negative light.


  • GaryLShelton and rgillis783 like this

#14 TheOptician

TheOptician

    Marshal

  • Tournament Manager
  • 3,392 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 25 January 2019 - 08:09 PM

Thus, the concern that small reports for trivial offenses may hamper a chance at more important improvements seems almost moot.


You’re probably right.

If the only thing we are ever doing is asking admin to ban this person, or change that persons rating, they might think that that is all we care about.

Admin have no intention to change anything - I just haven’t heard it from them. Have we even asked? When was the last time that MT got a statement from admin?

If MT publicised the last communication with admin ( that didn’t involve points or flags or bans ) I would love to see it - just to know where we stand - even if it takes a year.

‘Hi admin there’s this clown on the forum who thinks there is a 0.01% chance that something might happen, and that sending you minor points adjustment requests might be painting us in a pernickety light. So partly to shut him up - and partly because if you don’t ask you don’t get - can you confirm that even if we stop sending you these requests for a month (think of the time you’d save!) that this fellow has grossly over-estimated this likelihood by about 0.01%. Or would you consider a community proposal that picks just one and only one thing that we would just love for you to change?’

And at that stage - when they say that they have no intentions of changing anything ever - I’ll design a poster denouncing disconnectors and push for the following penalty schedule:

1st offence: 25 point penalty per week (sent in 5 individual requests of 5 Pts) every week until four weeks have passed without that player having a new request.

Because if you are going to bombard you might as well do it properly. Then the strategy becomes a siege. Annoy them so much that they do something for us just to make us go away.

I’m joking you know it, but only from the point where I said I would design a poster. Because in truth - my illustration skills are lame.

#15 Don_Homer

Don_Homer

    Captain

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 864 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Marshal

Posted 26 January 2019 - 07:38 PM

It looks like people (even MT's?) want (slightly) other things than proposed by Gary. I agree that it should not be punished too hard. A disconnect cost less time than an abusive timewaster without disconnect. You can get a cup of tea, read a newspaper or something to fill up the 3-4 min. It might help a lot of people to cope with their lose and connected frustration so I favour a mild punishment in this and greater ones for timewasting in game, abusive language and draw refusals. In all cases I plea for a warning letter to begin with. 


Edited by Don_Homer, 26 January 2019 - 07:39 PM.

Molto Bene, Thats a nica Donut !


#16 KissMyCookie

KissMyCookie

    Major

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,149 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Spy

Posted 26 January 2019 - 08:14 PM

In all cases I plea for a warning letter to begin with. 

 

I really appreciate your gentle idealism...this is based upon the idea that these kinds of players read their emails, or that warning metters are not sent into the Spam folder and lost for good.

 

No, I disagree...50 point penalty as this will most assuredly get their attention...more than a polite letter of warning.


  • GaryLShelton likes this

#17 GaryLShelton

GaryLShelton

    Flagbearer

  • Moderators
  • 6,200 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Lieutenant

Posted 26 January 2019 - 09:08 PM

A disconnect cost less time than an abusive timewaster without disconnect. You can get a cup of tea, read a newspaper or something to fill up the 3-4 min.

.
Don, actually, technically that's not always true. One type of ATW offense (buffer abuse) is recognized after 2 minutes of elapsed buffer with no change in the game, and typically at the end of the game. That's as opposed to a DC, which burns through 2:30 every time. Both of these offenses require two screens of evidence to establish to the MT and so are about the same on that end of things as well.

When you say you can go get a cup of tea during a disconnect, you're forgetting about the proverbial sneaky rejoiner. The only safe thing to do on a disconnect message box screen is to stay in your seat, attentive to the screen until the victory banner appears.

i77rs4m.jpg

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...931#entry468931


#18 tobermoryx

tobermoryx

    Major

  • Honorary members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,290 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Bronze Spy

Posted 26 January 2019 - 09:17 PM

There seem to be an awful lot of options that look much the same at a glance  :D

 

I don't know that, under the ELO system, any deductions can be really forceful penalties. Anyone who plays a lot will see their rating range over about 200 pts in a typical couple of months anyway. Deducting someone a 100 points is going to give them some easier games to play, and maybe they like winning more than they like reaching a particular rating that they made several times already and will inevitably return to again.

 

I suppose in theory if a player is close to their highest level, that a 100 point drop would be hurtful, but I doubt it. I have got up to 840 or so a few times, and if I was penalized 100 points I really might take hundreds of games to get back to 840. But, the way ELO works, I would drop way below 840 just by playing a few games anyhow, as I have never been good enough to sustain a rating of 800+ for long.

 

So the way the ELO system works actually negates the effect of any points deductions. Not that i have any better ideas of punishments, just an  observation.



#19 tobermoryx

tobermoryx

    Major

  • Honorary members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,290 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Bronze Spy

Posted 26 January 2019 - 09:18 PM

When you say you can go get a cup of tea during a disconnect, you're forgetting about the proverbial sneaky rejoiner. 

 

Anyone who loses to a sneaky rejoiner should be reset to 100 as a warning against ineptitude.


  • UnladenSwallow likes this

#20 rgillis783

rgillis783

    Lieutenant

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 747 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Sergeant

Posted 26 January 2019 - 09:45 PM

How about a hodgepodge everyone's suggestions !

 

1) Warning note 

2) 12 pt deduction

3) 30 pt deduction

4) One week ban --- Don't really care for this option but would get players attention !

5) 100 pt deduction

6) MT discretion -- account reset or 100 pt deduction or a week ban plus 100 pt deduction--- all options open to MT at this point !

 

Astro's choice don't disconnect ! If ya do there is a cost --- My own feeling is 20 pt deduction. 


Edited by rgillis783, 26 January 2019 - 09:58 PM.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users