Search:

[QUOTE=Frog;683421]So there's thing called the spirit of the game or something.

Basically if you are intentional bending the rules but not breaking them, it's breaking them.

It's similar to angle shooting in terms of bad.

I've been in games where players have tried to intentionally make 15 posts "1" "2" "3" etc. their posts didn't count.

I've also been in games where players spent 15 posts saying "hi" "yeah" "no" "brb" "I'll have more time later" "sorry guys" etc. their posts didn't count either because they weren't game related.

So just common sense stuff.

As for punishing AFKers, Griefera, etc.

Make the punishment logical.

Make them pay for their shit to prove they want to stay.

Like - if they AFK, and they want to get off of the blacklist ASAP, have them put in time for the site doing reports or something.[/QUOTE]

For some reason I got the impression your initial post was referring to hardline rules rather than guidelines. Anyway, I agree with a "spirit of the rules" approach lol.

Originally Posted by Frog

So there's thing called the spirit of the game or something.

Basically if you are intentional bending the rules but not breaking them, it's breaking them.

It's similar to angle shooting in terms of bad.

I've been in games where players have tried to intentionally make 15 posts "1" "2" "3" etc. their posts didn't count.

I've also been in games where players spent 15 posts saying "hi" "yeah" "no" "brb" "I'll have more time later" "sorry guys" etc. their posts didn't count either because they weren't game related.

So just common sense stuff.

As for punishing AFKers, Griefera, etc.

Make the punishment logical.

Make them pay for their shit to prove they want to stay.

Like - if they AFK, and they want to get off of the blacklist ASAP, have them put in time for the site doing reports or something.

For some reason I got the impression your initial post was referring to hardline rules rather than guidelines. Anyway, I agree with a "spirit of the rules" approach lol.

The main issue regarding making a particular rule about activity is the ambiguity surrounding what classes as suitable activity and what does not. If someone only makes 10 posts in a day but they're 10 dense, 6-9 line posts that give focused, game-related thoughts then it would be ridiculous to say the guy's inactive.

If someone else makes 30 shitposts and tries to lurk whenever someone asks them a question (and avoids contributing unless aggressively pushed) then there's clearly a problem. If you create a rule like "make 15 posts", there will be some people who shamelessly make 15 "=)" posts near EOD then fuck off XD.

We should take advantage of the fact we're a small community and encourage hosts to ban people from games on a case-by-case basis, with moderators overlooking the host to ensure there's no abuse / vendettas at work. We don't need some kind of rigorous rule system.

Anyway, I agree hosts should be more willing to openly blacklist certain players, or certain player combinations, if they think it will diminish the experience. It would certainly cause drama, but it'd benefit us in the long-term.

One good idea would be to have a separate (but equal) SFM queue that consistently runs only 9/10 people in mostly-vanilla setups. It would have an official, consistent blacklist that bans anyone who's caused drama in the last 3 months, where drama is determined by partaking in a big-ass argument, gamethrowing, or lurking (whether intentionally or unintentionally). Players would need to have played at least 3/4 games before signing up to this queue.

The main issue regarding making a particular rule about activity is the ambiguity surrounding what classes as suitable activity and what does not. If someone only makes 10 posts in a day but they're 10 dense, 6-9 line posts that give focused, game-related thoughts then it would be ridiculous to say the guy's inactive.

If someone else makes 30 shitposts and tries to lurk whenever someone asks them a question (and avoids contributing unless aggressively pushed) then there's clearly a problem. If you create a rule like "make 15 posts", there will be some people who shamelessly make 15 "=)" posts near EOD then fuck off XD.

We should take advantage of the fact we're a small community and encourage hosts to ban people from games on a case-by-case basis, with moderators overlooking the host to ensure there's no abuse / vendettas at work. We don't need some kind of rigorous rule system.

Anyway, I agree hosts should be more willing to openly blacklist certain players, or certain player combinations, if they think it will diminish the experience. It would certainly cause drama, but it'd benefit us in the long-term.

One good idea would be to have a separate (but equal) SFM queue that consistently runs only 9/10 people in mostly-vanilla setups. It would have an official, consistent blacklist that bans anyone who's caused drama in the last 3 months, where drama is determined by partaking in a big-ass argument, gamethrowing, or lurking (whether intentionally or unintentionally). Players would need to have played at least 3/4 games before signing up to this queue.