Ladle 83 Rule Change Discussion
Moderator: Light
- kyle
- Reverse Outside Corner Grinder
- Posts: 1876
- Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 3:33 pm
- Location: Indiana, USA, Earth, Milky Way Galaxy, Universe, Multiverse
- Contact:
Re: Ladle 83 Rule Change Discussion
One thing i don't like about sinewav's proposal is, If a player is banned for 1 ladle, they play that ladle they are banned for, then they only are banned for the next ladle? it should be Restart that ban and allow for up to 12 more ladle bans
Re: Ladle 83 Rule Change Discussion
We can make it say "<player> is accused of <violation(s)>..." And lump them together. Since everyone places their own value on rules, each voter can declare the severity of the crime when issuing the ban number. A ban of 6 months means "I think this is terrible" and a ban of zero months means "meh, no big deal." The median of all ban numbers will determine how the community feels at that time. Note: there is no way to eliminate favoritism. In fact, there has yet to be a single system of justice in human history to be perfectly non-biased. This is why I propose a cap on the maximum number of bans (probably 6-12 months).theo wrote:What if there are several infringements at once. Like playing for two team by not being logged in?
Good point, kyle. What if we just double it? Or send that person to trial immediately?kyle wrote:One thing i don't like about sinewav's proposal is, If a player is banned for 1 ladle, they play that ladle they are banned for, then they only are banned for the next ladle? it should be Restart that ban and allow for up to 12 more ladle bans
Re: Ladle 83 Rule Change Discussion
I think that we are missing one point thought.
People were mad about Liz and wanted to punish her badly when she had not done any wrong doing for years. Why do you think they are so willing to punish her hard then ?
My guess is that because she is banned and has been banned repeatedly from other dominions of the game. People then have anger toward the player and the system is not enough for them because they feel this issue.
The solution would be to link punishments among the different games played.
For instance, a repeated offender in pickup would carry warnings in competitions that would be triggered in the case of an offense.
Its like you are in probation coz you drove after drinking, and then you steal someone. You get bigger punishment as a recurring offender. Or you're Suarez biting in the world cup and get suspended not only for world cup events but also for national ones.
People were mad about Liz and wanted to punish her badly when she had not done any wrong doing for years. Why do you think they are so willing to punish her hard then ?
My guess is that because she is banned and has been banned repeatedly from other dominions of the game. People then have anger toward the player and the system is not enough for them because they feel this issue.
The solution would be to link punishments among the different games played.
For instance, a repeated offender in pickup would carry warnings in competitions that would be triggered in the case of an offense.
Its like you are in probation coz you drove after drinking, and then you steal someone. You get bigger punishment as a recurring offender. Or you're Suarez biting in the world cup and get suspended not only for world cup events but also for national ones.
Re: Ladle 83 Rule Change Discussion
you are all letting the cheaters off incredibly easy.
imagine if Arjen Robben got plastic surgery and played for Germany tomorrow. It's much worse than Suarez biting someone. That's what were dealing with here. It's irrelevant whether you like Arjen Robben or not. It's irrelevant what existing rules say. You don't make rules for things like this. A 1 ladle suspension is an embarrassment. Seriously imagine if that happened IRL. We'd be talking lifetime ban, and honestly I don't understand why we're not.
imagine if Arjen Robben got plastic surgery and played for Germany tomorrow. It's much worse than Suarez biting someone. That's what were dealing with here. It's irrelevant whether you like Arjen Robben or not. It's irrelevant what existing rules say. You don't make rules for things like this. A 1 ladle suspension is an embarrassment. Seriously imagine if that happened IRL. We'd be talking lifetime ban, and honestly I don't understand why we're not.
Re: Ladle 83 Rule Change Discussion
Good point, kyle. What if we just double it? Or send that person to trial immediately?[/quote]kyle wrote:One thing i don't like about sinewav's proposal is, If a player is banned for 1 ladle, they play that ladle they are banned for, then they only are banned for the next ladle? it should be Restart that ban and allow for up to 12 more ladle bans
I think we should send that person to trial again not allowing the ban to be lower than the original ban. For example, if a player is banned for 6 months and is caught in, let's say, month 4 then that person is sent to trial to extend the ban to a minimum of 6 months more, up to 12.
Re: Ladle 83 Rule Change Discussion
Sounds good Zap.
"If a banned player is caught playing during Ladle, a Global Moderator should kick/ban them immediately. The player in violation must be retried immediately and given a ban greater than the previous one."
"If a banned player is caught playing during Ladle, a Global Moderator should kick/ban them immediately. The player in violation must be retried immediately and given a ban greater than the previous one."
Re: Ladle 83 Rule Change Discussion
I have made several changes to the wiki for review. Most of it is the Warnings & Penalties rewrite, but I also added a few lines for Global Moderators since we plan of shifting some Team Leader responsibility to them (access to /OP).
Re: Ladle 83 Rule Change Discussion
made some revisions to ensure transparency
- kyle
- Reverse Outside Corner Grinder
- Posts: 1876
- Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 3:33 pm
- Location: Indiana, USA, Earth, Milky Way Galaxy, Universe, Multiverse
- Contact:
Re: Ladle 83 Rule Change Discussion
Most of your changes, Blondie, actually harm the system. Votes were supposed to remain anonymous. The To field actually does not work, It sets up for people replying to all, when the votes still should be just to the person issuing the vote, Votes should remain private, but the ladle enthusiast shall give the voters a unique ID for validating that their vote has been cast. Results shall be posted with unique ID. Like the example thread.
One other slight change i was thinking of, max ladles to be banned shall be 12*(number of potential infractions).
One other slight change i was thinking of, max ladles to be banned shall be 12*(number of potential infractions).
Re: Ladle 83 Rule Change Discussion
a private vote opens up the possibility of foul play.
Last edited by blondie on Tue Oct 07, 2014 12:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Ladle 83 Rule Change Discussion
That's a pretty good point. I'll back that up. Let's see if we can get more feedback on these changes. Anything else to address while we are at it? I think this is pretty good for now.blondie wrote:Considering team leaders vote on behalf of their team, there is no need for privacy, and the existence of it is therefore suspect.
Re: Ladle 83 Rule Change Discussion
The results can be anonymous and verifiable, and teams aren't the only ones who get a vote.
Re: Ladle 83 Rule Change Discussion
I don't see any benefit to anonymity.
Last edited by blondie on Tue Oct 07, 2014 12:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Ladle 83 Rule Change Discussion
I think concord has a really good point right there. I'll also support a public vote in this kind of event.
- kyle
- Reverse Outside Corner Grinder
- Posts: 1876
- Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 3:33 pm
- Location: Indiana, USA, Earth, Milky Way Galaxy, Universe, Multiverse
- Contact:
Re: Ladle 83 Rule Change Discussion
I just feel that public votes lead to the Mr. agreeable situation. once one posts most copy, could also let people back out in stating their vote if they see a lot of people voting a different way than what they want. Keeping in private kind of forces you to vote because you don't know what the outcome will be fore sure.
As dlh mentioned you can keep it fair and anonymous, 1 by having a list oh who voted and 2 by having a list of unique ID's, they ensure two things, one each voter knows their own ID, so they can verify their vote. 2 would enforce that people voting alike don't get the same ID to try to rig the results.
Just my thoughts, (still I really don't care if we use ID's at the end could just use names) I just think there should be an anonymous period. I think of the primary elections in the US. Since it is spread out over months by the time they get to Indiana for presidents, The race has already been won, making it almost pointless to vote for that.
As dlh mentioned you can keep it fair and anonymous, 1 by having a list oh who voted and 2 by having a list of unique ID's, they ensure two things, one each voter knows their own ID, so they can verify their vote. 2 would enforce that people voting alike don't get the same ID to try to rig the results.
Just my thoughts, (still I really don't care if we use ID's at the end could just use names) I just think there should be an anonymous period. I think of the primary elections in the US. Since it is spread out over months by the time they get to Indiana for presidents, The race has already been won, making it almost pointless to vote for that.