Mr. Gar, I'm not sure we've met. So, hi, first. :)

So, the thing about boot rates:

A boot rate in competitive games is going to directly, and negatively, impact your potential earnings. Let's say that in reality you're a 2000 rated player on the 1v1 ladder, which puts you around 17th on the ladder right now. But if your boot rate is 10%, you lose 10% of your games, and therefore get 10% less of your potential rating -- this pushes you 200 points lower, to 1800. So instead of 17th on the 1v1 ladder today, you would be rated 1800, which is roughly 51st on the ladder. It's a massive difference. And anything above that is even worse.

For every game you join, you have to own up to the result. You --have-- to stick with it to the end, and if it's a loss, you surrender when appropriate. A high boot rate is a sign of carelessness. A sign that you do not believe a game is important. It's a sign that you might join a game and then not believe it is at all important to you. And, since we're on this subject, I'll fully admit that my two active alts, Fateless and The Final, Forbidden Knowledge are both above 10% boot rate right now, due to my past mistakes. I neglected my alts, among other things, and it shows in my accounts' results... this is not a philosophy I have always followed, but it is one that I choose to accept and expect.

Nice one, please come up with more conclusive evidence of 'Trolls' rather than saying "oh my god, look at how much they play this dying game!"

you lose 10% of your games

But is 8.8% really that far off from 10%? When you're below 3.0%, we can discuss bootrates

Lol. It's not double digits. As said, I'm not perfect. :)

Honestly, though, if Fizzer gave a damn, there's plenty of data right now for supervised learning if he wants to eliminate the human decision-making. Just find frequent authors of heavily-downvoted posts, ID3 that shit, and you've got a troll detection algorithm on your hands.

kek. This would just make it so anyone who has an unpopular opinion is labeled a troll

@Nex

I don't play the competitive ladder. I primarily focus on diplomacy-style matches. I know many fellow diplo players that have high boot rates; some of these players are actually very good! Removing their ability to post on the forums can only lead to less of a focus on diplomacy matches in the long run.

Yea, what about us diplomacy players that don't play for points? Also 10% sounds wayyy to low. If you're going to ban someone from the forums, better make it more like 20% or 30%

Edited 11/19/2016 16:30:29

Again, you're kidding yourself if you think any number above 10% boot rate is respectable. It's just not.


Why would you join a game you don't intend to finish?

I have 11.2
A few weeks ago it was about 7.5
Then I got an afterschool detention for something I didn't do, meaning that I had to miss playig warlight that night. I then had 3hrs to do many games as well as a lot of homework.
Because of that, it is much higher

Because a (real-time) diplomacy game lasts for 1h30m if you're lucky to have non-staller enemies and a low amount of players.

A 40-man game, back in the days diplos were crowded and I actually gave a fuck, took much longer. A good 1h~3h to fill in and 3h~4h more of playing. One I played had gone to a pretty whopping 12 hours from the creation of the game to the last to die off. Not everyone's got that time and some really have no interest on winning. Don't even get me started on those who went off to take a snack and were unlucky enough for the game to start right when they were AFK because the host is a dumb fuck. I've been this guy (and this host too).

Multi-day is arguably even worse as some games last many months (I have an ongoing one from 2014 I'm trying really hard to end) and considering how unnecessarily creative the diplo community is, more games come faster than you can finish them. It takes one vacation (speaking of which, most diplos don't honor vacations) to ruin your boot rate permanently.

So if you're a diploplayer with any less than 10%, it's essentially the same as a strat-only player that takes no breaks without vacations and keeps game count below 15's 1%.

^
I used to be a big diplomacy player as well before they started to suck.

Edited 11/20/2016 01:10:56

if people are bad enough that rules need to be created so they can't use the forum, why not just ban them?

i got another idea, the forum can be moderated for porn and spam and we can post what we want, without all these ridiculous, unevenly applied rules.

even better idea, everybody go to the warlight subreddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/Warlight/

Edited 11/20/2016 10:56:43

The Big F still watches, and Reddit is shit. A non-official forum would be the way to go.

Boot rate doesn't include non-respected vacation boots or temporary retirements.

Edited 11/20/2016 21:17:55

if you think reddit 'is shit' you're not using it right.

reddit is simultaneously:

* the best news site
* the best discussion forum
* the best porn site

bunch of other bests, depending on your interests.

* the best porn site

That knowledge is forbidden

Why focus on prerequisites? Why not focus on crimes (offended) they did against the forum (in general)

I don't know about most of those people but GeneralPE was suspended for having unpopular views and disagreeing with people.

I was banned for being a Muslim.

edit: tshh this gets downvoted while above stays. Typic far-right ideology-spreading Fizzer.

Edited 12/8/2016 21:11:02

I don't get why everybody being so hard on Nex's suggestion. Its not perfect, and probably won't be implemented. But I don't think that was the point. It seems like it was more to start a discussion. Trolling is a real issue that can potentially ruin a forum, and there is no easy answer on how to "solve," it. Look at reddit. It had issues, it decided to solve many of these issues by taking reddit from a stronghold of free speech. To the heavily moderated/admined, and controlled site it is today. People were pissed off before they changed things, and today others are pissed off for other reasons. There are pro's and con's to any control an admin exerts over a forum.
Lets look at it from an economics perspective. First I'll assume that the forum considers trolling as undesirable and something we should reduce. If we want to reduce the amount of trolling we need to either reduce the quantity supplied or quantity demanded for trolling. One way we can do this is to have Fizz impose a cost on trolls. Thus reducing the quantity of trolls. A few ways I can think of doing this would be:

1) Create a second forum where only members can post. This will raise the cost of posting in that forum, and create a "two tiered," price system. Depending upon the value a troll places on messing with people, they might decide its not worth paying to post there. Of course you will still get some trolls, but not as many.
2) Create a second forum that you pay a one time flat fee to be able to make posts. This will have a similar effect, as the members forum. However, we could increase the price creating a larger disincentive to initially start posting in that forum. However, there would be no incentive to stop posting in this forum once the fee is paid.
3) Create a two-tiered forum system where you have be at a certain level or completed x number of games to have access to the higher tier. This again raises the cost of posting. However, it imposes a time cost. This creates a larger cost for people who's time is worth more. This could be a negative, if we assume trolls have a lower opportunity cost than a normal player this would impose a larger cost on more productive people, and thus on normal people.
4) Make more rules and begin to moderate the site, while giving shawdow bans to people who violate the rules. Like on reddit. If we assume trolls prefer to troll more people, instead of less people. This would reduce the benefits trolls gain, as their trolling reaches less people. Thus less people would be trolls. However we also run into censorship issues and such when we go down this route.
5) We could encourage a forum wide movement to identify and ignore trolls. If we assume trolls gain value from people reacting negatively to their posts, than by ignoring trolls we reduce the value people get from trolling, and thus reduce the quantity of trolling supplied.
6) We could create an invite only forum. Where people need to be invited in order to post. This would increase the cost of trolling this forum, as it would be more difficult to gain access too.


This brings me to what I believe would be a good option. We could create a two-tiered forum system in which people have the option to pay a one time fee to gain the ability to post in the paid forum (while still allowing it to be visible to everyone.) But make the paid forum moderated, laying out strict rules on what can result in a shadow ban/general ban of a profiles posts. This would reduce the initial incentive for trolls to post there, as they would need to pay the fee. While also providing a means to stop trolls from continuing to post there after the fee is paid. This would also stop the problem with trolls creating alt accounts to post in the forum. As it would be much more expensive to have to continually pay the fee after they are continually banned.