A Discussion on kingmaking and community standards.

[Sombre]

Originally Posted by K

Sorry, I'm a little sensitive about the fact that you've been cyberstalking me across multiple threads.

That you think that says more about you than me. Like everyone else I post when I feel like adding something. I'm a fairly prolific poster and you take extreme positions and are very self important, so it doesn't surprise me that I'd have posted in response to you in several threads.

And yeh, if you haven't played with me you don't know what kind of player I am. You are just slandering. The fact that you will never be able to find a player who has a grievence against me for in-game behavior makes you a liar and a bad person.

I haven't said anything about what kind of player you are. I'm shocked to learn that I'm a bad person. Really. I might go lie down.

Apparently, if you strongly defend positions in these forums some people will attempt to get people to not play games with you by telling people you are a dishonorable player. Like the "who's a vet" discussions or attempts to nerf tactics being used in currently running games, this is just one way that weak players try to defeat other players: by fighting them in the forums and not in the game.

Really? What does that have to do with me? I haven't said anything about you as a player. You seem to be implying I'm a 'weak' player without having ever played with me though. That's interesting given the indignation earlier in your post.

[chrispedersen]

Guys,

This is becoming a personal discussion which is both inappropriate to the thread and against the user agreements we all signed.

[K]

Sombre,

Here's a short course on forum etiquette to address your core issues:

1. Its not your job to skewer people you've decided are self-important with jokes at their expense in each and every thread they post in. It's especially inappropriate if that is your sole reason for posting.

2. You can't imply insulting things about people and get away with it just because you never said anything directly. Implying you would never play with someone because you heard they have a bad reputation is the same as saying they are bad players that should be avoided, and doing so in response to a particular posting is the same as slander of that person. Anyone with a basic mastery of the English language can read between the lines, and you are not fooling anyone.

3. Posting constantly and in all threads to up your post count does not make people respect your opinion more. No one notices the little number at the top of the post or give it any weight if they do. Here's some advice: take a page from Micah's book. He's often condescending and rude, but also has valuable insights to share. Because of this, people listen to him and give him some measure of respect (even me, though I would be greatly surprised if he cares).

4. No one wants to read past thread drama to get to the posts on the thread's topic. Baiting people to provoke thread drama lowers you in everyone's eyes.


Now, I'm going to give you the opportunity to have the last word in this exchange. Consider your words carefully.

[Trumanator]

Actually, I like thread drama And micah isn't so much rude as intolerant of BS

[Sombre]

Now, I'm going to give you the opportunity to have the last word in this exchange. Consider your words carefully.

Wow I really appreciate the opportunity you're granting me. But why would I need to choose my words carefully? Your posts make it clear where your reputation stems from. I don't feel compelled to respond to being called a liar, a bad person and post spamming weak player troll. I just consider the source and shrug.

Edit: I don't think there's any need for moderation here. I have no issue with K at all, as I said. I clarified what I said but I can't stop people reading insults, attacks and baiting where none were intended.

[Ballbarian]

Hey, I have no problem with drama. Here is a link to the Soap Central boards.

Now what was the topic?
Oh yeah, "A Discussion on kingmaking and community standards."

[chrispedersen]

Originally Posted by Ballbarian

Here is a link to the Soap Central boards.

LOL.. Spend a lot of time there Ball?

[Sombre]

He's a moderator there too. He often kingmakes soap stars.

[Strider]

Lay off the personal remarks to each other.
It's not only against forum rules, but it is taking away from those posters who are trying to have a legitimate discussion on a topic.

[WraithLord]

Amen to that Strider!

DonC, you said "What? So by disagreeing with you I proved your point. That makes any further use of my time debating you pointless."

Please don't be rash in your judgment and try and consider my point thoroughly. I have repeated the same point a few times but I think you still have missed it Please allow me to try again.

We are trying to come up with a good formula re. king making. First we need to agree to a common terminology. I think we have achieved that. Then we need to agree on semantics, what does king making mean. Most of the items in KM (pardon my fingers for tiring of typing the whole term) are agreed. For some reason gem/item/income transfer is not treated the same as VP transfer. I think they should be treated the same and have elaborated why, you disagree with me and have also elaborated why.
My point was that this disagreement is fundamental and is caused b/c of different opinions. So it can't be resolved but we do want to move forward. This is why I suggest that when prohibiting KM acts in house rules that all be prohibited VPs as well as gems as well as item transfer. This will ensure that the rules are clear and agreed on all and most important no one could feel cheated of victory b/c a KM move has done him.

I'll put together what I consider to be a constructive advice for game admins:
Either accept all KM acts as part of diplomacy games and make it clear in the house rules
or prohibit it altogether (all KM acts so no one complains)
or don't play diplo games.

I welcome any comments on that advise.