Maybe so but it's all we have for now. If I can't get 7 exceptional players with 99-100% reliability, I may consider accepting some lesser mortals with 98%....

ahahaha, fair enough :)

100% here. Count me in if the buy-in's 20 or lower and the phases are at least 2 days long.

Ok kasimax you're in

1 maniac 99%
2 kasimax 100%

Reserves
Socrates 98%

I can't play any more games right now, but I'd be up for this if you do another one in a month or two.

Is your game open to any 100% players ?
It would be good to take part in a game that is not ruined by drop outs .

Absolutely Nodnyl welcome aboad.
1 maniac 99%
2 kasimax 100%
3 Nodnyl 100%

Hey guys, I'm going to shut this down for now. The Reliability Ratings are NOT currently finished. Kestas does not want anyone blocking others from games until the ratings are more established. He will eventually build in features to allow games to limit players based on RR. He will be posting a formal announcement once the ratings are all ready for use. Thanks for your patience on making a game like this until that point.

-WebDip Admin

I understand, but as people are likely to use the data in making decisions to either enter games others have set up, or in deciding to give the password to password protected games they have set up, perhaps the data should be removed until it's ready for use?

jmo, i understand your concerns, but it's just like setting a private game up, no? i don't really see the problem.

Thanks for the opportunity Maniac I will look forward to the game.

The problem is the stats aren't accurate right now. If you want to use the resigned stat that has always been there then that'll be fine. But until the ratings are accurate you'd be making a private game based on rankings that are flawed, which is something Kestas wants to avoid at the moment.

@Maniac, I have no control over the data being removed or not. All Kestas has told us is that he's still working on the testing and implementation and that he doesn't want the stats used for excluding people from games for now.

I would assume that people won't use the stats to make decisions for now once they understand that the data isn't accurate yet.

@jmo excuse for being disturbing lately but people are rigth.
It's just another pasworded game based on a mutual data.just like deciding to create a game based on the first letter of the nickname.
This forum was supposed to be self moderated but instead is being over moderated.

I'm ultra hot, does that count?

no, i get jmo's concerns. thanks for explaining.

taos - we get it, you hate jmo because he righteously silenced you once, and you want to be a little bitch over it, but don't you think you can get over it?

If people will not obey orders they must be punished ...... der verdammte Schweinehunds !!

I'm in. jmo is just fired up because he's got the reliability of a player in a high school class.

Taos, I thought you were still having a hissy fit that the data was wrong and your RR shouldn't be so low? Are you saying that the data are correct and you are indeed an unreliable player?

@Everyone, sorry if I wasn't clear, this isn't my call, it's Kestas's and here is what he told us:

"Hi guys,

Will try and digest all this asap, but definitely were still in data collection, feedback and tuning phase, so keep the feedback / thoughts coming.

The main thing is Id like us to have a feel for the scores before we allow people to block others based on the scores, and to be collecting all relevant data before publishing the code, so don't worry about how its calculated now is that people cant block others yet.

Happy Easter,
Kestas"

So until he tells me otherwise, no games based on the new stats. Thanks.

Taos is an unreliable player, 2WL.

99% super reliable here (if this game ends up happening in any form i'd like to get in on it)

I have nothing against jmo.
So from now on all my comments have to be connected to that incident?
I am totally over it.
All i was saying is that any game can be created based on whatever reason you like and no rule was broken,it seemed to me as overmoderating but this was a premature conclusion before jmo explained his logic.
So i guess i was wrong again.
and yes i am unfortunately an unreliable player i don't think i really made 44 cd's but it can be right considering my inconsistentcy since i first signed up at the site,first i didn't understand how it worked and signed up to 10 games without knowing what i was doing,after that i left the site for about a year living the games without playing at all later i had some Internet issues so more games went down the toilet and after that there were two wars in my country therefore i couldn't enter any orders and also the 17/17 tournament was during that time.
That's why i suggested that the cd count should begin from the moment of the data apparition on our profile and not be retroactive for the obvious reason that no one knew we will be judged by it.

And do not forget the cases when you are left with one unit and you know you are going to lose so you just cd,many players do that.

While we always understand that life does tend to get in the way of Diplomacy occasionally, there are several ways that a player can improve their reliability rating, which we will detail further once the code is finalized. Of course, much like law firm commercials, past performance is no guarantee of future results, which is why we will provide several measures of improving ratings. However, we also want to provide recognition for the multitudes of players on this site who have been consistently reliable for their entire term on WebDiplomacy. I will also emphasize that this data has always been there but only now being used for statistical purposes.

I love the fact that the reliability score is unreliable.

In passing, I thought that Abge was the overseer of the forum just in case, heaven forbid, an egotistical, small-minded, just-obeying-orders type kinda of guy ho is better suited to admin should ever be appointed to the mod team?

No unintentional criticism of past, present or future mods is intended, I would like to thank the current crop do a thankless task brilliently. They are all volunteers and deserve our support from the heart of our bottoms.

*bottom of our hearts (oops)

Hi Maniac,

If you, or anyone else, has a concern, feel free to shoot me an email.

@Maniac, yep abge oversees the forum, and the rest of the team the games. Which is why I didn't lock your thread, I'll just cancel the game if you make it before Kestas is finished working out the development. You've lived without RR for 6 years, waiting a few more days on the request of the person who freely hosts this site for all of us won't kill you.

@Socrates "I'm calling everyone a bitch this weekend" Dissatisfied -- I remember you CDed this game and then came back:
http://webdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=101529

@abge - I don't have any concerns thanks

Fair comment JMO, waiting for a reliable reliability rating won't kill me, and you are quite right to cancel any game I create based on unreliable data as I'm sure that such a game would being unsettling for some other players and could in fact crash the Internet.

For completeness any game I create will be based on other unreliable data rather that a the unreliable reliability ratings.

mapu - i've nmr'd but not cd'd?

Advice please -

Consider that you have a marginal decision to make. You enter your provisional orders and come back to the game an hour or so before the phase end. You note that your opponent hasn't responded to press, or entered orders. Are you allowed to look at his unreliable reliability rating to see if you can rely on his unreliability or would this be considered metagaming?

METAGAMING

Thank you for waiting as asked Maniac. You're now welcome to run this game so long as you understand the data isn't complete. And to answer your question no, since everyone in the game has the option to base their moves off of incomplete data too.

Thx jmo