webdiplomacy.net

Another ridiculous thing about Reliability Ratings is that new players with 0% reliability often struggle to find their first game, since the default setting requires a 50% reliability.

FACTS

devbali02 wrote: ↑

Fri Dec 06, 2019 11:27 pm

Another ridiculous thing about Reliability Ratings is that new players with 0% reliability often struggle to find their first game, since the default setting requires a 50% reliability.

I've been trying to remember to host newbie games with 0% RR requirement. Ran 5 so far, but thanks for reminding me to create another.

devbali02 wrote: ↑

Fri Dec 06, 2019 11:27 pm

Another ridiculous thing about Reliability Ratings is that new players with 0% reliability often struggle to find their first game, since the default setting requires a 50% reliability.

Can a new player create a new game?

I investigated this and
1) Yes, they can (or at least create a bot game).
2) Playing against bots gives you a Reliability Rating, allowing you to play in regular games.

Claesar wrote: ↑

Mon Dec 09, 2019 6:59 am

I investigated this and
1) Yes, they can (or at least create a bot game).
2) Playing against bots gives you a Reliability Rating, allowing you to play in regular games.

Should this be added to the faq or naw?
Such as
I joined wediplomacy but cannot join a game?
Create a bot game to hone your skills and improve your reliability rating to join a public game!!!

New players get a reliability rating of 0%? What happened to the benefit of doubt? They shouldn't be obliged to start a bot game, just to get a decent rating.

I doubt the benefit of the doubt.

I had no problem joining or creating games when I joined in October, FWIW

I just joined, and for about 5 minutes I was puzzled I couldn't really join any standard game due to low reliability. Then I went to create a new game, and saw the possibility of playing against bots (which is super fun to learn to master the movement rules) and, 45 minutes later here I am, with a 100% reliability rating.

I second the "FAQ" suggestion, though. It could have prevented, or lessened, my surprise during the initial minutes.

Steady on HR,. "evil Chinese" Imho that's a poorly defined & sweeping condemnation of over a billion people perhaps? Go ahead and call out the totalitarian Government led by just one of many unique features​ of Chinese Communist party "democracy" President for Life Ji Xinpeng for being dishonest and repressive but please don't make what I regard as a rash statement capable of being interpreted as a racial slur. This is the Bwave New World Forum with more Decorum. The majority of Chinese people in Communist China are victims imho. Were those who died in Tianemen Square fighting for human rights "evil Chinese"?
Better be careful HR, that sort of rash statement might get you put in the Naughty Corner of Omnipotent Zultar's Magic Cave.

Good luck Captain Tomorrow. Hope you find happiness and peace.

MajorMitchell wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 09, 2020 4:09 pm

Steady on HR,. "evil Chinese" Imho that's a poorly defined & sweeping condemnation of over a billion people perhaps? Go ahead and call out the totalitarian Government led by just one of many unique features​ of Chinese Communist party "democracy" President for Life Ji Xinpeng for being dishonest and repressive but please don't make what I regard as a rash statement capable of being interpreted as a racial slur. This is the Bwave New World Forum with more Decorum. The majority of Chinese people in Communist China are victims imho. Were those who died in Tianemen Square fighting for human rights "evil Chinese"?
Better be careful HR, that sort of rash statement might get you put in the Naughty Corner of Omnipotent Zultar's Magic Cave.

I mean...if it didn't get him in trouble in the last 7 months since he posted it, he's probably safe at this point. Making a run for most delayed reply to a topic?

Yeah my bad, I didn't realize how old the thread was. At that point I couldn't delete my post anymore.

Apologies

Didn't read the date on HR's post jmo. Should I have not raised my concerns? Is it OK for me to call in the Forum with more Decorum all persons of a race that has a dishonest and repressive totalitarian Government evil then? Or would it be better if we were ALL careful with how we express noble sentiments to avoid misunderstandings?

MajorMitchell wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 10, 2020 3:50 am

Didn't read the date on HR's post jmo. Should I have not raised my concerns? Is it OK for me to call in the Forum with more Decorum all persons of a race that has a dishonest and repressive totalitarian Government evil then? Or would it be better if we were ALL careful with how we express noble sentiments to avoid misunderstandings?

Uh I think I understood half of that. Anyways moving along.

That might be considered a convenient way to avoid giving any answer to the most salient question posed, viz: (rephrased to kindly assist comprehension)
Is OK in a forum post to describe as "EVIL" all persons of a race or nationality which suffers from being ruled in home country by a dishonest and repressive t hiotalitarian Government, irrespective of whether some of they might have​ died fighting for human rights?
I cite the example of those Chinese people who died in Tianemen Square fighting for human rights and democracy in China. Is it OK to call them "evil Chinese"?
I understand the noble sentiments HR was trying to express but really do think HR could have used better, more carefully chosen words. I thought I also kept my "expression of concern" reasonably toned down in my "scale of scathing~ness"

If others choose to defend those words as being well-chosen then Bon chance mon ami/mes amis(?)

But if the questions I'm asking are embarrassing to some, then might I suggest they adopt a "dignified silence"as a response if answering seriously and honestly is beyond their capacity or willingness.
Less by a long way from genius level flippancy doesn't quite suffice imho.