Is it legitimate then to talk to their previous opponents about how they rated a player's style or trustworthiness? I am talking about players in open games with open IDs, mind.

That would certainly be unusual. I'm not sure how many responses you'd get, or how useful the information would be. Whether it breaks any specific rules or not I'm not sure, but I'd guess not

No to both responses. If you play non anonymous games with me, then you have to expect that I will check your profile.

I have talked to others in-game about a person I've never played before, but not ever taken it out to the forum at large. It's nt against site rules, but I think most people on the site aren't afraid to ally with anyone else regardless of what they hear from other players as well as past run-ins with that player. Each game is it's own.

I've been asked about others before and I answer honestly. There are only a small handful of players I will never play again and most of them have been banned from the site.

So much of how trustworthy another player is comes from how you've behaved in that game up until the moment of trust. In some games, I'm way more trustworthy towards some players than I am to others, because of how the game has evolved.

I'm not sure it would be easy to put together a general overall trustworthiness rating (either formally or informally) for a player, or even if that would useful if you could. So much of it is contextual.

"I've been asked about others before and I answer honestly. There are only a small handful of players I will never play again and most of them have been banned from the site."

I can't understand that approach. If I am going to play competition tennis against someone, then of course I check their previous games and talk to their previous opponents. Isn't that just common sense tactics? Am I missing something here? (If so, I apologise).

As jmspool said, the way a person treats players can vary enormously. Ask a dozen people about a certain players style and you will get a dozen contradictory responses. A few general trends might appear, but you're better off getting them from the stats page.

To illustrate the point with an example. I have occasionally spent virtually an entire game plotting how best to stab an ally, and doing my damnedest to turn other players against him. It just so happens that the opportunity to stab never comes and the game ends in a draw. Ask this player's opinion of me and he may well tell you that I'm the perfect ally, loyal to the end, when the reality is quite different.

I would recommend changing your profile comment brora, you can do so by clicking the settings link on the top right of the page.

You also have to consider that a player can take on a different personality in different games based on which country is being played and who he is working with or against. How someone plays Italy in one game may not be indicative of how someone plays in another game as Italy because of any number of factors - better diplomacy with one or more players, a bad order causing him to play more desperately, or any number of factors.

I agree with Octavious. I've also found that many players do better in different scenarios. I can say that for those that I've played in multiple games, I can tell you their play style backwards and forwards.

brora, I don't think your approach is wrong. I agree with you that I will definitely check a player's profile page. If I've never played someone before, I'll ask others in-game about them. I usually don't translate that to the general public.

I'm also not understanding your comment based on the quote you pulled from me. Can you elaborate?

I think he took your "no to both responses" and misread it as "no to both questions".

@ jmo1121109 "I would recommend changing your profile comment brora, you can do so by clicking the settings link on the top right of the page."

Thanks, I am not going to do that just yet.

@ Tru Ninja.

I think we may be talking at cross-purposes. I did not fully understand your first post but I do understand this:

"brora, I don't think your approach is wrong. I agree with you that I will definitely check a player's profile page. If I've never played someone before, I'll ask others in-game about them. I usually don't translate that to the general public."

To me, this makes perfect sense in gaming terms and is not just within the legal rules but within the spirit of the game.

I should say, by the way, - or at least warn - that all of you who have said they sometimes check another player's public games or PM other players to check their playstyle are in breach of this site's rules regarinf metagaming:

"It has been brought to the moderators' attention that you attempted to engage in flagrant metagaming by asking for information from another player regarding a previous game. As I'm sure you're aware, this is a violation of WebDiplomacy rules. Is "

Rather than continuing to post in this thread, you're more than welcome to check your email; that is, if your ISP says that it was sent.

@brora, that was not the extent of the reason you were emailed, nor the reason you were banned. Making details of your case public is just a bad idea that ends in other members harassing you.

@ JMO

Firstly, I'm sorry, JMO, how do *you* know why I was banned? And why I was almost immediately reinstated?

Secondly, as the email I have just quoted specifically says:

""It has been brought to the moderators' attention that you attempted to engage in flagrant metagaming by asking for information from another player regarding a previous game. As I'm sure you're aware, this is a violation of WebDiplomacy rules."

How can that be clearer?

@ 2ndWhiteLine Online

"Rather than continuing to post in this thread, you're more than welcome to check your email".

Thank you. I got your email. Can you perhaps explain to me what you meant by this:

""It has been brought to the moderators' attention that you attempted to engage in flagrant metagaming by asking for information from another player regarding a previous game. As I'm sure you're aware, this is a violation of WebDiplomacy rules."

Is this a violation of webdiplomacy rules? Or isn't it? I think some of us are unclear. I know I am.

isnt that why there are open games set aside from anons? after all knowing your enemy is a huge part of strategy

I know because I run the moderator team here on this site (you can tell mods and admins on the forum by the checkerboards next to our names). I also know that you were specifically banned for not answering our emails. I also know you were let off rather easily for violating rule 4,

"Lying is fine in Diplomacy except when it gives mods/admins unnecessary work to do!"

In regards to claiming in the global chat of your game that another member was threatening you in and out of the game when in fact no threats were being made.

The metagaming problem was an issue related to training on my part. I thought I'd included the defination of metagaming that states

There are 2 types of metagaming, the allowable type, and the non allowable type. The allowable is information outside of a game that everyone has an equal potential of accessing. Such as looking up someone's old games, or talking to other people who have played with them. Non allowable is talking to a friend from real life about someone they have played with, since your personal connection gives you an unfair advantage in getting that information.

So you should not have been contacted about that specific issue, and apologies that you were. The other 2 matters were perfectly valid though, and refusing to have a conversation with the site admin handling your case and simply calling him bent really isn't the appropriate way of working out the issue at hand.

-WebDip Admin

and if it were a real war time situation you would always confer with others, about your enemy

Correct JamesYanik, that is fine so long as it's a full press game.

oh... so this thread is just pointless. yay i guess

Seems that way.

Fair enough. I accept your apology for screwing up three perfectly good games I was - until now enjoying. You and your pal are, at best, clumsy cunts and, if I'm not banned for that little truth, kindly stay away from me. Many thanks.

dont push it they are gods

Well I honestly don't have a clue why you wanted to have this conversation on the forum or why you're not answering email, but as the person handling your appeal you've been docked 10% of your points for your violation of rule 4 and for not answering your email (rule 8). Please take this time to read the site rules, and know that further violations of site rules will result in a harsher point dock and or a ban depending on the severity.

-WebDip Admin

I can't remember if "bent" means drunk or gay or both.

It can mean corrupt, or gay - I've never heard it used to describe someone being drunk.

I've always thought it meant bent, which makes it even less sensical in the context of brora's insult.

brora: Checking other players' play history is absolutely allowed (even for anonymous and private games that have ended). That's why it's there. Hell, even if you're playing in an anonymous game, as long as the list of people who joined is public information, feel free to check the others' game history. If you have the time, doing research can give you a feeling of how your opponents/allies play. While this feeling may help you, do not take anything you see as divine prophesy.

As for messaging users about old games to get even more information, I've never thought of that. I don't see why asking questions of another user you have rapport with should get you in trouble, though. It certainly would be a flagrant violation if you were messaging another user about an ongoing game, though.

Don't just look at the "Game stats". They are incredibly misleading, especially those of users who have joined many games in progress.

"Well I honestly don't have a clue why you wanted to have this conversation on the forum or why you're not answering email, "

I wanted this conversation in public to show that you guys play favourites and send people emails that you know are bullshit - yes, I'm going to post it again:

"It has been brought to the moderators' attention that you attempted to engage in flagrant metagaming by asking for information from another player regarding a previous game. As I'm sure you're aware, this is a violation of WebDiplomacy rules. "

You know this is a lie.

So I say again. You're a cunt. So is 2ndWhiteLine. Fine me some more. Or ban me. I'm easy.

"I can't remember if "bent" means drunk or gay or both."

It means that you're corrupt - as far as that word has meaning on a site devoted to board games. I hope that clarifies your understanding.

Be careful what you ask for, brora...

We absolutely play favorites - we always favor users who answer their email and don't call us cunts.

What a cuntish answer.

We don't fine or ban for rude behavior, only rule violations. If you'd read the rules like I suggested above you would already know that.

brora calm down just answer your email and be nice, they have been here quite a while and know how he game works the best. also that wasnt a cuntish answer it was just sassy

I have read the rules. You know I have. That's why I know that the following email - which was the only one sent to me - was bullshit. I am cutting and pasting THE ENTIRE email now from 2ndWhiteLine:

'Here s the text of my original email:

'It has been brought to the moderators' attention that you attempted to engage in flagrant metagaming by asking for information from another player regarding a previous game. As I'm sure you're aware, this is a violation of WebDiplomacy rules. Is there an explanation for this behavior?'

That was the original reason why I was banned - and the only reason. Everything that seems to have followed is you and 2ndWhiteline trying to cover your arses from Tuan Nguyen who I imagine is the actual gamesmaster and made you unban me when he saw the bullshit you were peddling. . Now you seem to be coming up with the reason that I was 'making threats' to other players. That's also untrue - and I challenge you to paste any threat I made to anyone.

You cunt..

@ James Yanijk

"brora calm down just answer your email and be nice"

No, I don't think I will. These two mods have been in collusion with a long-time player called Octavious to close down a game he wanted to out of. I refused to vote for a draw so he made up some spurious complaints which 2WhiteLine then used to immediately ban me - without sending any email. As soon as I left, the game was closed down - you can see for yourself if you check my profile.

I complained to the gamesmaster and was immediately reinstated. However, these two cunts are now trying to bullshit their way out of this.

Meh, let 'em. I can stay in this thread for another half an hour or so calling them cunts and then tomorrow I can go and find a better board. But until I do: up yours, cunts.

oh well, youre unbanned, the reason why you are docked points is because you didnt reply on the email. SECONDLY, if you are upset about losing your games it is your own fault, i was nice (nicer than you at least) about the whole situation and they reinstated me into the games and moved them back a phase. you started bitching so you have lost that privilege.

Finally, 2nd White Line and jmo have a better grasp of the rules than the ones posted on the site. the rules that are posted are constantly being altered but all in all it is the admins who are editing them. And just as a question, were you messaging the other player, Asking about another player's tactics in an alternate, BUT STILL ACTIVE game or a FINISHED one???

also what were the complaints?

If you're looking for another site, I recommend:

PlayDiplomacy
Backstabbr
Stabbeurfou

After joining, you'll likely note that they have similar policies regarding answering email from site staff and are much less tolerant about being called cunts.

"oh well, youre unbanned, the reason why you are docked points is because you didnt reply on the email. "

Yeh, well that's another problem. I checked with my ISP provider who returned me a list of all recent emails sent to my account. Not one of them was from "WebDiplomacy Moderator <[email protected]>". All I knew was I was instabanned.

" i was nice (nicer than you at least) about the whole situation and they reinstated me into the games and moved them back a phase."

Well, at the risk of telling you an unpleasant home truth, perhaps you're more prone to putting up with bull than me.

"you started bitching so you have lost that privilege."

What privilege? I can call anyone I like a cunt. 2nd White Line and jmo are cunts. There! I just did it again.

"Finally, 2nd White Line and jmo have a better grasp of the rules than the ones posted on the site."

I want you to think seriously about what you just wrote there, Theon Greyjoy. If you genuinely believe it then, wow, I don't know, I wish you luck.

@ 2ndWhiteLine Online

Thank you, cunt, but I didn't ask for your help.

Okay this is just stupid. I've told you several times now that the metagaming isn't an issue. You got the email because in training other mods they were not trained properly on some of the more obscure parts of metagaming. I corrected that issue today.

You were banned for not answering the email. Members under investigation for anything who do not answer an email within 3 days are banned if they continue to use the site. We grant members who don't check the site more time. You were using the site, hence you ban. You then replied to us after your ban, hence your unban.

You were originally being investigated because a member in one of your games emailed us concerned about you claiming that another member was threatening you. As we do not allow personal threats on this site we investigated to make sure you were not being threatened. You were not. Hence, we determined you were lying. This is your extend of the rule 4 violation, as it wasted large amounts of time for everyone involved.

Your rule 8 violation was not answering mod emails, which you are continuing to do.

Together these violations are worth about a 10% point dock, which I gave to you. You're fully welcome to email Zultar again though if you think you did not violate rules 4 and 8.

If any part of this is unclear you are welcome to email me asking for further details. With that in mind I'm locking this thread, as I sincerely doubt any other site member has an interest in watching you call other members vulgar words.

-WebDip Admin