Tracking Karma (manually as of now)

[Oversoul]

What is the point?

[notscience]

What is mine

[pirate mollie]

What is the point?

[Nachomamma8]

CABD DO MINE

[Mr. Flay]

never liked the idea of a karma system. Just don't like an objective, automated criteria enforcing how I should behave. (I think we already handle excessive flakers pretty well on a personal level.)

Playing the games you sign up for to completion is an objective, automated criteria I think we can all agree to, in principle.

We are NOT handling flakers well, mostly from lack of consequences (flake on one game, sign up for two more).

[Oversoul]

We are banning the chronic ones?

[Faraday]

We are banning the chronic ones?

we should

[Aegor]

We are banning the chronic ones?

Hence the point of the system: to deter all flaking, not just chronic flaking.

[Oversoul]

We already deter all flaking through the threat of banning the chronic ones and mods do have the power to refuse players from their games.

[Faraday]

Like, flaking on one game isn't the end of the world - x replaces out of a game of mine before, guess what? I don't blacklist for that, he probably got busy or whatever - he's generally super reliable and solid and also pm'd me to apologise. It's people who frequently replace out of games for shitty reasons (and it's even worse when they're still on site) that should be clamped down on. I mean, sure I guess you can just create an alt to build back up your rep but *shrug*. I'd lie to see stricter punishments for people who continously flake, they'll just join more games, and in places like the normal queue with first time moderaters they'll generally be accepted.

[Faraday]

We already deter all flaking through the threat of banning the chronic ones and mods do have the power to refuse players from their games.

Who has seriously been banned for flaking though? And yeah, sure I have people I won't allow in my games again because they've shown to be unreliable/I suspect they're more likely to replace out as certain alignments but not all mods will have that info, will they? Do they have to get burned or do lots of research to find players?

[Aegor]

We already deter all flaking through the threat of banning the chronic ones

But that is not a threat against players who flake on occasion, which should not be happening either.

and mods do have the power to refuse players from their games.

Using whatever criteria they wish. This is one such criterion.

[Cabd]

I get the idea that faraday is in favor of working with me on this system or something similar.

[Faraday]

Well I think the fact people like Zazie are still allowed to sign up for games is just perplexing. I mean, i've played with him and don't have any dislike towards him...but come on.


edit: and yeah, I just really dislike how replacements change the game state, basically.

[Oversoul]

But that is not a threat against players who flake on occasion, which should not be happening either.

How draconian are you suggesting we get?

[Cabd]

Zazzier and all known alts, don't forget that sanhora thing, faraday.

[Aegor]

But that is not a threat against players who flake on occasion, which should not be happening either.

How draconian are you suggesting we get?

Mod discretion. When my mini theme is ready, anyone who has replaced out of any game in the last year will have to PM me.

[Cheery Dog]

Does my replace-out and them replace back into the same slot about a week later count for anything?

[Cabd]

It would count as one of each, so it would be a net negative to your overall score, yes.

[Cheery Dog]

It would count as one of each, so it would be a net negative to your overall score, yes.

So score would be the same as if I had managed to just play the game in it's entirety?

[TheButtonmen]

But that is not a threat against players who flake on occasion, which should not be happening either.

How draconian are you suggesting we get?

BAM rides again!

[N]

Why are newbie replacements worth double? In my experience, they're the easiest to find replacements for.

[Cabd]

It would count as one of each, so it would be a net negative to your overall score, yes.

So score would be the same as if I had managed to just play the game in it's entirety?

No.

Since there's a sqrt on the replace in part of the data, your score if just that one game would be below zero.

[Kdub]

I think a single "karma" number is too simplistic (even ignoring issues I have with the exact formula). I would get a much better idea of the player's reputation with three basic numbers: total games signed up for, total games replaced out of, total games replaced into.

For example, someone with a karma of zero could conceivably have never replaced into or out of a game, whereas someone else with a karma of zero could be a frequent flaker who always replaces in rather than starting new games. I think the first player should be seen as far more reliable and have a better reputation. The goal shouldn't be to encourage flakers to start replacing into games to "make up" for past flaking. Honestly, those players are more likely to flake again after replacing in than someone who never flakes and is replacing in because they actually want to play in the game rather than for karma credit.

[Cheery Dog]

It would count as one of each, so it would be a net negative to your overall score, yes.

So score would be the same as if I had managed to just play the game in it's entirety?

No.

Since there's a sqrt on the replace in part of the data, your score if just that one game would be below zero.

But the square root of 1 is 1.
(yes I know it was a newbie game and this point is invalid)