CFC team sign up

[Sommerswerd]

This is a really good point, and one you should actually address to RB

I'm not going to do that. It's disrespectful for me to go over there and try to tell them how to run their team. Or question them on their motives for doing this and that. You are well known over there, and this is YOUR issue so you should be the one to address RB.

3) is effectively a trust issue on the part of the players on RB, and a misunderstanding. They are thinking in terms of global lurkers, and not in terms of team mates which the new players would be. They are using experiences gained from playing PBEMs and PB games with open threads for anyone to look at, and transferring them to this game with locked fora. The players do not understand the difference

So YOU should explain that to them, and if they come around, then they can accept all their lurkers onto their team where they should be in the first place and this whole issue is resolved. Seems to me that you are barking up the wrong tree on this point

Hence I think that RB is being illogical in not accepting new posters, and that their paranoia is not a reason for other people to feel or do the same that they have done.

You may be right on the first point, but again, that is something for YOU to go tell RB "that they are being illogical." If you can't convince them then what do you want from us? Are you implying that we are so much smarter and wiser and fairer than RB? OK then, if we are so smart and wise and fair, compared to RB, then why wont you play with the settings we want? I think it is because you don't think we are any wiser or fairer than the RB players. At best we are the same, maybe you might even think the RB guys are actually a little wiser than us. So if that is true, then how can us 'pea-brains' at CFC be more logical that the wise and smart RB guys? It doesnt make sense The bottom line is you have to convince THEM. That's where the problem is. YOU have to convince them to take their own players.

Now as for the second point, I respectfully disagree. Saying 'paranoia' is just rhetoric right? It boils down to who is right. Who is more likely to have the best instinct in this situation (ie, what is the proper way to conduct an MTDG). You, saying there wont be any spying, or them saying there will be spying. What is their instinct based on? Is it based on experience? It seems to me that you are saying it is based on past experience, which is what our feeling was over here. So all we are doing is giving a little deference to RB's experience with this issue and going with their judgment. You can call that 'paranoia' if you want. I call it good decision making.

Another way to look at it, is if THEY are smarter than us, then we should do what they do (ie restrict access). On the other hand if WE are smarter than them, then you should be happy to play with the settings we want right?.

If it comes down to a straight forward "I will play with people I trust" ideal, then why are you playing with so many people on other teams that you have no experience with?

The premise of this statement is wrong. You start with the assumption that we have no experience playing with the other members of this team. In fact I have experience playing with EVERY SINGLE MEMBER of this team. Maybe on different teams maybe as teammates. I think everyone on the team was on one of the BTS MTDG II teams. None of the players on this team are complete strangers to me. Some of them are more like family (in a 'Civ' sort-of way). Everyone on this team has a posting history that can be checked and verified, so we at least know something about each other and our Civ playing history.

But that isn't even the main point (What there's more?... Yea, there's always more with Sommerswerd baby! This well never runs dry). When you only play with players with established histories, there is accountability. There is a reason you are able to shame Cal all over the threads... Its because he is an established player and poster with a long history and tons of activity. His reputation matters. His good name matters to him and everyone else. When his reputation is tarnished, there is an effect that is real and tangible and felt by everyone.

Contrast that with a person who has little or no posting history. So what if they do something scummy? So what if they get caught spying or whatever? So that account gets banned. So what? They will be right back tommorow with a new IP/ new account. There is NO ACCOUNTABILITY for new accounts.

You trust them not to cheat, and you don't know them. You don't know the new posters, but you don't trust them. It is an illogical position to take.

As I said you are mistaken on this. I know everyone on this team, so its completely logical for me to trust them more than strangers.

 

[darrelljs]

.

Darrell

 

[Krill]

I'm not going to do that. It's disrespectful for me to go over there and try to tell them how to run their team. Or question them on their motives for doing this and that. You are well known over there, and this is YOUR issue so you should be the one to address RB.

It can be judgemental or respectful to judge a person's actions , but not to ask why they were made. However, the RB posters are reading this discussion over here and they already know that everything here applies to them as well. But this is a tangential point anyway and not relevant to anyone’s actions.

So YOU should explain that to them, and if they come around, then they can accept all their lurkers onto their team where they should be in the first place and this whole issue is resolved. Seems to me that you are barking up the wrong tree on this point

The lurkers can ask to join any team; you are assuming that all lurkers would rather lurk RB than CFC, which isn’t necessarily true. Also, the bolded section is not something I’m sure the moderators or admins would agree with.

You may be right on the first point, but again, that is something for YOU to go tell RB "that they are being illogical." If you can't convince them then what do you want from us?

Just because RB are being paranoid, does not mean that others must be as well. Their behaviour does not justify your own, nor yours theirs.

One note on the word paranoid. Paranoia is not “rhetoric”, it is a thought process controlled by specific feelings of anxiety or fear, often involving distrust of others. Hence when I say paranoia I am referring to a thought process.

Are you implying that we are so much smarter and wiser and fairer than RB? OK then, if we are so smart and wise and fair, compared to RB, then why wont you play with the settings we want? I think it is because you don't think we are any wiser or fairer than the RB players. At best we are the same, maybe you might even think the RB guys are actually a little wiser than us. So if that is true, then how can us 'pea-brains' CFC be more logical that the wise and smart RB guys? It doesnt make senseThe bottom line is you have to convince THEM. That's where the problem is. YOU have to convince them to take their own players.

Strawman...

Now as for the second point, I respectfully disagree. Saying 'paranoia' is just rhetoric right? It boils down to who is right. Who is more likely to have the best instinct in this situation (ie, what is the proper way to conduct an MTDG). You, saying there wont be any spying, or them saying there will be spying. What is their instinct based on? Is it based on experience? It seems to me that you are saying it is based on past experience, which is what our feeling was over here. So all we are doing is giving a little deference to RB's experience with this issue and going with their judgment. You can call that 'paranoia' if you want. I call it good decision making.

As above, paranoia is a thought process, not rhetoric. This is also a non sequitur, who is “right” or “wrong” doesn’t have any meaning in this context, as it ignores that opportunity for cheating to occur in other areas of the game. The argument is based solely on reasons why the refusal to not accept new players are hypocritical. It is not based on “What is the proper way to conduct a demogame”.

Another way to look at it, is if THEY are smarter than us, then we should do what they do (ie restrict access). On the other hand if WE are smarter than them, then you should be happy to play with the settings we want right?

Affirming the disjunct... faulty logic. Games can be played on many settings, and people derive different levels of joy from different settings. This does not have an effect on which team a person plays for, nor the team policy for player participation.

The premise of this statement is wrong. You start with the assumption that we have no experience playing with the other members of this team. In fact I have experience playing with EVERY SINGLE MEMBER of this team. Maybe on different teams maybe as teammates. I think everyone on the team was on one of the BTS MTDG II teams. None of the players on this team are complete strangers to me. Some of them are more like family (in a 'Civ' sort-of way). Everyone on this team has a posting history that can be checked and verified, so we at least know something about each other and our Civ playing history.

Strawman. I am not commenting on the players that you do know, the point is that the players on other teams are players that you have not played with before and that you do not know, yet you still trust them to not cheat.

When you only play with players with established histories, there is accountability. There is a reason you are able to shame Cal all over the threads... Its because he is an established player and poster with a long history and tons of activity. His reputation matters. His good name matters to him and everyone else. When his reputation is tarnished, there is an effect that is real and tangible and felt by everyone.

What effect is that again? Calanthian has cheated in previous games, yet he is trusted to lead a team in an ISDG with what looks to be over 300 players.

 

[Majic]

I'd like to join the cfc team. Unless you don't trust me...

 

[Caledorn]

Um, you a mod? I didn't think so.

I don't need to be a mod to have an opinion, just as you don't need one. My post was directed to you as a request, not a demand. And I would like to add that if I were a mod and told you to scrap off, or moderated you based on your posts here, I would be abusing my powers.

What effect is that again? Calanthian has cheated in previous games, yet he is trusted to lead a team in an ISDG with what looks to be over 300 players.

I will stay out of most of this, as I don't feel I can contribute much. I was not an active player in the time of the incident you guys are discussing here, but I would like to say something in regards to that effect.

The effect is, I believe, called "forgiveness" and leads to "offering a second chance". It is one of the most admirable traits we humans have, and I am pretty certain that Calanthian sees the value of this.

I'll now leave you gentlemen to go back to your debate.

PS! Has anyone else noticed that the CFC forum have been very slow the past days?

 

[Krill]

I don't need to be a mod to have an opinion, just as you don't need one. My post was directed to you as a request, not a demand. And I would like to add that if I were a mod and told you to scrap off, or moderated you based on your posts here, I would be abusing my powers.

Cool.

I will stay out of most of this, as I don't feel I can contribute much. I was not an active player in the time of the incident you guys are discussing here, but I would like to say something in regards to that effect.

The effect is, I believe, called "forgiveness" and leads to "offering a second chance". It is one of the most admirable traits we humans have, and I am pretty certain that Calanthian sees the value of this.

I'll now leave you gentlemen to go back to your debate.

This I agree with 100%. But the follow up question is that why aren't the new players trusted, if it is accepted that people can cheat, intentionally and unintentionally (if we don't explain what conduct is expected of them, Dave's meta-rules point in the planning thread), and be forgiven? Just...why?

As I said, *I* trust Calanthian to the extent that I would both play against him and with him in this game. Considering the manner that the new players have been treated on two sites in this context...why can't they play?

 

[DaveShack]

I've been reading this thread for a couple of days trying to figure out how to handle it the best.

Being cautious about new members who seem to join just to play this game doesn't seem unreasonable. Sad but true, there may be a spy among them. OTOH, true new members should be welcomed, like I was welcomed when I first joined the Civ3 DG. What's a team lead to do?

I think y'all could tone down the trolling other sites.

 

[2metraninja]

Hey, Krill, if you are so interested in all having equal rights and receiving equal treatment, be kind and go make some 1 week discussion over RB, as they also deny newcommers access, but you are not filling their forum with long argumentations. Be fair and give them some food of thoughts too.

Also, you continue to ask why would someone not trust new player without any record to let him in his own private forum and in the same time trust someone with proven record, but still unknown player to play against. I think it is obvious. If I have to use metaphors to make it more clear for you, here it is: One thing is to not trust a complete stranger to allow him to see your country top secret documents (thats newly registered lurkers) versus when actually going at war to rely that soldiers from countries who proved respect human rights and respect the Geneva convention (thats other players from other sites we dont know, but yet trust they will conduct sportsmanship and fair play against us) to not conduct dirty war, genocide, etc. Makes sense?

 

[Sommerswerd]

It can be judgemental or respectful to judge a person's actions , but not to ask why they were made. However, the RB posters are reading this discussion over here and they already know that everything here applies to them as well. But this is a tangential point anyway and not relevant to anyone’s actions.

I said it was disrespectful for me to go over there questioning them. I have no problem judging their actions, but I will keep my thoughts in "my sandbox." It's just common courtesy. I don't care as much if what I say here ruffles their feathers, because this is "my home base" if they are over here reading all the interesting and entertaining stuff I have to say, well, I'll try to make it good But when I am visiting over there I keep my fat mouth shut. That's their house, and I don't disrespect it, no matter what they say over here. But over here, I will give as good as I get I know you understand this point and its' relevance. You are "family" over there so YOU are the one to tell them the error of their ways OVER THERE. I have already taken their @sses to task over here, and done a d@mn fine job of it if I do say so myself. Ball's in your court now buddy... Make us proud

The lurkers can ask to join any team; you are assuming that all lurkers would rather lurk RB than CFC, which isn’t necessarily true. Also, the bolded section is not something I’m sure the moderators or admins would agree with.

All we are talking about is the RB refugees. Dont try to change the subject. Stay on topic

Just because RB are being paranoid, does not mean that others must be as well. Their behaviour does not justify your own, nor yours theirs.

They are not paranoid, they are just being unfair and elitist and we needed some time to make a point, and sort out how we would handle their unsportsmanlike behavior.

One note on the word paranoid. Paranoia is not “rhetoric”, it is a thought process controlled by specific feelings of anxiety or fear, often involving distrust of others. Hence when I say paranoia I am referring to a thought process

Thanks Its still rhetoric to call them paranoid though. They would say "cautious", LP described it as "common sense" its all rhetoric because its all subjective. Nice try though

Strawman...

Again, Nice try. Obviously you have no response to a valid point so we can just let that go

As above, paranoia is a thought process, not rhetoric. This is also a non sequitur, who is “right” or “wrong” doesn’t have any meaning in this context, as it ignores that opportunity for cheating to occur in other areas of the game. The argument is based solely on reasons why the refusal to not accept new players are hypocritical. It is not based on “What is the proper way to conduct a demogame”.

You keep usin tha whord... I don thin it mean whachu thin it mean. On the other hand your response is a "non-sequitur"

Affirming the disjunct...

Nope sorry improper use of a logical fallacy label

Strawman I am not commenting on ....

Wrong again. 2metra answerd this very well already so...

Also, you continue to ask why would someone not trust new player without any record to let him in his own private forum and in the same time trust someone with proven record, but still unknown player to play against. I think it is obvious. If I have to use metaphors to make it more clear for you, here it is: One thing is to not trust a complete stranger to allow him to see your country top secret documents (thats newly registered lurkers) versus when actually going at war to rely that soldiers from countries who proved respect human rights and respect the Geneva convention (thats other players from other sites we dont know, but yet trust they will conduct sportsmanship and fair play against us) to not conduct dirty war, genocide, etc. Makes sense?

Yea... This.

What effect is that again? Calanthian has cheated in previous games, yet he is trusted to lead a team in an ISDG with what looks to be over 300 players.

Yea and I invited Memphus to join AMAZON. Proof that one incident does not spoil a record built up over time. All that does is strengthen my point, Thanks

I've been reading this thread for a couple of days trying to figure out how to handle it the best.

Hopefully there's nothing to handle as you can see from our private forum. We've done our part, time for Krill to do his, which brings me to...

Hey, Krill, if you are so interested in all having equal rights and receiving equal treatment, be kind and go make some 1 week discussion over RB, as they also deny newcommers access, but you are not filling their forum with long argumentations. Be fair and give them some food of thoughts too.

This exactly. We arent the problem here, so really Krill, this argument has no further purpose. Take the fight back home to RB. Godspeed

 

[darrelljs]

I'm sorry but I need to stop posting on RB. Everyone here is just too ******** since they joined the demogame. ********, patronising, and destructive to the forum environment.

Krill has given up on us, which is why he is ignoring your requests to move this...discussion back to RB.

Darrell

P.S. .

 

[Sommerswerd]

Krill has given up on us, which is why he is ignoring your requests to move this...discussion back to RB.

Darrell

P.S. .

Thanks Darrell! that made me laugh... So I guess he DOES think we are "smarter". At least he hasn't called us "********" yet

So I guess he will play for CFC now since he obviously likes our settings

 

[2metraninja]

Despite Krill is against the general flow, he might be right to some degree about certain things. It is hard to be prophet in your own village. And it is almost impossible to be a acknowledged as philosopher in your time.

 

[The_J]

It was strange coincidence that the same day when at RB was discussed possible spying on other teams and you wrote at RB that "CFC will accept anyone", we got 2-3 absolutely new CFC accounts signing up to be part of CFC team talking nonsenses like "we are here to see how CFC will beat all the other teams" WTH!?! You guys never registered at CFC, but you are well informed that there is a MTDG organized and you know who the other participants are and you wait to see CFC (which you never cared for till now to ever register) to beat the other teams? To me this smells bad and I am considered reasonable. Imagine how this smells to the more suspicious ones.

Just saying: If there's a suspicion that someone could be a DL, then the moderators can check some things to see if it's an obvious one (sure, you'll not get the people who know what they are doing, but at least some), or in another way suspicious enough to raise some flags.

 

[azzaman333]

Just saying: If there's a suspicion that someone could be a DL, then the moderators can check some things to see if it's an obvious one (sure, you'll not get the people who know what they are doing, but at least some), or in another way suspicious enough to raise some flags.

That would be a relevant point IF all the teams were CFC based. CFC moderators can't compare IPs of users on CFC to those of users on Apolyton, for example.

My personal opinion is that the game should be open for all to enjoy, but I can understand the concerns of those who wish to be more careful with who can see their team's forums.

 

[2metraninja]

Azza, there are many ways this to be done, even if not all teams are from CFC if you know what you are doing .

To add to this, we already have private high-level gentleman agreement between all team captains/site moderators/owners from the sites participating that special care will be taken that double- agents will be spotted, reported and dealt harsh with, so I think this will not be an issue at all.

 

[azzaman333]

It's not impossible, but it requires a great deal of effort, and is much more difficult to notice in the first place than if it were hosted on a single site.

 

[2metraninja]

It's not impossible, but it requires a great deal of effort, and is much more difficult to notice in the first place than if it were hosted on a single site.

Absolutely.

 

[tobiasn]

Hey guys,

Been following the debate (well.. been trying to avoid the meta bit ) with some interest. As you can deduct from my post count I'm predominantly lurking at the forums - but my signup date lies, I've been more or less actively lurking since '02 (i have an old acct from 03 actually.. Just re-found the pw. Don't really know if it matters). CFC is in many ways an integral part of the CIV experience for me, and has been for as long as I can remember.

Edit: I see my accouts are merged now So thanks to the Thunderfell for that

Somewhat randomly, I recently stubled into the older MTDG threads, via some SGs i follow with great interest. I was happy to read about the open, welcoming spirit of the Amazon team for instance.

This thread is kinda bleak in comparison, hehe. Makes you wonder what happened. Lots of grief, I guess.

Anyway, I was looking forward to finally come out of my lurkdom, and try to participate a little more actively in the community, by signing up for some SGs if they're open, and I was hoping to be a part of this MTDG too.

Now, I get both sides of the argument, although all your fancy debating techniques tend to get in the way of your points here and there I get that this means a lot to the veteran players, and I do respect that. I'm still, however, requesting a spot on the CFC roster. I feel like I'm on the team already, and it would be nice to actually contribute a bit to the forums, 10 years of (almost) just lurking is enough

A little bit about me: I'm Norwegian, 32 next week, not the best MM dude out there but eager to learn. I win at emperor most of the time, but consider myself to be at Prince level really.

Edit 2: Oh i wrote Emperor, did I Wishful thinking there. I meant Monarch..

So yeah, I'm in if you want me.

Spoiler :

(for the record, for those of you fearful of such, I have not and have never had accounts at any other civ site)

 

[Caledorn]

Ooh. Another Norwegian born in '80 *points at self for comparison*

Great introduction post!

Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2

 

[tobiasn]

Ooh. Another Norwegian born in '80 *points at self for comparison*

Haha. What are the odds. Diplo advantage for us then?