There may be a (separate) issue about the foeing system. However, you appear to be side-stepping the point that, whenever you foe someone, it's fully justified, but when someone foes you, it might not be. My point is that, however odd their reason, it's justified in their eyes. For whatever reason, they don't want to play you, so why should they have to?
If they don't like someone who doesn't chat, then that's their prorogative not to play you again, so I don't see any justification in you being allowed to join their game regardless.
I am not side-stepping anything. In fact, I have not personally foed a soul. My point on the premise for a foe (through personal justification) is based on a subjective measure. As such, why does one paying member have the power to negatively impact another paying member's overall playing experience?
Now for the argument I have been waiting to use - apparently there are no business, investment bankers, accountants and/or lawyers among us? Well, let me educate you all on something called risk.
Risk is an environmental factor that impacts a situation. You cannot avoid it; instead, you can only hedge it's impact. The ability to "foe" someone negates a risk for a prior person to join a game the foer is in. The problem here is where a line is drawn:
- Public games vs. Private games
Private games exist for a reason - they, quite literally, completely hedge the risks associated with public games. From POS players with <2 stars, to those whom you rather not play with, a private game does just as a foe system is designed to do.
Public games, on the other hand, provide people the opportunity to play in an unfiltered environment at their own risk. Why, then, does a foeing system allow the FOER the ability to alter a PUBLIC GAME?
This is a contradiction of the logic behind PUBLIC vs PRIVATE. No single member should be allowed to prevent another member FROM JOINING A PUBLIC GAME that they DID NOT CREATE.
If you do not want to "RISK" playing against someone you do not like - PLAY PRIVATE.
End of discussion. Again, take this off a "rejected" list; dismiss the individual whom made the ignorant decision and re-assess the entire argument through an unbiased panel.
Right now, there is complete bias. Lets be honest: point hungry people LOVE foeing others whom win against them. How many people create hundreds of public games then foe someone the moment they win against that person? It's an effort to "scam the point system". Is that not illegal through your policy, which i've read quite thoroughly? Yes. Is it enforced? No.
Chances are, many moderates have a very big foe-list.
Give me my $25 back and I'll find another site that has no "foe list".