[please delete] FEEDBACK COMMENT - Community moderation

[KLOBBER]

How do you mean?

[jiminski]

Klobby gives 5's to deadbeats yet still only has a 4.5 rating; after blackmailing and bribery ... just imagine his rating if he played it straight and also had not already added every non new player to his foe list...2 maybe!?

he is the perfect advert for why we need the addition of a comment.

[KLOBBER]

Klobby gives 5's to deadbeats yet still only has a 4.5 rating; after blackmailing and bribery ... just imagine his rating if he played it straight and also had not already added every non new player to his foe list...2 maybe!?

he is the perfect advert for why we need the addition of a comment.

4.5 is a fine rating, and it is on the increase. I'm very happy the way my system is working out. I have not "blackmailed" or "bribed" anyone; your understanding of the meanings of these two terms is obviously incorrect.

I have not added every non new player to my foes list, and my rating is as it is. If this, if that, if the other thing, your rating would also be 2, but that is your rabid fantasy, not reality.

Comments shall not be added. Period.

[Kaplowitz]

Klobby gives 5's to deadbeats yet still only has a 4.5 rating; after blackmailing and bribery ... just imagine his rating if he played it straight and also had not already added every non new player to his foe list...2 maybe!?

he is the perfect advert for why we need the addition of a comment.

4.5 is a fine rating, and it is on the increase. I'm very happy the way my system is working out. I have not "blackmailed" or "bribed" anyone; your understanding of the meanings of these two terms is obviously incorrect.

I have not added every non new player to my foes list, and my rating is as it is. If this, if that, if the other thing, your rating would also be 2, but that is your rabid fantasy, not reality.

Comments shall not be added. Period.

KLOBBER why am i on your foe list? I played one game with you when i first joined and that's it...

[hulmey]

How do you mean?

Your giving deadbeats 5 ( EXcellent ) for attendance. Ive created the below thread about you and informed the Admin's of this site!

viewtopic.php?f=5&t=54540

PS. your a prime example of the failings of the new feedback system. Hopefully we can get it changed by using you as an example!

[KLOBBER]

How do you mean?

Your giving deadbeats 5 ( EXcellent ) for attendance. Ive created the below thread about you and informed the Admin's of this site!

viewtopic.php?f=5&t=54540

PS. your a prime example of the failings of the new feedback system. Hopefully we can get it changed by using you as an example!

What is excellent and what is not is a matter of personal opinion. I did not encounter any "deadbeats," and I have given ratings according to my understanding of the term, "excellent."

There is no administrational moderation of the ratings.

[KLOBBER]

KLOBBER why am i on your foe list? I played one game with you when i first joined and that's it...

I have no way to determine why any member has you on his foes list. Even my reasons are no longer traceable with certainty, as the site has removed my personal notes on my ignore list.

I do not remember you, and I don't even know that you are even on my foes list.

Don't worry if you are, though. If you look hard, you may be able to find another member somewhere on this site who is still willing to play a game with you.

[*manimal]

KLOBBER why am i on your foe list? I played one game with you when i first joined and that's it...

I have no way to determine why any member has you on his foes list. Even my reasons are no longer traceable with certainty, as the site has removed my personal notes on my ignore list.

I do not remember you, and I don't even know that you are even on my foes list.

Don't worry if you are, though. If you look hard, you may be able to find another member somewhere on this site who is still willing to play a game with you.

You dont deadbeat kap so he puts you on foes.

[Timminz]

Even my reasons are no longer traceable with certainty, as the site has removed my personal notes on my ignore list.

Shenanigans!!!

Anyone can look at their foe list and see any old comments they left, or add new comments.

[alster]

I have no way to determine why any member has you on his foes list. Even my reasons are no longer traceable with certainty, as the site has removed my personal notes on my ignore list.

LOL. I recall being put on your "ignore/foe" list after having joined a handful of your circus maximus games (all of which you, incidentally, dropped). That was, well, maybe not an interesting one, but still somewhat of an experience.

[KLOBBER]

True, that is not interesting.

[jiminski]

there you are then!
Countless Foes who have been irritated and trampled on by the big fella.

Without some personalised input, the new system (although excellent in many ways) allows some less than reputable members to abuse without recourse!


Aside from the mechanics of the community Moderated system (which i think we are close to having a working blueprint for) the Key to the system being successful is in formulating the Guidelines by which the Community moderates.

Perhaps we will move onto defining the Guidelines next.
(with a little smattering of Klobbers poetic prose i am sure.. that seems unavoidable; a little like a dog with mange and a waggy tail)


(A couple of threads have been set up in order to halt Klobbbers abuse of the system: if you would like to come and voice his crimes and errs, as stated in here or anew, that would be lovely!
At the moment he is succeeding in his task of derailing this thread, he is doing that because the current system allows him to manipulate more effectively. .

KLOBBER - CC's NUMBER 1 CHEATER
AND

KLOBBER got PWNED

it is very interesting reading, even for those who have avoided him so far! In short: a grown man sits and encourages people to deadbeat; promises them a high rating when they do so; with the end goal of gaining points he did not earn .. a class act and champion of all this site holds dear!)

[jiminski]

Lock her down

[decoulombe]

Voted #3

[alster]

True, that is not interesting.

Nope. Just sad really. I believe that you would enjoy CC more if you learned how to deal with challenges and defeats.

[wicked]

Let's not turn this into another Klobber thread, eh? There's enough of those floating around. Jim, you still want to develop this idea?

[decoulombe]

Let's not turn this into another Klobber thread, eh? There's enough of those floating around. Jim, you still want to develop this idea?

Jim, I'll help you if you want.

[hulmey]

Let's not turn this into another Klobber thread, eh? There's enough of those floating around. Jim, you still want to develop this idea?

i know the admins are looking into jim's idea coz it fantastic ....I really think we have the finished product here but we need input from the Admins

[Lhuth]

hi everyone, quick question about leaving ratings...

i've just played a game where someone's attitude to it was fantastic but to be honest i've not really got that much to comment on their playing style/teamwork/whatever. can i leave a rating ONLY for attitude? or will it count as zeros for everythign else and screw up their overall ratings? thanks

[wicked]

i know the admins are looking into jim's idea coz it fantastic ....I really think we have the finished product here but we need input from the Admins

Actually, we're looking at the proposals that lack has set forward. See his main thread at the top of every forum.

[thellama73]

I have a couple of things to say. First, I hate the new feedback system because I have received several one star ratings from people who never even talked to me and are just mad because they lost. I sent them messages requesting an explanation, but got none.
Second, I have played lots of Circus Maximus games with Klobber and he has always been a gentleman.I have beaten him on occassion, but he did not add me to his foes list. If he chooses to play with new recruits to increase his score, I don't see how that's any different from all the other highly ranked players playing only in team games with two or three of their buddies as a strategy to keep their scores high. I think you'll find very few players in the top one hundred who will play any game with any oponent.
Just my two cents.

[KLOBBER]

Thank you, Thellama. I appreciate your kind comments. I also enjoy playing games with you, win or lose, as you are a nice person.

I do not place anyone on my foes list simply for winning against me -- I have NEVER done so. I place mostly jerks and people with anger management issues on the foes list, as I think everyone should do; that is what it is for.

These people who assume that I place other members on my foes list for any reason that they may imagine, have no way of knowing who is on my foes list and who is not, and in any case, it is impossible for such complainers to determine my personal reasoning for doing so.

I can tell you one thing, though: the majority of members who have complained about being on my foes list had first proven themselves to be personally antagonistic towards me without cause, and in very nasty, childish ways.

If there is a guideline on this site against using the foes list to categorize those who have proven themselves to be of a "foe" mentality, then I have never seen it anywhere on the site.

If someone can point out such a guideline to me, then I shall immediately remove all those envious jerks from my foes list, but I'm not holding my breath on this one.

[hulmey]

Thank you, Thellama. I appreciate your kind comments. I also enjoy playing games with you, win or lose, as you are a nice person.

I do not place anyone on my foes list simply for winning against me -- I have NEVER done so. I place mostly jerks and people with anger management issues on the foes list, as I think everyone should do; that is what it is for.

These people who assume that I place other members on my foes list for any reason that they may imagine, have no way of knowing who is on my foes list and who is not, and in any case, it is impossible for such complainers to determine my personal reasoning for doing so.

I can tell you one thing, though: the majority of members who have complained about being on my foes list had first proven themselves to be personally antagonistic towards me without cause, and in very nasty, childish ways.

If there is a guideline on this site against using the foes list to categorize those who have proven themselves to be of a "foe" mentality, then I have never seen it anywhere on the site.

If someone can point out such a guideline to me, then I shall immediately remove all those envious jerks from my foes list, but I'm not holding my breath on this one.

i really want to know why you havent gotten a warning for trollong. This is not a thread about KLOBBER , so please refrain from posting about yourself.

[KLOBBER]

I was told by a mod 3 days ago that responding to subjects in previous posts in a thread is okay. The above is a direct response to a post in this thread.

Good day, Sir!

[jiminski]

hmm well i've looked through all the additional proposals and although they really do try to answer the questions, ultimately they are sharpening an axe to perform open-heart surgery (ok the metaphor may be mildly opulent but you get the point... so i'lll keep using it) .... we need a more precise tool; we need a verbal-scalpel! ^^

The ratings will work fine, they simply need the Community Moderated Feedback to make it a worthwhile and less clumsy tool; a tool which I concede was fine for the amputation of site responsibility but what we are left with does not cut the mustard.

what a pun-fest! Anyway, I can't with all honestly see why this would be anything but bonus to the site.