Karma ratings don't seem accurate/helpful?

[aesche]

Just reading along and thinking since the start of this thread: The system allows players out of time to be kicked, and they get karma penalties. I dont get what‘s there to discuss in length if you decide to not do so. Also, if someone is not at 100% a game where the time went to negative doesnt help to restore the karma, so it does come with a small punishment. Quite some ideas and expectations here are ridiculous.

[LukeTheOrange]

Just reading along and thinking since the start of this thread: The system allows players out of time to be kicked, and they get karma penalties. I dont get what‘s there to discuss in length if you decide to not do so. Also, if someone is not at 100% a game where the time went to negative doesnt help to restore the karma, so it does come with a small punishment. Quite some ideas and expectations here are ridiculous.

You don't get why people want to finish a game they started or think it's unfair to the other players to end a game because one player is late? You don't get why some people think it would be better to be able to avoid late players in the first place? What's hard to get about that?

Are you sure the ideas and expectations aren't reasonable? Did you see the poster who pointed out that what is being asked for was LITERALLY the system several years ago, and then posted a thread about why it was changed to the current karma system and how many users predicted to a T what would be wrong with the current formula? If it's not reasonable, how did it exist before?

ETA: What's "ridiculous" about being able to filter by percentage of games finished on time, as was the case before? The only thing that's ridiculous is people who seem to think they should still have access to every table with players who play on time, even if they aren't going to play on time themselves. They want their preferences to be respected, but they don't think other people's preferences should be. Do you really not see why that's an immature attitude?

[aesche]

It‘s not about some other old thread and idea, it‘s about your thread and ideas and behaviour in it, as others pointed out before, and which you proof just here again to not get by all your exaggerations and calling out „immature attitude“.

As it was said by others, there are hundreds of reasons why a player may get over time sometimes, and a lot of them have nothing to do with all the accusations you are throwing around, nor would they deserve some serious measures about it. The door can ring, or the phone. Or a household member that wants to have a word in a bad moment. There actually might be a very hard move that needs more thinking. There could be some discussion arising, and the players may prefer to discuss it out in that moment when the situation is still around instead of just skipping on. Actual emergencies. And and and. There also aren‘t just turn based players (where games drag on very long anyway, so where‘s the drama there exactly, if a game in the end takes 26 instead of 25 days?), but also real time players (with predefined time options, which sometimes might be surprising or unrealistic), and such that do both, and their cases hardly compare. Some of these happen to me in about 1-2% of the games, while in the large majority i keep the usually fast pace as I set it up myself, and there is no related reason to cap my ELO or avoid me on a table. These cases just happen, even if one does the best to avoid them, just as they very likely do for almost all players that not only play a handful of games per year.

If you dont care about any of these, and want to be the nitpicker about someone wasting some of the time you‘re wasting on online gaming, go on and use the measure that is there, and reward the penalties that you think are so well deserved and urgent.

Or keep on ranting and exaggerating on and on over another 3 pages, wasting much more time on that but than on waiting for your turn, wondering why noone wont listen to you pushing ideas to discriminate the majority of the player base with, over such a non-issue that already has various fair solutions implemented to handle it with.

[qwertasdfg]

It‘s not about some other old thread and idea, it‘s about your thread and ideas and behaviour in it, as others pointed out before, and which you proof just here again to not get by all your exaggerations and calling out „immature attitude“.

As it was said by others, there are hundreds of reasons why a player may get over time sometimes, and a lot of them have nothing to do with all the accusations you are throwing around, nor would they deserve some serious measures about it. The door can ring, or the phone. Or a household member that wants to have a word in a bad moment. There actually might be a very hard move that needs more thinking. There could be some discussion arising, and the players may prefer to discuss it out in that moment when the situation is still around instead of just skipping on. Actual emergencies. And and and. There also aren‘t just turn based players (where games drag on very long anyway, so where‘s the drama there exactly, if a game in the end takes 26 instead of 25 days?), but also real time players (with predefined time options, which sometimes might be surprising or unrealistic), and such that do both, and their cases hardly compare. Some of these happen to me in about 1-2% of the games, while in the large majority i keep the usually fast pace as I set it up myself, and there is no related reason to cap my ELO or avoid me on a table. These cases just happen, even if one does the best to avoid them, just as they very likely do for almost all players that not only play a handful of games per year.

If you dont care about any of these, and want to be the nitpicker about someone wasting some of the time you‘re wasting on online gaming, go on and use the measure that is there, and reward the penalties that you think are so well deserved and urgent.

Or keep on ranting and exaggerating on and on over another 3 pages, wasting much more time on that but than on waiting for your turn, wondering why noone wont listen to you pushing ideas to discriminate the majority of the player base with, over such a non-issue that already has various fair solutions implemented to handle it with.

If it keeps happening in 10% of games, then op sure had a point. Maybe I am reading it very differently from you. But nowhere did anyone say that one overtime should be punished hard, or whatever you seem to be reading into it.
You're building a straw man here, and yes your arguments against that one are sound. But that's not anyones point

[LukeTheOrange]

Or keep on ranting and exaggerating on and on over another 3 pages, wasting much more time on that but than on waiting for your turn, wondering why noone wont listen to you pushing ideas to discriminate the majority of the player base with, over such a non-issue that already has various fair solutions implemented to handle it with.

If your attitude about it represents the majority of the player base, then surely I would never have anybody to play with, whereas you would always be able to find tons of tables to play? And your 95% karma would be a badge of honor, because it shows that you're not so pretentious as to play the way you agreed to play, which is obviously way too much to ever ask, right?

And like the post above mine says, nobody ever made this out to be some sort of huge punishment. You haven't understood the argument at all, and you haven't even come close to giving a good reason why players who consistently don't honor time limits should be allowed to play with players who do. Why is it so hard for some people here to respect the playing preferences of others? That's not a rhetorical question. Have you given some careful consideration to why that's so difficult for you and others in this thread? I haven't disrespected anyone's preference, I've just made it clear that it's not compatible with mine. I'm not suggesting that people who are more liberal with time limits should be restricted from playing with players who share the same preference, so why do you begrudge me the desire to play with players who have the same preferences as me? That's an incredibly immature attitude and I stand by that statement.

What's the point of even saying all these reasons that you might be late 1 - 2% of the time? How many people do you really think would cut you out of tables for that? I clearly said this is about players who consistently join games they can't play within the time limit and still have 100% karma. If that doesn't apply to you, then what's your problem? If you resent people who are really strict about time limits, why would you even care if they won't play with you?

[dgjxqz]

I'd prefer to have Karma-based table restriction replaced with recent-quit-rate-based one. IMHO, the most annoying thing an opponent can do is to quit mid game, but Karma in addition depends on moderation, running out of time, etc.

On the other hand, lack of quit-rate-based table restriction is a fairly minor issue. The workaround is to manually check quit rate of potential opponents before the game.

PS: It is interesting to know that quit rate-based table restriction existed in the past in some form.

My preference is the absolute number of timeouts as gating criteria to join a game or tournament since players can easily dilute their penalty by playing a few short games. I am fine with combining timeout and red thumb into kerma as long as there is no easy way to recover like it does now.