why on line gamers are so impatient?

[AmongMajesticRuin]

Perhaps, at least for real-time games, it should be the opposite: As soon as a player is overtime, the other players are offered a (secret) vote on whether they'd like to wait longer. If any player says no, or if any player fails to reply within a reasonable time (e.g. 20-60 seconds), the player in red is automatically expelled.

YUP! I'm patient, within reason, but when a player is CONSTANTLY in the red... time to eject. Don't join a "fast" game if you're slow. I have a semi-related thread about the other players being upset AT ME because I ejected the slow-poke.

[Cile]

Perhaps, at least for real-time games, it should be the opposite: As soon as a player is overtime, the other players are offered a (secret) vote on whether they'd like to wait longer. If any player says no, or if any player fails to reply within a reasonable time (e.g. 20-60 seconds), the player in red is automatically expelled.

I was going to say that's not functionally different, but it does do a lot to change the perception from "this game ended because someone kicked a slow player" to "this game ended because someone exceeded their turn time" so I would be in favour of it.

I would also be in favour of an option when creating a table that says "automatically kick players that exceeded their turn time." Players could see this option and avoid or include in their preferences as desired, and it would make it clear to other players "if you're not sure if you can play within your turn time then don't join this table."

[Trouncing]

Perhaps, at least for real-time games, it should be the opposite: As soon as a player is overtime, the other players are offered a (secret) vote on whether they'd like to wait longer. If any player says no, or if any player fails to reply within a reasonable time (e.g. 20-60 seconds), the player in red is automatically expelled.

I am definitely in favor of this as long as the opposite is also implemented. There is clearly room for improvement on both sides and a way forward to more game enjoyment all around.

4.) Add a category to red thumb called "out of time abuse".
https://boardgamearena.com/bug?id=97446

[Jellby]

4.) Add a category to red thumb called "out of time abuse".
https://boardgamearena.com/bug?id=97446

Given that public red thumbs are now not affecting karma (https://boardgamearena.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=32481), what is the difference between a public red thumb with such a reason and a private red thumb (with no reason needed)?

And how would you detect an "out of time abuse"? Is someone who doesn't vote immediately to wait longer abusing out of time? Maybe they didn't notice they had to vote, or they were away from keyboard, or they're simply have a passive attitude. The only abuse I see is when someone actually tries to make the other player go out of time and then repeatedly tries to expel them while the other player is trying to make their move (e.g. trade spamming in Catan), but I don't think this requires a specific category.

[nik592]

I would also argue that out of time abuse also qualifies when a game has been regularly progressing in spite of someone being in the red, it's now close to the end of the game and the booter is not winning. This happens in tournaments a lot. Personally I'd argue in tournament play, any game that's regularly progressing and someone chooses to boot rather than finishing the game probably falls into this category, but it's a bit more obvious when the game is also almost over and the booter isn't winning as well. But I've seen it in non-tournament play as well, and where the booter didn't worry about booting when the bootee initially went red, and in some cases, the bootee even recovers some (but not all) of their time overrun in the intervening time. If you didn't care when they were at their max overtime, but suddenly you care cause you're about to not win the game? Not cool.

I know people argue within the rules of play, blah blah blah, and I honestly don't begrudge anyone who truly believes that and behaves accordingly by booting as soon as it is possible (except in tournament play). I don't agree with them necessarily, but I get why they do what they do.

[Jellby]

In two-player games, a reason for not booting immediately is wanting to enjoy the game, see what interesting moves can be done, practice your game, challenge yourself to get a higher score, etc. The same reasons (some) people hold for complaining when the opponent concedes, apply for not expelling an opponent as soon as they go into red. Then, when the game is close to the end and you see you're not going to win, you push the button and say: no, sorry, you lost this game a while ago.

With more than 2 players it's more complicated.

[Trouncing]

In two-player games, a reason for not booting immediately is wanting to enjoy the game, see what interesting moves can be done, practice your game, challenge yourself to get a higher score, etc. The same reasons (some) people hold for complaining when the opponent concedes, apply for not expelling an opponent as soon as they go into red. Then, when the game is close to the end and you see you're not going to win, you push the button and say: no, sorry, you lost this game a while ago.

With more than 2 players it's more complicated.

I'm pretty sure we disagree but let me see if I understand your position correctly.
An opponent runs out of time early in a 1v1 and near the end is about to win but is kicked. This is fair game because the opponent lost when they ran out of time in your opinion. I suppose the unstated rule in this viewpoint is that a red timer is a forfeit... or do you tell the other player that you plan to kick them if they are about to win?

I think most people would disagree with you in that specific situation but the good news is that BGA has karma reputation features and could have specific red thumb features to influence matchmaking and keep you and them apart... unless you prefer to continue to be matched with them for the possibility of further no-lose situations?

Why is it more complicated with more than 2 players in your opinion?

[Jellby]

I suppose the unstated rule in this viewpoint is that a red timer is a forfeit... or do you tell the other player that you plan to kick them if they are about to win?

They can avoid being kicked out if they recover their time and get back into black. My not expelling them immediately is a kind of gamble: I'm willing to continue playing, at the risk of losing if the other player gets back in positive time (and beats me). Otherwise, as long as they stay in red, I'm "safe".

BGA has karma reputation features and could have specific red thumb features

They've gone in the opposite direction. Public red thumbs now don't affect karma, so having a specific red-thumb reason would be useless. Private red thumbs are and will probably continue being an option.

Why is it more complicated with more than 2 players in your opinion?

Because expelling in more than 2 player games affects not only you and the player expelled, but everyone else, both in terms of enjoyment and ranking. If I'm willing to expel a player the moment I see I cannot win, I presume every else will do the same, so there's little reason for me to wait and not expel immediately.

[Trouncing]

I suppose the unstated rule in this viewpoint is that a red timer is a forfeit... or do you tell the other player that you plan to kick them if they are about to win?

They can avoid being kicked out if they recover their time and get back into black. My not expelling them immediately is a kind of gamble: I'm willing to continue playing, at the risk of losing if the other player gets back in positive time (and beats me). Otherwise, as long as they stay in red, I'm "safe".

I see where you are coming from but I still definitely disagree with skipping to save ELO. I would feel like I was taking advantage of the system if I decided to play through a game, pretty much lost, and decided to null the results. But if it works for you I guess it's live and let live.

BGA has karma reputation features and could have specific red thumb features

They've gone in the opposite direction. Public red thumbs now don't affect karma, so having a specific red-thumb reason would be useless. Private red thumbs are and will probably continue being an option.

As far as Karma and Red thumbs, those are two different concepts... A player could use Karma to help keep players that run out of time out of their games. Another player could use red thumbs to help keep ELO skippers out of their games. Right now, the first parameter exists and the second doesn't.

Why is it more complicated with more than 2 players in your opinion?

Because expelling in more than 2 player games affects not only you and the player expelled, but everyone else, both in terms of enjoyment and ranking. If I'm willing to expel a player the moment I see I cannot win, I presume every else will do the same, so there's little reason for me to wait and not expel immediately.

In games with more than 2 players I often see the opposite reaction to expelling a player. This is probably because the 3 or more player games I choose are longer and there is a point of no return where it is more satisfying to finish than to skip, especially if the player who would win otherwise is not out of time. In this situation I have definitely seen Player 2 skip Player 3 to avoid losing to Player 1. There should be a way to counteract this or at least avoid playing with Player 2 in the future. If it becomes apparent to BGA as it is to me as many or more players who don't want Player 2 to be able to dodge this loss as players who don't want Player 3 to be able to waste their time, there should be a way to make this happen.

[Cile]

There should be a way to counteract this or at least avoid playing with Player 2 in the future.

Player 1 can red thumb Player 2 (I don't want to play with this player again -> personal reasons) to avoid playing with them again in the future.

Player 1 might want to consider giving player 3 a red thumb as well, otherwise this might happen again in a future game with someone else ejecting player 3.