Un-Rank Obvious Cheaters on Top 5

[lincoln9818]

Once, an arbitrator mention to me that those obvious moves of kingmaking (for example, intentionally losing when leading) are not infringing the BGA regulations.

Can you post a direct quote?

If such actions don't fall within the current moderationpolicy anymore, then it does explain why no substantial actions were taken.

I posted in my first comment already but here you are:

https://ibb.co/MR8s38S

[N_Faker]

Once, an arbitrator mention to me that those obvious moves of kingmaking (for example, intentionally losing when leading) are not infringing the BGA regulations.

Can you post a direct quote?

If such actions don't fall within the current moderationpolicy anymore, then it does explain why no substantial actions were taken.

I posted in my first comment already but here you are:

https://ibb.co/MR8s38S

That is a standard message for 'not guilty' verdicts. Which makes your claim wildly out of context.

[sprockitz]

There are hundreds of games that are extremely obvious.

In bombay, as an example, they don't even bother to pretend to play the game. I know it isn't a popular game so mods may not understand it at all. But Katalinski just consolidates every single turn (never moving off the starting spot for a game) and then has opponent move around aimlessly for a turn or two and then just consolidate as well. Playing an entire 'game' in under a minute.


Here is just one example. Katalinski just consolidates all game, and has the secondary account move around a couple turns aimlessly then consolidate the rest of the game. game finished in under 1 minute. typically a fast game would be 10-15 minutes...but would also require real moves.

https://boardgamearena.com/table?table=94203838

[Ze Monstah]

Can you post a direct quote?

If such actions don't fall within the current moderationpolicy anymore, then it does explain why no substantial actions were taken.

I posted in my first comment already but here you are:

https://ibb.co/MR8s38S

That is a standard message for 'not guilty' verdicts. Which makes your claim wildly out of context.

"Once, an arbitrator mentioned to me" is his way of saying... the report got dismissed, without punishment, with a standard message. And he expressed the idea with "once an arbitrator blah blah", instead of "the report got a standard message which dismissed his guilt". It was a matter of expressing himself.

Did you really find this detail of a different way of expressing, worthy of exploring? Again... instead of actively trying to do something against this type of cheating? Thanks.

[ViolentSilence]

I just don't understand why such an obvious kingmaking behavior is still neglected by the moderators and they do nothing to respond to it, or at least, the verbal warnings are not deterrent enough there.

There are many good reasons why - capacity is an obvious one. If there are 10,000 games being played everyday (I'm making a low estimate based on seeing 20,000 simultaneous users at peak times), it only needs say 0.5% of games to generate a report and suddenly that's 50 games for the mod team to respond to. Add to that reports from users swearing, or reports from the forums and it may well be the case that the mod team simply don't have time to investigate all instances fully, especially if they run in to language barriers. Compound that with the issue of some accusations being erroneous (and possibly malicious), and it gets really tricky to enforce.

There is possibly a lack of clarity about the rules of conduct on the site, Should there be a separate etiquette/behaviour FAQ that all users need to have ticked to have confirmed they have read? It's not immediately clear to some people why their behaviour is objectionable in regards to things like kingmaking, and there is also a question of whether kingmaking itself is well enough defined since there may be games where a player has to choose which opposing player to help (and the inverse, how would you investigating allegations of players ganging up unfairly)

Things are rarely as simple as they are presented

[N_Faker]

The time investment in moderating 'insult' reports is negligible compared to a single obscure 'cheating' report. Even with knowledge of the game and a detailed report. That also include reports that one would be amiss not to find 'not guilty'.

[whatshisbucket]

Sure, but it is most often the case that in the reports of such cheaters that the moderator reviewing the report comments that they agree that the accused user has been cheating in some way (indicating that they at least reviewed the evidence adequately). Not punishing cheaters in accordance with the moderation policy (which I think is a fairly good policy in this case) is a choice.

[ViolentSilence]

The time investment in moderating 'insult' reports is negligible compared to a single obscure 'cheating' report. Even with knowledge of the game and a detailed report. That also include reports that one would be amiss not to find 'not guilty'.

It's not about individual complaints as the totality of them. Yes, different types of case take different levels of investigation BUT as I thought I had alluded to simply enough, if you get a lot of complaints at once, there are going to be pressures to just get them off the system. This happens all the time, from police forces to HR departments. Are you really trying to argue against it happening here on a website still catching up to a massive growth period?...

[N_Faker]

Are you really trying to argue against it happening here on a website still catching up to a massive growth period?...

I wasn't arguing anything. You raised the subject of capacity and workload of which I merely added to.

[ViolentSilence]

Sure, but it is most often the case that in the reports of such cheaters that the moderator reviewing the report comments that they agree that the accused user has been cheating in some way (indicating that they at least reviewed the evidence adequately). Not punishing cheaters in accordance with the moderation policy (which I think is a fairly good policy in this case) is a choice.

Unfortunately, we're not really talking about definitive cheating like you would be in Chess (an illegal move, sliding someone's piece off the board without them seeing), we're getting in to areas where it's much more subjective/behaviour based - did that player king make? Or did they make what they thought would be the best move for their own score which was perceived as king-making by a rival player? I don't know if you ever saw the Hanabi post of the player who was accusing others of sabotaging him, but he was strident that was the case. It may be that some of the moderator reports are closer to "I can see why you thought it was kingmaking, but...". I'm curious how robust the system is in all honesty - how easy is it for a moderator to track back through linked games or is it the case that they have to investigate the games individually? That would make it easy for persistent offenders to slide past.

It might also be that there are too few options for punishing players - if you can show two players repeatedly collude, could a mod apply a flag to those accounts that either prevents them playing together, automatically makes the game one in training mode, or simply highlights to any players thinking of joining the table that this the case with this mix of accounts? If a mod has some doubt about banning someone, there doesn't seem to be much in the way of alternatives.

That's really one of the issues that ought to be looked at:
- Are there enough moderators (in terms of work hours vs time required to process the complaints vs what's an appropriate amount of time for people to work)
- Do they cover a wide enough range of languages?
- Do they have enough options to apply appropriate punishments?
- Is the report system working for users and for mods?
- Is there enough material out there so people really know what behaviours are allowed?
- Can you define etiquette issues in a way where they can be easily litigated?

Some of those are purely site management issues, but it would be nice to know the details from a user perspective - I tried reporting the obnoxious Hanabi thread for example but I think it took 3 days for it to be actioned (thread was looked, and I think all the user names listed in it were redacted), which is why I have questions about the volume of complaints vs the moderation capacity. All of it I feel will fall under the responsibility of the community manager role

Personally, I still feel like there should be an effort to get rid of the ELO, and just leave the competitive ranking part within arena, and if necessary, have an alternate gamification effect for the casual part (maybe have a higher emphasis on karma?) if that has a negative effect on site traffic. Reward people for frequent plays, or good behaviour reports, or trying new games... It really feels like most of the user complaints in the forums can be traced back to ELO scores being treated as important