Board Game Arena

What really gets me in this discussion is that when players do something like winning a tournament final by kicking out their opponent, no one moves a finger and people write it off as "this is what happens sometimes", even though the person who kicked out didn't play an actual game any more than a person who uses multiple accounts does.

I find this inconsistency baffling. If you are against cases of players refusing to play games normally, you should be against all cases of them.

FrankJones wrote: ↑23 September 2026, 21:35 I think perhaps what tbhp is saying is, BGA would be better off making a clear list of rule violations with clearly stated penalties, including some that might retroactively change results. In other words, remove subjectivity from the equation.

Then, everyone knows what you may and may not do, and what the consequences will be.

I think that would be better than just making judgment calls, though it still remains the issue of possible false accusations and no one ever being really safe from having their achievements erased. As a general principle, rewriting the history of tournaments just doesn't sit right with me and feels like against the spirit of competition. If something had to be done, it should have been done at the time of the competition.

On some level, I don't really care that Maradona scored an irregular goal or that Uruguay and Italy had victories that were potentially influenced by their corrupted governments (which if true, is pretty serious stuff). Obviously I care a lot about preventing similar abuses from happening in the future, but as far as the past is concerned, I think what is done is done, and we should remember history as it happened, not try to rewrite it.

FrankJones wrote: ↑23 September 2026, 21:35 I think perhaps what tbhp is saying is, BGA would be better off making a clear list of rule violations with clearly stated penalties, including some that might retroactively change results. In other words, remove subjectivity from the equation.

Then, everyone knows what you may and may not do, and what the consequences will be.

Doesn't really look like it, based on their comments so far. At most it's loosely connected as they vent about other stuff.

yakko_ wrote: ↑23 September 2026, 17:40 At this point the "you can't go back and undo anything or it's all chaos" argument seems like trolling. I've already addressed it, and Michael417 has, and ChiefPointThief, and FrankJones.

Yeah, a lot of their "arguments" seem like trolling. There's a reason several forum users no longer engage with them - you will never convince them that any position other than theirs can be valid. Not that you have to do the same with not engaging, but if you're finding it frustrating, you can always use this feature: https://boardgamearena.com/forum/ucp.ph ... &mode=foes

I am convinced. 90 percent is trolling. 10 percent of the time they are correct. Maybe less than that. Must have been a champion debater in school. More like a champion derailer of threads. Learn to ignore the insane trolling. Replying will only get you frustrated

yodamus wrote: ↑24 September 2026, 12:25 I am convinced. 90 percent is trolling. 10 percent of the time they are correct. Maybe less than that. Must have been a champion debater in school. More like a champion derailer of threads. Learn to ignore the insane trolling. Replying will only get you frustrated

Being wrong is not the same as trolling. But I appreciate the champion debater part.

It's not my fault if only 10% of the things I write make your day, haha. I can't read your mind. But I'll try to do better.

yodamus wrote: ↑24 September 2026, 12:25 Must have been a champion debater in school.

Doubtful. Top debate competitors understand logical fallacies and try to avoid them because if their opponent exposes it their score will suffer. Being fully committed to logical fallacies is inconsistent with being a top debater.

Meeplelowda wrote: ↑24 September 2026, 22:36 Doubtful. Top debate competitors understand logical fallacies and try to avoid them because if their opponent exposes it their score will suffer. Being fully committed to logical fallacies is inconsistent with being a top debater.

I expose logical fallacies on a daily basis on this forum, hahaha.

(the irony being I exposed one when responding to the same comment you responded to, but maybe you didn't see it since you have me on ignore)