Could low karma players be unfairly trapped if reputation restrictions were used to an absurd unrealistic level?

[Shivaware]

Someone attempted to derail a perfectly good thread with this question:

I have a question.

In the theoretical example where everyone who creates tables on this site decided to restrict access to users below a certain karma, how would users who fell below that threshold ever regain that karma?

They wouldn't be able to regain it in normal games. They wouldn't be able to enter tournaments either since they enable karma restrictions too.

I'm not sure about Arena, but in the event where the player hasn't reached 100 Elo in any game, they wouldn't be able to play Arena games and regain karma that way.

So wouldn't they just be forever stuck? Or am I missing something?

My answer is: maybe, but probably not.

I'm not certain, but you may not be able to filter out karma levels if your karma is also below that level. If that's the case, you will be able to play with other similarly disadvantaged souls, and may eventually be able to escape from your pit of suffering. I guess it might be possible that you are the only person with a karma below 50%, and so you might be stuck there until more people fall below that level.

[tbhp]

Well, huh, thanks for addressing my question.

It's interesting that it could come to the point where low karma players have to help each other out in order to escape this.

Still, it seems something is off with the system if the simple fact of everyone using the feature could have those sorts of consequences. Maybe they should figure out other ways to regain karma, like maybe after a certain period of time or something.

[Ceaseless]

Well, huh, thanks for addressing my question.

It's interesting that it could come to the point where low karma players have to help each other out in order to escape this.

Still, it seems something is off with the system if the simple fact of everyone using the feature could have those sorts of consequences. Maybe they should figure out other ways to regain karma, like maybe after a certain period of time or something.

The hypothetical is too extreme for concern. The entire playerbase isn't likely to karma lock themselves. The act of the entire playerbase doing anything is already a big ask, but even if given that, players going "hey, I can't play" would likely lead to communication that would sort out the issue. The system has no reason to be concerned; it can be safely stored under "we'll cross that bridge if we come to it".

[Shivaware]

Well, huh, thanks for addressing my question.

It's interesting that it could come to the point where low karma players have to help each other out in order to escape this.

Still, it seems something is off with the system if the simple fact of everyone using the feature could have those sorts of consequences. Maybe they should figure out other ways to regain karma, like maybe after a certain period of time or something.

I do actually agree that karma penalties should disappear after a few months. I'm pretty sure that used to happen at some point in the past, but certainly doesn't anymore.

One problem is that turn-based players get treated much worse than real-time players. If you have a bunch of turn-based games going, an unexpected week-long absence from the site can leave you with a 0% reputation. This will also take an incredibly long time to repair if you stick to playing turn-based games. Meanwhile, serial abusers can quickly get back to 100% with a bunch of real-time connect 4 games that they can throw by making nonsense moves.

[tbhp]

Well, huh, thanks for addressing my question.

It's interesting that it could come to the point where low karma players have to help each other out in order to escape this.

Still, it seems something is off with the system if the simple fact of everyone using the feature could have those sorts of consequences. Maybe they should figure out other ways to regain karma, like maybe after a certain period of time or something.

The hypothetical is too extreme for concern. The entire playerbase isn't likely to karma lock themselves. The act of the entire playerbase doing anything is already a big ask, but even if given that, players going "hey, I can't play" would likely lead to communication that would sort out the issue. The system has no reason to be concerned; it can be safely stored under "we'll cross that bridge if we come to it".

I realize that, but even on an abstract level, it seems off that a feature that is made available to use would break the site if everyone actually decided to use it. It means that the philosophy behind it is not well thought out. And that kinda makes sense, I mean, if we accept that everyone is allowed to block anyone they want, then we have to be prepared to reflect on the logical continuation of what this entails in the most extreme cases, and what it reveals about our human societies. Which in this case is, we think we have the right to block people, but we probably wouldn't be happy if we were blocked from everyone, which appears like a contradiction and an hypocrisy of human nature.

[tbhp]

One problem is that turn-based players get treated much worse than real-time players. If you have a bunch of turn-based games going, an unexpected week-long absence from the site can leave you with a 0% reputation. This will also take an incredibly long time to repair if you stick to playing turn-based games. Meanwhile, serial abusers can quickly get back to 100% with a bunch of real-time connect 4 games that they can throw by making nonsense moves.

That's why the idea of gaining back karma based on the number of games played without penalty has never seemed very obvious to me. I mean, on a level it makes sense, but at the same time it doesn't seem to hold much weight considering how someone can just mindlessly push through to gain back karma. They are just filling the requirement to get back their karma, without really "learning" in a way that would make them less likely to offend in the future.

One may say all punishment is deterrence, which to an extent is true, but rehabilitation is more effective when real reflection happens, and this system doesn't really do that, it just gives you a grind to do. Although I will say I'm not sure what could be a better alternative.

[Shivaware]

Maybe they should get rid of playing games to increase your karma, and just gradually increase your karma back to 100% over several months.

But BGA could display a popup with an offer to pay a fee and instantly restore your karma.

[FrankJones]

Solo games count toward Karma restoration. Boring, but effective.

[Meeplelowda]

Solo games count toward Karma restoration. Boring, but effective.

There is an avid solo gaming community that would get their knickers in a bind over this. I'm not among them, though.

[nik592]

The other point on this is I have seen players talking about how they've been unfairly given penalties resulting in a bad rep (sometimes through not realising what their actions were doing, sometimes through genuine emergencies pulling them away from BGA), and other players will often volunteer to play with that player and help improve their rep. I assume that those people are taking the low rep player at their word that they genuinely want to improve their karma and are happy to give them a chance to help them do that. And if they aren't genuine in their desire, that becomes evident pretty quickly and it's easy enough to red thumb them.