Red Thumb

[Sylvinho]

Would it be possible to know who gives you a red thumb on your reputation ?
It's the first one I received (out of 125) and I do not know who gave it to me (and more importantly why).

[Zoorp]

Did you play to Hanabi or Saboteurs, the cooperative games? They are a red thumbs nest

[Jest Phulin]

The mechanic of the red thumbs is designed so that one cannot (and should not) know who gave it to them. This prevents retaliatory red thumbs.

There are some players who just like to give red thumbs, unfortunately. They give no indication during the game that they don't like the method of play, but then give out red thumbs if they can. In a 7 player game (6 nimnt, for example), they can easily give out 5 green thumbs to the lowest players, then give a red thumb to the winner just because they won. Most people who give out red thumbs because they truly did not like the way an opponent played would have complained in chat for the opponent to play "better" (IE, more akin to their liking, not necessarily how other communities play or the rules allow).

No, it isn't "fair" or "just." But, it is what it is. There have been other threads about what is "wrong" with the system, and how it should be "fixed." (The quotes are intentional, as many solutions for one problem bring up other problems.)

The first red thumb is always the hardest. Below 5%, I wouldn't worry about it -- like I said, some people just like to give red thumbs.

[derscheid]

I'm truly amazed at some people's red thumb ratios. They must play a lot of Hanabi...

I don't typically start turn-based games with people if they're over 10% red thumbs, this usually indicates they're quitters or trash-talkers.

[Dare06]

There is one thing that gets me annoyed about some players, on BGA you have the right to forfeit the game and give the victory to opponents, which is understandable, if you get to a point in the game where there's a obvious winner, this happens quite often especially in Takenoko where players tend to 'hoard' objectives as much as possible so that if you do complete the objectives and gain the 'emporer' card, they can catch up on score and win the game. What bugs me is, if you decide to forfeit the game, the opponent(s) will give out red thumbs, people should not be allowed to do this as forfeiting a game finally comes down to 'OK you have won', which to me is just fair play, the exact opposite of what a red thumb should represent.

[teuz80]

There is an obvious solution to the red thumbs issue.
Forcing players to express a vote, either green or red. This will help keeping the red/green ratio low for good/fair players, and raising it for those players who actually deserved the red ones because of their attitude (and not because they won).

[Pisaac]

You know what would be good?
Showing how many red thumbs each person gives to see if they over react to some people or something.

[JstWhoIM]

For the individual who suggested exposing the "over-reactor" rating:

That is hilariously clever. You know that if that is programmed, that there needs to be a rating for thumbs green too. Once the programming for one is complete, it's not all that difficult to add the other. In fact, it's just built in from the onset. Regression testing exposes the bugs systemically for programmers to work through. Meaning, once one "bug" is fixed, then the next one can be too. The cost - benefit analysis is where this won't get done unless, from an economic factor, "leisure enjoyment" is included. "Laughter" at this outrageously funny notion of yours has merit, one which cannot be measured unfortunately. This is where a marketing decision is made usually. You are too funny. In fact, this entire discussion on "red thumbs" is.

[ap_seidel]

Another idea may be to force people to give a comment with every red thumb as to why the thumb was given. That way the hunger stemming from the "what did I do wrong" question that eats away at every good player with a red thumb would be satisfied.

To take the idea even further, illegitimate red thumbs could be reported to moderators and negated.

[derscheid]

Another idea may be to force people to give a comment with every red thumb as to why the thumb was given. That way the hunger stemming from the "what did I do wrong" question that eats away at every good player with a red thumb would be satisfied.

To take the idea even further, illegitimate red thumbs could be reported to moderators and negated.

The moment I red-thumb someone for bad behavior, and that red thumb is removed for being "illegitimate," I'd quit BGA forever. I already can't ban horrible dipshits from joining my games, because learning that I red-thumbed them might hurt their precious fee-fee feelings. I have a huge hunger for "I can't harm these people I don't like, who will go on hurting other good players in the future," and it eats away at me far more than any red thumb I've ever gotten (for "real" reasons or not).

So I'll tell you what I get told every time I bring this up: GET OVER IT. Walk it off, as they used to tell us back in gym class.

Getting red thumbs is gonna happen if you play enough, and as there is LITERALLY no penalty for it provided you stay below 10% recent red thumbs, there's no harm.

Every red thumb is legitimate. It's just feedback. There's no such thing as good feedback, or bad feedback. You asked people what button they were gonna push, and then they pushed the button.

(I'll also add, if someone has 300 green thumbs, and 299 red thumbs, I think the next time they get a red thumb, the system should publish their real address, so one of us can buy an international plane ticket, and come burn their house down. They are bad, and they should feel bad.)