Intersite DG: Apolyton's Reputation .... - Page 4

Beta · January 23, 2003, 23:14

Good points HH. I suspect there is no perfect answer to this one.

I like the idea of the pledge. If there is a DL, to be useful he will need to 'report' back, which means someone in an official capacity back on another team must know about it. So, maybe we need to rely on the integrity of the teams involved, as opposed to focusing on the individuals.

GeneralTacticus · January 23, 2003, 23:24

Thing is, though - what penalties could be applied for breaking the pledge?

kentonio · January 23, 2003, 23:29

The ultimate threat of removal of team from the game, with all the embarrasement that would carry for the site involved.

Kentonio

Arnelos · January 23, 2003, 23:32

I agree with who-ever proposed that ALL the people wanting to get in should be subject to approval by the other members of the team.

As for people who would typically be lurkers on our site, it presents a real problem...

They've been good citizens. No, they haven't posted a lot, but they've contributed to the nation by voting in polls (or at least many of them have). As good and ultimately loyal citizens, they really SHOULD be part of the inter-site game. The problem is that few of us can tell the difference between these "loyal lurkers" and those that would simply be spies.

The answer, I would think, would be similar to the answer reached in the inter-team PTW game that we're currently running here at Apolyton.

All of the teams agreed that they would not tollerate the existence of spies reporting to them on what was happening on other teams. All teams agreed that we would abide by an honors code and that we would police our own members in following that honors code.

So far (at least to my knowledge...), that honors code has worked. If the inter-team demogame is supposed to be a practice to learn things about the inter-site game, then lets go ahead and apply some leasons already learned.

If the teams and especially their leaderships can be trusted to police their own members in regard to not spying on other teams and refusing to utilize anything gained by cheating (such as the re-load bug), then we don't need to worry as much about individual people who may try to join more than one team. We will tell people that it is illegal, against the rules of the game, and if they are found out, they will be banned from ALL teams. That said, however, ultimately what will remove the INCENTIVE for people to cheat is for the teams to agree they won't use anything gained from cheating even if it takes place (and to honor that commitment).

If the other sites will agree to that and we believe we can trust them at their word on that (and we're willing to keep our word on it as well), that may be the best we can do...

Then we don't have to go through this whole idiocy of trying to exclude many of our loyal population who just don't have high postcounts.

It's not a perfect solution, but I don't believe one exists.

EDIT: typos

Beta · January 23, 2003, 23:50

And that sir, is why you were President.

Perfectly said. I think I will take your entire post to the 1BC site.

Thank-you!

Dis · January 24, 2003, 03:43

Well of course King is too high. Perhaps 500 post would be more reasonable with possible exceptions of course. There are always exceptions...

Also if an IP check could be done (it would have to be done all at once though. And if people aren't online, I'm not sure that is possible.

Also length of time registered should carry just as much if not more weight than post count. That show more of a commitment to Apolyton than a silly post count. but again, there are exceptions. I think I can vouch for Betahound even though he hasn't been here long.

Anyways, we may just be forced to play the "honour" system and keep a close eye out. It would be nice to have an impartial person admin the game, but I can't imagine who we would find for that.

E_T · January 24, 2003, 03:56

I agree with Arnelos, going by post counts is not the way to decide on this. When I started the SPDG, I only had about 150 Posts to my name. After becoming a member of the DG & being in the Goverment for 3+ terms, I'm now over 1500 Posts (10 times).

As a lot of you know, I have made a LOT of Contributions to the SPDG, which I would not have been able to, if that game had a post limit to try to join. We need to just hope for the best.

Remember, the same could also apply the other way around, i.e. some of us spying on them. While I'm not stating that some of us would, there is always that possibility. As long as we keep OURSELVES as honorable players, I don't really think that we should continue to consern ourselves with what somebody else might do. IF someone does go and Spy on us, we'll still be able to kick there A**es...

E_T

E_T · January 24, 2003, 03:59

Oh, where will we have our Trash talking thread with them?? In this Forum??

E_T

Donegeal · January 24, 2003, 04:05

I agree that King is probably too high, but I sugested it only because I have already attained the rank of Prince (and have a personal Avatar) and didn't want people accusing me of picking an arbituary number that I had already reached. The voucher system with Markos picking the first group of players I think is the most digestable suggestion (although I would prefer a team vote by all current members).

Tiberius · January 24, 2003, 04:24

Honesty pledge

I admit that I am a registered member of CFC, my login name being Huszar (if it's still active

). I hereby swear not to use it in any way to cheat, spy or do any harm to the CFC demo team. I don't have and I won't create any other logins on the other civ sites, for the purpose of cheating in the Interciv Demogame.

Tiberius

PS Now, I hope I don't have to divulge my Apolyton DLs, too

Aro · January 24, 2003, 05:02

I'm a registered member of CFC (and probably at Big Civ, also), too. Under the same nick I use here, I think...
Few posts in CFC, no posts (IIRC) in BC.

notyoueither · January 24, 2003, 05:45

I'll join.

btw, I am registered as nye (long version) at cfc. I think I have about 32 posts, or somewhere thereabouts.

notyoueither · January 24, 2003, 05:46

The trick is going to be getting TF to agree to an official cfc team, from what I know.

GeneralTacticus · January 24, 2003, 05:47

I also have an account at CFC, under GeneralTacticus, which has a little over 100 posts, but has been essentially inactive for months.

Beta · January 24, 2003, 08:55

Quote:

Originally posted by notyoueither
The trick is going to be getting TF to agree to an official cfc team, from what I know.

Hi nye. Last I heard is that they did in fact have a team - although they weren't sure they could get a closed forum. Which would make it - er - difficult, to play effectively as a team.

(and - you never answered my question - where is the picture of the tiger from?

)

kentonio · January 24, 2003, 10:26

Quote:

Hi nye. Last I heard is that they did in fact have a team - although they weren't sure they could get a closed forum. Which would make it - er - difficult, to play effectively as a team.

Looks like we (CDG) are going to be providing the forums for the CFC team.

Kentonio

Panzer32 · January 24, 2003, 14:03

It would work out OK if all the forums were on one site.

MrWhereItsAt · January 24, 2003, 21:19

Quote:

Originally posted by Arnelos
I agree with who-ever proposed that ALL the people wanting to get in should be subject to approval by the other members of the team.

As for people who would typically be lurkers on our site, it presents a real problem...

They've been good citizens. No, they haven't posted a lot, but they've contributed to the nation by voting in polls (or at least many of them have). As good and ultimately loyal citizens, they really SHOULD be part of the inter-site game. The problem is that few of us can tell the difference between these "loyal lurkers" and those that would simply be spies.

The answer, I would think, would be similar to the answer reached in the inter-team PTW game that we're currently running here at Apolyton.

All of the teams agreed that they would not tollerate the existence of spies reporting to them on what was happening on other teams. All teams agreed that we would abide by an honors code and that we would police our own members in following that honors code.

So far (at least to my knowledge...), that honors code has worked. If the inter-team demogame is supposed to be a practice to learn things about the inter-site game, then lets go ahead and apply some leasons already learned.

If the teams and especially their leaderships can be trusted to police their own members in regard to not spying on other teams and refusing to utilize anything gained by cheating (such as the re-load bug), then we don't need to worry as much about individual people who may try to join more than one team. We will tell people that it is illegal, against the rules of the game, and if they are found out, they will be banned from ALL teams. That said, however, ultimately what will remove the INCENTIVE for people to cheat is for the teams to agree they won't use anything gained from cheating even if it takes place (and to honor that commitment).

If the other sites will agree to that and we believe we can trust them at their word on that (and we're willing to keep our word on it as well), that may be the best we can do...

Then we don't have to go through this whole idiocy of trying to exclude many of our loyal population who just don't have high postcounts.

It's not a perfect solution, but I don't believe one exists.

EDIT: typos

Well obviously I don't have a monopoly on Presidential speeches that sum up the matter very nicely.

Ace post, Arn.

If there are Democracy games going around the other forums, I think that we can expect equivalents of many of us to be in these forums, and they will be dedicated enough to realise that cheating is just a waste of everyone's time. Civ players are not the sort to type IDDQD and race through the level to see the fireworks at the end. If you were, you have seen the end by now and are either inactive or playing the game for the sake of playing the game. This mindset has bred us - we're not going to cheat, Apolyton's reputation isn't as important as having fun. I think we can expect the exact same attitude from any Civ player serious enough to play an intersite game, and for any who violate that, these people will not be the leaders and the main players, they are the lurking 13 year olds without the maturity to play Civ for what it is, and they will have their little indecency condemned by the rest.

Zarn · January 24, 2003, 22:16

As an ambassador, I must say that I mean no harm to any demogame. I am trying to create a decent relationship between CFC and Apolyton. BTW, who is your ambassador to CFC?

Arnelos · January 25, 2003, 00:21

Quote:

Originally posted by Zarn
As an ambassador, I must say that I mean no harm to any demogame. I am trying to create a decent relationship between CFC and Apolyton. BTW, who is your ambassador to CFC?

Don't know that we have one.

Apocalypse is still, to my knowledge, our "ambassador" to the BigCommunity United Nations.

GhengisFarb™ · January 25, 2003, 01:17

Quote:

Originally posted by Zarn
As an ambassador, I must say that I mean no harm to any demogame. I am trying to create a decent relationship between CFC and Apolyton. BTW, who is your ambassador to CFC?

I believe we refer to him as the Grim Reaper and he has a scythe with CFC's name on it.

JUST JOKING

Arnelos · January 25, 2003, 04:43

Quote:

Originally posted by GhengisFarb

I believe we refer to him as the Grim Reaper and he has a scythe with CFC's name on it.

JUST JOKING

You see, "Apocalpyse" is our "ambassador" to the BigCommunity U.N. because we've sent one of each of his four riders of to each of four other Civ Sites... I just don't remember whether Apocalypse's death rider, war rider, famine rider, or pestilence rider was the one sent to CFC...

From what Ghengis is saying though, it sounds like we sent Death to CFC. Good choice

-----------

Zarn · January 25, 2003, 17:11

That would explain the terrorist actions of a poster at CFC. Can we have a friendlier ambassador? Or would you like me to report to CFC for you? Or would you not want to tell anything to CFC?

Arnelos · January 25, 2003, 17:19

Honestly, we don't have an ambassador. You can let CFC know what's going on over here if you want - we certainly aren't going to STOP you

notyoueither · January 25, 2003, 18:07

Quote:

Originally posted by BetaHound
(and - you never answered my question - where is the picture of the tiger from?

)

I found it on the Internet. I can't find it now. I can't remember the search terms I used.

It was on a wildlife preservation site. One dedicated to tigers. That's all I can remember. I will check at home to see if I still have the original file. I could then find the web page, most likely.

Beta · January 25, 2003, 18:47

nye - thanks. Please don't go to too much trouble. I just thought he may have been one of the Siberian tigers from the Toronto zoo. I'm there fairly often, and he just looked - well sort of familiar. But as I said before - I suspect they may all look alike - especially when shrunk down to avatar size.

Meshelic · January 25, 2003, 19:30

Quote:

Originally posted by BetaHound
he may have been one of the Siberian tigers from the Toronto zoo. I'm there fairly often, and he just looked - well sort of familiar.

Familiar is a good word for it Beta! hehe

Zarn · January 25, 2003, 19:38

Quote:

Originally posted by Arnelos

Honestly, we don't have an ambassador. You can let CFC know what's going on over here if you want - we certainly aren't going to STOP you

I meant we don't want Death. He's no fun. I think he is trying to kill me.

Panag · January 26, 2003, 09:28

Quote:

Originally posted by Arnelos

Honestly, we don't have an ambassador. You can let CFC know what's going on over here if you want - we certainly aren't going to STOP you

hi ,

,

, we could send GF , he would do a great job

have a nice day

pikesfan · January 26, 2003, 10:55

I would be interested in joining, but I would only be voting and sometimes posting. I could not take any executive rôle due to lack of time in RL and also too slow an Internet connection.

I am a member of the 1BC Civ3 Democracy game (joined before the Roleplay team came into being), but all I do now in that is vote. I will not join the 1BC PTW intersite game.

At any rate, I would just like to know what is going on and hope that someone posts updates.