(02-27-2021, 02:11 AM)typhoon Wrote: I may be about to drift a little off topic if so apologies in advance. Whilst I would be one of the first to say we have the best club around for our hobby. It is becoming noticeable that the majority seem to feel that change of any sort is not a good thing for the Blitz. This may be so it's very hard to tell yet to me to keep at the top something must evolve some things will get better and some things worst but is change itself such a bad thing. Either way interesting thread lots of talk which is never a bad thing and the poll has given everyone a hint of where opinion lies.

(02-27-2021, 08:14 AM)phoenix Wrote: But you can make those kind of guidelines for yourself (and any playing partner who agrees) right now, Green. I'm not sure why you need anyone else to make them, if they are really take-them-or-leave-them - why not just implement any guidelines you like (assuming your playing partner will agree) - what's the difference?

(02-27-2021, 08:42 PM)phoenix Wrote: You mean, Green, it's more hassle to say to a prospective opponent - 'I would like X rule on reporting, do you agree?' than to say 'I would like to use the X rule on reporting found 'here' (in the forum) - do you agree?' In both cases you say it has to be agreed. The second case is actually more cumbersome.

The reason you want a forum rule is that you want it to have some kind of normative force, otherwise there really is no point and you might as well agree your own rules. So there is to be some kind of idea of 'conforming to the norm' as you say. So it's a rule, and if it really were purely advisory it wouldn't achieve what you want. That's the whole point, because what you want to achieve is that the actual ratings - the results of the reporting - change so as to better reflect something you think ought to be reflected and which you think isn't properly reflected. You don't just want fairness (as you conceive it) between you and your opponent, but across the whole board, hence the need for a rule for everyone.

There have been arguments put against it, above in this thread, already. And arguments for it (the preceding paragraph is actually the argument for it). But I don't think - to say one last thing - that you should discount the view that some may have (me, for instance) that more rules are not desirable per se. As I argued above, it's meant to be an amusement, not something so serious as in need of rules to make sure the ladder - for those who use it - accurately reflects skill levels etc. Everything that the rule is meant to deal with has already been being dealt with for many years informally, between the players. I don't see why that can't continue, why the forum can't continue operating on trust and goodwill.

Fun discussion, anyway.....

As a postscript, one of the reasons when playing Napoleonic games that I prefer to get opponents from this board rather than the specific Nappy board (the NWS) is that that board is a much 'heavier' structure with all sorts of rules and behaviours which, for me (not everyone) make it a bit harder to just simply find an opponent, play a game and report it if someone wants that. It's one of the great things about this place that it is simple and free of clutter. It does what it says it does, with the minimum fuss. I think that probably attracts people here.

It's also clear from the small numbers doing the vote that most people don't really care about this - much more than the numbers who vote that they don't care. I actually am also someone who doesn't care much, but the reason I'm voting against and joining in this discussion now is that it can happen that things change gradually into things you no longer want or like if you allow rules to be put through by the minority who want a rule change, who are naturally more exercised about the issue and more inclined to argue their case and be bothered about it. So it's good if some opposition is felt, I think, from the silent majority. Because what is really going on here is that a very small minority of users care about an issue that the vast majority don't care about - and that's not a good basis on which to put through a change. The voting figures should be read that way, perhaps - there are (at the moment) 10 people who care at all about this, and all the other users don't really care....