From the WWPA home page:

What is the WWPA?

The Weewar Players Association is a community of like-minded Weewar players.

What is the purpose of the WWPA?

The purpose of the WWPA is to serve as a useful social resource for Weewar players. It was created in response to the need of the Weewar player base to regulate itself in terms of fair play and good sportsmanship.

What can the WWPA do for me?

The WWPA maintains and publicizes a list of players who adhere to some modest guidelines on fair and honourable play. You can use this list to help you find opponents who won't spoil your fun.

What does it cost?

Just like Weewar, WWPA membership is absolutely free. Registration is quick and easy, and you don't even need to provide an e-mail address.

Join now!

--------------------------------------

Okay, folks, I have been hard at work on this for many days, and I have it in what I believe to be a presentable alpha state.  Before we go all majorly public with this, would the Tangling Weewarist population please pop over, signup and test the site.

Once you're signed up, please certify all your friends and previous honourable opponents.  The more certifications, the merrier.

Please expect plenty of bugs, 404's and other nasty errors.  Just report any problems back to me here in this thread.

Any [constructive] feedback, suggestions or comments on the WWPA are welcome!

Just a quick note as I'm signing up - I like the verification method. Original!

I like your certification standards, though I think that as time goes on they can be expanded on perhaps? Or set in better terms perhaps? They work well, but I think they could be reworked.

My only wish is that by submitting someone for certification that hasn't joined yet (being that the member list only shows myself and Pistos) that an email or message could somehow be sent to them inviting them to join the site now that they are deemed "WWPA" Certifiable. While that seems to be a grey area due to privacy policies and the such I would love to see it happen in future versions of the site - even if that requires some overlooking and agreeing from the WeeWar admins to make it "official". Another thing that I can see - and this is more of a feature idea (which I realize it may be a bit early for) is some kind of badge. Just thinking....

darthnerdus: Thanks for visiting the site, and thank you for your insightful feedback.

The standards are by no means set in stone, and I had full intentions from the outset to make them rather malleable as the community sees fit.  I just threw together some rough guidelines to start with based on what I've read and discussed with others here on the Weewar forums.  Did you have any particular suggestions?  I'd love to hear them, and I can make any improvements.

As for e-mail... that is a bit trickier.  I haven't thought of a satisfying process.  For example, I don't have any secure mechanism to interact with the live weewar accounts, and I wouldn't suggest this for the time being, either, for security reasons.  So, the only other way I can think of is if we let people send an e-mail alert to an address that they type.  But in that case, the WWPA becomes a potential vehicle for spam, and that would be most undesirable.

Perhaps if there were some static e-mail template that couldn't be modified... "Your friend foobar has certified you at the WWPA.  Click _here_ to join the WWPA and accept the certification." or something like that.  What are everyone's thoughts or suggestions on this matter?

Badges: Could anyone draw something up?   I'm not much of an artist.  There was that fellow who made the transforming unit animation, he offered to do up widget graphics.  We could try to contact him.

I note now that the Weewar Labs server is unreachable for some reason... I am looking into this.

Site down.

p.s. I can help with the graphic stuff. What do you need. I sent you a private message so we can talk more about it.

Yeah, I think the server is dead until further notice, unfortunately.   I can't get access to it for probably another 8 or 9 hours.

madmike: Okay, I'll check out your private message.

madmike: Well, basically, I suppose you could just quickly draft up some rough sketches/ideas/outlines on a scalable badge that had the text "WWPA Member" or "WWPA Certified" or "WWPA Certified Member".  We'd probably want something that could scale to sizes like 200x200 for full display, all the way down to maybe 32x32 for inclusion on a website.  Or maybe a little bar (12x90 or something similar) to put on websites.

ok. will do.

madmike: BTW, thanks.

Server is back up.  Everyone please check it out and contribute your presence to the community. 

sounds like a pretty cool idea...nice work

Thanks.   Spread the word, so we can get more certs...

dpache1: I note that you haven't verified your account yet.  Did you not want to, or did you not know that you had to? 

Great work Pistos. I am curious where this is going to. A few questions:

Is there a way I can see who certified me? What does the 1.0 mean?

I'm as confused as bert, clarification would be helpful...

also, if the numbers have anything to do with certifying, than the certs that I am sending out are not going out and are registering on Pistos... (how convenient)

I had a feeling there would be confusion.   I will post a FAQ up on how the certs are calculated.

I will also add a listing of who certified you.

TheTorrent: I will add this to the FAQ in detail, but basically, people aren't going to show up as certified until they actually signup for WWPA membership.

Thanks for signing up, guys.  Spread the word, and try to point the site out to your friends and favourite opponents.  The system works better with many certs.

Alex: Both the Rankings page and the WWPA page are fit for blogging now. 

cool. will do asap! Very exciting!

Pistos, I'm just getting into CSS and HTML, so I could help clean up the sight style/layout.

I'll see what I can do with it, and send you a some (hopefully) improved versions just for fun.

The one thing that I've been wondering about Pistos is why in the world the certification ratings go on forever and ever into the high hell of decimal values. ie. Why don't we just cut off the repeating decimals? I think that would make it look a lot more presentable.

darthnerdus: Q: Why?  A: (i) because I didn't realize it would be an issue until the system actually got some use, and (ii) when I finally saw it, I did not have a chance to fix it until about 16 hours later (now). 

Cypy: Okay, thanks.  I have been focusing far more on function than presentation.  Feel free to make up some graphics or send some CSS patches or whatnot.

Anyway, folks, I've updated the certification description page with some more details on how it's calculated and what it means.  I hope this answers everyone's questions.

madmike has generously donated time and effort to create some cool WWPA membership badges:

Feel free to grab these and use them to show off your WWPA status!

I have also added a "Certified By" section in your member home page to show you who certified you.

nice work, madmike. I think I have finally found a profile image

oooh.... very nice!!

I'd better get my act together and sign up for WWPA

(do I qualify?)

Awesome work Pistos and madmike.

Thanks. 

dekrazee1: Anyone who has a Weewar account can signup for the site.  After you signup (which takes only 10 seconds), verify your account by following the instructions, and then go ahead and start certifying your friends and respected opponents.

There are no special or secret entrance requirements for the WWPA. 

There are no special or secret entrance requirements for the WWPA.

Being Tangler's mascot helps though 

Here is an example of the updated personal badge.

And a blank one, for you to decorate as you like:

Alex/bert: Now, if we could allow some simple HTML or bbcode in our profile text, we would include small images like this on our weewar.com accounts.   And crosslink them, too.

looks great

do the bullets have a deeper meaning? the more you have, the more trustworthy you are?

Well, he just put those as an example, or such.  I haven't decided anything about bullet meanings or whatnot.  There is theoretically no upper limit on one's certification level.

We might be able to do something via percentile, though.  "Player X is in the top 10% of certified WWPA members."

Ya, the bullets are an example as a rating stars.

Although, like Pistos said he would need to figure out how much one bullet is worth.

Pistos: I have all the different badges from 0 to 10 bullets, without a space for players name.

We should discuss if such a rating system should be implemented into Weewar. If the game is finished, you could rate the other players. The more "bullets" you have, the more your vote counts

That would take us to the next step: Transforming Weewar into a Social Networking site

Kurisu: The system already works somewhat that way.  The higher your own certification, the more "powerful" your own cert of other people.

(I mean the WWPA system, not the weewar.com system)

heh

Next on the table for the WWPA is a player matching system, so you can find people that play at your frequency, availability, etc.

great!

hey Pistos, I'm having trouble verifying my account...can you help me out? sent you a message about it. Thanks

dpache1: For some reason, I thought you had eventually gotten verified, so I ignored your message.  Sorry about that.

Alex/bert: Check this out, http://weewar.com/api1/user/dpache1 is a 404, but http://weewar.com/user/dpache1 is fine.  I'm using the API to verify WWPA accounts.

dpache1: I have manually verified your account for you.

Ahhh..... thanks Pistos! I thought you had to have a certain number of points or something

And Kurisu, stop calling me a mascot! hehehehe

mascot or chat plugin - you decide 

HAHAHAHAHA

I love chat plugin cos it's just so funny! Cracks me up everytime!

But then everyone will think I'm a bot! (I have a hard enough time with that as it is!)

mascot plugin should solve that problem 

anyway, I think your services should get a "real" domain, pistos. like weewar.net / .org. it would cost a few dollars, yes, but that should be worth it, shouldn't it?

Weeell... I'll get it later.   I don't have a dollar tree growing in my backyard, so I can't justify the expense yet.  Perhaps when there is more traffic, popularity, etc.  I don't think I'd get weewar.net or .org though; I think the main Weewar guys should get those, if they aren't grabbed already.

sorry for such a mundane request, but I signed up for an account two nights ago, and am certified, but my password that I chose for WWPA does not seem to work at all. There is no mechanism on the site to reset ot request my password so....? Could someone reset it for me?

alison @ pixelpixie dot net

I now have a blurry, downsized, over-compressed one of those badges in the bottom corner of my avatar

Its just about possible to make out what it says if you look at my profile, and I put a brief explanation in my profile text 

Hi guys. Have joined up on the site but don't appear to be able to verify, even though I've added the relevant words to my profile. Anything else I need to do?

Great idea, btw.

alison: I have deleted your account and changed any existing certs for you into pending certs, so when you signup again, they will automatically activate.  Just make a new account now.

hb239: You suffered from the same problem as dpache1.  Apparently, the user API is broken for select people.   I have manually verified you, too, so you should have full access to the system now.  Thanks for joining.

Thank you Pistos, that took care of the problem.

How do we rate players who join a game, play a few turns then apparently wander off without notice leaving the other players with their thumbs up.  I don't mind waiting for a player who has the good grace to alert me when he will be delayed.  I waited three days for a player who informed me he had busines to take care of and would not be available.  I have no patience for anyone who is so rude as to delay the game without alerting the other players.

I realize that some games have one day or longer turn limits.  I  also know that I will never initiate another game with a turn limit of more than one hour.

There is a chat line.  Any player who leaves the game for more than a few moments should be obliged to alert the others that he will be away.  Any player who leaves for more than a few moments with alerting the other players should be liable for peremptory expulsion from the game.

<hanging around two games - half my available space- waiting for some putz to complete his move>

slugthog: In the general context of Weewar, I agree that abandoning games without communication is bad, and it's even worse when intentionally done in order to avoid rating loss.  However, the vote-out ability available to all players is a reasonable deterrent to the latter.

In the context of the WWPA: I am still mulling over how to incorporate negative feedback or negative peer review into the system.  It's been asked about twice already.  The current system is a positive system by design.  The intention was to imply either uncertainty or negative review via low cert level or absence from the WWPA.

slugthog, your comments started me thinking.  at first i was having a problem with your attitude/expectations, especially when i got to reading your third paragraph "There is a chat line..."  i was thinking of replying to you and saying, just that, for me, during the first day of a game, especially when i'm playing with folks i haven't played with before, i try to let them know when i'm leaving, either to go to bed that night, or to leave from work to go home, where i might not get back online to weewar for a couple hours or more.  but from then on the only schedule stuff i talk with them about is if i think i might be gone past the time limit.  i've done this a couple times while playing for the past few months.  the first time i was gone, which was for the longest time, i didn't realize i'd be gone that long and didn't say anything, but they waited for me.  another time, i was pretty sure i would be gone for a few days and i surrendered my games, however it ended up that i got back in a day or two, so uh-oh, i possibly now have a lower rating/score because of that.   another instance of where i won't mention to them that i might be gone for a few hours (sleep anyone?) is if they themselves seem to be taking a few hours.  they must have different schedules than i do. 

however, if you want to only play 1 hour or less time limit games, that's fine.

nonetheless, a couple ideas that i have had because of your comments are:

1. a message to all feature, which has been mentioned elsewhere, just to lazy (and busy with work) to find it right now.  and it wouldn't really be a message to all, with all meaning everyone in the whole game system/server, but rather to everyone that you are currently playing against.  this is kinda like bulletins in myspace.

2. chat log times, which again has been covered in other threads.

3. a notification that would be next to your name in each game that says an estimated time to be back.

Having an "e-mail all" button might be handy, though possibly abused.  Having a way to give a status message in your account might prove useful, too.  "Will be back Saturday at 10pm" or whatever.

Okay, folks, I have added a juicy feature to the WWPA: Notification via instant messenger.  I am quietly announcing it here in this thread, because I don't have it working perfectly yet, but I want current WWPA members to test it out and help me iron out the bugs and problems.

To get IM alerts, login to the WWPA then go to your member home page.  You should see two new submenu options, one to setup your IM contacts, another to setup game watches.  Try these out, and let me know what's working or not working.  Thanks.

I was not able to successfully test this yet (still waiting for the other party to play) but this is great. You are on a roll! I hope you might spin this off into a separate app though I can see how it will really benefit the wwpa. (Side note: I think the feedback link in the main navigation should be visually different from the others  as it takes the user out of context)

Alex: I saw you set it up and test it.  According to my logs, it sent an alert to your IM account.  Did you not receive it?  Thank for the feedback. 

I'll think about making it available to non-WWPA players as well, but that would probably be later once this has matured and stabilized.

I will try to make the Feedback link a bit more distinct.  Thanks.

Might have missed adding your robot to my contacts - now I have but it has not been my turn since. So I am not sure what happened but will confirm once it is my turn while I am online. Naturally I am looking for the error on my end first

  Okay, let me know.

i'm having success!

Cool. 

Let's see if it can consistently alert you, though.  I find it sort of breaks down after a while.  Hopefully it won't. 

it's still alerting me.

hey pistos, question: what would happen if i change my username at weewar?  i would think that it would affect wwpa.

Question.  We have a player in a game who is online but has not moved in fifteen hours - though the times says he only six  and a half hours have passed.

1) Has anyone else noticed that the timer is operating in failure mode??

2)  Is there any way to boot the player before the timer hits 24 hours - if it ever does.?

luckymustard: I that case, I think it's only fair for you to also make a new matching account in the WWPA.  The two names would be separate entities, as it were.

slugthog: The timer seems to have reset when they did the release.  I think this is a "feature" in response to people complaining that they got boot prematurely because they were unable to login to take their turn during the downtime.

slugthog: afaik, when the server is down for an update that tends to reset the game timers.

We reset the timer for all games when  we are coming back up after a scheduled downtime in order to avoid people getting kicked without being at fault at all. We'd prefer to simply turn the time back to account for the exact down time but unfortunately for the time being our only option is a total reset - which is still much better than simply letting the clocks run.

ok, so now what we need is a blacklist of players that should be boycotted.  I'd like to nominate nhatinator to start off the list.

I played a game with nhatinator not too long ago. He seemed like a nice person and didn't do anything offensive or bad. What did he do that deserves to be placed on a blacklist?

possible droner, and a spammer. Started a game got only 2 rounds in before the other players abandon the game. Due to this spamming the chat box.

always wants to play 3 player with himself, and his friend nogglebeak as player 2.

Pistos: Bargain, thanks, works a treat.

How long does it normally take for a certification to go through? I'm apparently uncertified on the members list but I have one certification in my profile.

I love this idea, it's fab

hb239: Certification should be instantaneous.  However, the person that has certified you is themselves uncertified, therefore he has no power to grant you certification.  Thanks for joining, and thanks for your feedback.

ok, so if you are uncertified and you certify someone else, it doesn't count until you yourself become certified?

Is there any way to determine if a player is running more than one side in a game?  IP check?  Call his mom?  Whatever.

I'm wondering if WeeWee can check IPs in multiplayer games and bounce two players with same IP if at least one player with different IP?  Or perhaps just not score points.

How could that work though? Workplaces? I play at work. I also happen to live on campus at school 0 which means they provide internet... I always show up as the same IP - not mine. Just like everyone else here at my school... So we can't play together?

This is a public access online game so we can't ban IPs which is why the WWPA was created. Also this game is still in it's early development stages so we want it to grow as fast as possible to ensure it's success so making it's environment hostile with bans would be counter productive. Games are on invite only and you always have the option of declining invites so this problem can be avoided without dev intervention.

I'd like to keep the weewar society as friendly as possible and if there are repeated offenders then I'm sure the WPA would have some sort of demerit system to forewarn players.

But there is no clear way to identify cheats, is there.

We could examine a player's record.  If two nicks frequently play in the same games and one of them always loses...  Beyond that there is nothing to prevent abuse.

defbyte: That is correct.  Your certification strength is a function of the number and strength of certs you have.  In general, if your cert level is low, try to play games against those with high certification so that they can get to know you, and then cert you after two or three games.

Re: IP check: Perhaps if we could get a little notification in the pre-game about whether some players are from the same IP.  Then it could be up to one's own discretion to join or not.

Re: cheaters, etc.: I have been formulating a system which I hope to incorporate sometime in the next few days.  It will essentially be a relatively informal adjudication system, where you present a case with some evidence against a transgressor, and if your case is deemed sufficient, then the player will be added to a blacklist, which will be made public (along with brief reasons, such as public game replays).

(little note: For those players who use the name changing feature to cheat or stay unnoticed, we have silently introduced a public, unique and permanent id for each account visible from the profile - not much but might be handy...)

This will come in handy for the blacklist.  Thanks, Alex/bert.

ah so there is a blacklist, this is good, unfortunately I have already deleted the game

yeah as mentioned in another topic, I've got a game with hugger kicking me when I was winning. I archived it it's

http://weewar.com/game/17711

also, is there a place to formally report this? if not there should be one

TheTorrent: I haven't coded anything yet, it's all in my head.  I hope to have something in place over the next few days, though.

oh ok, thats good

I have the game Archived Torrent.

pistos, here's a bug:

i input a game number and it says that "No such game id: 20812".  yet, in fact, it does exist.

Well, the API gives a 404 for that game.  I look at the game normally, and I get greeted with: "Sorry, but this game is not public.  Private games are only available to participating players."  I suspect we will be unable to watch or notify for private games. 

(Since I have no way of determining who's playing or whose turn it is)

I will adjust the error message, though.

Alex: If we could be able to access accounts using their ID number as well, e.g. http://weewar.com/api1/user/12345 that would be nice.  That way, I can link to blacklisted players using the ID instead of their name, which could change.

another thing, now that you have the blacklist up and running... i must admit at this time that i broke one of the rules/standards.  it was a long time ago (few months) during probably the first month i was playing.  i, and another player by majority, which was unknown to us that that was how it worked, kicked another player out of game who had previously told us in the chat that he was going to be gong for some extended period of time.  the other kicking out player and i, after doing so and hearing back from the player that we kicked out, only then went back and saw his message that he would be gone.  in other words we had both forgotten that he said that and we didn't properly check to see if he said anything like that before we kicked him.  we were then very apologetic.  however, speaking for myself here (and elsewhere - who could i ever really speak for?), i did go about making the point along the lines of that (not verbatim) "hey, we agreed at the beginning about the time limit."  i have since gone to great lengths to be much more considerate and i'm thinking that i haven't kicked anyone out (except in the first three rounds on the test server recently) since.  i hope this mostly makes sense, i feel like i'm rambling here, but i had to get this out in the open.  btw, the person we kicked out is one of the people that has certified me.  so if he, or anyone else, wants to take away his certification of me, so be it.  again i'm sorry.

luckymustard: Well, I can't speak for anyone else either, but as for me, if it's long ago, and you've proven yourself with a good track record for a while now, then I think whatever happened in the distant past doesn't matter any more.   I won't add you to the blacklist.

In other news: I have added a button on the Game Watches page to let you refresh your watch list from the live server, so that it is watching the games you are active in right now.  This makes it a bit easier to add and remove the right games, assuming you always want all games watched.  You can still manually add or remove games, though, if you find yourself needing to for whatever reason.

Out of curiosity: In light of the fact that such a thing is missing on weewar.com, would anyone want a basic message system on the WWPA?  For use with things like strategizing with teammates in private, or for gently tapping a player that seems to be taking too long, to ask what's up, etc.  It could be either a direct message system (where you login to the WWPA to read and send messages), or an e-mail proxy (send a message to player X, and that player will get an e-mail forward of your message, without you needing to know his e-mail address), or both.

thanks pistos.

Pistos: Just so you know, I tested whether or not I could certify myself and it turns out I can! This should probably be fixed, but until then I'm removing the cert

It's permitted, but has no value. 

If people are bothered, I could make this impermissible? 

Naw, leave it.  It will make for some amusing future conversation

@Pistos:  I was just unsuccessful messaging you in PlayersAss.

ErrMsg: Failed to deliver message to Pistos.

And the message vanished.  annoying.

Question was about yer stats page.

Apparently you give losses and ties the same weight.  I would be more inclined to weight wins & losses at 3 and ties at 1 or zero.

A tie can often represent a game not played: players examining a map, a gimme to a noob, a map begun then abandoned for technical reasons.

Am I still registered? I can't find me on the memberlist and I can't login (although that may be that I'm getting the password wrong)

I personally do not agree so much with the new black list while I very much appreciate the self organizing white list (it is kind of telling that one needs much more moderation and administration then the other). That said I can see why it can be a really helpful feature.

I would suggest to make the black list only visible to logged in wwpa members - so it becomes a service for members (which would be much more true to my understanding of the wwpa as a voluntary system of good conduct). It will certainly take heat away

anyway - it is just a thought ... I like the wwpa fo what it is and for just being there, too.  It is immensely rewarding for us to have attracted such  a great community and to see it evolve on its own!

slugthog: I will see to doing something about lost messages like that.  Sorry.

Super-King: You don't seem to have a user record.  Just register again.  I'm not sure what could have happened if you registered before and disappeared.

Alex: Your opinion has a lot of weight.  I will make the blacklist viewable by members only unless and until there are strong demands to make it public.

My input on this should be no more important than anybody else's . This is yours and thereby your call entirely - my suggestion came from me as wwpa member Cheers!

Okay, then... what does everyone else think? 

Tried to re-register, said that I already exist

Turned out I just forgot my password, but I remembered it eventually 

I assume that hitting the "verify account" button will mean I'm now on the record

Super-King: You must receive a "this account is now verified" sort of message.  What's your account name?  I thought it was superking.

Yeah, SuperKing if its case sensitive

When I logged in there was a link there to verify, now it says I'm verified

Okay.

slugthog: I have fixed things so that message failures should keep the text in the input boxen.

Denks.  Good Job.

Vis-a-vis black list:

There are significant benefits to knowing the players who are abusing the system.  I can understand Alex's concern that WeeWar is new and doesn't want to turn away potential customers.  OTOH, cheaters and abusers can turn away new users even more quickly.  Word of net that WeeWars could be fun but is full of cheaters or lurkers will keep folx away in droves.  Reputation is everything.  If WW early develops a bad reputation, all of the invested time and money will have gone for naught.

It is consistently a problem that abuse is the last thing developers consider when creating a product.  As a consequence systems to control abuse often are tacked on late in the testing process and almost always are inadequate.  When the developers are not able to control abuses from within the game then citizen's committees of vigilantes usually take up the task

The problem with this sort of solution is that it creates, at least from the perspective of the noob, an In-group and an Out-group.  Elitism replaces Egalitarianism, important in keeping the game enjoyable for all players. even if such was never the intention.

This can be somewhat nullified by incorporating the vigilantes into the game system and making it responsible to the developers.  To incorporate it into the game system simply draft anyone who has played in a minimum number of games.  That way the Society of Vigilance contains all regular game players.  To make it responsible to the developers they, the developers, must grant the Society of Vigilance it's imprimatur.

White lists become "players in good standing", Black lists become "players not in good standing", and a well defined methodology for moving a player from one list to the other must be available to all.

As I've said on other threads about the "black list", that i think it is a bad term to use. the term "cheaters" is being thrown around which I feel is not accurate... Waiting for the last minute to boot someone is not cheating...even if it's not the most friendly thing to do. Let's not call these players cheaters when they are not.

Now, droning (playing with multiple accounts) is cheating and this should not be dealt with by the WWPA, but the devs. Whoever is caught (and backed up by proof) droning should have their account completely removed...period. All WW players should have the right to report someone that is cheating this is not a WWPA responsibility.

I still believe that the "black list" as it is being called right now should not be a place where everyone who is put on this list is ostracized from the community just for playing for points instead of friends.

Remember that every game you join, you agree to play within the alotted time or else. if you don't conform to the contract, you are at the other player's mercy. You can text him, beg him, call him or whatever...it's his right to boot you. And some people have this mentality about games; being on the top of that leader board is the most important thing.  These people are not evil; they just have different priorities that you.

We should call the list of these players the "Powergamer List", "Hardcore List" or "No Mercy List" to let people know the type of player they are, instead of telling everyone to refuse to play them.

I am willing to change the name of the list.  Besides dpache1's suggestions, does anyone have any other possible names to contribute?

Indeed, the name needs to connote more of the fact that they are simply not following WWPA rules.  I agree that this does not necessarily mean they are bad, evil, cheaters, or what have you.

There is some merit so dpache's post.  We should not ostracise them, nor brand them with a flaming iron but neither should we laud them by assigning them badges of honor like "Powergamer"

A simple field associated with the player's name could contain a terse comment or two such as: "Plays the clock strictly" , "Has attacked allies" or more strongly "Has employed drone in competition"

Having a drone account in order to study maps is not itself a sin particularly if the games are played to a draw or abandoned.  Employing a drone in game with others is flagrant cheating.

To be clear: Using a dummy account for investigative purposes does not break the WWPA standards as currently laid out.  Droning is using dummy accounts for point gains.

ah good - I sent an invite to myself ages ago to check out something on a map.. or maybe it was just to see if emails were gettign through, either way I then drew the game. Wouldn't want to now be accused of foul play 

@ pistos:  another reason draws should not be included in player rating or stats

slugthog: I'm just drawing the numbers straight off the official weewar.com site.  The only number I have control over is whether draws are counted against win %.  This is easily changed or added (i.e. I could have both types of win %).  Would this be to your liking? 

If I understand you clearly, yes - leaving draws out should give a more reliable measure.

BTW, you have known me long enough now that, "you can call me slug, or you can call me sluggy, or you can call me slugster, or you can call me sluggo or even you can call me OldFart but ya doesn't has ta call me Johnson!"

Hey, how about adding a five game moving average so we can watch our improvement ... or decline

Hmm... what's your suggested formula or algorithm for that?

I'd like to be able to put in more information about myself.  For instance, I am a strict adherent to the time limit, but I state that clearly up front when I start the game.  If someone lets me know in advance that they'll be gone for a specific amount of time, then I'll be patient.  Otherwise, I'll boot at some point after the time limit.  (This is why I'd like to see timestamps and arena entrance/exit notices in the chat window.)

I'd also like to see a ratings (like eBay?) system for all players, regardless of whether they've registered with WWPA, so that you can quickly identify questionable players.  Not necessarily drones or other egregious offenses, but poor sports who should be avoided.  (And with a ranking system, if they change their ways, future players give them a better rating and over time my negative rating counts for less or falls off the chart.)

Besides "WWPA Member", what about recommending other text in a profile, like all the items we hope to eventually see in a matching system?  (Time zone, preferred game size, turn limit, rating variance against your own, etc.)?  http://weewar.com/user/tvjames

tvjames: If the WWPA standards do not cover your idea of "poor sports who should be avoided", what other criteria would you add (or take away)?  The WWPA standards are not set in stone, and I would like the rules to cover what the majority thinks of in terms of good vs. bad sportsmanship.

Just to update folks on what the WWPA offers now:

What can the WWPA do for me?

The WWPA maintains and publicizes a list of players who adhere to some modest guidelines on fair and honourable play. You can use this list to help you find opponents who won't spoil your fun.  There is also a blacklist of players to avoid.

The WWPA also offers an instant messenger notification service to members.

There is also a member-to-member messaging system. This can be used for many things, such as inter-team strategizing, or trying to get in touch with absent players.

Use the Player Match system to find opponents that match your preferences.

there are a couple ways to compute moving averages.  The simplest is to sum the previous five scores and divide by five but weighting the more recent scores responds more quickly to recent changes.

Whoops forgot to put my shoes on.  Averages of averages don't mean much.

MovAve5.thisGame(wins) = Sum(wins,thisGame, thisGame-4) / 5

MovAve5.thisGame(losses) = Sum(losses, thisGame, thisGame-4) /5

MovAve5WinLoss.thisGame = MovAve5Wins.thisGame /( MovAve5Losses.thisGame +1)  {gotta watch out for Divide by zero}

or you can calculte WinLoss by WinLoss = thisPlayer.wins / (thisPlayer.wins +thisPlayer.losses)  { another way to prevent Div by Zero}

Unless I put on the wrong shoes

I have joined, but yet to be "accepted" or "certified" although i have verified ^_^

Very nice idea, original way of gathering like-minded gamers and it smoothly interlinks with the main site. Now that's silky!  Good work!

Demonicy: Just play one or two certified members, then ask them to certify you after the game. 

And thanks for the positive comments. 

pistos, i just got sent here by wwpa.  it tells me to tell you about "what went wrong". 

anyway... in the "find opponents" area i was clicking on the type of units selection (radial buttons) and i clicked on the far right one, pro units required, i think.

Okay, thanks, I'll check it out. 

Okay, fixed!  Thanks for reporting it, luckymustard. 

what are the checkboxes for that are next to the members on the certified members list?  they don't seem to do anything... yet!

I was going to ask about the tick boxes too

what are they for? Tell us tell us tell us tell us tell us tell us tell us! 

Heh.  I am ramping up for a "start new game with these players" feature.  Stay tuned! 

I was proud to play the 2nd rank seed moJoe and got talking to him a fair bit (plus i had a practice with pro units!) I haven't checked anything yet but hopefully he has given me a credit like i gave him.

Hi Pistos, I forgot the password i used to log into wwpa its really frustrating is there a reset my pwd type thing or .email me my pwd????? please help i want o to certify and be certified : ( Thanks

Fluffy: The usernames are case sensitive on the WWPA (unlike weewar.com).  There is a "Fluffy" account registered 2007-08-26, and a "fluffy" account registered 2007-09-13 (today).  Try logging in with both with some password guesses.  I am unable to send anyone their current password because it is one-way encrypted.

I can also just delete both accounts and you can reregister.  I can preserve your certs in such a case.

ehm... A few days ago I joined, was in the new members line, but now I am all out of the list.

Is that good or bad?

I was just about to convince a few players to put in a good word for me...

I had the same thing happen, then I logged in and it asked me to click to confirm the account, did you do that yet?

erm... not sure

wait ....

exellent. works now. thanks for the tip. Your the King!

I'm in!

Easy to do... Good job!

so if I get this right, after a game is over I should rate my opponents?

how do I do that? by certifying them?

Once you think you know someone well enough to attest that he or she will not break the WWPA rules of conduct, then you certify them.  When you do this will vary from person to person; perhaps you already have been good friends with someone for years and know their character.  Then you can certify them right away without ever having played them.  With a stranger, you probably will play at least one game, and chat with them a bit during the game.

Hi Pistos, yes please could you delete both fluffy accounts - they are both me! - I will start again with a sensible pwd i can rememeber this time!

fluffy: Okay, done.  Proceed with the username Fluffy, with a capital F, since that is what is on the weewar.com site.

In order to become a certified member of the WWPA, you need to play a game with another member or defeat them?

Chaos

Play them, demonstrate your moral/honourable play, they certify you as conforming to the wwpa guidelines (you also have to register yourself)

Okay, good.  I have played moJoe before.  I'll see if he'll vouche for me.

I'll also see about playing a couple of other players as well.

Chaos

I have known slugthog for a long time.  He is a surly, nitpicking know-it-all.  Can I get him banned from WWPA?

slugthog: With convincing evidence of rule violations, yes.

additional support herein for banning slugthog from all proceedings. Returning points for past "defeats" at the slugthog's hands also recommended.

Ah, the quisling Vichy Ho again raises his traitorous wail.

Is it the line-up to ban Slugthog?

Yaaay! I got certified! Thanks Pistos!

Pistos, can you add a link to the main home page in the list of links that are there when you are logged in?

Shoot I am not certified yet.

you are now

I keep forgetting to do that after games

So how does this certification thing work? I thought once someone is certified, that's it, but so far 3 ppl have certified me. So I'm not sure if I should be going around certified certified players.

What's the procedure?

every time you want to put in a good word for someone you certify him, then his or her score on WWPA increases by 0.01. If you go there and look at the members list, you see that your score is ... 1.00 ... ??? that would mean 100 folks certified you. Wow!

I wonder how pistos got his 2.34? 234 votes? Maybe I am wrong. Maybe it matters WHO certifies you, so your score increases if you get certified by a more valued member? So anyway, I want to know now as well.

I'm pretty sure I haven't been certified by 100 people...

So what's the aim of these points?

I think you receive more points for being certified by members who has been certified a lot  themselves. or maybe not. It is complex, you know

Don't I know it!

*scratching head*

The better certified you are the more weight your certifications carry. The system is designed for you to certify everyone you think deserves it so that relative values of certified-ness appear

There was an explanation somewhere on the wwpa site. using an analogy of basins full of water - the more "inflowing" certifications you have, the more your "outflowing" certifications are worth, although if you certify loads of people it gets spread thin and they don't gain so much each

luckymustard: Okay, added it.

Everyone: The certification system is explained in summary and in great detail over here.  Basically it is a system of a combination of trust, reputation and popularity.  We start with one or more people ("seeds") who are assumed to be trustworthy, and follow the network of who certifies whom.  The closer you are in the social network to the seeds, the higher your certification level.

You want to certify as many of your friends and favourite opponents as possible, with the only restriction being that you be relatively certain that they haven't and won't break the WWPA rules of conduct -- certain enough that you'd stake your reputation on it.

In your member home page, it will list all the people you have certified, and all the people that have certified you.

Okay, cool... Thanks guys.

I'll pay more attention to it now

So will I...

"stake your reputation"... aghhhh...

Can I make a case her to put someone on the blacklist?

mightygeorge  kicked my mate Master without any warning and without any clear winning position.

http://weewar.com/game/28789

is that a legitime claim from my side, what do you think?

Did you ask him why he did it?

not exactly. dissatisfaction with the event was expressed, but no reply. I assume the game was removed as soon as it was over.

Wait, so you weren't in the game yourself?

no

It just came up in a discussion with Master  recently

Streen: Okay, mightygeorge has been added.

While I can appreciate the rule about people creating alt accounts to use in the same game as their main as that's clearly an exploit, I feel that's something that should be left to the devs to resolve. The rule about not kicking someone from a game once their timer has expired unless you try to contact them first strikes me as completely unnecessary and I would even go so far as to say that this hurts the game by giving players far more time than they need to take a turn. It's clear at the start of a match what the turn timer is set to, so if you feel the turn timer is too long or short then don't join. Problem solved. Anyone who complains about being kicked because they couldn't be bothered to log in for 5 min in a 24 hour period deserves to be kicked in my opinion. Further, I feel that this encourages people to take far longer than necessary to take their turns. If you can't be bothered to take a turn a day in a match, don't play. Beyond that, this association just seems to be taking what is a simple, fun game far too seriously.
 

Okay, Druhim.  Last week I was bed bound as the result of crippling back pain.  Now I was able to contact all of my games and alert them to the reason for my extended absence by virtue of the fact that I have an iBook on my nightstand.

Had I not had the iBook I would have not been able to contact the other players for more than 24 hours.

I assume that you believe it would have been appropriate for the other players to kick me at hour 24 plus one second.

Yes, I do. Let's be realistic here. How often is someone so sick that they can't log in for a few minutes a day? Most people that are taking over 24 hours either forgot (but you can set it to remind you via e-mail) or just didn't care enough to log in. Which is fine, as long as they're willing to accept being kicked because they couldn't be bothered. The occasional emergency a few players have now and then does NOT justify having to wait additional time to kick someone.

I misread your post and thought you said you were unable to contact them. If you do contact them then it's their call. I'm willing to cut some slack if someone lets me know (though I don't get why you were able to contact them but not take your turn), but my experience has been that anytime someone goes past the timer I don't hear squat from them. Probably because it's just as easy to take their turn as it is to notify me and it's just that they completely forgot about it.

It's all about communication. We had a dude gone for 3 days in a game. He told us he was going to a yoyo tournament. I'm not gonna kick someone that's going to a yoyo tourney! 

I respect your point of view Druhim. We have 3 days games for those people.

Yeah, I'd be cool with someone telling me they'll be gone for 3 days. I just disagree with blacklisting people because they kicked someone. It assumes that the person doing the kicking is at fault when I feel it's the responsibility of any player to communicate that they won't be able to take their turn on time.

Druhim: I think perhaps the main misunderstanding here is what it means to be on the blacklist.  It doesn't mean that the person is an evil person, or a blatant cheater, or what not.  It simply means that the WWPA has rules of conduct, and that person broke the rules.  The code of conduct is there so that those who wish to find certain kinds of players can come to the WWPA to find them, and to be one of them.  Those who don't care about this sort of conduct (people such as yourself) are completely free to (a) not be a WWPA member (b) consider the WWPA member list meaningless (c) ignore the WWPA blacklist.

After all, it's not like the WWPA blacklist makes it impossible to play someone on the blacklist.  There is no enforcement of this sort on weewar.com at all.  It doesn't even put a scarlet letter, as it were, on the listed players, when seen on the weewar.com pages.

Treat others as you'd expect to be. The WWPA means you generally adhere to a standard of behavior. Nobody is saying you have to join it. Nobody is saying you can't do what's right for you.

I realize that and I'm just expressing my opinion on the standards you follow for the game. Just as you're entitled to discuss your opinions on the game.

Fair enough. 

I can't wait until you become an old fart, Durhim.

When you suffer pain so crippling that you cannot move!!  When all an analgesic can do is make you too stupid to think about the pain for a couple hours.

Yes!  You are just expressing your opinion but it is difficult to understand you with your buttocks resting on your shoulders.

...

whatever slug, I'm 41 so I'm hardly some naive punk

I would give a quarter of a century to be forty-one.

Too bad though, I would have preferred ignorance to stupidity.

well, someone can't take a difference of opinion without resorting to personal attacks. suit yourself though, it only makes you look small.

It's not your difference of opiinion, D.  it's your apparent inability to acknowledge the its inherent flaw.

       ignorant = lacking in information, stupid = lacking in reason

Wow, that's cute.

whoa, they agreed to disagree, peace had broken out, smilees were being brandished rather than swords, lets move on. 

Erm... okay, guys, if you insist on being unpleasant, I'd ask you to take it to a private thread. 

+1 yay pistos! 

got to say Pistos...I still think that the term "Blacklist" is bad to use. It just has too many negative connotations.

I still wish you could consider calling it something else.

Any suggestions? 

"Deviants"? 

"Greylist"? 

Thanks Pistos.

as for the name, I agree that it might sound to harsh, especially if we discuss it here and folks not knowing what we are about.

WWPA violators?

no, i cant think of a better one

I think "Greylist" may get the point(s) across.

"Players to avoid"

That's not bad.

'Smelly Fish'? 

Prompt kickers?

I have suggested this before and I still think it would generate a lot less heat if the "grey list" was available to logged in wwpa members only. So it would be less of a wall of shame and more of a service for its members.

I have renamed it to the WWPA Greylist.  I am undecided on making it a private list.  What do others think?

Make it private to encourage more players to sign up for WWPA.

Not sure how much of an incentive that would be. 

Tell them there will be punch and pie.

And free beer, courtesy of Goater?

I've not yet worked out the kinks in my Beer-Over-IP, or BOIP, yet.  Expect my IPA IPO soon, though.

If there were beer and pie, I'd even join! peace to y'all.

Blacklisted is fine IMO. WWPA is not like, say, the front page of youtube.com with your picture and direction to your place. Why would non-WWPA browse the list if they don't plan to join and don't care for that sort of stuff? If someone is a jerk, let it be known. Life is short, in my gaming carreer I went through enough idiots that I now want to stay away from them.

sorry Brainz I'm still here

For one, the bad guys could check the list to see who wont kick them, but dont wanna join so that they will keep the opportunity to kick

but generally I agree, why should non WWPA members give a damm?
 

WWPA members: I am thinking of adjusting the WWPA code of conduct, as described at the WWPA website.  Specifically to do with point 1, friendly voting.  The current rules are:

1. Friendly voting. B has never voted A out of a game, OR B has voted A out of a game and:

1. B made reasonable attempt(s) to communicate with A after the turn time limit was exceeded
2. B waited at least 24 hours for A to respond
3. A made no reasonable attempt(s) to communicate to B that A would take his/her turn within a reasonable time period

I propose to remove the clause "after the turn time limit was exceeded".  The spirit of the new rule would be: You can kick at any time that you are able, providing that you gave 24 hours notice of your intent to kick, and got no communication from the kickee.  This would let people kick sooner than 48 hours in 1-day-limit games, sooner than 96 hours in 3-day-limit games.

What does everyone think?  Speak your mind! 
 

Yes it makes sense. I think from now on I'll only create games with a 3-days time limit. I had someone booting one of his neighbor player at 25h to obviously gain a game advantage. That was in a game I created. It's upsetting. I'd rather a full fun slow game then hollow games with ghost.

How many light years are we from AI?

Indirectly I think the whole 'kick' thing is caused by full HQ that people want to empty... We don't want the games to stall because we cannot join nor create new games (except per invite which removes the whiol fun of playing people you don't know).

Yes, that is clearly the major reason.  (The only reason?)

As for AI: I have been mulling things over in my head, because I think I'd have more fun programming an AI than playing myself.  First step is to have a robot login, which I haven't been able to accomplish yet.
 

Once I have something going, I intend to open it up so that people can submit scripts for their AI.

i thought hugo was joking when he said "AI", but it seems like you're serious about it pistos, huh?  that'd be really cool to play against some AI players too. 

^ Usually AI are not as challenging as (most/some) human players and tend to be predictable, but it's all good. Lux has some really great user-made AI, and a few very difficult ones too, each with their personality.

I mentioned AI in relation to people being kicked and their units sitting by idly. At least if someone is removed an eventual AI could replace the player that's goner.

Just make the AI flood that corner of the map with infantry, the 'Zapp Brannigan Method'

hugo: The difference here would be that AI authors can refine and resubmit their scripts, making them smarter and smarter.

Allowing external AIs to play in regular games (properly marked as such of course) is hugely interesting to us. It would require a substantial extension to the api but it is defenitely something we want to offer eventually. Imagine you can start a game and invite a mix of humans and different remotely hosted AIs. It is the future! (sorry for high jacking the wwpa thread). We are not quite ready to support this but will hopefully soon be able to have an informed discussion.

Alex: I'm ready whenever you guys are.  Any little bit of cooperation from your end would help my development a lot.  Otherwise, I am groping in the dark by reverse engineering your AJAX and form posts, etc.

I've moved the AI discussion over here.  Please continue the AI thread over there if you have anything to say on that topic.

I just tried to make a Greylist submission, but the tweewarpa email address came back as No Such User. Is there a different address I should be using? I sent it to tha gee mayul place, did I get it wrong?

The username is weewarpa.  The provider is gmail.

Hey pistos, fyi, the weewar replay thing is broken.

I've let all my Weewar third-party development sit idle while the core devs stabilize their servers, apis and URIs.  I'll get back to things in the [near?] future.

Thanks for the report, though.

Hey Pistos ... I hate to ask, but can you reset my WWPA account and retain any certs that I might have?  I thought I knew the password, but I can't figure it out.  I used every variation of the password that I could come up with, but nothing worked.  I did check the case on my username and tried different cases on the password, but to no avail.  My username is "Tracy".

Thanks, Tracy

Tracy: Send me a Tangler PM with a special keyword and a new password, then add that keyword to your weewar profile, then give me a URL to your profile to show the change.  I will then set your password to the new password.

It isn't that quick for me to swap certs or things.

Pistos - I forgot my password too. My username is dnorton.  Thanks!

DNorton: Follow the same instructions I gave to Tracy.

Hi folks and members of the WWPA

I happened to notice that somebody listed me in the "grey list". After I read the "laws" the WWPA abides I was confused. I am a reasonable player who hates it, when games become imbalanced because someone leaves. So I thougth to myself why on earth should I be greylisted?!

The game on the link is fairly old, but after a reading the chat and thinking about it a while I remembered what happened. It was in mid game, I was playing very good so all turned against me. 2 players allied in chat and the 3rd did not reply to anything. Still the 2nd and 3rd player did not attack each other anymore and the 3rd player could throw everything at me instead of deviding it for two fronts.

I was kind of pissed about the prospect of paying points to ALL players, even though I might have won or at least make 2nd place.

At this time the 3rd player - who never spoke in the chat before - told us that he will be gone over the weekend. Just one line, all the direct questions we asked him earlier remained unanswered.

A few days later, when he was well overdue, I recapped the situation. That 3rd player was the weakest and would probably not survive the next 5 rounds. Still he was producing all he could in the cities on my border and nothing on his other border. The math was easy: he will be a pain in the ass to me for a few more rounds before he resigns and presents his bases on a platter to the 2nd player.

I explained that in the chat and voted him out before he could imbalance the game even more.

So now, I would like very much to be removed from that grey list, where all the mean droners and hideous voters are collected. I am a nice guy, I really am.  Just ask the people I played with.


Thank you

Basti

I've [re-]reviewed the game's chat log.  Here's an excerpt:

Basti removed titelines from this game.
Hugh Whoa, that's harsh, Basti - removing a player who gave fair notice of their absence.
Basti Yes, it is
Basti But my reasoning still stands. [...]

Here you admit that you booted him without giving warning.  I interpret that as a violation of the WWPA code of conduct.  The standards ask that you try to contact the player about your intention to boot, and that you wait for 24 hours before booting.  You did neither, it seems.  I don't see why this case should be reopened.

Nevertheless, I am open to anyone making an effort to demonstrate that they've changed their ways and that "from now on" they are playing by the WWPA rules.  The current means of getting off the list is: become a WWPA member and raise your certification above 0.00.  If you can achieve this, I will take you off the greylist.

Well, I never said, that I gave him a warning before booting him - which is by itself needless and stupid. If somebody doesn't go online to check his games, he won't be able to read the warnings. And if he does go online, I can't imagine, why he shouldn't just make his move.

Back to my "case" - your honor. I thought I made it clear, that the circumstances were special and the consequences for the player I voted out did not change. It just made the game more balanced. He wouldn't have survived he next rounds anyway, but he was not playing fair. And I thought, the WWPA is all about fair play.

Unfortunately you seem to hard line some artificial rules which lack a certain quality and common sense that I would expect from a "law".

Fortunately the WWPA is not part of our cute little weewar we play everyday. Because weewar is about fun, about kicking some ass and getting ones ass kicked. The rules of weewar are pretty clear, if you are overdue, players may vote you out. If you were nice enough in your manners and can convince all others to wait for you a few days, then good. If not: Tough luck! Go cry. Lose some points. So what?! This is WEEWAR and not the Wallstreet.

And of course I will not join some club where somebody set up a "code of conduct" like we had back when we were little kids. Do you also print little membership cards that give me a refund in my local crybabystore?

hrhr, sorry, I got carried away here. Where was I? Ah, yes

And of course I will not join some club just to get my name off some list that is irrelevant outside that club. Who knows, maybe you will add some other "laws" to your "code of construct" like "leaver bases are to be left alone" or "only cowards use artillery".

In contrary:
I now proudly stand tall at the beginning of your grey list to show everybody, how much sense that list makes and how accurate people can and should be judged by it.

Go on and denunciate others. Nobody can stop you, it is your right. 

Basti

PS: I also eat little babies and tell bad jokes.

Bipolar?

Well, I'm glad you realise that the WWPA is in no way official or binding, that you have every right to kick when you want, and that the WWPA has every right to put you on their greylist.

So many people would take it as a personal insult, then proceed to demand the WWPA change their rules because what they did is of course perfectly legitimate gameplay.

On another note: There was another potential droning case brought to my attention recently.  What does everyone think about unspoken collusion?  I am about 65/35 leaning towards silent alliances being okay, and part of the game; at least in a 2 vs. 1 vs. 1 situation.  Probably not so much in a 2 vs. 1 game.  :)

At the same time, the 35% part of me can see how it seems underhanded to enter a 4-way supposed free-for-all and make the other two players think they need to fight all 3 other opponents, while the secret team of 2 keeps open borders and advances on the remaining 2.

Thoughts?

the problem being that it is "unspoken" and "secret"...proving this is very hard. often times in multis it is very easy to form a non-spoken alliance with someone else who's goals mimic your own. For example: One player gains an advantage, and the other players band together, though nothing is said.

What I'm getting at is that you are entering a slippery slope, and it would be best to approach it cautiously. I agree with your 65 side.

i have non-spoken agreements all the time, to not fight and to fight, in 2 players and multi games. 

I assume you're referring to this game that I reported recently:

http://battleground1.weewar.com/game/74635

I admit that many times it's hard to prove unspoken/secret collusion. But when you can, it seems on par with droning. The motivation is hardly any different. You're using two accounts to reap points off of unsuspecting other players.

1. These guys joined my game. They could easily have said "how about top vs. bottom" or even during the game agreed to an alliance in the chat. While allying in the middle can be kind of lame, it's legitimately part of the game and saying it in chat puts the other players on notice that they may have to fight against others.

2. It's obviously not in the spirit of the WWPA to allow secret collusion. Generally speaking, I think the purpose is to provide opponents that give FAIR games. When they don't do this, it seems to me that addition to the gray list is legitimate.

3. In the game at hand, Purple (one of the two) was getting rolled by yellow while red (the other of the two) was easily handling me (blue). Purple sent an infantry unit and, without being opposed, took red's base. That's what tipped me off that this wasn't merely two people choosing their battles wisely.

--

I guess my point is that alliances and diplomacy are part of the game, but it becomes an unfair disadvantage when it's unannounced and uninvited. It's two people coming into a game and deciding to ruin it.

oh, also, tell me if i'm wrong, but I don't think i probably should have incurred the verbal abuse from the guy. i was trying to be as polite and reasonable as possible.

zoroaster: Well, until I make any changes to the WWPA rules, collusion does not fall under the realm of droning.  In your case, I would judge that collusion is definitely present; but it's hard for me to conclude that droning is going on, hence my not adding those players to the greylist.

Maybe we'd like to change the WWPA rules to make collusion a violation; but until then collusion is still valid in WWPA play.

And nobody deserves verbal abuse in a game.  :)  I affirm you and anyone else that puts in some effort to be reasonable and polite.

okay. then add it. i don't mind that you can't do it for these guys this time, but it's unacceptable and unfair practice to collude without their opponents being informed of it. The reasons that it's unacceptabe are the same as droning:

1. It makes the game unfair for unwary participants. WWPA is about (correct me if i'm wrong) helping assure that players you face are playing you transparently and fairly.

2. It is done for the purpose of boosting the ratings of the players involved.

The definitional difference between droning and what happened here is simply that, though Cussler is obviously willing to let bacpad win eventually (he just let bacpad take the base back), he does care about his rating as it pertains to the others in the game. For the people that the droning rule is supposed to protect, it is an inconsequential difference.

---

I should reiterate that this isn't about alliances announced or discussed in the chat. This is about whether the WWPA allows people to get off the hook by coming into each game and ganging up on everyone else without their knowledge. It creates an unfair environment that reduces the enjoyment for all else involved and it destroys the integrity of multiplayer games.

Any objections or other comments?  I'll make a rule change proposal soon.

although undeniably unfair, I dont think you can or shoud do anything about issues like this.

It can happen by coincidence that you happen to be in a common game with another player and suddenly the suggestion on teaming up on another game comes up. Of course, you would not go and make a big announcement in the other game then

the difference between droning and secret team up is that one is just unfair where the other is outright cheating.

So, although it sucks if it happens to you, I agree, I probably have done secret teamups myself on occasion as well.

undeniably unfair and you shouldn't do anything? If the consequences were official weewar sanctions (suspension, etc.) then I think I agree with you. But it's not.

but yes. I think you should discuss it in that game's chat.

Don't get me wrong, I think the standard for being put on the greylist should be pretty high. It's fairly difficult to prove that someone's colluding secretly, after all. But in cases where it's blatant (and these will be the most egregious violations anyway), it can be shown with little room for doubt. For example, in the game above, Purple and red have swapped, without opposing each other, one of the bases depending on how the game is going.

I wouldnt mind if it was proven that the same players secretly join up throughout multiple games. This would show a willful continuous collusion from the begining by the same players (or single player).

Anything else should not be included in the wwpa rules.

If this happens continuesly over time I could get on board with greylisting someone, but based on just one game like the one Zoraster described is not a good idea me thinks.

Yeah, I think the proposed rule will have to somehow mention repeated offences.

yeah, i have no problem with it only being repeat offenses. But I think that people who suspect collusion should be encouraged to report the problem even if it's not repeat. Otherwise it puts those who suspect someone in the position of having to completely research a players' games... and if a player only colludes on one game at a time, it'd be virtually impossible.

I think collusion, whether private or in the open remains the game's biggest weakness—or at least part of the game's biggest weakness—in that patrolling fairness isn't built into the game. Too often in games, after a few rounds in, two players will make their agreement once it's clear that one player is now the underdog. So, it leaves that 4th player to simply "take it" and, at best, partner with the underdog 3rd or simply leave the 3rd alone as you try to stave off first elimination. Either way, you can only hope for 3rd.

The greylist, and the WWPA, is the most impotent thing...it's value is innocuous, especially as the game grows.

it's not that i agree with collusion, much less practice it. But alliances are part of any multi-player game.  Multiplayer games are about dealing with many different opponents at once.  And with that  part of the strategy of winning multiplayer games is learning how to team up when you need to balance out a stronger player.

For this reason, i know alot of players who don't play multiplayer games, and that is their prerogative. But if you do join a multiplayer game, getting ganked by multiple players is a risk you are choosing to take. The WWPA should stay out of this aspect of the game, except for the most blantant and obvious forms of collusion, i.e. repeated collusion by the same players.

I think I am leaning towards dpache's sentiments in this regard.  On-the-spot alliances, secret or otherwise, seem okay.  But repeated collusion from the beginning of each of multiple games does seem dastardly.

dpache said (more eloquently than i could have) what i've been thinking.  tx

I'm a little surprised that the lack of gamesmanship is condoned by so many...

While it is a risk you take when you join a multi-player game, it doesn't make it right. Droning is also a risk you take when joining a multi-player game, but that's not fair, right?  The difference to me is grey. It's either 1 person with two accounts or 2 people with 1 account each basically tilting the odds so far in their favor that it makes impossible for others to succeed. I'm of the mind that the best should win, and not the most should win...

I'd love to see the WeeWar society frown upon collusion, regardless of whether it will still happen, in just the way we do with droning. To that end, I think policing for fairness should be built into the game properly, whether by developing a user rating system or some other way that I'm not clever enough to devise.

I completely agree with Saint. I think when people are put on notice of an alliance, fair enough. But players shouldn't be expected, when playing with WWPA condoned players, to encounter secret alliances that put them at an unstated disadvantage. I understand why you wouldn't want to put someone on the grey list for one violation (for droning or unfair voting for that matter) because of evidence issues (how do you prove it without multiple instances), but in the abstract, I don't understand why you need it to be multiple times for it to be unfair and contrary.

If WWPA's lists aren't there so that players can check and see whether their opponents are going to give them a fair game, I don't know what it is there for.

I agree with not including people on the grey list until there are multiple complaints, but not because secret collusion is okay in one instance but not okay in multiple. It's not okay in any instance.

zoraster: Well said.  I'll formulate and draft up a new rule set, and post it here for final feedback before enacting it.

Alright, ladies and gentlemen, please review the following proposal for an update Code of Conduct for WWPA members. Please note that I am also amending rule 1 in an attempt to expedite the kicking process when a WWPA member wishes to kick.

1. Friendly kicking. B has never kicked A out of a game, OR B has kicked A out of a game and:
1.1 B clearly communicated, either to A in particular, or to all of the game's participants in general, that B intends to kick
1.2 Within 24 hours of the time of B's declaration of intent to kick, or the beginning of A's turn (whichever is later), A failed to provide a reasonable explanation for any delay in taking the turn
2. No droning. A has never witnessed B being or using a drone player. (A drone player being defined as a player in a game being used to augment or benefit the in-game welfare or point rating of another player with little to no regard for its own in-game welfare or rating.)
3. No collusion. A has never witnessed B participating in an undeclared alliance from the start of a game. ("Undeclared" meaning not clearly made known to all the game's participants.)

I've actually found it rather difficult to write up the rules so that they are both unambiguous and easy to understand.  But anyway, I believe the above communicates the spirit of the 'law'.

I should also state that I've deliberately left in the grey and relative quality of the rules, since this is supposed to be a social, community-based thing as opposed to a strictly legal one.

i'm a law student, and i can tell you that legislatures have equal difficulty making rules that are both unambiguous and easy to understand.

in any case, it looks good to me. ultimately, you'll have to be the arbiter of what is and isn't collusion which gives you a good bit of leeway in making sure that the rule doesn't become unmanageable.

Thanks for your input. zoraster.

i think it's good.

I'm ok with these revised rules, but would propose to Pistos, that you emphasize this point on collusion:

A has never witnessed B participating in an undeclared alliance from the start of a game.

I would recommend that you stress this point since players may assume collusion is any undeclared alliance that forms throughout a multiplayer game. I still feel you need to be extra careful in putting anyone on the greylist for collusion. This is not because I condone it, but because  someone  could very easily be falsely accused.

To SaintArved and zoraster:

I understand where you guys are coming from, but feel the WWPA should be extra careful when it comes to collusion, as there is alot of grey area when it comes to alliances. In truth, during a multiplayer game, alliances can be formed and broken many times over. It is in this dynamic that someone could very easily get the wrong idea and accuse someone of collusion. This, in turn, would offend that person when they find out they are being investigated by the WWPA, or worse when they find themselves publicly humiliated by being posted on the dreaded "greylist".

is the Weewar enhancer the upgrade? I clicked on the link and i wont pull it up on my computer.

dpache1: Okay, I will italicize that clause.  As for being careful: To date, I think I have ranged from reasonably careful to downright strict in considering people innocent until proven guilty.  If there is reasonable doubt about a presented case, I do not add to the greylist.  To date, there have been a number of cases that I have dismissed on account of insufficient evidence.

Rexking: The Weewar Enhancer is a greasemonkey script I wrote a long time ago.  I have not kept it up to date, so I don't know whether it still works or not.  Its main purpose is to allow you to select players on the WWPA or on weewar.com via checkboxes, then start a new game with the selected players without having to remember their nicknames.

I have a number of other programming projects on my plate, so I don't think I'll be fixing it any time soon if it is broken, unless there is great demand.

dpache: I understand that, and I agree that's fine. I agree that the most problematic part of this is that people are likely to cry collusion when it's not really there (not everyone has to attack everyone with the same strength all the time... that's strategic choices). But I'm against all undeclared alliances as a general policy... just not necessarily making a rule against all of them.

Okay, everyone, the WWPA Code of Conduct has been updated.  Adjust your behaviour accordingly.  :)