Originally posted by GiannottiThanks for your feedback. Probably no clan will get everything it wants, but if we can get broad-based support for a negotiating framework, then every clan should be able to sign on to most of what it wants.
the recent posts by moonbus are a step in the right direction
i like the four point framework
can we agree to adopt this, and begin work on the details
- Joined
- 17 Jun 08
- Moves
- 179883
as we get into this
please know that i respect both the clan-centric play and fair play
shortcircuit's strategy has proven itself time and again
are we going to ask the man to play piano with mittens on?
i became a clan leader fairly recently
i've tried to avoid the collusion and counter-collusion that happened this year
The Fast Players, under my watch, will remain ethical and not interfere with fair play
i'm hoping that sound governance will come of this forum
that being said, i have to admit that this year was very exciting
when we're all done figuring out how to make everything ethical and fair, maybe we should consider a second set of clans where the mittens come off
i for one, would like to create a clan in the second (hypothetical) set
it'd be fun to see machiavellian creativity turned loose
i'd tell players to win for the clan at all costs
i'd invite daggers, poison, infiltration, collusion, and see where it goes
maybe, rather than being suspended for ethical reasons
(which i'm all for, and trying to help facilitate)
a clan could have a place to go, where clan-centric play is rewarded
this might invigorate play
Originally posted by GiannottiYou mean create a sissy league and a Romulan league?
as we get into this
please know that i respect both the clan-centric play and fair play
shortcircuit's strategy has proven itself time and again
are we going to ask the man to play piano with mittens on?
i became a clan leader fairly recently
i've tried to avoid the collusion and counter-collusion that happened this year
The Fast Play ...[text shortened]... an could have a place to go, where clan-centric play is rewarded
this might invigorate play
Originally posted by padgerYes, the current system of awarding points does not accurately reflect a clan's depth and strength, only its profligacy. In such a mixed field as this, I doubt any single criterion of success would prove to be suitable; hence the suggestion that multiple criteria be applied for gauging clan success. This would allow several clans to show their strengths in different ways.
I would still like the points awarded for a win sorted out
The current system is daft
As I have pointed out before you should not lose points that you have already won
Several times it has been said that clans should have minimum numbers to be counted as a clan frequently 5 or more muted.
There is no basis for this as to start a clan you are but one member.
You then attempt to recruit members some quicker than others.
Surely as long as your clan plays by the same rules as larger clans then you shouldn't be kicked aside by the lack of numbers in your clan.
Lemondrop has proved that numbers are not required under the current system to climb the greasy pole.
- Joined
- 12 Nov 05
- Moves
- 145614
Originally posted by Mctaytoif my memory serves me right (possibly not) but didn't reinfield do well in the standings a couple of years back on his own?
Several times it has been said that clans should have minimum numbers to be counted as a clan frequently 5 or more muted.
There is no basis for this as to start a clan you are but one member.
You then attempt to recruit members some quicker than others.
Surely as long as your clan plays by the same rules as larger clans then you shouldn't be kicked aside ...[text shortened]... drop has proved that numbers are not required under the current system to climb the greasy pole.
I don't have an issue with one man clans and they all start with one.
Maybe have a limit of being in 2 clans at a time? - then there will be more people to go round for the clans?
- Joined
- 12 Nov 05
- Moves
- 145614
Originally posted by GiannottiSome users like just sorting out their own challenges
what inspires a player to become a clan of one?
For some it won't be by design - they will create a clan and then get stuck with recruitment/give up as there aren't lots of people actively looking for a clan - and theres little point in recruiting in the clan forum.
- Joined
- 17 Jun 08
- Moves
- 179883
in my last two posts, i wanted to show that i'm free from bias
i don't play as they do, but i accept their possibilities and acknowledge their success
chess is the best of games, and we have been invited to participate in creating sound governance for clan play on this site
let's keep our minds open and show respect
Originally posted by MctaytoAll Lemondrop has proved is that by sandbagging you can achieve all most anything
Several times it has been said that clans should have minimum numbers to be counted as a clan frequently 5 or more muted.
There is no basis for this as to start a clan you are but one member.
You then attempt to recruit members some quicker than others.
Surely as long as your clan plays by the same rules as larger clans then you shouldn't be kicked aside ...[text shortened]... drop has proved that numbers are not required under the current system to climb the greasy pole.
Originally posted by robbie carrobie1. We are not going to get consensus on basing clan standings on ratings because a number of people do not believe that this will put a stop to dead players, sandbagging, and collusion. What most posters want to see is a rule which says "no dead players, no sandbagging, no collusion etc." and punitive action for infractions.
1. Unless there is a change to an ELO based system all the other grievances and abuses of the system will persist. There is no point on discussing anything else until this is finalised.
2. Clan size is not an abuse of the system, sandbagging, end of year dumping of challenges, prematurely resigning games when a challenge is numerically won are. ...[text shortened]... 4. Unhitching clan rating from other ratings has not been addressed, this needs to be finalised.
2. I don't see the point of calling something a "clan" which has only one player. There are tournaments for those who want to play as singles. Maybe some one-man-clanist would like to express a view here, what he gets out of it or would like to get out of it.
4. Is mentioned in my summary of a framework for clan play (item 3).
Originally posted by moonbusYou can only start a clan with one player before adding to it's number thus a one man clan has to exist or new clans are dead
1. We are not going to get consensus on basing clan standings on ratings because a number of people do not believe that this will put a stop to dead players, sandbagging, and collusion. What most posters want to see is a rule which says "no dead players, no sandbagging, no collusion etc." and punitive action for infractions.
2. I don't see the point of ca ...[text shortened]... d like to get out of it.
4. Is mentioned in my summary of a framework for clan play (item 3).
Originally posted by moonbusYes clan is a collective noun but a word in favour of one man clans.
2. I don't see the point of calling something a "clan" which has only one player. There are tournaments for those who want to play as singles. Maybe some one-man-clanist would like to express a view here, what he gets out of it or would like to get out of it.
.
As a 1900-2000 player I am in the top rated banded tournaments yet am routinely expected to play 2400 players some of whom have been outed as engines. If I join a clan with similar rated players that cuts down my potential opponents. If I offer open invites anyone can pick them up and it may not suit me to play for example: non subs, returning 2400 who timed out a year ago, the same couple of players time after time. Thus the clan challenge system limits the rating spread of potential opponents, includes opponents who want roughly even matches, provides other clan leaders with potential opponents for their 2000 player if they are not biased against one man clans.
This can be just about the type of chess provided rather than the precise arrangement of electrons known as the clan table. When time allows one man clans can be expanded.