I enjoy playing as Italy. If you like, I'd take over.

@jmo
You are right though that this incident and one other that happened two weeks ago involving user goldfinger have probably brought to the forefront a character flaw that I need to work on.

"Well previously it was declared not to be so. But now Jmo says the rules have changed..."

@jamiet, don't pretend like I'm speaking on behalf of the mods. If I were a mod then I'd have a checkerboard. If you have something you want clarification on rule wise then email them.

I'm guessing the comedy cube is real. JMO isn't funny anymore

@Jmo: You are a former mod who is very well respected here, and whose word carries weight. You made a clear statement about the rules. You didn't say "I think" or "my opinion is..." you spoke as though you were presenting a statement of fact.

I do not suggest you are speaking as a spokesperson for the Mods. Nowhere did I say that. However, this issue has not arisen for a while and perhaps you are right - perhaps the rule has changed.

I have publicly requested a mod ruling on this - and in that request I have been careful to describe you as a "former" mod. I hope that meets with your approval.

Jamiet99uk never met a rule he didn't want clarified.

@ OB: I think the position was quite clear and I am surprised that Jmo is taking this view.

To clarify, my understanding of the rules is that metagaming is when information or actions from outside of the game that are *not available to all members of the game* are used to impact the game.

In this specific situation I was referring to the fact that there has never been, to my knowledge, a decision on whether changing play-style on a sitters identity is allowed. And I think this decision rests on the question of: Is a sitter expected to play the country to the best of their abilities or play to the best of their abilities in the bounds of the alliances detailed by the original member. In the case of someone temporarily taking over a game I would expect the initial member to leave instructions and for the sitter to read past press to mimic the members play-style to the best of their capacity. Hence if another member in the game starts changing their interactions to match the sitters past play-style, and not the play-style of the initial players instructions you would have a negative impact to the game due solely to information that is outside the game (the sitters play-style).

Additionally, since the initial member and the sitter are NOT required within the rules to tell any or all members that there is a sitter in the game, there is information in play that may or may not be available to all members equally. Which is where the line between allowable and non-allowable metagaming was drawn in the past. Per the conversation you referenced earlier. So yes, a ruling by the mods probably needs to be made, and I expect it to be something along the lines of:

If the answer to the earlier question is to the best of the sitters ability then:
Members/sitters are required to announce their presence in a non-anon game in global press and the ending of the sitting period. As well as, members/sitters are not allowed to announce their identity in an anonymous game, but must announce there is a sitter

If the answer is the sitter should follow the guidelines left to them then:
There should be no identity revealed in any case about who the sitter is, merely that there is one since anyone should be able to follow instructions.

Since that would remove the "equal" factor/borderline situation. However, I have no idea what the actual decision/if any will be.

^ This is not what you said before. You stated that taking into account another player's previous game history was illegal metagaming that would be punished.

I am kinda glad for your clarification but it's totally not what you previously said.

I had about 30 seconds before to write my thoughts, and figured it was clear I meant in the context of a sitter in a game since that was the situation presented. It apparently was not clear at all, so I apologize for that.

By the way if it hadnt been HR it would have been me. I was asked to sub in but my RR was too low. 87. The game is 90

Er sit in. Not sub

Jamiet, you know it's true. You're a little rule obsessed. No disrespect.

brainbomb, no one gives a fuck.

I'd just like to point out that regardless of the right or wrong answer to the question in discussion, civwarbuff has come across as damn classy in his calm, thoughtful, respectful responses.

^ multi

I hope I'm allowed to be replaced everytime I feel as if I'm losing a game!

@DO, I don't think the point is entirely that he is losing, but that the way that the sit in has presented himself has presents an unfair skew to alliances, especially after the public mockery that has happened towards CivWarBuff. Correct me if I'm wrong.

No. The whole reason this dramatic scene happened in the first place was because things didn't go the way he wanted them to go. I think he needs to realize that his gameplay style of making threats and absolutes in an attempt to get others to do what he wants isn't going to work with players who've played more than one game of diplomacy. I greatly dislike sore losers.

The only reason that I asked to be replaced is because of the situation that arose in the game. My position in the game was fine.

OB man, I said someone was a multi on the forum as a joke and I earned a forum warning...

And the dude was actually a multi lol

I am not beholden to DemonOverlord and I do not have a regret in being replaced. It is unfortunate though that DemonOverlord has elected to slander me.

I know that bo-sox and goldfinger want to play, so maybe I will do that.

@brainbomb
I have no connection to Denoiden. Also, I have never been replaced in a game that had already begun before, so I don't think that attacking my integrity is fair.

Please do not make cheating accusations on the forum, OB_Gyn_Kenobi.

Hellenic Riot (webDiplomacy Administrator)

You might be just,taking it too harshly.

Im not attacking you at all... I dont know you. Im simply saying calm down its just a dip game.

A 35 point pot no less. Lol. Like fuck ppl are dying out there.

I don't care about the points or anything. I don't expect to get the points back. It just all got really ugly and this is for the best.

All I'm saying is, next time a game doesn't go my way I'll just throw a public hissy fit and get subbed out ;)