Maybe I'm unique, but I would rather a small dedicated community than the crap attitudes I've seen coming in of late.

It has been suggested one shouldn't start a game knowing that one ahs to ask for a pause somewhere during the game. If that's the case, I woulod be completely unable to play. I usually play games of 2 days/phase. It takes about 3 months to get to 1910, and then the game is all but finished. The times when I know exactly what I'm doing for the next 3 months are rare.

like i said BESM its your right to have whatever opinion you want. and to clarify im not vacationing in vegas its a huge conference and im there for the career opportunity. not everyone can be as dedicated as you, entering orders while your father is on his death bed. again i didnt claim my situation was an emergency. some games im in i joined months ago when i got back into diplomacy after a long break. so i just shouldnt play any games because i have an engagement in a couple months? sorry but i just wasnt thinking about that. if no one joined any games because of future plans there would be a lot less players and games.

Since it's in a non-anon game, I think it's fair to say it was BESM who refused to pause on me, and that was mostly me realizing at the last minute that the phase length was not what I thought it was. He did agree to let the clock wear out on moves, though, which saved me from a possible true NMR (a retreat phase triggered that I wasn't a party to).

Whenever someone asks me for a favor, ,it's my choice whether to grant it or not. I got a sitter once, too, and that worked out well. I recommend it.

The question one should ask oneself is "Is diplomacy important to me?" If the answer is 'yes', you will find a way of playing or find a sitter - and if the answer is 'no' then why is it so important that players pause for you? If you nd up losing a game that isn't important then so what?

Maniac is a very smart person.

it is important to me, thats why i asked for the pause. i dont want to be so preoccupied that i miss one phase whether it costs me the game or not.

"The question one should ask oneself is "Is diplomacy important to me?" If the answer is 'yes', you will find a way of playing or find a sitter - and if the answer is 'no' then why is it so important that players pause for you? If you nd up losing a game that isn't important then so what? "

That's total BS. If the game is important to you, you should know it's played with 7 people and CDs tend to ruin games. If you can't figure this out... not pausing is the least of your worries :)

The question one should ask oneself is "Is winning important to me?" If the answer is 'yes', you should never vote to pause.

Wow... brilliant logic. Cheating should also be ok then?

lol and if your ally is the one who needs the pause then you shouldn't vote pause either? what kind of logic is that? Anyway, I for one cannot understand why someone would refuse to pause a game when someone asks for it. Especially when the person has a very good reason. I have read that with free wifi and smartphones everywhere, there is no excuse when going on a trip. That may be the case in the USA or UK, but I for one am from Venezuela and many times I have had to go away on business trips to places where I don't even have signal on my mobile. If I cannot even make a call, how could I possibly connect to the internet? There are many members of this community from all over the world and such reasons should be considered.

Such reasons warrant a sitter. But we've already seen that some players just refuse to pause a game.

guak-Red is going to Vegas. He's going to have lots of down time away from business. He just doen't want to think about Dip. He also asked for almost a week in a 36 hour game. But the point still is, the pause, like the cancel or the draw, requires everyone agree. That means anyone can refuse. Sorry Ivo thinks that's the same as cheating. He is, after all, one of my favorite players. Whether the player is ally or enemy shouldn't reallly affect the decision. But, in Red case, a sitter is a good choice as is internet at any hotel in vegas. his problem stems from the epectation of the pause, not because of an emergency or even any last minute move to the center of the rain forrest. He just seemed to think his comfort was worth inconveniencing any of the other players in the game. Since I was in the game, I didn't think so. Fortunately, I had a vote. Such is dip life.

Actually, I know where and what Red Sq is going to Vegas for and he's unlikely to have a single moment to himself.

i am not going to have a lot of down time that is why i ASKED. i didnt demand or expect it. i was very apologetic to all the players in my games and recognized that pausing is a pain in the ass! i dont like it either but such is dip life. anyway i think i may have found a sitter.

also very much disagree with not pausing when your ally needs one. that should definitely affect your decision.

I can tell you for a fact he won't pause for an ally, and I respect that more. Equal protection.

i guess at least his stand is not just if it benefits him. but is that really smart? what if not pausing for an ally certainly means you will be eliminated?

The ally comment referred to Geofram's comment that stated "The question one should ask oneself is "Is winning important to me?" If the answer is 'yes', you should never vote to pause." If that is the question that needs to be answered, then his logic is flawed because if an ally needs a pause it may give him a better chance to win than allowing him to be overrun by an opposing faction.

On a separate note, as long as people are being reasonable on when to pause the games and when not to, I don't see a problem. But saying you will never under any circumstance pause a game seems to me a huge lack of sportsmanship. I for one believe that if a pause will allow the game to run more smoothly it should be given.

And regarding the alternative of a sitter, there are three great disadvantages: the first one is the anonymous games played, the second one is that it is not always possible to find a reliable sitter on short notice and the third one is that the moves made by the sitter during the absence of the person in question may be crucial and be the deciding factor in a game. It would suck to win or lose because of moves made by another person.

"The question one should ask oneself is "Is winning important to me?" If the answer is 'yes', you should never vote to pause. "

Pauses are not supposed to be tactical/strategic tool. This is in the site rules.

The moral question of whether to pause or not to pause is dilemma. Personally I always pause when requested, but I understand why some players hate pauses.
Ideally all players should be on the same page about whether pauses are allowed or not.

The next time I start a game, it will forum recruited with certain rules agreed to by all players, such regarding the question of pauses- this must be made clear from the outset. I think this is the best way to avoid confusion and bad feeling.

Would be nice if there werer a pause/no pause when setting up just like WTA or PSCC and time limits. i don't know how you control for pausers.

someone mentioned this earlier but if pauses had time limit options so that they would definitely unpause at a certain point would also be good

Having the option should not be too complicated, maybe the timed pauses would.

iF we had timed pauses, i would have no real problem with pauses. It's the no end in sight part. Though I know we can force the unpaus with a mod, that is more work than we should have to do because some inconsiderate boob screwed up. For now, the onlly option is not pausing, though as sacred noted, one can delay finalizing for the full time limit and that is fine with me.

@bas - "It has been suggested one shouldn't start a game knowing that one ahs to ask for a pause somewhere during the game. If that's the case, I woulod be completely unable to play. I usually play games of 2 days/phase. It takes about 3 months to get to 1910, and then the game is all but finished. The times when I know exactly what I'm doing for the next 3 months are rare. "

But that is different from *knowing* you will have to ask. You don't know what is going to happen, so you don't know you will have to ask. But if you have a trip planned in 10 weeks, don't start a game.

"But if you have a trip planned in 10 weeks, don't start a game. "

That would mean some people simply could not play at this site. I think this is advice is a bit extreme. Don't start a game with people whose policy is not to pause sure; but feel free to start a game with *me* anytime. I don't mind, and plenty of others don't mind either.

A pause option would be nice, but since that is not available might be best to arrange certain conditions in the forum first.

One of the few rules we do have Geo is not to use the pause feature as a diplomatic weapon.

It wouldn't be a diplomatic weapon. It would be refusing to pause whether it meant a disadvantage to you or your enemy.

You could always say to the creator of the game or in the thread in which the game is being created, "Hey, I have a trip planned in ten weeks, is that going to be a problem for anybody who is signing up for this?"

My point is that, if you *know* something is going to come up while the game is still ongoing (a preplanned event) then make certain everyone is OK with the pause before you join.