Without wanting to piss on anyone's cheerios, I have to agree with Ghost, flash.

There is a simple workaround that has been proposed to you (utilize olidip or one of the other alternate servers) that would allow seven players who wish to play a game where the results are effectively unranked. If memory serves, your response was something to the effect that you enjoy the caliber of competition you receive here compared to olidip.

With respect, you appear to have a problem - a strong distaste for people utilizing rankings as part of their decision making process - but are asking others to solve it without apparently being willing to make any sacrifices yourself. Were this just a matter of stating a desire that would be one thing, but you appear to have made disparaging remarks of others because they do not make your priority *their* priority. I would urge you to consider how you would feel were the situation reversed.

It would appear a short term solution would be to attempt to locate players - via forum post or private message - *here* who are willing to play a game *there*, with the stated intention of bypassing the baggage you perceive as inherent in the ranking system. This is something you can do today, with minimal effort and without being dependent upon anyone else, and without waiting for someone to supply a 'magic button'

If you are *unable* to locate six others willing to do so, then that - to me - would be an indication that you wouldn't exactly be inundated with nonranked games here even if this feature was implemented.

stratagos +1

Stratagos +.5

I'm deducting for the faulty assumption:

"If you are *unable* to locate six others willing to do so, then that - to me - would be an indication that you wouldn't exactly be inundated with nonranked games here even if this feature was implemented."

I'm not on OliDip because I don't want to have to go to two sites all the time to keep up with my games. I'm sure plenty of others feel the same way, so making that assumption is invalid as you haven't had the opportunity to see any data in relation to that corellary, much less apply any stringent tests to see if other factors might be coming into play.

Beyond that, I agree with the added caveat that I want to put the magic button in myself (willingness and talent, just looking to make the time).

Oh, and despite that fact that I play to have fun, I finally went and checked my position on this months GR and I jumped up another 74 spots to 370 from 444. And I wasn't even trying...

I did say it was an *indication*, not that it was conclusive proof. OTOH, if it's really that grating an issue for certain types of players, I imagine the added annoyance of a second site would be considered minor

Yeah, it's really a balancing scale thing. My point was, even as an indication, that is a huge assumption. there has been no established cause and effect between the two to say it is anything more than circumstancial coincidence.

Geez, Draug, like I'm the *only* person around here guilty of gross overgeneralization - have you read 90% of the forums? ;)

No, only 89%. :-)

Marvelous:

a) the solution to something affecting this site, something that is not actually a part of this site, is to go play on another site...

b) TGM: you talk about how you nearly left yourself. The words drama queen come to mind. People did leave, other people, good people and without any fuss or public flourish. Some have effectively left and are only playing out a trivial number of games.

Saying that something is history so we should forget it doesn't cut. If something was wrong, it was wrong and needed to be dealt with. You were told clearly at the time the incident occurred in the Premier League that you were making a serious mistake. For you to now even start hinting that you recognise that this was so (above) is not exactly going to get much sympathy from those affected. The best you can do is learn from it.

Your efforts have been appreciated - said by all and sundry above and elsewhere, and yet also perhaps overdone. You obviously cannot and never could contemplate the same level of effort for this site when you hit Uni as you have at school, something that you will find when you go to work as well. With the first term approaching fast, running down your involvement was already on the cards. What are you reading, Maths? You'll get more headaches from that than anything you had from Diplomacy.

I could have been a lot kinder in my words above regarding having non-rated games if you had simply said something like, 'I agree but have no time. Someone else should code for it.'

stratagos: there are multiple themes/problems that TGM and I are referring to here, not just the GRs. He has referred to other issues himself as this thread developed from the GR starting point.

flashman, stop being stupid. I didn't hint that I thought I had made a mistake, I hinted that people disagreed with my decision. I didn't enjoy the whole affair one bit, largely due to the fact that you were remarkably ungracious during the whole thing. I stand by my decision, and only you actually objected. My decision, remember, was that I wouldn't do anything not provided for in the rules unless there was universal agreement to do it.

Not so radical really?

I have no qualms with discussing these matters to learn from them, but there has been *nothing* to learn from this thread regarding these leagues. The only thing I have learnt is that you quite like talking about times when you think you've been wronged. The only interesting question you can actually answer is "what, in future, can be done about NMRs to minimise the effects of them in the leagues?" Given that the pauses now tell you the time remaining, the exact circumstances cannot be repeated.

In the event, every course of action had *someone* opposed to it.

Anyway, unless this discussion about the leagues is going to become helpful, it isn't worth having. I prefer not to dwell on acrimony.

I am fully aware that I cannot do as much at uni as I can now.

what are ghost-ratings?

@ flash - I had not realized the discussion had broadened into a clash of personalities; otherwise I would have kept out of it.

@ killer - http://tournaments.webdiplomacy.net/theghost-ratingslist

Actually TGM, this present discussion/thread is about the GRs, not the Leagues - that came up as a side issue, and I have definitely been able to read above that you both agree with the concept of non-rated games and yet seem determined not to see it happen. Baggage?

No, as I have said, it is low on a list of priorities that I would have. Draugnar and I will hopefully do some work on making tournaments less of a hassle to run, and Draugnar has said he is willing to make the unrated games option in with that. Given that, I am more than happy to see it added so long as Kestas agrees to it.

@flash - Ghost isn't "determined to not see them happen", he just is not able to give the time to all the things he considers even higher priorities, so won't put the time to make something way down on his list of priorities happen. I am going to be working with him to try and pick up some of the development slack while he is at Uni. I would like to see this as well, so I will look into doing it when I'm making the league and tournament changes.

@Ghost - Get that list of things to me so I can start looking at them this weekend. Also, what is the URL for the latest code. I don't have it handy.

Sorry, I was typing all that when you did your equivalent post, Ghost.