Yes I see that now Draug. Not being a gunboater I never realized that the pause button had somehow acquired this particular connotation, meaning "reduce the size of the pot". Human creativity with language never ceases to amaze me. Fascinating.

So this use of the pause button is the issue in question? Right?

The rules do state that pause/unpause is not to be used as a diplomatic tool. However there is potential confusion here. I think there could be a distinction drawn between *pressing* the pause button, and *actually* pausing the game. Thus one might think that the rule, as stated applies to the game *actually being paused*, AND not the *pressing* of the pause button itself. Thus, at first glance, it might appear that the rule is intended to stop players from refusing to unpause a game unless certain conditions are agreed to or. OR refusing to agree to a pause unless certain conditions are met. BUT regarding simply using the pause button itself as communication device - this seems to me to be a different category than the one spelled out in the rules.

Am I the only one who sees potential confusion here?

Nope, you are not spyman, which is why punishments and warnings related to this have been very light until the moderator team has time to talk as a whole and figure out how and when this rule should be applied. We don't have access to change the rules so we will have to get Kestas to change the wording for clarity's sake when we figure out an ideal way to act on these situations.

If I'm perfectly willing to draw a game and my draw vote is in, but the leader is going for a solo so doesn't vote, then another player gets down to one or two SCs I will withdraw my pause vote as a signal that I'm no longer willing to draw under the current circumstances. It's a signal, on one hand, but it is also my true intention, I no longer want the draw if we can easily thin it.

Does this count as using the pause button as a diplomatic tool? I always thought that meant you couldn't refuse to undraw unless you got your way. Signaling is different than being a stubborn douchebag.

For the moment I do not have an answer for you, though if possible to avoid any signals using pause I would. They have not and will not be "punished" until the team can figure out with Kestas how to better word that particular rule. It was originally intended to mean you cannot refuse to unpause in the hopes of getting a draw. But the current wording is more restrictive then I think it was intended to be.

Thanks jmo. I, for one think you do a hell of a job!

@philcore - I do that all the time. When someone looks like they are going for a solo, the other players start clicking draw, hoping for one. Then, when it looks like the leader will be stymied and one player will be easily knocked off, I pull my draw vote. Technically, I guess, that is using the draw button as a communication device, not a diplomatic tool. Very confusing.

@jimgov, I think the way we use it is an honest display of our intentions. It might indirectly communicate intention, but it directly says "im no longer willing to draw this game ... For now"

I think we're doing it right :-)

I interpret the draw button as "I prefer a draw to continuing the game". This also tells me something about the current worldview of the power who hit it. This does mean that I might well set draw if it looks like there is a solo threat not being properly stopped (a draw is better for me than a survive) and remove it when the solo thread has been stopped and I think my result can be improved (a draw is no longer better than playing on).

I interpret the cancel button as "I believe this game has been spoiled and therefore should be annulled". I generally use it when there is an early CD.

I interpret the pause button as "I am requesting that my neighbors stop whatever else they're doing and kill me", and comply. If I suspect my neighbors are using the cancel button in a similar way, I interpret it in the same way.

Looking at this from a very objective viewpoint as I have no idea what rule was or wasn't broken I think 30% is harsh.
Firstly how many other people have been fined 30% of their pot?
Secondly if it were so serious surely a different punishment would be appropriate i.e. not just points?
Thirdly so that everyone is completely clear what this is why don't the Mods tell us so that we all know in future these kind of rule transgression will be treated very harshly.
SplitD is obviously aggrieved because he fells the punishment was punitive although in reality it probably has not stopped him entering any games as he has a large no. of points anyway.
This highlights a good point about Moderating a site and also trying to be fair at all times. If Kestas got involved and thought 30% was appropriate this must be a very serious breach of rules but surely the only way we learn as a forum/site is that the Mods clearly state the infringement and also guarantee that people who do the same in the future will also be treated in the same way.
I think for us Users also we should not be so surprised that different Mods will see things slightly different on different occasions, a good example recently was when 2WL was silenced by Zultar and the decision was reversed within the hour, he made a mistake and it was corrected very quickly. It just feeds the belief that some players are treated more harshly based on who they are for whatever reason.
What about this idea, give Split the option of a 10% fine and a 2-week ban as opposed to a 30% fine.
Anyway ...... I'm bored now and need a coffee. Listen to me I'm the voice of reason :-) (no emoticons, Grrrr !!)

More to the point:

The idea of gunboat is simple: a game with the same mechanics as Diplomacy, but without the ability to negotiate apart from submitting orders. Gunboat is Diplomacy with no vocabulary. A game in which the draw, cancel, pause, etc. buttons can be used to communicate and negotiate is a different game -- it's standard Diplomacy with a limited vocabulary, but not no vocabulary.

Further, having any sort of canonical meanings to these buttons, in my view, is not a gray area, but clear cheating as meta-gaming. It's agreeing with another player in the game to use a set of pre-arranged signals in order to negotiate and communicate.

The following would be equivalent. Let's say that I talk with you ahead of time, and we make an agreement that anytime the two of us play a public press game, we will each send secret messages hidden as every tenth letter of our public press. So, in the event that we find each other in the same game, we'll recognize that and be able to communicate privately in addition to the public press that everybody else gets. Or, if you prefer, can a group of people pick a shared PGP key and post encrypted public press, hoping that somebody is able to read it and responds accordingly? Would that be legal? I mean, it's all public information, isn't it? Well, no, it's not, because there's a private key.

And this isn't a gray area. From the rules:

3. Don't work around game messaging/press rules.
If you enter a game with limited press/messaging (such as global-only) then you can't use other methods such as email or PM to bypass this.

I don't see how using these buttons to communicate can be seen as anything other than working around the no messaging rules of a gunboat game.

There is a very extensive conversation on the pause issue in the gunboat tournament thread.

bump. @Nigee you didn't read the whole thread carefuly,I explained why they docked me points and you can find it if you are interested in it.But that's the other case of which they also made a farse.I was talking about PLAYER A and PLAYER B,neither of them wasn't me,who have done the same mistake but were treated diferently. This is not a thread about the pause feature or about the ways of punishments but about the mods corruption.

I intend to get to reading this thread, maybe this evening. I agree with Split D's statement in the OP.

Neither wasn't you? The double negative means both were you. Wow, how often do you get in trouble with the mods?

"This is not a thread about the pause feature or about the ways of punishments but about the mods corruption" Sorry, Split. I have read this thread from the beginning and have stayed out of offering my opinion until now. By you continually bringing this up and no one really backing you up on this, you are looking like a whiner. I know that you don't care what I think, but, IMO, you should drop the whole thing. This is just not advancing your cause one iota.

All the time.Because I don't know how to kiss asses,you should teach me about it. I was neither of them - sorry about that.

I understand your point jim but I'm also pointing out my opinion,the same as you do. Am I not allowed to have an opinion too?

@jimgov - if someone feels aggrieved, whatever the rights and wrongs is it not better to share it with the forum, he is whining because he is not happy about something, you're right he's not getting a lot of sympathy but that is par for the course.
I hope the Mods can appreciate the strength of opinion that people feel if there is a perceived injustice.
SplitD is a little disingenuous in his accusations against the Mods as they seem to have spent some time on this but I would be mightily pissed off if I lost 30% of my points even though I've got nothing compared to SplitD.
What would be really cute and really smart would be for the Mods to half the punishment to 15% with a warning if it happens again it would be treated more harshly.
Have the Mods (and Kestas) got it in them to try and get a win-win out of this and give a little back, that could be interesting.
Ego is one thing, principles are another, leniency is all-powerful.

@Nigee you are wrong again,I don't give a shit about those points.It was a couple of months ago so I would have been whining back then if I had cared about points. That's not the point of the thread,do you hear me finaly?

@SplitD - so if the Mods just admit that from time to time they are selective in their decision making (which we kind of already know despite their best endeavours) you would accept the issue is closed. I think the point you make is a truism, it's rhetorical.
It doesn't mean they are not trying, it just means they don't get things 100% right all the time, possibly down to the person, possibly due to attitude, etc, etc.
I rip the mickey out of the Mods at every opportunity but when it comes to doing their job I don't doubt they are doing their best, you're an intelligent, you must see that things have changed for the better in the last 6 months.
Have the Mods ever done anything good/proper/right in your eyes because I think there are lots of good examples of them being spot on but a few notable exceptions that we will not let them forget because in our hearts we are all Mod-botherers, I think it's healthy, it keeps them on their toes :-)
Why don't you give them a chance to get it right next time ..... then we can all love you for being so reasonable and forgiving, humility is a wonderous thing !!

Everything is written in the very first message in the thread Nigee. No need to admit anything as everything is well known,just an announcements of the list of their friends here so I could know whom I wont play again. I know a couple of them but I'd like to know them all.

Again you make an assertion that is unfounded. They take each *case* at face value. It isn't about friends but about the politness and willingness to admit to wrong doing combined with newness/experience and repetitive actions. I get drunk and wreck my car, but if I don't kill anyone and it is my first offence and I say to the court I am sorry and make restitution to whomever's property I destroyed, I get 6 months suspended license and a suspended sentence. Somebody else does the exact same thing but gets all up in the judge's face and is slow in paying back the damages, he gets his license revoked and goes to jail for 90 days (or whatever). It truly is a matter of you not knowing all the details. You don't know how the guilty parties reacted to the mods and you don't know if they had been caught doing it before or not.

That's very good definition but you are wrong regarding this case again - a guilty party hasn't reacted to the mods because the mods have never contacted a guilty party. I mean contacted via e-mail,maybe they were contacting in their home,who knows...

How do you know? You have made this assertion that the mods didn't even contact them. I want to know how you know this for a fact. Did the person tell you this? This is a Diplomacy site, full of liars as that is the nature of the game. For all you know, the guilty party *was* contacted and just isn't telling you the truth. Personally, I wouldbelieve a mod before someone guilty of breaking the rules.

@SplitD - how do you know who the Mods have and haven't contacted, it sounds like you have inside information, is there a supergrass in the mod team supplying you with information, this scandal gets curiouser and curiouser ...... let's get an independent adjudicator involved who can hold an inquest, this could turn nasty.
Which of the Mods are in the dock for this 'alleged' crime, and is Kestas implicated?
No one should be above the Law ..... no stone should be left unturned, justice must be served

We don't talk about how I know that,what's wrong with you? Can you take a post at least once without questioning my honesty.Are you call me a liar? What's that of your concern how I know something or don't know something?

Is this about me?

What you think?

Because second hand knowledge is suspect. If you are going to accuse the mods of impropriety, back your accusation up with more than hearsay. Otherwise, go the fuck away cause your bitterness is making the forum look bad to noobs who have just found us.

Oh and your bitching woild have gotten you silenced or banned at a lot of other sites and that is evidence enough that we have fair and lenient judges.