Be a Byzantine

Advance Arab aggrandizement

Hold on to ur hauberk

Abelard & universals gameID=7402

Eight ( 8 ! ) units, fleets & armies each, for openers

Taylor4, I'm happy you like that much Viking Variant: I like it as well. And I'm proud you like that much this game I created: I love real gunboats and I think that VC=43 is a Real Viking as well.

What I don't get is why you did an advertisement. Look at the requirements:
Requirements: RR >= B / MinPhases > 299 / Bet to join: 20

I mean, it's not a 5 game with no restrictions where you can find all kinds of diplo-fauna.
It's a game addressed to those players with some experience (at least 300 phases) owning and willing to bet 20 in a game as gambling as a Viking gunboat can be.

These players, aside maybe some 15yo child, are expert enough to choose the game they want to join among all the starting games: opening ad reading carefully the "New" page and picking up the one they think it's the best avaliable. They usually don't pick up the first game advertised on the Forum as a noob who joined the site 2 weeks ago would do, without knowing if there's anything better avaliable.

You made this ad. But the players who don't like Anonymous games wouldn't join it anyway. And those who do, don't join it because you broke anonymity.

So this thread was not only useless, it was damaging. Even backfiring, since someone (me) left the game because of this thread. This game is not a real gunboat any longer.

I believe that ads are useful only if the game in question got some special rule (Team games, Beginners Only, No Stabbing, Mandatory Foreign Language, No Lying, PBEM, No Draw, etc....) or if you need to make points in some easy game against fool noobs who read ads. ;-)

In any case, ads should never break anonymity.

Not very clear on what a gunboat game is - can you enlighten me?

Guaroz, I have to ask:

Don't you think that if people wanted to play an anonymous gunboat that they *wouldn't* go messaging taylor4 for his identity? If they're there to play anon gunboat then they're not going to try to work around the system, unless they were already intending to do so, in which case the game was already ruined because cheaters were there.

Basically, I don't think that taylor4 advertising an anonymous gunboat game is suddenly going to make people go "Oh my gosh, I know a person in that game! TIME TO CHEAT" -- they either already intended to cheat, or they weren't going to cheat either way.

Gunboats are usually played with anonymous players - but not always.

There is a tacit agreement that players do not communicate to each other verbally - to do so would be seen as a breach of the rules. (however this does not stop players from attempting to 'communicate' via what they order their units to do on the board. ie. A War s A Gal - Ukr, can be seen as an invitation to an alliance etc...)

So to sum up, a Gunboat game is one where players not not communicate verbally via Private Messages, Posting a thread in the Forum, or by in-game messages.

Guaroz is a annoyed because by posting this thread silence has been 'broken', and the game in question is no longer truly anonymous, allowing for potential Private Messages to be made.

Got it. Thanks.

Although I respect the President's perspective in part due to his massive Presidential brain, it seems to me that an inadvertent breach can happen if people see a game advertised, and have some experience with that player. We all have our tells! I am with Guaroz - a breach is breach.

"Guaroz is a annoyed because by posting this thread silence has been 'broken', and the game in question is no longer truly anonymous, allowing for potential Private Messages to be made."

But the game hadn't started yet. There was no silence to break; he was advertising for people to join.

And yes, I understand, there would have been potential for PMing. My point is that the players wouldn't do that unless they already intended to cheat and were cheating in-game anyway, because in signing up for the game as an anon gunboat they are looking to play an anon gunboat, and thus would not exploit the 'breach' anyway.

Thus, advertising serves a positive by getting people to games which otherwise wouldn't be there, and while there are indeed potential negatives to advertising these kinds of games, those negatives wouldn't be actualized unless cheating were already happening.

"Have you ever had a game orphaned on you?" - Northern Flame, 29, June 1991

Hands up, those who not only are annoyed by CDs (and a little gratified at the Reliability Index) and the subcategory addressed hereinabove: Failure to make signup deadline.
The quote is from the Diplomacy Archive online. It is a test question to ascertain if you are "seasoned" or a novice Dip. player. Or, as the Essay's title suggests, an Old Fart.

It's not only a matter of silence:

- Advertising an anon game makes me know that userIDXXXX is in the game.
- Give me some years of play and I can understand which country userIDXXXX controls (we're talking about gunboat, yes).
- I know that userIDXXXX is country YY, I collect some informations about userIDXXXX from his profile (or maybe I met him and I knew his playstyle beforehand)
- My decisions in the game will be influenced by those informations.
- The game is altered EVEN IF there is no PM exchange.

It's anon. I have to stay in the condition to say "I don't have a clue about who's playing with me".
During the pre-game period, after the 1st turn CD, during the game until the end.
After the end an EoG thread is more than welcome...
but the advertised game becomes something else from what I was supposed to play: an Anonymous game.

@all: what DL just said.

@PE: my friend, do you remember gunboats in Facebook Diplomacy? No anonymity. Even no "no-press": you had all the mailboxes avaliable and you had to trust other players about being silent. Still, most of gunboats worked. So I understand what you said, esp. in your first post.
But nobody is keeping you to create a game like that if you like it. You title it "Gunboat-1", everybody's in knows who's in as well, all players know they must not talk. But the point it's not gunboats.

If I created an Anonymous game (gunboat or not), it's because I want that nobody knows anything about anyone. Stop. Simple. Why complicate a simple thing?
You can call Anon "the Variant where nobody knows anything about anyone" whether it's also gunboat or Global-only or Full-press or Team-game or No-Stabbing or No-Draw or whaterver else variant(s) you want to mix Anon with.

If I wanted someone to know something, I would have made a Private Game (passworded) and set my own rule about what must be known or not.

In a Public Game:
If there's no press, I trust players they preserve anonymity on the forum, PMs, Email, etc.
If there's some press, I trust them they preserve anonymity also on in-game messages.

threadID=23662: It's pointless to make anon games and tell everybody that you are in the game...

@DL: You're missing the whole point of what I'm saying though. YES, someone *could* do that. But if everyone signed up to play an *anonymous* game, that means they *wanted to play an anonymous game*, meaning they WON'T do that. What you're describing is a willful, conscious effort by the player to bypass anonymity to gain an advantage in the game. The whole point of signing up for an anonymous game is *not* to have that information available for use, adding a challenge to the game by not being able to research a user's past game history. Thus, if the information is made available, the player is still ruining the point of the challenge by using that information.

Therefore, whether a player reveals himself to advertise the game is irrelevant, because that information wouldn't be used by people trying to play anonymous games. And, conversely, it must be argued that the only people who would exploit this breach are people who were looking to game the system anyway; they're already looking to cheat, in other words, and so this doesn't make you any more susceptible to cheating or abuse of the system.

http://www.freeonlineresearchpapers.com/thomas-hobbes-john-locke

@PE
“But if everyone signed up to play an *anonymous* game, that means they *wanted to play an anonymous game*, meaning they WON'T do that.”

Could you swear it?
I could not.
2000 users of every kind of age, from any part of the world, beginners and experts, honest people and cheaters… do you really think all of them have your same opinions-attitudes?
That’s why the anonymity of the game must be preserved , from the pre-game period until the end.

...yes, I could. It's tautological:

1. Cheaters cheat, non-cheaters don't cheat.
2. If a cheater cheats, then the cheater was already looking to game the system, i.e. the cheater was already cheating.
3. If a non-cheater doesn't cheat, then the non-cheater will disregard the means to cheat, i.e. the leakage is immaterial.
4. Based on 2 and 3, we can conclude the leakage would not cause cheating to occur where it were not already.

PE, Anon is the Variant where nobody knows anything about anyone.

I don't like semi-Anon games where I must hope all game long that nobody will use informations they shouldn't have got.
I want a true Anon. That's the Variant.

If you like semi-Anons, create them Private and give them a password. The implicit special rule would be something like: "Semi-Anon: all players know the identity of the one who gave them the PW and made the ad". Whoever uses the password is warned and accepts the terms.

Instead now, I join a game thinking it's truly Anon while someone is turning it into semi-Anon talking about it on the Forum for some reason. Whether this reason is good or not is irrelevant, the game is not Anon anymore and I could be aware of that too late, when (and if) I read that thread on the forum.

Only because you think that there's not much difference between Anon and semi-Anon
this does not mean we should all be forced to play semi-Anons.

PE, we're talking about Anon, you're talking about semi-Anon.
Looks like it's you the one who's missing the whole point of what we're saying.

What are you even talking about, Guaroz? I didn't say a single thing about "forcing people" to play semi-anon, nor has that ever been my policy. If you don't like that he advertised the game, don't play it, no one's making you. But the responsibility is on *you* not to join semi-anon games - which means browsing a relatively small forum to see if the game hasn't been advertised - not on taylor4 not to advertise. Since games can at the most be 10 days old, we're only talking about a couple of pages of forum threads.

And in the meantime, for those who aren't paranoid about cheating, the advertisement provides a benefit, as it increases awareness of an ongoing game and makes it more likely that someone will join.

I just honestly find the logic process fairly ridiculous. You're worried about cheating to the point that you will not play an anonymous game in which only one person's membership in the game is revealed, because you worry someone will follow the process DL outlined. How, then, do you reconcile playing 3+ player anonymous games at all, or indeed any 3+ player game? You wouldn't know if there were multiaccounters or metagamers. In fact, even if you had your suspicions, you would never know. The nature of the system is that technically, *no one* knows. So every game has the potential for cheating.

But you play anyway, which means that you trust people not to break the rules enough to play. Why, then, do you not apply this to anonymous games...

...and, bringing it home, why do you flood every single thread about an anonymous game ever to silence and harass the thread creator for doing something that isn't even against the rules?

In response on PE’s tautological point 2:
I’m talking about to putting cheaters in the condition not-to-cheat.
If you advertise an Anon game or if you talk about an ongoing Anon game in the forum for some reason, like it or not you’re just feeding cheaters, you are increasing the “potential for cheating”.
This doesn’t look that difficult to understand.

If I want to join a game I just have a look and scroll down the new-and-open pages. This is the correct way to do. Those are the two “official” advertisement pages, and they *should* be enough.

"If you advertise an Anon game or if you talk about an ongoing Anon game in the forum for some reason, like it or not you’re just feeding cheaters, you are increasing the “potential for cheating”.
This doesn’t look that difficult to understand."

But no, you really aren't. People do not just go "AHA! I HAVE DISCOVERED THAT THIS PERSON IS IN THIS ANONYMOUS GAME! I WASN'T GOING TO CHEAT BEFORE, BUT NOW I CERTAINLY SHALL!" If they were planning to cheat before, they were going to cheat in the game anyway. This doesn't add or subtract anything, because in their plans to cheat, they already de-legitimized and ruined the game.

"If I want to join a game I just have a look and scroll down the new-and-open pages. This is the correct way to do. Those are the two “official” advertisement pages, and they *should* be enough."

That's not for you to decide. If the guy wants to advertise his own anonymous game, that's his right. You get to decide if you want to play in it or not, but the responsibility has to be on *you* to decide not to play, not on him not to advertise.

I just fundamentally cannot understand this obsession with anonymity. WebDiplomacy advertises plenty of anonymous games on a huge forum with a huge community (which would thus make the consequences of cheating diminished), and yet *nobody* has these kinds of sportsmanship/trust issues. Y'all worry too much.

Because it ruins the Variant, PE.
Just because a specific rule isn't given here:
http://www.vdiplomacy.net/rules.php
doesn't mean everyone is allowed ruining others' fun. It is not against a specific rule but it's against the Variant rule.
Let's see some Variants.

If you join a "no-stabbing" game you can't attack anyone before you declare war. There's not a rule in the Rules that forbids it and the software allows you to stab someone. But this doesn't mean you're allowed to ruin the Variant stabbing someone. This doesn’t look that difficult to understand.

If you join a "Spanish speaking only" game you can play it if you know Spanish. There's not a rule in the Rules that forbids you to join it even if you don't know a word in Spanish and the software allows you to join it anyway. But this doesn't mean you're allowed to ruin the Variant joining the game without knowing Spanish. This doesn’t look that difficult to understand.

If you join a "Anonymous" the only thing you know about other players is that nobody knows anything about anyone. There's not a rule in the Rules that forbids you tell everybody that you are in the game and the software allows you tell you're in the games in many ways. But this doesn't mean you're allowed to ruin the Variant telling someone or everybody that you're in the game. Nobody has the right to change the Variant. A person can't decide for all. This doesn’t look that difficult to understand.

Yes, you didn't say a single thing about "forcing people" to play semi-anon, but when you turn an Anon game I'm in into a semi-Anon, I'm forced either to play a different Variant or to leave the game.

Creating a semi-Anon passworded game requires a few minutes to ONE person.
But some lazy people prefer to turn Anons into a semi-Anons in a few seconds, actually forcing dozens of other people to check the Forum just to see if someone has ruined the games they're in.

If you don't like true Anon don't play it, no one's making you. But if you join an Anon, the responsibility is on *you* not to ruin aninymity - which means not tell everyobody you're in it: it takes 0 seconds.

If you want a semi-Anon, you can either create a passworded one or look for it browsing a relatively small forum to see if some semi-Anon Private game has been advertised - responsibility is not on me to look on the Forum, each time I can, to see whether the game I'm in has been ruined and to hope I notice someone has ruined it before the last player joins it and the game starts. It would be ridiculous, I can't check the Forum every 5 minutes: I sleep sometimes, you know.

I can't understand why you're obsessioned by this non-issue. Anonymous must stay anonymous. Simple. It's pointless to make anon games and tell everybody that you are in the game. Simple. Noobs and newcomers have to learn it. Simple. Why are are you complicating everything with these pointless arguments? They go nowhere.
You are an expert player, PE, you should help us teach it, instead.

Ahaha yes, we're all obsessioned by this :))
If only people looked at a vocabulary and check what "Anonymous" means....
Another point is that not all the players are Forum-addicted like you and me...People could join a game without knowing whether it's advertised or not...

Your entire mentality regarding this issue is unbearable. You're insisting that you have the right to tell taylor4 what his game is. You do not. If he advertises it on the forum, that makes it semi-anonymous. It is HIS GAME, he CREATED THE GAME, therefore HE GETS TO DECIDE THAT. NOT YOU. You don't like it? Start your own game, and don't advertise it.

You'll note that I am not arguing that anyone should be able to advertise anonymous games. I say only the game creator can, because it makes them semi-anonymous. But you're arguing, basically, "bawww, I can't be expected to take responsibility and check the forum to see if a game is anon or semi-anon! poor old me! bawww" and it's self-serving, shameful and repugnant. There's not that much activity on the forum and if you're too lazy to check it and thus call for a ban on advertising games just to serve your anal-retentive desire not to join a game that doesn't exactly fit your specifications, shame on you. Just shame on you.

I'm most certainly not obsessed, either. You're the one that mercilessly hounds everyone who dares make any vague reference to an anonymous game and obsessively searches the games to piece together the slightest clues toward a game being referenced so you can whine and cry about it on the forum when it's not hurting anybody. You're the self-appointed anon police. That's obsessive, and incredibly irritating, and doubly so when your fundamental position is completely illogical.

Ahahahahah PE .....
I CREATED THE GAME !!!!!!
what the hell...
THAT'S WHY I'M TIRED OF THOSE PEOPLE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

And it was not "my" game anyway, it was Public.
If you want a game to be "yours" you must password it.

About cheating.
Again, PE, I repeat something that can’t be debated:
If you reveal anything about identities of an Anon game (either during the pre-game or during the game itself) you are going to increase the “cheating potential”. Either via PM or via the way I described. The whole v-dip community does not behave like you do.
Of course, there are other ways to cheat that nor we nor the mods can control. This doesn’t mean we don’t have to make our part in preventing some kind of cheating.

About the choice system.
Try to look it in my point of view: someone advertised on the forum gameID=0000, so he has potentially lowered the chances of my unadvertised gameID=0001 to get started. So what shall we do? Shall we swarm the forum of game advertisements in a continuous race to have the most visible game?? Is this the correct way? I don’t think so.

Mine is not an obsession. At least it’s not as big as Guaroz’s.
I mean, I’m not going to get off an Anon joining list just cause someone advertised it. I’m just unhappy of it. If I get off an advertised game, I will hardly play an anon game.
You’re right when you say that there’s not any rule stating how to handle this stuff: a clear rule should avoid that we discuss about it.
But one sentence is written: “Use common sense and respect other players”.
If you create an anon game and then you tell the world you’re in... you’re not using common sense in my opinion. Nobody forces you to play anon games, but if you do, I expect you to keep it anon.

Moreover. PE, if you offend the others you’re going against the above-mentioned written rule. Hold your fire, this is not Webdip.

...you did, Guaroz?

...lol. My bad, then. I feel like an idiot. I apologize for that. I understand where you're coming from now. That's embarrassing.

Yeah, taylor4, ask for permission from the game creator before you advertise a game that isn't yours next time, please.

That said, Guaroz, the statement you made at the end kind of undoes everything you said before. If it's a public game, and no one owns it, then he can make it semi-anon...

"If you reveal anything about identities of an Anon game (either during the pre-game or during the game itself) you are going to increase the “cheating potential”. Either via PM or via the way I described. The whole v-dip community does not behave like you do.
Of course, there are other ways to cheat that nor we nor the mods can control. This doesn’t mean we don’t have to make our part in preventing some kind of cheating."

I know they don't all behave like me, but that doesn't refute the whole argument I made in the first place, unless you mean to say that people here *actually do* think "OH LOOK, HE'S IN THAT GAME! TIME TO CHEAT NOW" which is, honestly, so stupid and patently ludicrous that I cannot understand how someone can even have such a logic process as that.

The point is that it *isn't* preventing cheating.

"About the choice system.
Try to look it in my point of view: someone advertised on the forum gameID=0000, so he has potentially lowered the chances of my unadvertised gameID=0001 to get started. So what shall we do? Shall we swarm the forum of game advertisements in a continuous race to have the most visible game?? Is this the correct way? I don’t think so."

...no... that's quite the slippery slope you've constructed for us. You advertise a game if you feel like it. If you feel your chances of getting your game started are so drastically diminished from one advertisement as to warrant your own counter-advertisement, go ahead and advertise. I don't think you or anyone else would consider that as a serious option.

"But one sentence is written: “Use common sense and respect other players”.
If you create an anon game and then you tell the world you’re in... you’re not using common sense in my opinion. Nobody forces you to play anon games, but if you do, I expect you to keep it anon."

On the contrary. I think advertising a game to make sure it starts, on the assumption that people want to play an anonymous game and thus will not abuse the revelation that x person is in the game as undisclosed-country-y, is quite sensible. Not to mention that "common sense" is a load of crap anyway.

"Moreover. PE, if you offend the others you’re going against the above-mentioned written rule. Hold your fire, this is not Webdip."

Well, while I understand his frustration in this specific game, I see Guaroz jumping everyone on every thread that dares mention an anonymous game. He's spelled out ways of finding people's identities that *I* didn't know beforehand. If not for him I wouldn't be able to "cheat" in an anonymous game because I wouldn't know how; now I, and anyone else who peruses the forum a little bit, knows how. I feel like his posts have exacerbated the problem by unintentionally making knowledge of how to cheat widespread. Not to mention that it's incredibly irritating being chided about something completely irrelevant for no good reason, as I have been on more than one occasion.

Like I said, I get his frustration in this case, and I apologize for my comments related to it. I was ignorant of the fact that he started the game and my entire understanding of the situation was all wrong as a consequence. But I still think as a general statement that he goes too far and probably makes the issue worse, not better.