Should a Player be able to Blind anyone?

[Tom]

A rules is being used that has come to my attention.

The rule PROHIBITS A PLAYER IN A FINALS MATCH FROM BLINDING ANY USER FROM WATCHING.

It basically is putting the rights of regular FIBS users (tourney player or not) above the player who has made it to the finals.

It is not part of the official rules listed on the website for the F3 http://fibsleagammon.free.fr/tfridays3.htm

It goes against the American Backgammon Tour rule 1.7:

1.7 SPECTATORS. Spectators shall remain silent while
    observing a match. Spectators have no right to
    draw attention to any misplays or comment on
    plays. Spectators who observe improprieties
    or irregularities during a match should discuss
    them in private with the Director. A player may
    request the Director to bar one or more spectators
    from viewing his match.

[diane]

For me, there are certain online players who repeatedly violate the American backgammon tour rule..they talk, comment on play and are rude to the player - some whether they are playing or watching.

I dont think they should be allowed to repeat the behaviour - ie by being banned for each individual offence and then allowed to do it again the next time. Any match, tourney or otherwise should be a chance for a player to give their best....that cant happen when another seeks to disrupt their play.

Simple really.

[pck]

It goes against the American Backgammon Tour rule 1.7:

    A player may request the Director to bar one or more spectators
    from viewing his match.

It could be argued that the TD can refuse any such requests. (The rule does not say "may command".) Especially in light of

1.1 INTERPRETATION. The Tournament Rules and Procedures cannot and should not regulate all possible situations that may arise during a match. No set of rules should deprive the Director of his freedom of judgment or prevent him from finding the solution dictated by fairness and compatible with the circumstances of a particular case.

[Tom]

It could be argued that the TD can refuse any such requests. (The rule does not say "may command".) Especially in light of

True but it is very likely such a denial would be a very rare event and considering how abusive people on FIBS can be, it would be granted more often than not.

tom

[PersianLord]

I think in a tourney, all of the tourney players, not all the fibsters, have a right to watch any match. Part of the fun in taking part in tourneys is following the tourney as it goes on. We want to see how the matches proceed, especially the final match.

BTW, if a spectator happens to comment on the play or behave abusively, the players have every right to inform the TD and then banning the watcher.

PL

[socksey]

Tourney results for Fri3 was abandoned by me on the Fibsleagammon site because I found the format difficult to post.  It was much easier for me to post to Fibsboard instead since I am a moderator here as well.  So, the original rules have not been kept up to date there, nor have the tourney results..

Fri3 and Mini-Matches as well as all of the regular tourneys played on Fibs are not for money.  Presumably, they are played for fun and/or for people to watch who are still trying to learn the game.  Since we have the "gag" command and we have the "silent" shouts command available, I see no reason to not allow anyone to watch a final tourney match, but I do stipulate that if someone is disruptive in kibitz, either player may "blind" that player.  It seems to me, with these tools at our disposal, it is just being mean, vindictive or someone on a power trip to deprive anyone the right to watch.  Perhaps their power of concentration is so poor that just knowing the offender is watching can break concentration.  In that event, I suggest the player use the command, "show watchers" and that they close the window that announces when someone is watching them during the final.  There are solutions to abide by the TD's rules and still maintain concentration. 

I vote allow anyone to watch.  But, no matter how this voting goes, Fri3 and Mini-Matches will retain the no-blind in the final rule for the reasons I have given.

socksey


If we got one-tenth of what was promised to us in political speeches there wouldn't be any inducement to go to heaven. - Will Rogers

[diane]

BTW, if a spectator happens to comment on the play or behave abusively, the players have every right to inform the TD and then banning the watcher.

Do you have a feel for how many times a player / watcher can do this, in assorted tournaments, before they a player can simply say, this person has done this many times..I dont want to wait for them to be abusive and disrupt my game..I want to get on with this match in a nice environment and that means they cant watch?

[diane]

Since we have the "gag" command and we have the "silent" shouts command available, I see no reason to not allow anyone to watch a final tourney match, but I do stipulate that if someone is disruptive in kibitz, either player may "blind" that player. 

Same question to you - do we have to wait for that to happen in every single tournament for you to act? The blind command will stop the watcher watching the match. You have repeatedly stated that is not allowed.

[Tom]

Same question to you - do we have to wait for that to happen in every single tournament for you to act? The blind command will stop the watcher watching the match. You have repeatedly stated that is not allowed.

Diane brings up a good point.

There are some people who often bother other people.

Patti has taken to ban some people from shouts for days or weeks to punish them for bad behavior.
She makes decisions based on the history of a user.

Let's follow her example.

Here in the USA most states have a "Three Strikes and You are out" policy with gun use to commit a crime.
(It also goes by "10 - 20 - Life" for time put in prison)

We could use the same idea... Three Strikes and you're out...

If a fibs user causes problems in tourneys 3 times they get added to the "OK TO BLIND LIST" for all tourneys.

That could be a compromise, after all since this rule has been around for over a year and has not been an issue that often
I bet the list would only end up with a small handful of people on it anyway...

Of course once those 5-10 people are on the list, the rule might as well not exist at all.

Tom

[socksey]

To my knowledge there have been none of those problems in ages.  I'm not sure if it's because the people who object strongly have not been playing the tourneys or if the problems have removed themselves.  However, this seems reasonable to me and I'm a reasonable person in most things. 

Does that mean you might implement the bans I requested, Tom?  Keeping in mind it's temporary until the offenders apologize to me.  Olive branch submitted.

socksey



Politicians are people who, when they see light at the end of the tunnel, go out and buy some more tunnel. - John Quinton

[Tom]

To my knowledge there have been none of those problems in ages.  I'm not sure if it's because the people who object strongly have not been playing the tourneys or if the problems have removed themselves.  However, this seems reasonable to me and I'm a reasonable person in most things. 

Does that mean you might implement the bans I requested, Tom?  Keeping in mind it's temporary until the offenders apologize to me.  Olive branch submitted.

socksey

Maybe we can wipe the slate clean?

I still want to come up with a set of common rules... which I am sure will take some time...

Like you said in your email...

ok, so the bans won't be in force if i happen to not be there.  i can live with that.

Tom

[socksey]

Yes, I said I can live with that, I didn't say I like it.  It means extra steps for me. 

socksey



I offer my opponents a bargain:  If they will stop telling lies about us, I will stop telling the truth about them.  ~Adlai Stevenson, campaign speech, 1952

[KissMyAss]

I voted that players should be able to blind and gag anyone. 

As I remind people from time to time in fibs, I have an anti b.s. policy, which has been my one and only rule.  "Be nice, be silent, or be gone" seems to have gotten through to people that if they can't be nice to their opponent, play silently.  If they really can't stand the sight of that person, thanks for coming, remove yourself from my tourney.   Or be removed if I catch you starting any drama.  I have only had to ban one player, for a week, which got my message across and have never had a problem since.  I know players who join my tourneys have others on permagag, and have never had anyone whine at me that someone has them gagged/blinded therefore they can't watch a match.  I don't get involved in past drama.  If they're gagged or blinded, bad luck for them.  I made the be nice (etc) rule for my players.  I don't see the point in making rules in the tourney, to govern watchers/non players in my tourney.

From the perspective of my newbie players, who have either recently started participating, or for the ones I will attract in the future, it's hard enough for me to sit there keeping an eye on the list of players who join, thanking them for registering, and filling a newbie in on how to register/invite to matches/timeout clock explanation.  I don't feel the need to swamp them about gagging and blinding issues, which I don't even understand myself. 
My own personal belief is that it would put a lot of new players off, to be swamped like that.  And what if I get more than one new player in a tourney?  I'd have to be trying to make sure they all understood, as well as informing them about the timeout clock, which most get, but some need a more detailed explanation of. 

The old adage of KISS (Keep It Simple Silly) is the best way to go on this, I think.  The more we get bogged down in rules, the less fun it will be to participate in tourneys for old and new players alike.

Hugs

[Tanika]

thanx PL ! I couldn't have said it better! LuckyDice was the first one that started to use the rule, after players went through nearly 1.5 hrs of playing just to discover they can't watch a final, and these werent newbies. It was regular Bago participants. We've discussed it for a few days and decided on a no-blind rule for our tourneys. I know dorbel don't agree with the rule, but when he DO play the tourneys he respect the rule and abide with it. If you know the rule exsist in a tourney and you enter then you should keep to it! SELA !

[LuckyDice]

Yes, I started it to use that rule for the BagOlympic-tourney (and for the Saturday Night-double elimination-tourney too).

And it is very simply:
all fibsters should be able to watch the final match.
In case of disruptive watchers, the player/s can contact me and I will talk to that disturber and the players have the right to use blind/gag.
Btw, I am always watching the final match, so such a problem can be "fixed" quickly.

This IS equal to live tourneys, where that rule is valid for all matches: all people have the right to watch any match and the players are alltime allowed
to contact the td in case of any problem and he will judge for a ban or not.

As long as I am the td for the BagOlympics, and Saturday Night-de, the rule stays valid; without any discussion.
I have had enough discussions before I realized the need to make it effective.

** One hint for the players who don't want any disturbance:
use JAVA-fibs, switch the board to vector and you can expand it to full screen or for hiding any window you don't want to see.
Then you are able to concentrate on YOUR match ONLY!


Btw, everybody is free to bring up her/his opinion, but from my pov, we have to much deeply discussions about nonsens here and in fibs,
and often with commentsfrom people who are not really interested in a topic, only just for stirring xxx or thinking they must give any comment,
useful or not.
Why are we here and in fibs? For playing backgammen AND "meet" people around the world. So, keep all sh... at home and be nice!

see you in the tourneys   

[Tom]

I can see allowing all Tourney Players to watch any tourney match, after all they paid to enter (or exit that is, with rating points)

I will abide by the vote as a good example.

In my other thread I will still come up with a set of rules as a common base, so we have something written down.
I will also add some fields to TourneyBot so the rules can be referenced when you signup for a tourney.
And an extra line for tourney specific rules, so there is no question what rules are in effect.

Tom

[socksey]

I think the idea is to promote tourney players.    In a live tourney, are watchers only allowed who are playing in the tourney?   It's all for fun on Fibs in the majority of tourneys.  There is a money tourney on rare occasions.  During a money tourney, I can see why excluding a watcher or two might be okay.    I just can't see it otherwise.

socksey



My dog is worried about the economy because Alpo is up to $3 a can.  That's almost $21 in dog money. - Joe Weinstein

[vegasvic]

These tourneys are for fun and for some a learning experience ,lets not lose sight of that.

Long ago i had a problem with a player that will stay unnamed playing Friday 3 and i had cubed .

Kibitz: resign?
In return i said back HUH ?
At the time there  were 3 watchers . I called the TD and copy pasted the kibitz from the player and the TD said   " Vic i know <username> and she does not cheat if you do not move you will forfeit this match, end of discussion ". At this point the watchers left the match saying nothing and i was left with finishing the match . After when i complained to the TD for the way it was handled i was banned from Friday 3.

So its up to the TD as to how they want to run their special tourneys and how they handle situations . Even if i did not agree with this ban it was the TD prerogative .

In my case i was not allowed to  play in the Friday3 because of this little episode thru two different TD's  until socksey  took over and i made my case and she lifted the ban .

Ps Rules are there if you do not like the rules do not enter .. it is so simple .

Pss Also its so nice to be able to shout and tell all the whiners STFU and move on .

[Tom]

In a live tourney, are watchers only allowed who are playing in the tourney?

In live tourneys a watcher is juat a watcher, tourney player or not.

Money or not, we all still want to win. Which is why the rule to exclude watchers exists.

tom

[vegasvic]

online and live tourneys are not the same .. i am sorry

online if a watcher says nothing you do not see them in a live tourney they are within your eye sight .

I have asked a person not to watch my game where i can see him , i was ok if he was out of my eye sight .

This is for fun not for money ... its suppose to be FUN

[inim]

Just happened today. "Do what I say and not what I do ...".

Code Select Expand


TourneyBot shouts: Wed35 (#4805): FINALS (5pts) zackf 0 vs vegas_vic 2

> watch zackf
You're now watching zackf.

> show watchers
Watching players:
inim is watching zackf.
Ignaz is watching vegas_vic.
PersianLord is watching vegas_vic.
socksey is watching vegas_vic.
person is watching bonehead.
LadyLinda is watching vegas_vic.
AmzaPellea is watching dikran.

vegas_vic bans you from watching.


[Tom]

online if a watcher says nothing you do not see them

That is a good point.

I for one find it a LOT of fun to win my matches!

Tom

[socksey]

Just happened today. "Do what I say and not what I do ...".

Code Select Expand


TourneyBot shouts: Wed35 (#4805): FINALS (5pts) zackf 0 vs vegas_vic 2

> watch zackf
You're now watching zackf.

> show watchers
Watching players:
inim is watching zackf.
Ignaz is watching vegas_vic.
PersianLord is watching vegas_vic.
socksey is watching vegas_vic.
person is watching bonehead.
LadyLinda is watching vegas_vic.
AmzaPellea is watching dikran.

vegas_vic bans you from watching.


Ah, the point here is that the tourney you were in today was Tom's tourney and Tom opposes the "no blinding in final" rule, so of course vegas_vic felt comfortable in blinding you, inim.  

I have no problem with differences in the rules of different tourneys, nor would I try to enforce my tourney rules on someone else's tourney or in a tourney I am an alternate TD of.  

Neither do I have a problem with anyone watching me play.  I know how to use the gag feature if I don't want to listen to anyone in my matches, or if they undo my gag, I feel comfortable blinding them as well.  

socksey



Instead of giving a politician the keys to the city, it might be better to change the locks.  ~Doug Larson[/b][/size]

[vegasvic]

Dear Inim,

You have me blinded and gagged .... i do not have you blinded gagged .
Now when and if Tom puts in a rule for watching matches in his tourney i would be happy to abide by his rules .

THERE WAS NO SUCH RULE AND SO I BLINDED YOU KNOWING YOU WOULD COME RUNNING IN HERE TO POST IT !!

[garp_02]

Nice to see Vic back - talking hypocritical crap as always 

[PersianLord]

Garpapa, how do you dare to come back to FB after that shameful drop in the other thread?!

Save FB residents a favor and get back to your hole.

PL

[garp_02]

Drop? Hole?  Je ne comprends pas!!!!!

I will post when and where I wish - if I choose to, or not to, it is my decision.

It's something we leftists call freedom of choice (nothing to do with economics) - look it up

[moonshadow]

I still want to come up with a set of common rules... which I am sure will take some time...

I like the idea of no blinding in supposedly 'fun' FIBs tourneys but I realize its not that simple for the reasons others have already given. However, whatever the consensus on whether to blind or not, I really like the notion Tom has put forth of some common rules that all TDs adhere to and are put down in writing.

TDs also need to be able to have some flexibility to make exceptions to some of the rules when circumstances dictate, as when a Player or Watcher claims they are keeping the rules, but its clear that is not their true intent. This is another issue and has more to do with the wisdom and competency of the individual TD than anything else.

[moonshadow]

These tourneys are for fun and for some a learning experience ,lets not lose sight of that.

I found this quite amusing, as my idea of fun and yours are quite different.

Before you were permanently shout neutered by patti because of your complete lack of self-control, your idea of tourney fun, to put it mildly, was to loudly and shamelessly bring as much public attention to yourself as possible, often at the expense of others who had no wish to be part of your antics.

One example of this that I thought especially distasteful and ungracious was your shouting out the Gnu Error Rates of opponents after tourney matches. A number of your tourney opponents never shout nor make a spectacle of themselves and unless you had there permission to do so, you braying their Error Rates or Luck Rates in public only demonstrated that your Error Rate on the jackass scale was fairly high.

Numerous other examples from the past decade could be given.

I agree tourneys should be a fun and a learning experience and perhaps you have changed, but you almost sound like the pyromaniac who has been burning down houses for a decade thinking thats perfectly acceptable behavior, then telling everyone,  "Hey, let's have some fun!"

[socksey]

Since the voting seems to have come to an end, and since some of you are using this thread to malign others rather than sticking to the topic, I am going to lock this topic now. 

Please review the rules of this forum posted on the front page here. 

socksey

[diane]

I don't think this discussion is over, but socksey is correct that it is degenerating somewhat.

I have unlocked for anyone to add pertinent points, ideally those who have not already contributed.

Any posts pursuing argument, rather than commenting on the actual poll question, will be dealt with individually.

[Tom]

I agree with locking this topic.

[edit] I was asked why it is now locked. - I am DONE with this thread. If someone else wants to talk about they can start a new thread. I want no part of it.

The discussion is over.

[diane]

Well, so it seems..and the outcome..no change to status quo.

If you are finished with this discussion, as the originator, and feel you have got what you need - then lock it and I guess anyone else is free to start another.