Conquer Club

I would like to know if admin has made a final decision on punishment for rating abuse.....such as giving 1 star ratings just because the person lost badly. For example JaMarcus seems to love giving people that beat him 1 star for all catagories just because he loses. I would also like to know what way i can have the stupid rating removed.


to those of you that will say take it to the abuse forum.....i'm not accusing anyone in perticular(which is required for the forum) i just want to know what the admin are doing for this problem.

thanx MB

spikeboat wrote:you won on complete luck of my bad dice fortune and then you insisted is was bc you outplayed me. it irritated me immensely.

http://www.conquerclub.com/game.php?game=2850972
If you read the game log this is not true at all.Plus he has left me a 1 star for attitude.My attitude was fine this game.

spikeboat abuses the system too.

i'm not looking for people to start posting who is all abusing the system.....i use JaMarcus as an example but the point of the thread isn't an accusation. i want to know if the admin have made any way a person can get pointless ratings removed....as you could with the feedback if it is unfair it would have been removed. i was wondering if there was anything in place yet or if there is something being worked on in the case of rating abusers bad ratings being removed.

There is something being worked on, but final decisions have not come yet. Stay tuned.

thanks lancehoch. any insite as to whats being worked on?????

The site is aware that the concept of ratings abuse exists. The question is how to define it, and then how to handle the people who are abusing the system.

What about taking away their ability to rate others. (but definitely let others rate them).

that would be a good temperary fix.... the players that are suspect of abusing the system could get there rating rights taken away....but i think to avoid players leaving retalitory ratings those in question should not be able to recieve ratings. but players the question would still be how to define ratings abuse????? which is abviously very dificult based of the fact the each individual could have there own 'style' of rating as to what each person would deserve according to them. the only obvious abuse of the system is shown in a game like i had with JaMarcus where we didn't say a word to each other and we didn't miss any turns(we actually played rt) and i dominated him and he left all 1's. the 1's were obviously unjustified. And in most cases if a person ha done it once they have done it many times. but that still leave no clear definition of ratings abuse

Except that if they were not subject to rating, then they could just act like jerks without fear of consequence (though granted, ratings might not mean much to some).

Another option might be to dock their rating by 1 or 2 full points for each instance, either instead of, or in addition to, the above (or dock is the first penalty, then if they continue, they lose rating priviliages ... if they still continue, suspension from joining any new games for a time).

I would also suggest they might be banned from tournaments an Battles Royales, since giving all 1's continually probably means they are not such a nice player, in general.


BUT, I think the first question is how to define rating abuse?

Also, what of people who just plain like to play the "diss" game? That is, they will give their friends all 1's because they think its funny.

Finally, since the ratings were to avoid the mod intervention in feedback ... how do we avoid getting back into that same trap?

How about a point deduction for obvious abuses such as -50 per star rated and
someone like JaMarcus would surrender 150 points for that retaliatory feedback.

Except, how is it determined to be retaliatory? What are the standards? The plan was to avoid moderator input, I thought?

I think that if this is going to work, we can't worry too much about individual abuses, jerks. That is, just like before, even the best/nicest/most tolerant player will get a few bad ratings. I got all one's myself, from someone who was subsequently banned (for being a multis, not the ratings), my rating dipped slightly for a day or two and is back up.

Conversely, there will always be those who think they should not have gotten 1's, even when the person who left them felt that really and truly was what they deserved. I mean, before attendance was automated, some people objected to getting a 3, (never mind a 1) in attendance when they deadbeat!

I think the concern is folks who always/almost always leave all ones or who leave all 1's whenever they lose.

You shouldn't put any sort of policing to how subjective ratings are awarded. That's the price you pay when you have such a thing. For every clown that rates 1 like crazy, there's 20 people who give everybody 5s, but nobody will complain. Just either scrap the ratings and go back to actual feedback, or leave it be and live with it.

Mine was an example too.I could have listed 100's.He is a bad offender thats why I singled him out.
I do not like rating systems.Especially on a site I have to pay to play on.

lancehoch wrote:The site is aware that the concept of ratings abuse exists. The question is how to define it, and then how to handle the people who are abusing the system.

well, when you look at this guys ratings left, he has over 2 pages, and less than 10 people have ratings above 1!!!! this is just obvious and blatant:
http://www.conquerclub.com/player.php?m ... e=JaMarcus
as i've said before, freemium access needs to be severely limited for aspects of the site that they can affect, leave, and have zero repercussions for what they have done. this guy has been a member for
2 months, has played a little over 200 games, and has left 1 ratings for over 30 premium members!!! i mean, 30 out of over 50 of his abusive ratings have been against paying members!!! yes, i realize he is one person, but if more start doing this sort of thing as a retaliation, it is going to get ugly around here...

seriously, make premiums be here a certain amount of time, so they can see how it all works, and then allow them access to certain parts/aspects of the site. just like, if you allowed new freemium members a limit of 1-3 posts in the forums per day, you would squash most of the trolling activity. anyway, i know it is being looked into, and yes i put in my 2 cents in the ratings reloaded thread, and i know it is an ongoing process, and i appreciate the hard work everyone is putting into this.-0

owen the only problem is that now you are saying punish the people that dont have a premium membership.....us freemium members as you call us have rights on the site too. i have been on here for enough time that i am entitled to my oppinion and saying to limit the posts is rediculas becuase some of us freemiums actually have some good imput. the only reason i dont have a membership myself is that i am a student and dont have the money for it......so why punish the people like me that dont have the money for membership

mattbaillie wrote:owen the only problem is that now you are saying punish the people that dont have a premium membership.....us freemium members as you call us have rights on the site too. i have been on here for enough time that i am entitled to my oppinion and saying to limit the posts is rediculas becuase some of us freemiums actually have some good imput. the only reason i dont have a membership myself is that i am a student and dont have the money for it......so why punish the people like me that dont have the money for membership

I agree, to a point ... but I don't think you are one of the people who would be limited.

No one is saying that you cannot leave 1's. Some people absolutely deserve it. The issue is leaving ALL 1's, for 80-90% of people. (and not because their first game was with a jerk).

It seems that if there is a very high limit, then it might be workable. BUT, this will only catch the very worst. And in no way would impinge the average person's right to rate folks down when they feel it appropriate (whether other agree it was appropriate or not).

mattbaillie wrote:owen the only problem is that now you are saying punish the people that dont have a premium membership.....us freemium members as you call us have rights on the site too. i have been on here for enough time that i am entitled to my oppinion and saying to limit the posts is rediculas becuase some of us freemiums actually have some good imput. the only reason i dont have a membership myself is that i am a student and dont have the money for it......so why punish the people like me that dont have the money for membership

you didn't read my entire post or comprehend it that well... i said to LIMIT what freemiums can do for a time to halt some of this abuse. make a freemium be here for X amount of games or X amount of time before they can leave ratings for players. as far as posting, make them be here a certain amount of time, before you give them full access to posting. the point is, people couldn't create multi accounts to spam up the forums in the blink of an eye, with a new account. you get a new account, you get 4 posts in one day, that is great, you can't spam up the forum with that. you hang around for longer than a few days and complete some games, you gain full access just like with rating. i was a freemium for quite a looooong time before i became premium, and i appreciate all the access given to freemiums. however, doing this would limit some of the abuse that is going on with ratings and with multi accounts being used for nefarious acts.

I have the simplest fix ever! Get rid of the ratings system all together. Problem solved. If you do not want to play someone anymore then foe list them. Simple.

If someone gives unjustified poor ratings, just be robust in your response if justified. Works for me.

Bruceswar wrote:I have the simplest fix ever! Get rid of the ratings system all together. Problem solved. If you do not want to play someone anymore then foe list them. Simple.

Indeed. Person's rank reflects his skill and playing with him will allow you to estimate his personality.

Speaking of this new "improved" rating system, check this out. I played 3 team games with a pup by the name ConquerAce (1 with him and 2 against him). Since I have been victorious in all three of these games, he decided to judge my Game Play and awarded it 3 of 5 stars. Seriously, had the last Mod not been fired I think that I might even bother with writing her a complaint just for the kicks of watching justice in action.

KoE_Sirius wrote:

spikeboat wrote:you won on complete luck of my bad dice fortune and then you insisted is was bc you outplayed me. it irritated me immensely.

http://www.conquerclub.com/game.php?game=2850972
If you read the game log this is not true at all.Plus he has left me a 1 star for attitude.My attitude was fine this game.

spikeboat abuses the system too.

lol, the benefits of this system (that i believe are the exact reason that the mods moved to it) is because of its subjectivity and generalness that it doesn't require constant e-tickets, while still providing possible useful incite into player X. i dont know how a mod with a clear conscious can overturn a a 1-star for gameplay given by a brig to a cook because a cook took down a brig in heads up bc he simply auto'd every 3 he had on the map round 1... this is an extreme example, but the same thing arises with someone getting a 2 or 3 star as well... its like yeah, you won, but your play was average to sub par at best so this is what i feel like giving you based upon my own subjective method of determining stars... people need to worry less about the stars they recieve and worry more about their performance overall which is already taken care of in the score.

and more thoughts..

""

owenshooter wrote:

lancehoch wrote:The site is aware that the concept of ratings abuse exists. The question is how to define it, and then how to handle the people who are abusing the system.

well, when you look at this guys ratings left, he has over 2 pages, and less than 10 people have ratings above 1!!!! this is just obvious and blatant:
http://www.conquerclub.com/player.php?m ... e=JaMarcus} ""


even for a case like this where you may argue that he could be a "blatant abuser"... the fact that he gives these to everyone basically provides you with two useful things... everyone elses score will be that much lower, and if you get a 1 star from a guy who gives a 1 star to everyone, why would you really care?? are you really that shallow where you need all 3 stars or better to feel ok about your striper image... i think that people that fret over a star here are either very young and not at all familiar with an entirely unfair world or just a hopeless donk

sorry for the 3rd post but i feel strongly about this and i wanted to share some more thoughts, mainly b/c i just finished a game that believe fell into the gray area some of you may have problems with...and i hope you just dont see this as hyperbole...

my most recent game...
http://www.conquerclub.com/game.php?game=2942703
...

doubles/freestyle, this guy joins up as my partner who i dont know and i give it a shot...

we win and he was rather polite so do i give him a 5??? a 4??? a 3???

you all might think somewhere along those lines but i don't... lets look further...

in round 3 he did not take a plus 6 continent with 45 seconds left in the round for a 8v1+1, 5v1+1..
in round 4 he attacked me then he attacked my 4... rather than forting to me and letting me do the attacking...

now we won, but against halfway decent opponents these two mistakes would have cost us dearly and i wouldnt play another team game with him for all the tea in china.... he is getting 1-2 star, bc i have a code about how i rank all players and i stick to it... and thus if you get a lower rank from me i had a reason at the time and other people got it for the same reason and therefore it all equals out...

any review is pointless EVEN for the blatant offenders... id like to see it abolished all together like bruce that way people would be entire focus'd on getting their rank higher making for better game play all around...

You should send your complaints to NJDRFSE. This is the new jersey department of ratings and family services. They help abused rating get of a dangerous situation and find them new homes.







This message is complete bullshit
Trade mark of bullshit enterprises.

Georgerx7di wrote:You should send your complaints to NJDRFSE. This is the new jersey department of ratings and family services. They help abused rating get of a dangerous situation and find them new homes.







This message is complete bullshit
Trade mark of bullshit enterprises.

LOL-