17 coaches online • Server time: 05:52
* * * Did you know? The best blocker is Taku the Second with 551 casualties.
Log in
Recent Forum Topics goto Post Mixed Team: Disharmo...goto Post Warpstone Open XVIgoto Post Worst Positional in ...
Christer
Last seen 4 hours ago
Overall
Star
Overall
Record
8/2/6
Win Percentage
56%
Archive

2023

2023-01-29 15:52:51
rating 6
2023-01-21 18:35:18
rating 6
2023-01-11 12:39:37
rating 5.4
2023-01-02 18:57:10
rating 6

2022

2022-12-31 12:10:19
rating 6
2022-11-30 23:28:31
rating 5.6
2022-03-28 15:32:21
rating 5.8

2021

2021-10-16 20:23:20
rating 5.9
2021-09-02 11:32:40
rating 6
2021-08-27 23:04:22
rating 6
2021-08-06 23:08:34
rating 5.8
2021-07-26 01:26:31
rating 5.8
2021-07-20 02:46:59
rating 6
2021-07-07 20:30:33
rating 5.9
2021-06-14 14:24:30
rating 6
2021-03-09 00:39:11
rating 5.9

2020

2020-12-09 11:20:11
rating 6
2020-11-30 18:03:36
rating 5.8
2020-10-13 11:59:57
rating 5.9
2020-08-08 22:48:43
rating 5.8
2020-08-07 21:32:26
rating 5.9
2020-03-18 14:09:47
rating 6

2019

2019-12-13 21:32:02
rating 6
2019-11-25 16:00:40
rating 5.9
2019-04-14 23:33:08
rating 6
2019-04-07 16:59:39
rating 6
2019-04-07 00:55:26
rating 6
2019-01-08 15:27:38
rating 5.9
2019-01-05 02:58:18
rating 5.8

2018

2018-08-17 17:28:31
rating 6
2018-08-15 00:05:40
rating 6
2018-07-17 20:17:40
rating 6
2018-06-28 14:28:08
rating 5.9
2018-05-23 17:55:10
rating 6
2018-05-10 22:42:46
rating 6
2018-05-09 19:42:28
rating 6
2018-04-30 10:44:23
rating 5.8
2018-04-23 12:33:02
rating 5.8

2017

2017-04-23 18:06:35
rating 6
2017-04-06 23:00:56
rating 6
2017-04-03 19:06:00
rating 6
2017-03-29 22:35:46
rating 6
2017-03-25 16:18:39
rating 6
2017-03-11 21:24:26
rating 6
2017-02-14 14:23:58
rating 6
2017-02-10 14:54:03
rating 6

2016

2016-11-30 00:04:21
rating 6
2016-11-27 23:40:04
rating 6
2016-11-17 18:18:07
rating 6

2015

2015-09-06 23:59:26
rating 6
2015-01-24 15:56:29
rating 6
2015-01-22 13:10:32
rating 6
2015-01-19 21:20:53
rating 6
2015-01-10 19:03:45
rating 6

2014

2014-09-09 15:35:53
rating 6

2013

2013-04-26 11:48:40
rating 5.7

2012

2012-12-18 17:37:29
rating 5.9
2012-11-18 18:19:19
rating 6
2012-09-25 13:47:16
rating 5.6
2012-08-15 12:31:53
rating 5.9
2012-08-10 23:12:22
rating 5.9
2012-06-27 22:53:48
rating 5.9
2012-04-10 11:56:38
rating 5.9
2012-03-07 13:52:00
rating 5.9
2012-02-16 16:59:56
rating 5.9
2012-02-04 19:00:41
rating 5.3

2011

2011-07-25 23:32:43
rating 5.6
2011-05-23 13:12:52
rating 5.6
2011-02-04 14:26:18
rating 5.4

2010

2010-03-26 11:38:41
rating 5.1
2010-03-01 12:16:53
rating 5.6

2009

2009-12-08 16:40:30
rating 5.8

2008

2008-09-11 14:47:19
rating 4.1
2008-02-26 21:16:54
rating 5.3
2008-01-21 01:01:58
rating 5.6

2007

2007-11-06 21:23:14
rating 5.1
2007-10-16 00:26:11
rating 5.4
2007-09-30 17:10:03
rating 5.4
2007-09-30 12:01:42
rating 5.3
2007-08-09 12:14:57
rating 4.5
2007-08-06 12:02:52
rating 4.9
2007-08-03 17:56:21
rating 5.4
2020-06-10 13:20:02
78 votes, rating 5.8
Behaviour towards staff and rules breach consequences
So, it was recently brought to my attention that a coach on the site was surprised that how people act when communicating with staff members will affect the consequences of a rules dispute. This coach claims to have received several PMs from other coaches claiming they "see it [their] way" but are unwilling to formally step forward on this topic.

First off, let me state that I find it sad to hear that people are unwilling to step forward and express their opinion on the site rules. If there is genuinely a wide-spread disagreement on how things are done I am absolutely interested in hearing about it.

Now, to get to the actual topic. I'll be super clear here and state that it is an explicit request from me to the staff that they do indeed take coach attitudes into account when making a ruling. As a general policy, the rules of the site are written in a way to give a certain amount of flexibility to staff members given that rules simply cannot be completely boxed in with clear lines. The reality of any kind of system such as FUMBBL is that rules breaches are mostly on a spectrum of being right or wrong.

A typical example is a coach who played 3 games 10 years ago, and just recently returned forgotting their old account. They make a new one (which is not allowed as per the rules), and after 25 games get noticed and reported to the staff. Now, strictly per the rules, we would lock the new account, unlock the old account (adjusting email, password recovery, etc) and possibly a temporary account ban for breaking the rules, depending on other factors (previous rules breaches etc). This hypothetical situation doesn't really warrant that amount of time spent and the staff member is absolutely in their right to step out of the rules as written and make a judgement call to simply leave the coach on their new account, lock the old one and move on.

Given that there's this spectrum of potential outcomes from a rules/policy breach, a coach who approaches staff with a civilized and friendly attitude will, and in my opinion should, be likely to have a more beneficial outcome of a rules breach than someone who's being aggressive and abusive towards the staff. The point here is to being able to have a staff team who can reduce the time needing to be spent on abusive, aggressive people while having the leeway to take an extra step or encourage friendly attitudes when dealing with situations that can sometimes be difficult.

As with *any* discussion about how staff makes decisions and deals with issues, I would like to point out that mistakes are absolutely made sometimes. I would also make it crystal clear that I am taking responsibility of any and all mistakes made by the staff team. It's up to me to be clear towards the staff of how I expect things to be dealt with and if a mistake is made it's because I haven't been clear enough. The staff team does an amazing job from my perspective and I couldn't be happier with their efforts in keeping the site as good a place as it can be.

Another point I would like to make here is that any time a staff member makes a decision you are not happy with, you have the option to get in touch with me directly to have a review of the issue and the ruling. It's one of the primary reasons I try to leave non-trivial issues to a staff member first before making a ruling of my own, as coaches simply don't have a way to have my decisions reviewed.

And again, to be on topic again. Coaches approaching me for a review of a ruling are 100% going to have their case affected by their attitude. If someone is being abusive, aggressive or just generally intolerable, I am not going to spend time on reviewing a ruling made by another staff member. I understand that coaches can feel frustrated with their opponent or whatever it may be, but taking it out on the staff or me isn't acceptable behaviour.

Finally, I would like to stress that I really welcome objective discussions about the site rules. If you genuinely think there's a real problem or issue with the rules, or how they're applied it's very helpful to me to receive feedback. I have personally written the rules as they stand and am ultimately responsible for conveying the intent to the staff, and am happy to talk about the thinking behind any individual paragraph or the rules as a whole either in private or in public.

Expressing that you don't agree with a particular rule isn't something you should need to be afraid of doing, and I am absolutely not opposed to making adjustments if I feel there's a need to do so.
Rate this entry
Comments
Posted by PeteW on 2020-06-10 13:28:31
Hear hear! I cannot believe that anyone would be rude or aggressive towards staff who are volunteering their time, or towards Christer, who does an amazing amount of work which he gives to the community for free.

Rude people can go away and stay away. Unbelievable.
Posted by asteflix on 2020-06-10 13:30:11
Considering this is a thread about rules and staff, I wish to illustrate a frustrating part of the site for me. I greatly respect some staff members, and I know it's a difficult job.

My specific issue is that a lot of the time this site will choose not to act, either out of laziness or because our community is so small and everyone knows each other they will choose not to punish established coaches. Even if they do act, nobody knows that staff chose to act and so we're all led to believe that staff didn't act.

Example A: Coach A is notoriously abusive towards other coaches. Coach A gets reported. Ticket is closed by staff and nothing is said about whether coach A was punished or not. A month later, Coach A is abusive again and a ticket is submitted again. Ticket is closed and staff informs us not to send a ticket for the same subject, despite it being a different occurrence of the same problem.

What I want is transparency from the staff, if a punishment is handed out I want the person that submitted the ticket to be informed of whether or not their ticket had any effect at all. It's an incredibly frustrating position to be in, because once the ticket is closed often the staff won't tell you if your ticket was warranted or not, if a punishment was handed out or not etc.

Posted by awambawamb on 2020-06-10 13:49:21
kudos to asteflix.
I believe giving a feedback is absolutely necessary and it's a part of a non-written gentleman's agreement not to disclose personal information regarding an issue with another coach.
I also believe that a more gentle approach to communication leads to improve relationships, where a stern and "pompously official" communication makes communication only harsher, especially when there is prejudice.
"If I'm seeing another pm...", "My decision has been taken and I can't care less", "Cease and desist" and similar answer are all nails in the coffin of communication.
My opinion is that we have many Manwë-s and Ulmo-s, and few Tulkas' and Aulë-s, to say in another way.
Posted by Christer on 2020-06-10 13:53:40
Asteflix, I appreciate the frustration but I strongly believe it's for the better to not publish information about rulings made to avoid witch-hunts on coaches, and rules lawyering posts about how X issue should have been dealt with differently.

If we were to publish the result of each ticket in public (or as a response to the ticketing coach or coaches), it would result in the need to spend many many hours having to justify each and every ruling, and specify *exactly* what grounds were used as a basis for the ruling. This is a completely unacceptable amount of work to do and expect from the staff, who deal with a hugely negative aspect of the site for free.

A huge majority of games and communities do it the same way. You write the ticket, staff deals with it and you get nothing but a "thank you for your report" response (assuming it involves other coaches).

In your hypothetical example (which, I'm almost certain isn't hypothetical and likely to cause more fuss, which is likely your intention when bringing it up), the second ticket should be an objective report of the new offense and no need to bring up "in the past, X was being offensive in this and this and this match" and add on that "by the way, he did it again". Simply report offensive behaviour as it happens and let the history be dealt with by the staff (which it is).

You seem to expect that if someone calls their opponent an egghead, the offender should never be allowed on the site again. Clearly not how I feel offensive behaviour should be dealt with. Repeated offenses will, and do, get escalated to stronger and stronger levels of consequences, up to and including permanent ban from the site (which more often than not causes a streak of new accounts being created by the same person, and a time of cat and mouse games).
Posted by Kam on 2020-06-10 14:03:59
"My specific issue is that a lot of the time this site will choose not to act, either out of laziness or because our community is so small and everyone knows each other they will choose not to punish established coaches. Even if they do act, nobody knows that staff chose to act and so we're all led to believe that staff didn't act."

I'm not very active anymore and I don't know half of the current staff.

Yet (and if was even more true back in the days) I know if I submit a ticket against a coach I will have the benefice of the doubt. Most likely. Because of the moderators' notes and all.

That being said, when I was in fault - and there was one very noticeable instance, which costed me 3 legendary players - the staff didn't hesitate to do what was right.

So I don't know if things have changed - I have no reason to believe so - but from my personal experience, I would say thanks to the staff for their work.
Posted by koadah on 2020-06-10 14:45:46
It should be obvious how you should interact with admins.

If in doubt, address them as you would a police officer. ;)
Posted by Kam on 2020-06-10 14:48:58
I have too much respect for the admins for that!
Posted by asteflix on 2020-06-10 15:18:24
''
You seem to expect that if someone calls their opponent an egghead, the offender should never be allowed on the site again. Clearly not how I feel offensive behaviour should be dealt with. Repeated offenses will, and do, get escalated to stronger and stronger levels of consequences, up to and including permanent ban from the site (which more often than not causes a streak of new accounts being created by the same person, and a time of cat and mouse games). ''

''A huge majority of games and communities do it the same way. You write the ticket, staff deals with it and you get nothing but a "thank you for your report" response (assuming it involves other coaches). ''

There is a strong contradiction hidden inside of those two statements. The first statement is the idea that fumbbl is it's own thing, and that it's policed by individuals and not a robot or a script. The 2nd post indicates that this community policed by individuals chooses for those same individuals to act as if they were robots.

What I want is really simple. I want staff to either indicate that the ticket was warranted and as such *a* punishment has been handed off, or that the ticket had insufficient proof and or was unwarranted and as such the individual was *not* punished. I don't want specifics, I just wanna know if the ticket worked or not. Plenty of communities say thank you for your report, but they do say stuff like ''Thank you for bringing it to our attention, we shall take the appropriate steps to insure that this behavior is not repeated''.

This is not a witch hunt, and I also have made mistakes in the past. But I strongly believe that hiding everything behind the curtain creates frustration, and makes coaches take it into their own hands.

I'm not even gonna comment with your insinuation that i'm doing this to drum up attention, and frankly it's really disappointing to see from a thread that was supposed to be about communication. Ask yourself, does''(which, I'm almost certain isn't hypothetical and likely to cause more fuss, which is likely your intention when bringing it up'' encourage coaches to come out and communicate with you more or less ?
Posted by Kam on 2020-06-10 15:25:32
OK.

Back in the days there was one guy named Lizvis. He was the most obnoxious player you could ever think off. He was on Xchat 24/7 and he did hurt the community. He was toxic.

He's no longer here. Not sure of the details, but.... that was a relief for everybody.

It took years for that. Yet I'd rather trust people who take years to get rid of someone like that than people who would ban him on the spot because of one report.
Posted by Stimme on 2020-06-10 15:58:18
I wasn't aware we could only have one active account. Please delete my alternative username MenonaLoco then.
Posted by Rags on 2020-06-10 16:38:31
'Back in the days there was one guy named Lizvis. He was the most obnoxious player you could ever think off'

Ever run into MoThuggin? A coach who lived every inch of his badass handle
Posted by MenonaLoco on 2020-06-10 16:52:28
BWAHAHAHAHAAAAAAA Good try! :-))))
Posted by MattDakka on 2020-06-10 16:53:53
Last time I had to report an opponent who used the catch-after-Blitz! bug I think that the admin was confrontative with me, so I asked help to another admin but he said that it was better to let the admin who originally dealt with my ticket to handle it without another admin's interference.
I wasn't happy with the first admin's tone and I would have complained with you, but I remember that you, Christer, said in another occasion that admin staff has been chosen and appointed by you and criticizing staff is like criticizing you personally, so I refrained to send you a PM to discuss that admin's conduct.
Mind, I'm not whining or complaining about the bug (it has been fixed), just saying that, according to your own words about staff I was scared to contact directly you to discuss that admin's conduct and some details, for example if breaking a clear written site rule about exploiting a bug for personal advantage is "my assumption" or not, I know you have lot of stuff to do and your time is precious, I don't like to disturb you nor admin staff if I can avoid it, but I really would have liked to discuss that, given the chance.
On the other hand, I thought that it could have backfired, because, since you already said that criticizing an admin is like criticing you personally, you could have banned me or something, so I refrained.
Please, don't take this as me trolling or attacking you, just trying to be constructive in the debate and explaining the reason I didn't contact you, maybe other people here don't send you a direct PM because of the same reason.
Posted by Dominik on 2020-06-10 17:20:57
Ideally staff should be neutral like referees. Complete neutrality cant be achieved by human nature and even more so when the staff is participating and having the role as a coach too. Then it is a natural result that you build up sympathies and antipathies, some more and some less.

I do not know a way to solve that problem as the whole site is runned by volunteers.

Anyhow on the whole the staff system and handling of support tickets is great and it became even better in recent years.
Posted by happygrue on 2020-06-10 17:33:37
@Asteflix

My understanding of the ticket system is that they are logged. So the act of filing a ticket and then, presuming it wasn't something petty, dealt with in a warning or change of player name or whatever - that sits there as a notice of a broken rule. In extreme cases, I seem to recall bans for those that don't take the warning seriously. So the very act of filing tickets is, to my limited understanding of the system, a key part of the system itself. As is, presumably, filing a lot of petty tickets.

I'm sure that if SOMEONE were to HYPOTHETICALLY report a staff member for the abuse of surfing to many of my menz - I mean SOMEONE'S menz - in a game, that would be in... SOMEONE'S file as a petty ticket. On a related note, we should all try hard not to file petty tickets (not talking about legitimate tickets), because wasting the staff's time has been well documented to piss off Nuffle.
Posted by happygrue on 2020-06-10 17:36:38
Just to be clear: what I'm trying to get at is that it sends a very different message to see 8 people all file 1 ticket on an individual, than to have one person file 8 tickets against an individual. These are the kind of things that, I would assume, the staff look at as they try to keep this the generally nice place that it is.
Posted by Kam on 2020-06-10 18:33:07
@ Rags

Fine, let's settle this with BLOODKILLERMACHO

https://fumbbl.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=Sections&file=index&req=viewarticle&artid=7&page=2

shall we? :D
Posted by Rags on 2020-06-10 18:55:07
@Kam Bring it
Posted by Malmir on 2020-06-10 19:14:14
I have to say I have always found the staff absolutely spot on when I have contacted/ been contacted by them. But then I'm not a douche when I speak to them. Reap what you sow... On a serious note, I would like to think everyone, yes even you, can appreciate people giving up their time for free to help support an awesome hobby. Long live Fumbbl and thanks to Christer and all the staff who make it possible.
Posted by koadah on 2020-06-10 21:58:45
The problem with the Lizvis issue is that the site let him continue his antics for far, far too long. Then he just disappeared.

We don't know whether he was banned, he just quit or he got hit by a bus.

The site lost a lot of goodwill over that. The goodwill would have returned much quicker if we'd known that he was banned.
Some coaches may have returned to the site quicker if they'd know that he was banned.
Posted by Swampserpent on 2020-06-10 22:05:47
Props to Christer for this blog.

my two cents (lol) :

1- I agree with Asteflix in that we should receive a pm after the fact that simply says " Punishment was administered by admin as appropriate" or " no action was taken"
etc.

2- I have personal experience with the admins on multiple occasions regarding multiple things and good advice is : Squeeky Wheel gets the grease And you get more flys with honey than a swatter.


On an entirely different subject: COST OF SITE-

I would wholeheartedly pay 10,15,20$ a month to access this site and play. But- that means I would expect quality control in admins, site operation, etc.

This site is free, with option to donate if you want.

I love this site I know many people could not /would not pay so give the admins some slack, they use their time for free. thanks
Posted by Malmir on 2020-06-10 22:39:50
I agree with Koadah's point about Lizvis being allowed to peddle his rubbish for far too long and I can see Asteflix's point too. Just an indication about whether the complaint was valid or not would help people move on.
Posted by fidius on 2020-06-11 01:42:48
I'm with PeteW, I'd be shocked if you didn't take attitude into account. Absolutely fair, and not even worth blogging about tbh.

In my 9 years on-site I've had a couple run-ins with admins over comments I've made in-game (2/2 got reported, natch), and a couple forum run-ins where I was misunderstood and subsequently slapped down. In all cases I've found it useful to remind myself that this game is played mostly by social misfits and therefore I should cut my fellow players (including admins) some slack. I've had my moments too.
Posted by Amon242 on 2020-06-11 03:11:53
oh mighty exalted admins of fumbbl, with much humility and an attitude of complete and utter subservience to you wisdom and knowledge, Stimme is correct when he states that his second account is indeed MenonaLoco. With an attitude of complete transparency and honesty, I too have used this account on occasion and my only wish is you lock this account. Please take my attitude into account when making your decision. As your humble servant, and possible major donor, I hope you take my gracious, groveling attitude into account when you lock said account.

Amon

p.s. It would be interesting to see what has been logged against you, kinda like Uber, where you lost .5 stars because you closed the door too hard.
Posted by Uber on 2020-06-11 06:09:57
I do substract .5 stars for closing the door too hard. Don't try that funny stuff with me Amon!
Posted by luxyluxo on 2020-06-11 09:33:21
What about the Roman solution a gladiatorial battle to the death in circumstances where neither side can come to a satisfactory resolution. Meet in a car park middle of night somewhere neutral ( face masks of course) and whoever leaves the car park alive was correct?

Personally, I have been on fumbbl for 8 years now and played over 1400 games and honestly I do not think I have ever had an issue ? I have had on the very rare occassion a grumpy coach, but a bit of character adds to the spice of life and a little bit of physchological warfare during a game, adds to the strategy and enjoyment, just as long as you let it go and everyone is friends afterwards.

So Christer and admins keep up the good work :-D , everyone has a different perspective in life and it is very difficult to make everyone happy.

Luxy
Posted by Harad on 2020-06-11 09:33:28
Personally I have always found it a little disappointing that anyone wants to see anyone else be punished.
A 'something has been done' note would be redundant anyway. Something is done about every ticket. Sometimes that something is just that it is stored and considered in future analysis.
If the person says they want to see the punishment so they can check on the good of the society (I am not convinced this is true), I think they would be better directed to observing the behaviour of the society than its punishments. The Fumbbl community seems to be largely quite respectful, pleasant and tolerant, ergo its punishment system is likely to be within the bounds of appropriateness for its situation. If you focus instead on the punishments you may struggle to determine if they are well judged as your own biases may well interfer in that judgement and you may not be a good judge of the results they are likely to bring.
Posted by koadah on 2020-06-11 12:05:43
"Personally I have always found it a little disappointing that anyone wants to see anyone else be punished."

"The Fumbbl community seems to be largely quite respectful, pleasant and tolerant".

It doesn't stay that way because we are all wonderful all of the time. ;)

Some people have complained bitterly about Fumbbl's "draconian" admins. Fortunately, most of those seem to have jumped ship when the Cyanide game launched.
Whether they jumped or were pushed, IMO we're better off without them.

I'm not that bothered about generally knowing that people have been punished. The case I mentioned was a bit of a special case, mainly because the site let it go on for so long.

As the sayings go:
"You've got to nip it in the bud."
"You let one get away with it, they'll all be doing it."

;)
Posted by Wozzaa on 2020-06-11 12:10:36
Completely disagree with asteflix.

Once you've sent your ticket or complain, you should trust that the correct process has been followed. The person sending the complaint has done their bit. It's up to the admins then.

No one needs to know who that person, what they did or what was done about the complaint. No need for public punishment.

As stated, it wouldn't take much for the consequence to be widely known in this smallish community here.
Posted by JanMattys on 2020-06-11 13:47:07
I disagree with asteflix as well.

As a coach you can (and maybe even should) point out rules violations or blatant misconduct, but that is a sort of public service you are doing for the good of the community, not for your own satisfaction.

Other people, who have been appointed and are supervisioned specifically for that, have the burden of judging every case, often (and this is IMPORTANT) using data that is not (and should not be) available to you as a reference.

You are not entitled to a resolution of your ticket, just as the guy you report is not entitled to know who reported him. Your job starts and ends with the submission of a ticket.

Asking for a feedback leads to the judgement of the staff from a position of ignorance, due to you not having access to many things that impact the decision (the PMs or the chat between the suspect and the staff, the suspect's fumbbl history log, the suspect's counterarguments, and so on).

You see yourself as a complainant, but you are not. A ticket is not a trial with a judge, an accused, and an accuser who seeks justice. It's a request for a review, nothing more. You make sure that someone takes a closer look specifically at what you pointed out. Nothing more.
Posted by PurpleChest on 2020-06-11 14:05:06
On the very rare occasions i have submitted tickets I have always taken 'ty for the report' as EXACTLY the same as 'something has been done'.

What the admins decide to do is not my business.

As Asterflix demonstrates here, any details of the ruling, upheld, dismissed, noted, it doesnt matter. Gives the reporter something to take further, to disagree with, to endlessly blog, forum post and whine about. It can never have a positive impact.

there does need to be an appeal system, and someone always need to watch the watchers and police the police, but giving complainers more details can and will lead to yet more endless complaints about the complaints results.

The only reason to even call for this is 'I want to see if i agree with the ruling', no other upside. With the slight added stink of 'I want to be able to be a douche but yet insist to be treated like everyone else'.

Well no, the easiest thing to adjust is your attitude, not expect changes from everyone else.
Posted by ClayInfinity on 2020-06-11 15:49:32
I am loathing of the fact I cannot insert that Michael Jackson Meme where he's eating popcorn.

Been here 17 years... never had a major issue, all admin dealings with me have been cordial, factual and pleasant. I love the site, Christer has made my life better for 17 years and for all the admins, past present and future, I thank you for volunteering your time.
Posted by FRSHMN on 2020-06-11 16:07:25
I myself decided not to communicate with fumbbl again since this happened:

https://fumbbl.com/p/blog&c=FRSHMN&id=21827

And yes, Christer, you did your part to my decision not to do so again. According to my experience, there have been several events where you acted from a "Seat of Power" when confronted with anything you didn't like. And it's okay, it is your show, and you can dictate the rules. But as a result, people won't raise their voice again.

For myself, I came to the conclusion to simply consume fumbbl where and as long as it is fun, but not to get too invested to it anymore. And once the fun is gone, I'll be so, too.

I think it has to be said, that this haasn't happened so far, so overall you seem to do a lot of right. But the way you communicate (at least in some special occasions) isn't your selling point ;-)
Posted by MattDakka on 2020-06-11 17:25:41
@FRSHMN: I've read that blog, I understand you are annoyed by concessions, I'm annoyed too if they happen after 1 turn for a futile reason and I have not enough spare time to play another game, but the game rules allow them. I never concede but I don't expect others to do it as well, I'd just like they conceded for real reasons (being clearly outnumbered and unable to play the rest of the game without turning it in a slow agony, not because they deployed bad and suffered a Blitz! like on BB1 Cyanide, although skipping turns is always an option, I do that if I can't play, instead of conceding).
The true problem was when an opponent could abandon a game and admin could not award you the win after 3 days as per site rules due to concede button being broken. The concede button and the Blitz! rr catch bug have been fixed lately, those fixes show that Christer, Candlejack & staff work to improve the things. Let's be positive and grateful. :)
Posted by DrClaes on 2020-06-11 18:44:31
1800 games in and I can count the number of rude or unpleasant coaches I've played on one hand. Some aren't chatty, sometimes language barriers exist, but mostly we can laugh about the silly and awesome things that happen on pitch.

We have a mostly awesome community here, Christer and admins are doing a lot of things right as I see it. It's why I've pledged to the fundraiser taking place this month (shameless plug).
Posted by erased000026 on 2020-06-12 00:35:35
I really couldnt care less about knowing what happened to someone I reported - admins notify me that ticket is resolved, moving on.

I do care about how admins treat people differently, even when the approach is exactly the same. I know there is a human factor to take into account here, but if you accept the role as admin, you also accept to see beyond this, and that is sometimes hard for some people. I can get 2 completely different rulings on the same case, presented in the exact same way - only difference is wether or not the admin likes you.

Being admin for free is no carte blanche to act a fool or go on personal vendettas.

So of course rules needs to be flexible, because it is hard to set up strict rules and strict rules often ends up punishing those who they are not meant to punish.

But somewhat of a redline would be appreciated for sure, it can be really ahrd to see it sometimes :D
Posted by Jogrenaught on 2020-06-12 02:07:08
My experience so far has been very positive.

Should the way you speak with staff affect the outcome of a decision?

The fact that we're asking if I can be ignorant to someone, ask them for help, and then expect a favorable response out of them is an incredible question. I would expect that if someone spoke negatively to a fumbbl support staff member for ANY reason, that that person would be given a warning right there. There really isn't a good excuse to act a fool to anyone, let alone the people running this site for free. So I mean, if the request was rude, then I HOPE you didnt get what you wanted. Why should bad behavior be encouraged?

As to how staff member have treated me, theyve been very patient with me especially in the beginning. From a new FUMBBL coach perspective, theres a lot to learn on here. FUMBBL is a very different mindset for me as opposed to playing tabletop or anything Im more experienced with. So of course, I started to wonder if something was wrong with the system. At one point I asked if something was wrong with the RNG... *rings bell* shame-shame-shame. But the answer was well thought out and respectful especially for a question I am certain fumbbl staff get a lot of and are tired of hearing about. My point, the response to my very absurd question could have been met with disrespect and a condescending attitude and it probably wouldve been justified. But the staff didnt do this and that response led me to really think about how I look at the game, how I look at dice and results, and how I in general feel about it. I have a lot to be grateful for because of that snowball effect of what happened.

I wear my scars on the outside. Im not perfect. I have to unlearn complaining about bad dice. Im getting better at it and itll take time. But I was set on a better path because of how I was handled here by the fumbbl staff.

I get the whole (your rulings should be grey) argument. I get that you want someone making a ruling to only think about the game itself. But I don't get how if youre rude, you even expect to get in the gate to make your case heard much less supported.
Posted by DrDeath on 2020-06-12 14:55:06
The referee's decision is final.

That is the rule in every sport or other competition out there, it beggars belief that some coaches are having a go at our Admins just over a game of Blood Bowl. They Admins give up their time to do a great job and don't always get the recognition they deserve, so it is sad to read this. I think the community here by and large is great - I guess there are always a few bad apples... If that daft minority can't improve their behaviour and want to play somewhere else, see how they get on in the open ladders of Cyanide... I reckon they will be knocking back here within 2 weeks!
Posted by Jeffro on 2020-06-12 20:00:03
Christer - how you state your reasoned and obviously biased opinions towards this site and how it should be run is one of the reasons FUMBBL is the only Patreon I gladly support. It is also the reason I don't hesitate to guide what little traffic of players I can offer to the site.

Thank you. Well done. Keep on keepin' on.
Posted by sann0638 on 2020-06-13 16:57:43
Full support for Christer and the admins from me. Not a fan of criticising volunteers.
Posted by Matthueycamo on 2020-06-16 05:30:25
I actully came to the conclusion a number of years ago it's not worth reporting anything because you get no feedback and often the problem seems to go unadressed let alone the fact there is no punishment. I had to check back to one particular ticket that sticks in my mind. I was perfectly polite and reasond and the reply was rather flipant and almost game across as taking the piss as if I should be greatful for wasting an hour of my time because I won the game.

The problem is if you play a game and somebody wastes an hour of your time by concceeding for example in what to reasonable people is highly questionable based on what the rule actually says. Or you get a coach that is really unplesant but they keep behaving the same it's just a bit disheartening from a faith point of view in I guess the people supposed to do the policing.

The result of this is I stopped playing anything but League, I dabble occasionally and still enter the Fumbbl Cup but that's it. Leagues police themselves probably more effectively along the general site rules in my view than the site does and you just don't have your time wasted once you start a game. There are less problem coaches to begin with partly because of the way the rules are applied and that leads to better games from that point of view. If you have a problem it's acted upon and you get feedback from the people running the league. In my experiance that never leads to rules lawyering.

I've had many conversations over the past 6 years where I know lots of people feel the same, I think that is a real shame that a decent minority of coaches feel that way because I think it detracts from general site activity. I don't often go on the forums because again it's mostly talk about regular Blood Bowl plus site tornaments etc and I don't play that anymore. I only found out PO got turned to Juggs a few years ago yesterday, that's how little I end up outside the league bubble these days.

I'm not after every minute detail or even the level of punishment given out, perhaps some small explination as to why it's not acted on in cases where you feel puzzled as to how it does not break the rules as written on the site page. That's mainly to do with rules on concessions and abuse rather than any of the other rules. However for coaches to have trust in the system some level of feedback is necessary.

I have never spoken about this before for two reasons, first because I long ago decided it was really something that would never get changed and that even there was no real intrest in changing. Second having decided that I moved to the space on the site that better deals with the rules so it's not really relevant to me any more. I guess I'm saying this now because perhaps in the future if enough people that feel the same say so that something might change that makes things better for other coaches in the future.
Posted by Matthueycamo on 2020-06-16 06:02:08
I should probably adress things like this thinking about it. I do respect PC a lot but I think there is a lot wrong with the following.

"The only reason to even call for this is 'I want to see if i agree with the ruling', no other upside"

But that is not the case at all, because you already believe the actions of the other coach broke the rules when you submit the sorts of tickets we are having problems with. We already know what the coach that reported it thinks and add to that we already have a good number of coaches that are disaffected by the current system. I can't imagine that is going to make things worse, I'm not sure how the feeling of discontent could get worse than it is over the issue. Just think about wider society, problems mostly stem from lack of either information, acountability or rules seemingly not applied properly with no explination. We are already in this situation.

Benifits of better communication are things such as coaches having a better understanding of the rules so less eronious tickets. Surely that's a win for the admin department? Better engagement with the site. Less coaches that feel frustrated which is going to lead to on average nicer interactions on the whole from both parties. Fosters a feeling of mutual respect something I feel given the topic of this blog is clearly lacking in fairly decent numbers. Perhaps we end up after a while in a situation where we as a group decide that certain rules need rewritting which going forward would make things better as well because the rules reflect how the Admins admin and everybody then knows where they stand. I think there is an obvious disconnect between the rules as written and how some of them often seem to be applied.

I would imagine others can come up with other benifits but that's already about a half dozen from me.
Posted by PurpleChest on 2020-06-16 13:22:03
Mattheuycamo I respectfully disagree. I think you are looking alone at best case scenarios, where every admin decision is seen as valid and unquestioned. As the complainant is often emotionally involved in the case this can be seen to rarely be true in any justice system. It is why most developed countries find the law system of Saudi Arabia (as one example) so horrific, the involvement of the aggrieved party in the judicial process ends up looking far more like vengeance than justice.

'Benifits of better communication are things such as coaches having a better understanding of the rules so less eronious tickets.'

Sounds plausable but so is the opposite. If the complainant disagrees with how the rules are structured/enforced surely more tickets (maybe weight of numbers will get more impact...), or more people not bothering. the rule do absolutely need to be clear and available, but not the punishments.

'Better engagement with the site.'

Or less, if people dont like the outcome of their complaints. also the public shaming of coaches is not likely to help them stay and rethink their actions

'Less coaches that feel frustrated which is going to lead to on average nicer interactions on the whole from both parties.'

Or more frustration, if people dont agree with rulings, and a worse atmosphere.

'Fosters a feeling of mutual respect something I feel given the topic of this blog is clearly lacking in fairly decent numbers.'

Really? I feel the opposite is true. Neither of us have proof, but the voices here wanting change are few and i could have predicted their names, they jump on every chance to bash admins and demand things done the way they think they should be and why? because they have once, or repeatedly, not agreed with admin decisions. Wanting instead 'their' justice enforced. More public decisions can and will lead to more people that dont agree. People rarely seem to say 'i got 90% of what i thought was needed so all good'. No, they come back moaning about the missing 10%.

'Perhaps we end up after a while in a situation where we as a group decide that certain rules need rewritting which going forward would make things better as well because the rules reflect how the Admins admin and everybody then knows where they stand.'

Who is this 'we'. Because if its some 'democracy' model show me a gaming site where that works well and doesnt end up in factions, infighting, user bases splitting and death. I can show you several where it has.

'I think there is an obvious disconnect between the rules as written and how some of them often seem to be applied.'

That's your opinion and you are entitled to it. i think there has to be space for all the usual human stuff. Apologies, Language barriers, miscommunication, newness, rage fits, cats on fire.etc. etc. etc.

the day my father died I illegally conceded a game. I thought it would help distract me, it didnt. i wasnt in the mood. Should I have been punished to the letter of the law? Should I have been given a pass and my personal circumstances explained to everyone? Should I have been forgiven with no reason given?

I am afraid you see this issues through the lens of your apparent mistreatment at some point in the past. All the reasons you give only apply if people agree with the decisions of the admins, and people never ever do. Barring the magic one offs when the complainant gets the EXACT result they have deemed fair, even a very minor deviation from the wanted outcome leads to resentment and more, and open, arguments and bad feeling.

Go through the forums/blogs, just see how many complaints by one person are jumped on and co-opted by others (the same names time and again) to air their personal grievance, no matter how much people have to contort the original discussion to shoehorn their pet grieve in.

And you advocate more of these.

to quote Mark Vernon, the author of Philosophy For The Curious and Ethics For The Curious:

Victim sentencing could serve as an outlet for their rage, pain and desire for justice. It promises closure by offering catharsis, thereby helping to restore the victim's happiness, or at least helping to lessen their pain.

However, this might backfire.

Given the choice, many victims might desire longer sentences than the judiciary would allow. When that desire is not satisfied, their anguish might be exacerbated. The therapeutic argument has also been called the "Oprahisation" of sentencing.

This is because victim impact statements may include attacks on the defendant. There is a danger, then, that the court room comes to resemble a talk show, particularly if the trial is televised. This may increase general happiness, though not by helping victims, but by entertaining viewers.

Is this really what you want?
Posted by Matthueycamo on 2020-06-16 14:48:42
I actually had somebody conceed against me yesterday. Not exactly because of a death but it was not a trivial just because the game is not going well, they had probably had the best of the game so far. It didn't even cross my mind to complain or send a ticket or anything, I didn't even feel annoyed. Why? A bit of communication.

I can confidently say that ever faced with real life situations causing things like that I would be happy for the coach to do what they needed to do.

Currently you have 3 groups of people. The people that have no issue, the people who have an issue but don't complain or have lost faith in the process not because of the fact no punishments were given but rather there is no reason given when it is so obvious the rule has been broken by the letter of the law and often also it's sprit. The third is people that might be abusive as they get nowhere with the system. So how would changing the process affect these groups? Group 1 likely no change. Group 2 they will be 90% more satisfied to before. Group 3 hard to say if it will be a large effect but I imagine there will be some benifit even if its just a 20% improvement.

The problem is it kind of comes across that you are sort of talking like there is no angst now, well that's false. I also think the rest of the site can argue against serial complainers in a more open system, maybe even make excessive whining against site rules. So the group 1 and 2 coaches and the group 3 coaches who are now happy can tell the people still unhappy to jog on.

Could you have predicted my name? Most of us that feel this way would not say anything because we feel it is pointless and have never said anything in the past. It's four years since I filed a ticket about a rules break for example. I haven't said a word before because I have no faith in the system, I actually don't see the point in it. In my mind the site would be no worse without that aspect. I'm not going to say any names because it's up to them if they become public with their feelings it is not my place to stick them in the firing line. But if you have no faith in things ever being better why would you bother? So this feeling ends up getting mostly hidden.

Or alternatively you change the rules to fit the judgments, that's the easy thing. If you relax the rules people can't complain the rules are not followed well enough.

I have only said something now because Christer made this blog and perhaps that meant that maybe half an ear was open to making the site better in this regard. It's now clear I was wrong because the blog just seems like lip service if I am honest. Given later replies there seems there was never any intention of having an open mind with regards to changes going forward.





Posted by PurpleChest on 2020-06-16 15:51:14
no Matthueycamo, i confess I would not have predicted your name.

But when it comes to closed minds, you dont answer a single of my points.

I state that the angst you see would only be worsened unless those individuals get EXACTLY the justice THEY deem appropriate, and that that is impossible. you have shown and said nothing to alter that view, rather you have reinforced it.
Posted by Throweck on 2020-06-16 19:52:44
'...you have three groups...' I think this says a lot.

I would argue four (if I were to follow the above belief). The fourth being the admins.

Quite a few coaches don't actually see the admins as part of the site/community for whatever reason. Perhaps a natural issue with any kind of upper structure? Who knows.


Sometimes people forget we are human and have lives outside of the site. We make mistakes, we check messages but don't reply immediately because we are on our phones, etc. I enjoy being an admin but sometimes you can't make everyone happy. It is what it is.

' It's now clear I was wrong because the blog just seems like lip service if I am honest. Given later replies there seems there was never any intention of having an open mind with regards to changes going forward.'

Re-read the original blog. Christer does not say he will change anythinging. There is an emphasis on whether he feels there is a need to. He also explains that he welcomes feedback and would explain his decisions. In a past life as a Head Teacher I would welcome feedback from parents and pupils about my school daily. I would listen and explain my reasons. If I put it all into place I would have had water slides in classrooms and a 24 hour school day. Feedback does not constitute change.

Some people have misunderstood this when reading it I think.

Posted by MonkeyMan576 on 2020-06-17 16:26:35
This is one of the most well run sites in the history of the internet, and that is not hyperbole. I have played thousands of games over dozens of years and I have rarely, if ever, had any issues with other coaches or staff. I recently purchased BB2 and despite the superior graphics the community of fumbbl makes it by far the superior product. I have no complaints and I am quite frankly shocked that admin behavior is even a topic of discussion.
Posted by fidius on 2020-06-18 04:41:45
waterslides pls