Event Attendance: No Shows and Bails, discussion.

[lt_poncho]

You are correct, Duckman - things no matter what they are can be taken the wrong way. I guess what has to be made clear, something that is missing from this conversation, is the quantification of time and resources that is continually put into a game of such a scope.

It's getting increasingly difficult to 'swallow' games that have a lot of time and money invested when everyone says 'wow wee gosh oh boy yeah' on paper but come time to put your money down and show up and it's...??? Where is everyone? And then, as added spice, you get posters complaining that there isn't enough substance in games or enough of a sort of game - the very one the game host just offered!

I see this as just a safeguard to keeping games of this sort alive before players just push their plate back and say 'fuck this noise'. Quite a small effort to ensure continutity of a segment of the sport if you ask me.

[Scarecrow]

Originally Posted by Duckman

could that not have a negative effect as well?

Possibly. But frankly the same argument could be made about Trader Ratings in the Buy and Sell suppressing sales.

I think it has a better chance of creating positive change than it does negative. We'll see. Like anything else all this is voluntary -the community will support it or ignore it. We'll see...

[spleen]

PErhaps we could make the important number a ratio of posting your attendance to actually attending. Therefore a new player who has only been to 2 games, but never missed one he/she said they would attend still has a good rating. Because shit happens to everyone. It's not the fact that you missed one game or attended 50 that counts, it's how many you said you'd attend vs how many you actually did.

[Arnisador]

Originally Posted by lt_poncho

, is the quantification of time and resources that is continually put into a game of such a scope.

That's the crux right there. Its one thing to plan a general skirmish where you have "pickup" teams the day of the event. If people don't show, its not as huge an issue than if a host spends a year+ planning an event, possibly putting together a storyline, props to develop and test (as per KS2) and needing specific numbers of players to make it work.

Its not even necessarily a mil-sim vs rec game situation. Or a vets vs newbies situation.

Its about having respect for game organizers who take time out of their day to plan something fun for the attendees.

Anyone can criticize. Its easy to point out mistakes, its easy to just not bother attending without notifying. In a lot of cases, what it really is, is laziness.. Take the time to inform people about your attendance, or take the time to plan and run an event and let the other planners actually play before you criticize how the event runs.

Maybe then you'll learn to appreciate what other players and planners are actually doing to help the hobby.

[03lourob]

With the player ratings there is no way to know who is in the right or wrong it could be misused too easily and too often. I think problems like that should remain on the field and off these boards. It sounds like a horrible idea if you ask me and quite unnecessary. Although attendance issues are all valid concerns I certainly agree with the ideas in that department.

[MMMiles!]

I've considered non-refundable deposits... especially if you're hosting a game on your own property, this seems like a no-brainer. Even if people don't pay up before the game, and drop out, you can put it on their tab: if they want to come to another game, they can pony up the penalty fee before even signing up.

I don't think it's necessary for most games, but if you really beleive the integrity of your game (whether it's a scenario, or a skirmish but someone's fronted money) will be harmed by having dropouts, then force a deposit. $10 or $20 out of a 25 field fee would be enough to coax most people into taking it seriously.

Asking people for a deposit would go alot further than slapping some kind of player rating on people - money talks...

[Duckman]

but how are you supposed to take it up with someone on the field if they dont show up???

[Scarecrow]

Originally Posted by 03lourob

But the player ratings there is no way to know who is in the right or wrong it could be misused too easily and too often.

How do you think it could be misused? If you are a no show with no explanation and no cancel message, its pretty clear. Also, just like with the trader rating systems, if you unnecessarily flame someone with a bad rating you have the potential of being counter-rated. And with a dispute mechanism it also lets you address your critics. I still fail to see a problem that doesn't self-solve with such a system, particularly with the success of trader rating systems as a precident.

BTW, percentages are ratios and the rating system would be almost identical to what you see here in trader ratings or on eBay, a comment along with a positive, negative or neutral...

[whisper_kill]

Please note, in the Humanity's Hammer game thread in the events/game forum, I'm currently posting the pre-payment opportunity for the game.

[03lourob]

Originally Posted by Scarecrow

two rating systems, one for player ratings and one for show ratings.

Sorry what were the 2 rating systems I interpreted "player ratings" as something else. Its still a bit unclear why there is 2 and what each is.

[Duckman]

Originally Posted by 03lourob

Sorry what were the 2 rating systems I interpreted "player ratings" as something else. Its still a bit unclear why there is 2 and what each is.

i'd interpret that as a rating for attendance and the other as a players integrity during game play. sportsmanship etc.

[Scarecrow]

Originally Posted by Duckman

i'd interpret that as a rating for attendance and the other as a players integrity during game play. sportsmanship etc.

Bingo.

[Lisa]

Chronic noshows should automaticly get bumped on games where there's a player cap.

[BiffTheAncient]

I Like Lisa's idea......

[Dirty Deeds]

I agree with an attendance rating. People who confirm attendance to a game and then bail without explaination, or to attend another game, in my opinion have no respect for the game hosts nor the other players attending. I think that games with a player cap should ONLY allow confirmed players. In other words, if you're not sure you can make it leave the spot for someone who knows they can make it. The lack of respect for hosts and players is rampant by certain individules.

Which brings me to the Player Integrity rating. Who would be in charge of leaving the feedback? I mean, not many people will like their fate left to just anyone.

For instance, I myself am a quiet guy, social, but will not go out of my way to infiltrate someone's "click". I may be one of the most honest players around, however who will know if no one really knows me? And how would the host know, out of 70 players, that I am just the type of player he wants at his games if nobody knows who Dirty Deeds is? I am just using myself as an example.

Also someone mentioned something about hosts being able to make games for players with an "X" Player Integrity ratings or above to attend. I think this would kill the sport for the newbies. Maybe I am interpreting this rating wrong, if I am, please clarify.

Originally Posted by lt_poncho

I totally agree, it's consent. You see it a lot lately - guys posting here talking shit about how they play in their backyard, couldn't care less about what we try to uphold cause it's not their values - why the fuck are their accounts still active? I'd have deleted it before the end of this thread;

http://www.airsoftcanada.com/showthr...2&page=1&pp=15

Poncho speaks the truth. We all DO NOT need someone like this on these boards. I know alot of guys are having fun bashing the shit out of this moron, but lets face it, in the end do we really want some idiot like this affilliated with ASC??? This guys shows a total lack of respect for the WHOLE community and to the standards we are trying to uphold.