Hey all,
Patience and deadline enforcement are GM perogatives. It is the player's job to get moves in by the deadline, and you generally have a week to do so. After that, just cuz a GM runs a turn a couple days late one time, does not mean you get a couple extra days each turn, or can protest if you dont get the same slack. It's you who didnt have moves in on time. As a regular / busy GM, I can attest that often times I'll get to a game a few days late, and then more often, I'm within 5 minutes of the deadline. In either case, more time is never expected or assumed, because it is always the case that I can (and should try to) adjudicate relatively on time. I also have a house rule (and recommend other GM's have the same) that indicates an extension of any type for the current turn is not allowed. So you always might get more time, but you can never count on it. The only 2 times I broke that rule at GM discretion were for Hurricane Katrina, and when a player went into the hospital for a week. Other than such extreme cases, get in the very good habit of using prelims!

It really does make for better Diplomacy when a GM does not allow for extensions or delays, and runs a turn promptly - how often are you all hanging on a turns results, and checking your mail hoping for some results, only to have to wait a few days? Timely results really do make the game exciting. They make for last minute negotiations that really do have a hard cutoff, and they keep the interest in the game up. I will always support a GM running a turn even if a player did not have moves in - cuz if you're wishy washy even once, you encourage wishy washy back from the players, and then it's downhill from there as it spirals into more and more people who dont think of the deadline as real.
-mike



From: David Ellsworth [mailto:davidellsworth(at)sbcglobal.net]
Sent: Tue 12/23/2008 7:10 AM
To: Former Trout; Jon Stern
Cc: verticallychallangedcutie(at)yahoo.com; DC 212 Forum; Greg Neilsen DC 212 England; Patrick Canning DC 212 France; Jimmy Ghostine DC 212 Italy; Andrew Ott DC 212 Turkey; Stephen Lytton; The White Wolf; Michael Sims; David Ellsworth
Subject: DC 212


Interesting,

I agree. Rachael has the right to adjudicate when she did. I think it was inconsistant, and along with a few other inconsistancies, so I said enough for me. As the White Wolf pointed out, you can only really maintain your own blacklist. This DC offers no other recourse to dissatisfied players as of yet. Maybe oneday, but someone can always just change the signon name.

I do think the bit about her being a mother was sexist, and frankly incorrect. I was much more patient with my players. The games did run slower, and I am not claiming better, but I did my part to satisfy and accomodate all players. To people with jobs, families, and lives in general, less than 24 window between the reminder letter (which was before the deadline) and the adjudication, may not be the best way to induce a complete and fair game (in addition to it not being consistant with other rulings). <<<Heck, on the family note, I got her and White beat two-fold and they are old enough to have plenty of sports, music and other activities, so lets leave family out of the equation, and focus on bringing a good game experience to all involved.>>>

I think this game is shot, but that is for you all to decide. I do feel better knowing it was not just me who felt the inconsistancies, but now whoever plans to stay with it needs to move on or (more appropriately) end the game. My experiences at DC are done. This was the last bad taste for me. If I come back it will be with a diferent name.

David Ellsworth

From: Former Trout <former.trout(at)gmail.com>
To: Jon Stern <jstern78(at)gmail.com>
Cc: verticallychallangedcutie(at)yahoo.com; DC 212 Forum <dc212(at)diplomaticcorp.com>; Greg Neilsen DC 212 England <yeeha77(at)yahoo.com>; Patrick Canning DC 212 France <patrick.t.canning(at)gmail.com>; Jimmy Ghostine DC 212 Italy <Jimmy.Ghostine(at)vtmednet.org>; David Ellsworth DC 212 Russia <davidellsworth(at)sbcglobal.net>; Andrew Ott DC 212 Turkey <drew3739o(at)yahoo.com>; Stephen Lytton <stevelytton(at)hotmail.com>; The White Wolf <cloudhurler77(at)yahoo.com>
Sent: Tuesday, December 23, 2008 1:02:47 AM
Subject: Re: DC 212 Reply to player posts

Rachael is doing a fine job IMHO - and it is not her responsibility to allow for players missing getting in their orders.

The GMs set a deadline. Orders should be in before that deadline. End of story. Players need to live up to that deadline.


Look - I'm actually really sorry that David missed the deadline because it screws me up just as much as it does him. But ultimate responsibility for that lies with him - not with Rachael.


The act of running the game takes a slight bit more time than the act of sending in orders. Sometimes we GMs set deadlines anticipating that we will have the time to adjudicate but it doesn't turn out that way - so we need to delay the adjudication. In NO WAY does that mean that the order deadline has changed, however...


Trout

On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 4:20 PM, Jon Stern <jstern78(at)gmail.com ([email]jstern78(at)gmail.com[/email])> wrote:

I think the point is that if you have to delay for personal reasons, that's fine. But you can still see the time e-mails and moves were sent in, in order to see if they were before the deadline.

You can also always grant an extension regardless of personal scheduling issues. If a 24-hour extension is inconvenient for you, extend it for 48 hours. Or extend it for 24-hours and then just put the game on hold until you get back. But don't deny it, unless you are going to deny every extension. Maybe the game slows down a bit, but that's a small price to pay for having everyone feel like the rules are fair.

Again, nobody is complaining about late adjudications. People are complaining about you sometimes waiting for late orders and other times adjudicating immediately.

Nobody is saying that your family should play second fiddle. But putting the game on hold IS better than showing preferential treatment to some players/requests. Much better.

I feel like you keep jumping to the conclusion that I/we are saying that visiting your family is not a good enough reason to delay the game. Delay the game! No problem. What is not cool is sometimes granting extensions or sometimes waiting for late orders. My suggestion for your games would be:

- Grant any extension request of up to 48 hours once per player. If that means a deadline falls at an inconvenient time for you, delay the adjudication, but not the deadline.
- Allow a grace period of 12 or 24 hours for late orders. Once per player, and only once.
- Do not propose that a specific player as a replacement and ask the players as a group if that's ok.

Above all, be fair and consistent in your rulings. Your family activities are more important than the game, but you can still schedule around your real life without comprimising fairness.

Jon


On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 4:23 PM, Rachael Jameson <verticallychallangedcutie(at)yahoo.com ([email]verticallychallangedcutie(at)yahoo.com[/email])> wrote:
[quote:235d4ec0ba] First off let me start off by saying I have in no way shown any type of favoritism or have I tried to throw the game. I stated in the very opening email that if you NMR twice I replace you. When I had to replace Turkey it was because he ASKED to be replaced because he had some personal things to attend to. Secondly, I always said Prelims were always encouraged in case you couldn't be online for a turn. When I first denied the very first extension request it was because I was going out of town to visit family that I hadn't seen in 3 years ( my parents and little brother ). I worked the game around the time I was traveling and visiting instead of just putting the game on hold.
I don't understand what inconsistency you are referring to. ONE time I put out an adjudication slightly over 24 hours late. The player did send me his retreat and on a timely matter. I do have two young children and they come before any game I GM or play in. With Christmas approaching I figured you guys would understand that a little. My husband is also active duty Navy and works 12 hour days leaving me home with a 4 year old and a 1 year old.
As for adjudicating 2 hours past the deadline, that's EXTRA time you get to send in moves. I have every right to send the turn out at the 7pm deadline. I DO NOT have to give anyone a GRACE period. Ask any MOD or GM on this site and they will tell you the same thing. IF I was doing so poorly in my GMing I am pretty sure one of the two MODS I include in every turn would have pointed something out.
David: As for you not turning in moves I sent you a PERSONAL reminder 11:38am the day orders were due informing you I was missing your orders. You had a WEEK to get your orders in. Just because you got sick the day they were due doesn't excuse you not sending in orders. My very first game ever of dip I missed the deadline by 2 minutes and my GM did not let me send in orders he NMR'd me. When was this extension request you sent to me? I never recieved it or I probably would have granted it. You can ALWAYS change your moves up until you receive the adjudication in your inbox. More then one player in this game sends me several sets of orders all the way up until the deadline. So when a new player joins the game you get EXTRA time to think about orders and talk to the new player. I thought replacing a player without delay was a good thing! I don't like to play a country in CD if I don't have to. Everyone signed up to play a 7 player game why not do so until countries are elimanted.
If you all want to cancel the game that's fine, or for the players who still would like to play I can find replacements. There are more then enough players on the website who would be willing to play.

Mods: If you have seen anything I have done wrong please let me know. I don't think I have.

-Rachael

[/quote:235d4ec0ba]