Arrogance, nice. But this is clearly not being compromising is it? "I want them all" Hmmm. You and spinner have been having it out over this on and off for a year. And you've never settled.

^^ Have a look back, I'm settled

I know you have, i was referring to him

Its hard to settle when the admin don't understand English.

Even now he still doesn't understand a word of this thread.

Post removed by forum moderator

Lol don't you love it when people harass other members on the forums and when i try to talk some sense into them in the game they think its harassment then he argues with me and trys to fraud me of harassing when he doesnt show when he harassed me?

Please grow up and stop being self-centered.

You joined my room uninvited and started abusing, kinda what this thread is all about stopping...

' You insulted Spinner who has been a good admin to us, which got me involved in this '

You said that was your reason for getting involved, which is laughable.

anyway, goodnight!

This topic does not apply to tournament game rooms at all - neither player would be able to remove anyone.

Probably a lot more reasons too, but at least one springs to mind: Some players may not want spectators to hang around since they could be helping the opponent.

Then why not make use of the private games?

It's really very simple, either you want to choose who is allowed to watch your games, or you don't.

I don't understand this personally...why does it bother you so much? Why not just enjoy the game, or as spinner said, make a private match.
This is just one of those things that's getting blown out of proportion.


(Asking them to leave nicely could work a lot too i've noticed)

Please Dave, can you please read what I write instead of repeating the same mistaken assumptions over and over?

It's frustrating to say the least when you insist on ignoring all the posts defeating your own arguments and instead keep repeating the same flawed assumptions.

I'll indulge you one last time tho: What you list above are two extremes. There is a lot of space between "either you do or you don't". This is NOT a binary problem.

In short, what's being asked for, again, is a middle road - being able to have some control over your game room, but at the same time keep it public so random players join your room rather than having to hand-pick each opponent.

Sounds like privacy gone overboard to me, ignore is enough imo, if someone is sad enough to waste their time following me il happily indulge. Private games are enough and if that puts you off in your games then you really should think about whether you should be playing on here lol.

As I have stated over and over, I completely understand that.

What I am trying to find is a sensible compromise, as everyone can see a "boot from room" option would inevitably be abused.

As I have repeatedly said, would it not be sensible to simply not allow players on ignore from joining the game room?

This would mean in the rare even of someone actually being harassed in this fashion, they could put said "harrasser" on ignore, and leave, create a new room once only and know the "offending" player could not enter.

It is still way too restrictive in my personal opinion, but that is irrelevant here.

Yeah then the next thread will be block players from the same chat room as them lol.

If that is the case I urge you to prove that by not repeating the same statements over and over, statements based on NOT understanding this.




All that would be needed to avoid abuse is a simple statement that a game is owned by the game creator.

It's a bit ironic that even the default game title is "janmb's game", yet we are not supposed to consider ourselves owners as such.

Precisely how could such a feature be abused anyway? As long as a game owner is allowed to remove players for whatever reason they see fit (which is how it ought to be), there would be no such thing as a bad or invalid reason.



That was my own proposal a couple pages back, and yes, would be a good step in the right direction. It would be plenty for 2-player games, where you can quite easily add a problem player to ignore list then go make a new game. It is a slightly less good solution for larger games tho, where leaving and making a new game is less desirable since there is usually a number of other players being stakeholders in such a scenario.

Chat rooms are not created and owned by yourself. Game rooms are. Entirely different ball game.

^ never mind the mods and admin who are often in chat rooms - a lot more frequently than they appear in ranked game rooms or friendlies

The point was about there not being a 'there and then' solution

chat rooms have that (when the mods are there)

Besides, this isn't about whether people behave or not. It's far more a topic of not wanting a particular player blocking others from joining your game as a player or spectator.

Ignore takes care of everything else as far as I'm concerned.

Also please keep in mind that spectators are also a potential problem beyond what they write in the chat window... Often spectators act as helpers of your opponent, something I for one don't give a damn about, but I can very much understand players resenting that.

Right, lets try the opposite.

Why should a perfectly innocent user who has done absolutely nothing wrong be booted from any game room which they fit the criteria to be in?