What is acceptable lurker behaviour?

[novice]

If anybody wants to discuss this, maybe do it here instead of in various spoiler threads. Remember, no spoilers though...

[shadyforce]

This gets my vote:

1) Lurkers can respond to civ4 mechanics questions (eg how many turns for a worker to chop a forest? Why didn't my cottage grow? How does the AP work?)

2) Lurkers can congratulate players on achieving a goal (eg Well done on getting that city spot)

2a) However, don't reveal unnecessary information on your comment (eg Well done on getting that city spot - I really thought that Greece was going to get it)

3) Lurkers can participate in option discussions but only after the player has articulated the options and only to the extent of pointing out additional strengths / weaknesses of options that the player might have missed

3a) Lurkers can NOT suggest additional options that the play might have missed
3b) Lurkers can NOT express opinions about various options

4) Lurkers can express opinions on player agreed rules, but should also point out that rules agreed by the players should be discussed by the players

5) Lurkers cannot ask sequence questions (eg when will Settler for Black Dot be ready?)

6) Lurkers can ask for screenshots

[novice]

When in doubt, post in the no players thread.

[Ruff_Hi]

With the voting down of my lurker code of conduct ... I posted a private code of conduct in my RBPB3 thread ... here it is (if it helps) ...

[SIZE="4"]Lurker's Code of Conduct[/SIZE] ...

1. when I win - I don't want anyone to say I only won because I had lurker spoiler information
   
2. no giving away my plans to the other teams
   
3. no giving away their plans to me
   
4. don't make me haunt you if you wreck my game
   
5. don't make another team haunt you for wrecking their game
   
6. will your actions stand up once the spoiler threads are uncovered?
   
7. what would you say if a player came back at you with one of these questions / comments ...
   • "Why did you tell so-and-so our plans?"
     
   • "So-and-so never saw that coming until you told them"
     
   • "It was perfect, I had completely fooled them ... until you wrecked it all by bring it to their attention"
     

And, by the way, if you post here or if you post in the 'RBP3 Lurker Discussion Thread - No Players!' thread about Rapoleon_Hi of the Aztecs, then you have signified your agreement to abide by the above LCoC.

Now comes the fun part ... who will police this LCoC? Well, it won't be me ... too busy playing! It will be you ... the lurkers. If you think that a lurker has broken the above LCoC then feel free to lambaste them in the lurker thread.

[Yazilliclick]

I believe after the fact however they should be able to point out mechanics mistakes without being asked (provided of course that it is too late to fix the mistake). I think part of these games at least for myself is to get better at the game so I'd hate to make mistakes and not eventually find out. I agree though that lurkers shouldn't be correcting people playing at the time else it's unfair to everybody else. Multiplayer games should be team vs team not team vs entire community.

[Krill]

No tactical advice, ever.

[SevenSpirits]

First of all, the no spoilers rule is obvious. If there is some game information that the thread's team does not know according to the game rules, and they become aware of it because of people who know it posting, that clearly breaks the game rules. This includes directly posting information that the team should not have as well as changing your posting behavior based on the content of secret information you have. This is unambiguous and inarguable.

Past that it appears that people have different opinions about what the limits should be. As a lurker, what I care about most is what rules or guidelines are already in place, so I can be sure to follow them. As far as I can tell there are no additional global rules about this and it has so far been up to the players on a per-team basis. I'd appreciate being pointed to anything that contradicts this assessment.

Now about how things "should" be. At this point the discussion is about a hypothetical, completely unspoiled lurker, who has only read a single team thread and thus has strictly less information than the actual team members (due to not having game access).

- Should the extent of their involvement be up to each team, or to the game rules?
- Should they be able to provide unsolicited strategy advice?
- Solicited strategy advice?
- Unsolicited game mechanics knowledge?
- Solicited game mechanics knowledge?


My opinion happens to be that the game rules should allow all of these, but individual teams may wish to restrict unsolicited advice and mechanics comments. Personally, I think the more, the merrier. It's a good way to grow and bring together the community.

Of course, I will defer to the wishes of the players. As of now my best information is that they voted down Ruff's (earlier) proposed code of conduct.

[Mr. Nice Guy]

Now about how things "should" be. At this point the discussion is about a hypothetical, completely unspoiled lurker, who has only read a single team thread and thus has strictly less information than the actual team members (due to not having game access).

Wouldn't such a lurker be an unofficial team member and be entitled to say whatever they want?

Rather than being spoilered, such a lurker is actually less informed than the team members as they do not have direct access to the game, diplomacy e-mails, etc.

[Krill]

Yeah, those are two separate scenarios; the unspoiled, single team follower, and the spoiled all-team lurker.

[SevenSpirits]

OK, glad to hear you agree.

There have nevertheless been a couple complaints in PB2 about lurker postings which were not spoilery so I don't think there is necessarily consensus on that. Obviously I won't go into any details about the game...