But the thing is that that politeness rating would be "zero" for almost everybody, and "one" for 90+% of the rest. What does that get you?
Because in fact, "valid reports of abuse" do cause suspensions and bans. Most of the people who are habitually rude have not been reported yet (because people don't bother, or they put the person on ignore, or they boot the player from the table, or they leave if it's someone else's table). Or the banned player came back with a new nick, and hasn't been IP-banned yet (or has learned her lesson from the banning, and in the new nick tones it down to acceptable levels).
And people's rudeness quotient vary. What I would consider rude enough to report might be well beyond what you consider. And it could be both ways! For instance, my "issue with names" is something that, if pushed, would be an auto-pitch (but not, likely, a report to abuse); maybe one in ten thousand would even notice it? But I probably don't even notice (and don't ever get) sexually-, racially-, or religiously-coded abuse [*] and so many people who would be perfectly friendly to me would be casually rude to Sandra[***], or Pradnya, or Abdul. And some, frankly, consider "anything even vaguely resembling criticism" to be abuse, because bridge players, as I've said before, are petty entitled [--]s (NOTE: I am not suggesting OP, or anyone else in this thread, is at that level. But we all know that person, don't we?) What is considered "valid"?
If you try automating it, you get the problem with my "ex-university drunk and foul-mouthed game". Or the Czech or Turkish equivalent (good luck with that). I still remember the procedural penalty I gave out in Penticton where the person tried to minimize the issue because he used the British "two finger" rather then the North American "middle finger".
I am not meaning to minimize the problem; frankly I have not played in "open entry games" online for over a decade. I found a good partner or six, played in local clubs or in games set up with invited players from one of those trusted users, and added more people to my "trustworthy" list. There's a reason for that, and there's a reason it's what I recommend to others. Yes, I know it kills "push cards for 30 minutes at lunch" and "play individuals" as strategies; for me it's worth it.
I also understand Allan Simon's "can't play levels", and that I'm pretty high on that list (even if one level below "Canadian national champion", which is probably about one level below "World Champion"); and as a result, I am both less likely to *get* "when did you learn to play? I mean, I know it was today, but
what time today?" and more capable of either ignoring it or being able to respond with a correct analysis when I do than less experienced players.
And, as I say "the only bad way to play bridge is to stop playing, or convince someone else to stop playing"; so I actually would like to have a better answer. Because this does stop people playing.
* well, okay, the Mexican equivalent of "mauditeanglais"[**] that translates to "He thinks he's a mexican director, but doesn't understand enough Spanish to get the insult". Which, you know, is a valid criticism. I'm working on it.
** "I lived in Montréal for 6 years before I found out 'maudite anglais' was two words." - Bowser and Blue.
[***] Note: It doesn't have to be overt. "You can't -ing play", to Sandra,
can be sexually-coded.
When I go to sea, don't fear for me, Fear For The Storm -- Birdie and the Swansong (tSCoSI)
Help
