Addition to forum / chat rules

Sky_Poker

Hi all

Following some recent discussions on the forum, we have decided to introduce a new rule. This is to help deter something which occasionally gets reported to us.

From today, anybody who 'mocks' or abuses other players based on their results (e.g. on Sharkscope stats) will have action taken against them. We will deal with each case individually but players need to be aware that breaking this rule may ultimately result in the loss of forum and chat privileges.

We're sure people will understand why we have done this. We really want Sky Poker to be a nice place to play poker and so stopping things like this will help.

For our full set of forum guidelines see here

As usual, we'd appreciate support in applying this. If you spot anything which you thing breaches these rules, please either PM us or contact customer care.

Thanks
Sky Poker

GaryQQQ

Good idea, it's about time this was stamped out.

#unsavoury

Sky_Poker

In Response to Re: Addition to forum / chat rules:

Good idea, it's about time this was stamped out. #unsavoury
Posted by GaryQQQ

Thanks Gary.

gazza127

Just so we are all clear... we can still talk about Sharkscope etc on chat?  Its just when it starts to get abusive/revealing stats of other players without their permision when the problems arise?

Sky_Poker

In Response to Re: Addition to forum / chat rules:

Just so we are all clear... we can still talk about Sharkscope etc on chat?  Its just when it starts to get abusive/revealing stats of other players without their permision when the problems arise?
Posted by gazza127

More or less but you might want to avoid it at all given that it may open the door to that kind of discussion. One we'll all learn to watch out for.

DoubleAAA

What if someone is mocking a player because of how they played a hand?  Would this also be the same as mocking someone based upon their sharkscope stats?

Jac35

What if someone starts a thread in the clinic, leaves names in the hand history and makes things up?

Would this also be the same as mocking someone based upon their sharkscope stats?

Sky_Poker

In Response to Re: Addition to forum / chat rules:

What if someone is mocking a player because of how they played a hand?  Would this also be the same as mocking someone based upon their sharkscope stats?
Posted by DoubleAAA

It's a case of common sense really. You guys will know what is reasonable banter and what might be considered as OTT. We are not going to be heavy handed but if people are stepping over the line and upsetting other players, especially consistently, we will support our players who are being mocked. 

Sky_Poker

In Response to Re: Addition to forum / chat rules:

What if someone starts a thread in the clinic, leaves names in the hand history and makes things up? Would this also be the same as mocking someone based upon their sharkscope stats?
Posted by Jac35

Its similar to our other response before really - saying something like "why do you think my opponent played the had this way" is fine, but saying "what is this stupid idiot doing" (for example) would be not.

chicknMelt

Have you thought about adding a "mod" or "report" button? Just having it present would be enought to make some people bite their tongue..

You wouldn't have to have a mod on standby either - the button could just email the chat log to customer services or whatever with the name of the palyer that clicked "report"

hhyftrftdr

In Response to Re: Addition to forum / chat rules:

What if someone starts a thread in the clinic, leaves names in the hand history and makes things up? Would this also be the same as mocking someone based upon their sharkscope stats?
Posted by Jac35

Brilliant.

DOHHHHHHH

So chatbox 'petulance' & unsavoury behaviour will be punished, but outright cheating in the form of multi accounting & account sharing isn't? 

pffffft. 

Much bigger problems on the site than this 1. 



 

skicowboys

I think Sky has a bigger sharkscope agenda here. Last week we get a thread from Tikay, now this.

Sky, abuse is abuse, the sharkscope part is irrelevant surely?
I can't see if I type the following into a chat box "sharkscope -35.6% roi, 150 games played". Is this abuse? I don't believe it is, I'd like to know Sky's justification if it is.

Another thing is that the only people that will know about this change, are the ones that had read the forum. how are sky going to let the other few thousand punters know?

GaryQQQ

In Response to Re: Addition to forum / chat rules:

I think Sky has a bigger sharkscope agenda here. Last week we get a thread from Tikay, now this. Sky, abuse is abuse, the sharkscope part is irrelevant surely? I can't see if I type the following into a chat box "sharkscope -35.6% roi, 150 games played". Is this abuse? I don't believe it is, I'd like to know Sky's justification if it is. Another thing is that the only people that will know about this change, are the ones that had read the forum. how are sky going to let the other few thousand punters know?
Posted by skicowboys

Of course that's abuse, you're ridiculing him in front of the rest of the table (and anybody on the rail) by quoting his results, essentially saying 'you are a terrible player, I've looked you up, here are the Sharkscope numbers that prove it'.

As far as I'm concerned a ban on Sharkscope based chat abuse is more attractive than Sky opting all players out of Sharkscope by default, which they also appear to be considering.

Which would you prefer?

Sky_Poker

In Response to Re: Addition to forum / chat rules:

So chatbox 'petulance' & unsavoury behaviour will be punished, but outright cheating in the form of multi accounting & account sharing isn't?  pffffft.  Much bigger problems on the site than this 1.   
Posted by DOHHHHHHH

Sorry you have this totally wrong.

Those things are not allowed. We do monitor and act against these things but if there's anything you want us to look at or have any information, do please contact customer care.

Sky Poker

Sky_Poker

In Response to Re: Addition to forum / chat rules:

I think Sky has a bigger sharkscope agenda here. Last week we get a thread from Tikay, now this. Sky, abuse is abuse, the sharkscope part is irrelevant surely? I can't see if I type the following into a chat box "sharkscope -35.6% roi, 150 games played". Is this abuse? I don't believe it is, I'd like to know Sky's justification if it is. Another thing is that the only people that will know about this change, are the ones that had read the forum. how are sky going to let the other few thousand punters know?
Posted by skicowboys

There is no bigger or hidden agenda. You are correct, abuse is abuse and we are just highlighting this as one form of it.

unknown_username

For clarity...............

Can you add "Mocking Richard Orford is still ok" into the small print please

Sky_Poker

In Response to Re: Addition to forum / chat rules:

For clarity............... Can you add "Mocking Richard Orford is still ok" into the small print please
Posted by POKERTREV

It's OK trev, no need. That's what Tikay is paid for. To be fair, Orford gives as good as he gets from Mr Kendall. Comes from years of practice.

skicowboys

In Response to Re: Addition to forum / chat rules:

In Response to Re: Addition to forum / chat rules : Of course that's abuse, you're ridiculing him in front of the rest of the table (and anybody on the rail) by quoting his results, essentially saying 'you are a terrible player, I've looked you up, here are the Sharkscope numbers that prove it'. As far as I'm concerned a ban on Sharkscope based chat abuse is more attractive than Sky opting all players out of Sharkscope by default, which they also appear to be considering. Which would you prefer?
Posted by GaryQQQ

Hi Gaz, yes in one sense, he may be a terrible player, but figures don't lie. Poker players generally have thick skins, if you've played for any length of time or ever played live you know that's true, but it's not abuse, it's a statement of facts. In terms of ridicule it's impossible to say, at what point does a minus roi become ridiculous, -10 -20 -40%?. His roi might have been worse and he's actually improving, he may not have the chat on or be multi tabling. Sharkscope based chat abuse is no different to any other abuse, just my opinion.

Tikay10

I think some of the replies suggest this is being taken too literally.

It's just a common-sense thing, we alll know what genuine abuse & mockery is, it's just a derermination to try & stamp that sort of stuff out. There is just no need or benefit in a decent society.

Normal convo always was, & will be, abso fine.
 
I'm, not aware of any agenda either. My thread was entitled "Thinking Out Loud", & I thought it went very well, & did exactly what I hoped, producing excellent & balanced Feedback.   

DANDYDON87

What about calling someone a Horse after sucking out on you? Is this deemed unacceptable?

Tikay10

In Response to Re: Addition to forum / chat rules:

What about calling someone a Horse after sucking out on you? Is this deemed unacceptable?
Posted by DANDYDON87

A horse? Like a big donkey, you mean?

It is just a common-sense thing really, if great offence is intended, it's usually easy to recognize.  

cenachav

In Response to Re: Addition to forum / chat rules:

What about calling someone a Horse after sucking out on you? Is this deemed unacceptable?
Posted by DANDYDON87

Easy way to deal with someone calling you a horse or a donkey.  Just tell them that you must be as you're hung like one!

55013

In Response to Re: Addition to forum / chat rules:

In Response to Re: Addition to forum / chat rules : Easy way to deal with someone calling you a horse or a donkey.  Just tell them that you must be as you're hung like one!
Posted by cenachav

LOL.
I was getting grief last night in a low stakes DYM after going down to less than 200 chips in a SnG with 5 players left with yours truly being the shortest stack by a mile but managed to claw my way back into it and come in the top three. Makes me wonder why i ever have the chat box on as i hardly ever see any benefit in it, i don't even get any satisfaction from seeing other players getting stick. Sometimes i think i should play Omaha only as the bad banter is always considerably less in those games.

cenachav

As a general rule of thumb, the more a person gives abuse in the chatbox, the worse they are at poker.

chicknMelt

as a general rule of thumb, the more abuse someone gives, the dumber they are.

Lambert180

Well I just reported my first person for abusing someone over their Sharkscope stats last night in chat... be very interested to see if I see them chatting again in the near future. Gave transcript and all game details.

SAV4BP

In Response to Re: Addition to forum / chat rules:

As a general rule of thumb, the more a person gives abuse in the chatbox, the worse they are at poker.
Posted by cenachav

And sharkscope will back that up....oh wait :-)

cenachav

In Response to Re: Addition to forum / chat rules:

In Response to Re: Addition to forum / chat rules : And sharkscope will back that up....oh wait :-)
Posted by SAV4BP

As long as you don't post their stats anywhere you can check them