FOCAL Code of Conduct

Discussion and announcements relating to unofficial Countdown competitions, held online or in real life. Observation, discussion, reflection, and other stuff ending in -ion.
Post Reply
JackHurst
Series 63 Champion
Posts: 1982
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 8:40 pm

FOCAL Code of Conduct

Post by JackHurst »

I had a great time yesterday at my first FOCAL Countdown competition I've attended in Milton Keynes and would like to thank everybody involved in running it!

Based on my experience yesterday, and my research on https://focalcountdown.co.uk/ it appears that there is no code of conduct that participants have to acknowledge before signing up to and participating in an event. To be brutally frank I find this quite alarming and in my opinion it needs sorting ASAP!

Why do I think this?
When I sign up to a co event, I'm implicitly giving my consent to sit and interact with strangers at a table to play a board game for 30 minutes or so at a time, before I move on to sitting with even more strangers. I do not know those people prior to the event, so I cannot vouch for them or their behaviour. It's the duty of the event organisers to do this by enforcing a code of conduct. If an individual violates the code of conduct they get a ban and cannot come to future events. This make sure that events are a safe space where participants are protected from harassment and inappropriate behaviour. I am aware of several individuals who have attended these events in the past who are known to have harassed individuals and/or behaved inappropriately, and have indeed witnessed incidents before myself that I think are completely unacceptable at these events (I will not go into details here for reasons of privacy).

There is also the topic of allowing minors (under 18s) at events and the extra protective measures that need to be in place in order to protect them. Without something like this, if something were to happen to a child at one of these events, I believe the event organisers would be in a very tricky situation indeed! I claim no expertise in this field, but my common sense tells me that as a bare minimum, if an event will allow children then at least:
- There must be a committee member present with a valid DBS check/certificate
- All under 18s must be accompanied by a responsible adult
- All participants attending the event must sign a code of conduct, within which is a declaration that they are legally allowed to be at events with minors, and they have no history of offences that would be deemed inappropriate to have them present at an event with children
- If any of the above three conditions cannot be fulfilled then the event would not be suitable for minors, and they would not be able to attend


Reading Material
Other similar group events that do have a code of conduct:
Mind Sports Olympiad: https://msoworld.com/code-of-conduct-an ... nt-policy/
North American Scrabble: https://scrabbleplayers.org/w/Code_of_Conduct
I also use meetup.com to go to conferences and to find sports clubs. It is standard there for any club/organiser to provide a code of conduct to protect their members.

How and why you can sort out a code of conduct for events: https://medium.com/@mikebroberts/give-y ... 7143429e3a
Protecting young people at public events: https://www.huntingdonshire.gov.uk/medi ... actice.pdf


My motivation for making this post is to convince the FOCAL committee to produce an adequate code of conduct for these events in the future. I sincerely hope that this happens.
User avatar
Rhys Benjamin
Postmaster General
Posts: 3100
Joined: Thu Sep 09, 2010 4:28 pm

Re: FOCAL Code of Conduct

Post by Rhys Benjamin »

"All participants attending the event must sign a code of conduct"

Would a better solution not be that signing up to the event constitutes a commitment to abide by it, rather than asking for signatures at the start of the day?
The forum's resident JAILBAKER, who has SPONDERED several times...
User avatar
Ronan M Higginson
Enthusiast
Posts: 289
Joined: Fri Apr 19, 2019 5:11 pm

Re: FOCAL Code of Conduct

Post by Ronan M Higginson »

.
Last edited by Ronan M Higginson on Tue Jun 02, 2020 5:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Gavin Chipper
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 13194
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm

Re: FOCAL Code of Conduct

Post by Gavin Chipper »

Really?
User avatar
Graeme Cole
Series 65 Champion
Posts: 2024
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 9:59 pm

Re: FOCAL Code of Conduct

Post by Graeme Cole »

Rhys Benjamin wrote: Sun Aug 11, 2019 2:27 pm "All participants attending the event must sign a code of conduct"

Would a better solution not be that signing up to the event constitutes a commitment to abide by it, rather than asking for signatures at the start of the day?
Yes, I agree. If applying a code of conduct to events is as easy as putting a statement somewhere on the website saying something like "by attending an event you agree to abide by the code of conduct", and also including a similar statement in the announcement post for each event, then I don't see any good reason not to have one, especially if other similar gatherings such as MSO have them.

Event organisers already have the right to ban people from their events for any lawful reason they like, so the fact that someone hasn't physically signed the code of conduct shouldn't prevent organisers from taking that action against people who break it.
Gavin Chipper wrote: Sun Aug 11, 2019 4:20 pmReally?
By this I'm assuming you think some kind of written code of conduct would either be unnecessary or ineffective. If you're implying it's unnecessary, I suspect that more harassment goes on at and around events than you or I are aware of. By the nature of harassment and inappropriate behaviour, not all of us get to hear about all of it - it's not like it all gets publicly announced along with the scores and standings of the event.
Gavin Chipper
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 13194
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm

Re: FOCAL Code of Conduct

Post by Gavin Chipper »

Graeme Cole wrote: Sun Aug 11, 2019 5:11 pm
Rhys Benjamin wrote: Sun Aug 11, 2019 2:27 pm "All participants attending the event must sign a code of conduct"

Would a better solution not be that signing up to the event constitutes a commitment to abide by it, rather than asking for signatures at the start of the day?
Yes, I agree. If applying a code of conduct to events is as easy as putting a statement somewhere on the website saying something like "by attending an event you agree to abide by the code of conduct", and also including a similar statement in the announcement post for each event, then I don't see any good reason not to have one, especially if other similar gatherings such as MSO have them.

Event organisers already have the right to ban people from their events for any lawful reason they like, so the fact that someone hasn't physically signed the code of conduct shouldn't prevent organisers from taking that action against people who break it.
Yes. Getting everyone to sign something does seem a little drastic.
Gavin Chipper wrote: Sun Aug 11, 2019 4:20 pmReally?
By this I'm assuming you think some kind of written code of conduct would either be unnecessary or ineffective. If you're implying it's unnecessary, I suspect that more harassment goes on at and around events than you or I are aware of. By the nature of harassment and inappropriate behaviour, not all of us get to hear about all of it - it's not like it all gets publicly announced along with the scores and standings of the event.
I suppose the point is that quite often we find ourselves in a position where we have to interact with strangers, and we don't have to sign a code of conduct every time we do this. I didn't have to sign one last time I went into Tesco's and interacted with the checkout person. I didn't have to sign one the other day when I told someone where the nearest dog poo bin was. It might be that in Tesco's there's a sign somewhere saying that certain behaviours towards the staff won't be tolerated, but most people don't notice these, and it's unlikely to actually affect behaviour.

Certain behaviours are illegal anyway and would be covered by the law. The rest is largely obvious. Getting people to sign something at the start of each CO-event would be too much hassle. Having something on the website might clarify matters, but most people probably won't read it, and as you say "Event organisers already have the right to ban people from their events for any lawful reason they like", so not having a code of conduct shouldn't prevent organisers from taking that action against people who behave in a terrible manner.
Zarte Siempre
Series 78 Champion
Posts: 1344
Joined: Sat Jun 30, 2012 8:56 pm
Location: Dadford, Buckinghamshire

Re: FOCAL Code of Conduct

Post by Zarte Siempre »

If I have to add additional admin to my preparation for every event to accommodate under 18s, I'll just impose a blanket ban on them, frankly. Not worth my time or effort given the infrequency with which they attend.

Re: harassment however, I'd be in favour of an implied contract. Though how you'd enforce it... tricky.
Possibly the first contestant to accelerate with a mic clipped...
Fiona T
Kiloposter
Posts: 1441
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2019 12:54 pm

Re: FOCAL Code of Conduct

Post by Fiona T »

Graeme Cole wrote: Sun Aug 11, 2019 5:11 pm If you're implying it's unnecessary, I suspect that more harassment goes on at and around events than you or I are aware of.
I think having a tickbox code of conduct is a good idea - mainly to protect the organisers.

However "around" events is a tricky one. The organisers organise the event (and possibly the dinner) - if people misbehave outside the event at a different venue (e.g the pub) then that's not really part of the event, and is probably the most likely place for any such transgression.

re: minors - the easiest thing is to ensure they're accompanied by a responsible adult.
User avatar
Matt Morrison
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 7822
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 2:27 pm
Location: London
Contact:

Re: FOCAL Code of Conduct

Post by Matt Morrison »

CO means CO.
User avatar
Callum Todd
Series 69 Champion
Posts: 1122
Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2013 3:38 pm
Location: Leeds

Re: FOCAL Code of Conduct

Post by Callum Todd »

Something along these lines is now being considered. Is there anything you eventgoing folk would particularly like to see (or NOT see) included in a FOCAL Code of Conduct?
Mark Deeks wrote:Callum Todd looks like a young Ted Bundy.
User avatar
L'oisleatch McGraw
Devotee
Posts: 930
Joined: Sun Dec 13, 2015 2:46 am
Location: Waterford
Contact:

Re: FOCAL Code of Conduct

Post by L'oisleatch McGraw »

Gavin Chipper wrote: Sun Aug 11, 2019 8:43 pm I suppose the point is that quite often we find ourselves in a position where we have to interact with strangers, and we don't have to sign a code of conduct every time we do this. I didn't have to sign one last time I went into Tesco's and interacted with the checkout person. I didn't have to sign one the other day when I told someone where the nearest dog poo bin was. It might be that in Tesco's there's a sign somewhere saying that certain behaviours towards the staff won't be tolerated, but most people don't notice these, and it's unlikely to actually affect behaviour.

Certain behaviours are illegal anyway and would be covered by the law. The rest is largely obvious. Getting people to sign something at the start of each CO-event would be too much hassle. Having something on the website might clarify matters, but most people probably won't read it, and as you say "Event organisers already have the right to ban people from their events for any lawful reason they like", so not having a code of conduct shouldn't prevent organisers from taking that action against people who behave in a terrible manner.
^^^ All of the above is completely on point. ^^^
I have no interest in the introduction of any paranoid 21st century crap into FOCAL.
If ye insist on doing it, then fine... but pls make it as non-intrusive as possible.
:arrow: :arrow: :arrow: S:778-ochamp
User avatar
L'oisleatch McGraw
Devotee
Posts: 930
Joined: Sun Dec 13, 2015 2:46 am
Location: Waterford
Contact:

Re: FOCAL Code of Conduct

Post by L'oisleatch McGraw »

Oh, and to be bit more constructive, I recommend the code of conduct specify a ban on geatoning, and on Annie Humphries impressions. ;)
:arrow: :arrow: :arrow: S:778-ochamp
User avatar
Callum Todd
Series 69 Champion
Posts: 1122
Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2013 3:38 pm
Location: Leeds

Re: FOCAL Code of Conduct

Post by Callum Todd »

L'oisleatch McGraw wrote: Mon Feb 03, 2020 9:30 pm
Gavin Chipper wrote: Sun Aug 11, 2019 8:43 pm I suppose the point is that quite often we find ourselves in a position where we have to interact with strangers, and we don't have to sign a code of conduct every time we do this. I didn't have to sign one last time I went into Tesco's and interacted with the checkout person. I didn't have to sign one the other day when I told someone where the nearest dog poo bin was. It might be that in Tesco's there's a sign somewhere saying that certain behaviours towards the staff won't be tolerated, but most people don't notice these, and it's unlikely to actually affect behaviour.

Certain behaviours are illegal anyway and would be covered by the law. The rest is largely obvious. Getting people to sign something at the start of each CO-event would be too much hassle. Having something on the website might clarify matters, but most people probably won't read it, and as you say "Event organisers already have the right to ban people from their events for any lawful reason they like", so not having a code of conduct shouldn't prevent organisers from taking that action against people who behave in a terrible manner.
^^^ All of the above is completely on point. ^^^
I have no interest in the introduction of any paranoid 21st century crap into FOCAL.
If ye insist on doing it, then fine... but pls make it as non-intrusive as possible.
We're not looking at anything intrusive or overly bureaucratic. If this were some iron-fisted crackdown on fun and freedom, we wouldn't be asking publicly for ideas towards it!

I agree almost entirely with Gevin's point, and there certainly won't be an expectation that anyone has to sign anything before events or anything like that. It'll just be something on the website. Maybe most people won't read it, and maybe most of what it covers will be covered by law anyway, but it at least sends out a message that certain forms of behaviour are not tolerated or approved of at our events (whereas currently it's possible that our community's silence on the matter of certain behaviours may be interpreted by some as passive acceptance).

I hope that you won't find the contents of the Code of Conduct, once it is produced, to be either "paranoid" or "crap", but may I ask: if not the 21st, then from which century would like us to draw our ideas?
Mark Deeks wrote:Callum Todd looks like a young Ted Bundy.
User avatar
Callum Todd
Series 69 Champion
Posts: 1122
Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2013 3:38 pm
Location: Leeds

Re: FOCAL Code of Conduct

Post by Callum Todd »

L'oisleatch McGraw wrote: Mon Feb 03, 2020 9:38 pm Oh, and to be bit more constructive, I recommend the code of conduct specify a ban on geatoning, and on Annie Humphries impressions. ;)
A FOCAL Code of Conduct will not outlaw geatoning. What consenting adults get up to in their own private time is their business. Incidentally though, I personally would recommend that inexperienced geatoners limit it to an andante pace at most, for personal safety reason.
Mark Deeks wrote:Callum Todd looks like a young Ted Bundy.
User avatar
Jon O'Neill
Ginger Ninja
Posts: 4544
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 12:45 am
Location: London, UK

Re: FOCAL Code of Conduct

Post by Jon O'Neill »

Good personal hygiene should be required.
Not washing hands after going to the toilet is a bannable offence.
User avatar
Graeme Cole
Series 65 Champion
Posts: 2024
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 9:59 pm

Re: FOCAL Code of Conduct

Post by Graeme Cole »

Callum Todd wrote: Tue Feb 04, 2020 10:44 am I hope that you won't find the contents of the Code of Conduct, once it is produced, to be either "paranoid" or "crap", but may I ask: if not the 21st, then from which century would like us to draw our ideas?
Best C4C comment for ages.
Gavin Chipper
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 13194
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm

Re: FOCAL Code of Conduct

Post by Gavin Chipper »

So erm, what actually is geatoning? I've definitely heard the term, but it must be an in joke because Google turns up nothing.
User avatar
Callum Todd
Series 69 Champion
Posts: 1122
Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2013 3:38 pm
Location: Leeds

Re: FOCAL Code of Conduct

Post by Callum Todd »

Geaton is a verb coined by Eddy Byrne. As you may have guessed either from the context in which you have seen it used or simply by the identity of its author, its defintion is graphically sexual. I shan't post it on a public forum although if you feel it's important for you to understand its defintion more specifically than 'to enact a daring sex act' then I'll tell you privately.
Mark Deeks wrote:Callum Todd looks like a young Ted Bundy.
User avatar
Matt Morrison
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 7822
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 2:27 pm
Location: London
Contact:

Re: FOCAL Code of Conduct

Post by Matt Morrison »

Jon O'Neill wrote: Tue Feb 04, 2020 11:50 am Good personal hygiene should be required.
Not washing hands after going to the toilet is a bannable offence.
From personal experience (of watching other men very carefully in the toilets), the numbers at Colin would be decimated. And at the Fox & Hounds afterwards, the dirty locals.
Fiona T
Kiloposter
Posts: 1441
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2019 12:54 pm

Re: FOCAL Code of Conduct

Post by Fiona T »

Matt Morrison wrote: Tue Feb 04, 2020 5:35 pm From personal experience (of watching other men very carefully in the toilets),
:o :o :o

Gevin type scoring?
User avatar
L'oisleatch McGraw
Devotee
Posts: 930
Joined: Sun Dec 13, 2015 2:46 am
Location: Waterford
Contact:

Re: FOCAL Code of Conduct

Post by L'oisleatch McGraw »

Callum Todd wrote: Tue Feb 04, 2020 10:49 am but may I ask: if not the 21st, then from which century would like us to draw our ideas?
No century. Because you don't need a Code of Conduct.
You also don't need audited accounts, police vetting, an AGM, quarterly meetings, independent event adjudicators, shareholders or a memorandum of association.

It is good that people are enthusiastic about 'doing FOCAL properly', but beware of over egging the pudding.
Callum Todd wrote: Tue Feb 04, 2020 10:49 am A FOCAL Code of Conduct will not outlaw geatoning. What consenting adults get up to in their own private time is their business. Incidentally though, I personally would recommend that inexperienced geatoners limit it to an andante pace at most, for personal safety reason.
You've been to co-events where the geatoning involved privacy and consent? :shock:
You've done well...
:arrow: :arrow: :arrow: S:778-ochamp
Marc Meakin
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 6225
Joined: Wed May 20, 2009 3:37 pm

Re: FOCAL Code of Conduct

Post by Marc Meakin »

I would happily sign one
With my reputation it would prolly be compulsory 😀
GR MSL GNDT MSS NGVWL SRND NNLYC NNCT
User avatar
Rhys Benjamin
Postmaster General
Posts: 3100
Joined: Thu Sep 09, 2010 4:28 pm

Re: FOCAL Code of Conduct

Post by Rhys Benjamin »

I was just going back through the forum to fill in gaps for co-events in the wiki and saw this again.

For what it's worth, something I didn't mention nine months ago is that if none of the current FOCAL committee have a DBS check, I do have one and it's a real pain in the arse to get one. It also means you're hyper-careful around U18s in order to make sure everything you say is kosher (the kids are super-jobsworthy these days). It usually comes with a safeguarding course to go on as well, and whilst this is usually online, it will seem like overkill for Countdown given you'll receive counter-terrorism training.
User avatar
Thomas Carey
Kiloposter
Posts: 1478
Joined: Sun Jan 09, 2011 4:17 pm
Location: North-West of Bradford
Contact:

Re: FOCAL Code of Conduct

Post by Thomas Carey »

I'm also DBS checked and happy to be whatever role needs this, you know I turn up to most events anyway
cheers maus
User avatar
FOCAL Countdown
Rookie
Posts: 36
Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2018 3:22 pm
Contact:

Re: FOCAL Code of Conduct

Post by FOCAL Countdown »

Hey folks, Callum here.

The FOCAL Code of Conduct is now live.

I'm not a lawyer or in any way trained in formal writing so I'm sure it's not the most articulate or watertight thing you've ever read but I think it does a good job of establishing that FOCAL will not accept certain behaviours that threaten the safety of eventgoers. If anyone thinks there are any glaring errors or omissions feel free to let me know, either here or privately as I'm keen to stress that this is something that exists for YOU as eventgoers, so you absolutely must have a say in it. If there's anything I've got badly wrong I'm happy to correct those errors.

That being said, I don't want this thing to be edited every time the wind changes. It should be as evergreen as possible, otherwise it's unreasonable to expect people to adhere to constantly shifting standards.

Thanks to Jack for kickstarting the impetus to get this done. Sorry it wasn't done sooner.
FOCAL Countdown - the unofficial tournament circuit
focalcountdown.com | @focalcountdown | focalcountdown@gmail.com
Paul Anderson
Enthusiast
Posts: 300
Joined: Tue Dec 10, 2019 2:18 pm

Re: FOCAL Code of Conduct

Post by Paul Anderson »

Well done Callum, just had a read, good stuff!
We must give this some airtime in the next podcast. Perhaps it should have to be read by all attendees to co events? If they turn up on the day, it could be given to them in person to read.
Fiona T
Kiloposter
Posts: 1441
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2019 12:54 pm

Re: FOCAL Code of Conduct

Post by Fiona T »

Good stuff Callum. I'd also suggest that in the event that you're not present at an event, the first point of call should be the event organiser - often any transgressions would be best dealt with immediately.
JackHurst
Series 63 Champion
Posts: 1982
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 8:40 pm

Re: FOCAL Code of Conduct

Post by JackHurst »

Nice work Callum!
User avatar
Graeme Cole
Series 65 Champion
Posts: 2024
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 9:59 pm

Re: FOCAL Code of Conduct

Post by Graeme Cole »

FOCAL Countdown wrote: Sat Jul 10, 2021 9:10 am Hey folks, Callum here.

The FOCAL Code of Conduct is now live.

I'm not a lawyer or in any way trained in formal writing so I'm sure it's not the most articulate or watertight thing you've ever read but I think it does a good job of establishing that FOCAL will not accept certain behaviours that threaten the safety of eventgoers. If anyone thinks there are any glaring errors or omissions feel free to let me know, either here or privately as I'm keen to stress that this is something that exists for YOU as eventgoers, so you absolutely must have a say in it. If there's anything I've got badly wrong I'm happy to correct those errors.

That being said, I don't want this thing to be edited every time the wind changes. It should be as evergreen as possible, otherwise it's unreasonable to expect people to adhere to constantly shifting standards.

Thanks to Jack for kickstarting the impetus to get this done. Sorry it wasn't done sooner.
Thanks to Callum and Jack for their work on this. I think the code of conduct strikes the right balance in clearly identifying what's not acceptable, without over-prescribing too much detail. In particular, the explicit condemnation of harassment and similar behaviour brings us into line with codes of conduct used by other communities.

I would suggest a few tweaks to the "foul play" section. In particular:
  • Just an opinion, but I would call this section "Fair play", using positive language and emphasising what conduct is required rather than what is banned.
  • There are already definitions of cheating here and here, relating to apterous, which I think are well written and have served apterous well for many years. The FOCAL Code of Conduct would do well to model the definition on that, perhaps adapted for in-person events.
  • "Cheating is best defined as..."? I would make this the more authoritative "Cheating is defined as..." or even "Cheating is..." It's a code of conduct, so players shouldn't be treating it as opinion or ignorable advice.
  • The code of conduct ought to specify what happens if you're caught cheating. This only needs to be a general outline of what could happen rather than a prescriptive set of procedures.
Regarding this paragraph:
The FOCAL Code of Conduct (section 4) wrote: Please note that several behaviours exploitative of the rules such as Hansfording, numbers fudging, or tactical declarations – while unsporting – are not technically cheating and should not be reported as such.
Thinking about it some more, I reckon we could do without this paragraph entirely.

Recently I tried to draw up a document which pretty much every other game-based organisation has but we don't - an authoritative document of the Rules Of The Game as they are applied at events. I quickly found that if you try to include explicitly every scenario you can think of and over-prescribe things, not only do the rules become unmanageably long and complex but you make a rod for your own back and the rules become more of a hindrance than a help.

That's the problem here with that final paragraph on what's not cheating. Apterous can explicitly allow numbers fudging because the patience timer will time you out if you take too long, it's very strict and it's the same for everyone. But I worry that if the FOCAL Code of Conduct explicitly allows it, it'll be seen as a free pass for everyone to do it. Some people might take too long over their numbers solutions, then complain when they get timed out because "the Code of Conduct explicitly says this is OK, I should have been given more time!"

If that paragraph is completely removed, all those problems go away. A player who Hansfords a conundrum and gives their answer promptly or fudges a numbers solution but still delivers their working without hesitation won't fall under the definition of cheating - they haven't used any artificial aid and they haven't done anything they couldn't do in the studio. I just don't think the code of conduct should be explicitly backing it. The rules on cheating can afford to err on the side of broadness.

Of course you're free to ignore all these suggestions, or wait for other replies before changing anything, but if you decide to keep that paragraph, could you please bear in mind the following points:
  • I don't think it's right to link to Jeffrey Hansford's wiki page, publicly namechecking a Countdowner from years ago in the code of conduct. A short one-sentence description of what Hansfording is would suffice.
  • New players might not know what you mean by "numbers fudging" - again, a one-sentence description like what appears in the apterous cheating page would help here.
  • Even I'm not sure what you mean by "tactical declarations". Is it deciding to declare a risky 8 or safe 7 depending on the scoreline and the stage of the game? Not sure why anyone would consider that unsporting.
  • "... are not technically cheating" - the word "technically" doesn't need to be there.

tl;dr: how I would write section 4 would be as follows. Feel free to take or ignore as much or as little of this as you think necessary...

4 - Fair play

Entrants to FOCAL events are expected to observe the rules and to play in the spirit of the game.

Cheating is a player's use of artificial aid during the game to improve their performance. This includes, but is not limited to, the use of dictionaries, word lists or numbers solvers during a round.

Reports of cheating will be handled by the event organiser and/or the FOCAL team. A player found to be cheating may face sanctions including the loss of any title or finishing position achieved at the relevant event(s) and exclusion from some or all future events.
User avatar
Callum Todd
Series 69 Champion
Posts: 1122
Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2013 3:38 pm
Location: Leeds

Re: FOCAL Code of Conduct

Post by Callum Todd »

Thanks for this detailed feedback Graeme. I think you've got it spot on. Just a few notes for the sake of transparency as to the thinking behind the poorly written bits of the Code of Conduct:

- 'Foul play' was chosen over 'Fair play' because it's consistent with the previous three headings (Abusive behavior, Harassment, Damage to venues or equipment) and the point of the Code of Conduct is specifically to outline what behaviours are not acceptable rather than what behaviour is desirable. We don't want to tell people what to do. We want to let people do whatever the hell they like, with a few sensible restrictions that are to be laid out by the Code of Conduct. I felt like 'positive' headings would make the Code of Conduct (at least perceived to be) more of an attempt to compel people to behave a certain way, rather than just to tell them that certain behaviours are unacceptable but everything else is basically okay so long as it's legal.

- I tried to structure the Code of Conduct (I wish I could abbreviate this to CoC but unfortunately that acronym is taken in this community) so that the first part states what not to do, and the second part (In the event of a Code Violation) says what happens if somebody does it anyway. However I did put a bit of what to do in section 3 ('Damage...') because I thought that action was quite specific to that part of the Code of Conduct so I appreciate my attempt at structuring the document has been inconsistent and therefore unclear.

- The bits about what isn't cheating were done to try and pre-emptively avoid event hosts and FOCAL team being inundated with reports of cheating because someone feels their opponent sounded a bit hesitant when declaring or took 2 seconds longer than they would have liked. The apterous cheating definitons you link to also state what isn't cheating too, so I think this is a reasonable disclaimer to have in a section about cheating. I think the problem with this section isn't it's existence but it's quality, because I haven't written it very well.

- In hindsight yes, the link to Jeffrey Hansford's wiki page was ill-judged. I did it because I felt it was a good way of describing what is meant by that jargonistic term without clogging up the Code of Conduct with an extra paragraph. I should have thought that because that information is on Jeffrey's page rather than a page dedicated purely to the concept of Hansfording, it is a public namecheck. That was a bad oversight on my behalf. Thanks Graeme for pointing it out, and sorry Jeffrey.

- Finally, all the inadequacies in the Code of Conduct are my fault and mine alone. I wrote them. I am not a very efficient or articulate writer, as anyone who has read one of my lengthier c4c posts (hey if you're reading this then that means you!) can attest to. That's why I'm posting this on my personal c4c account rather than the FOCAL one, to be held personally accountable.

I really like your alternative section 4 and personally would be in favour of doing a straight swap for the current section 4. The one change I would quite like to make, but am wary of doing it so badly that it does more harm than good, is reintroduce a brief disclaimer about what does not constitute cheating. So I'll wait a few days or so for anyone else to add their two pence worth and if everyone's happy with your contribution I'll just copypasta your section 4 into the Code of Conduct in place of the current one.

Because of my wish to be transparent and not make the Code of Conduct a conveyor belt of daily edits, I won't make any changes at all right now apart from removing the link to Jeffrey Hansford's wiki page which I think is egregious enough that it would actually be quite improper of me to leave it there having had my error pointed out to me. In the meantime, if anyone else has any comments on my proposal of using Graeme's section 4 in the Code of Conduct please speak up here or contact me privately within the next few days. Here it is again:
Graeme Cole wrote: Sat Jul 10, 2021 1:08 pm 4 - Fair play

Entrants to FOCAL events are expected to observe the rules and to play in the spirit of the game.

Cheating is a player's use of artificial aid during the game to improve their performance. This includes, but is not limited to, the use of dictionaries, word lists or numbers solvers during a round.

Reports of cheating will be handled by the event organiser and/or the FOCAL team. A player found to be cheating may face sanctions including the loss of any title or finishing position achieved at the relevant event(s) and exclusion from some or all future events.
Mark Deeks wrote:Callum Todd looks like a young Ted Bundy.
Fiona T
Kiloposter
Posts: 1441
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2019 12:54 pm

Re: FOCAL Code of Conduct

Post by Fiona T »

Yep, I like Graeme's wording. I'd add "looking at your opponents notes" as that's probably the most likely cheat at an in person event.

I do share Graeme's concerns about the what is not cheating - if you must keep that section, then make it clear that hesitation and delays will down to the judgement of the game host (some of whom will be very inexperienced at hosting)
User avatar
Graeme Cole
Series 65 Champion
Posts: 2024
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 9:59 pm

Re: FOCAL Code of Conduct

Post by Graeme Cole »

Callum Todd wrote: Sat Jul 10, 2021 1:31 pm Thanks for this detailed feedback Graeme. I think you've got it spot on. Just a few notes for the sake of transparency as to the thinking behind the poorly written bits of the Code of Conduct:

- 'Foul play' was chosen over 'Fair play' because it's consistent with the previous three headings (Abusive behavior, Harassment, Damage to venues or equipment) and the point of the Code of Conduct is specifically to outline what behaviours are not acceptable rather than what behaviour is desirable. We don't want to tell people what to do. We want to let people do whatever the hell they like, with a few sensible restrictions that are to be laid out by the Code of Conduct. I felt like 'positive' headings would make the Code of Conduct (at least perceived to be) more of an attempt to compel people to behave a certain way, rather than just to tell them that certain behaviours are unacceptable but everything else is basically okay so long as it's legal.
Why not call the headings "Respect for others", "Respect for boundaries", "Care of venues and equipment", and "Fair play"? The text itself could still prescribe what's not acceptable rather than what is. I just think the positive messages in the headings make it look more code-of-conducty.
Callum Todd wrote: Sat Jul 10, 2021 1:31 pm - The bits about what isn't cheating were done to try and pre-emptively avoid event hosts and FOCAL team being inundated with reports of cheating because someone feels their opponent sounded a bit hesitant when declaring or took 2 seconds longer than they would have liked. The apterous cheating definitons you link to also state what isn't cheating too, so I think this is a reasonable disclaimer to have in a section about cheating. I think the problem with this section isn't it's existence but it's quality, because I haven't written it very well.

...

I really like your alternative section 4 and personally would be in favour of doing a straight swap for the current section 4. The one change I would quite like to make, but am wary of doing it so badly that it does more harm than good, is reintroduce a brief disclaimer about what does not constitute cheating. So I'll wait a few days or so for anyone else to add their two pence worth and if everyone's happy with your contribution I'll just copypasta your section 4 into the Code of Conduct in place of the current one.
Does the problem of frivolous cheating allegations at events even exist? I still think that would be a more manageable problem than what might happen if numbers fudging is explicitly allowed in the code of conduct when it doesn't really need to be. Co-events don't have the luxury of a strict two-second timer after each operation, so they need to be more careful than apterous in what they allow.

If you're worried about people reporting hesitation as cheating, what about a paragraph which makes clear that cheating is more than just hesitation? For example: Slow play or hesitation does not by itself constitute cheating. For example, a player who appears to be making up their numbers solution on the fly may have their solution disallowed for taking too long, but this should not be reported as cheating.
Gavin Chipper
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 13194
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm

Re: FOCAL Code of Conduct

Post by Gavin Chipper »

Some good work going on here, but one thing:
Graeme Cole wrote: Sat Jul 10, 2021 1:08 pmCheating is a player's use of artificial aid during the game to improve their performance.
I wouldn't word it like this. If anything I'd put it the other way round - a player's use of artificial aid during the game to improve their performance is cheating. While it's difficult to list every possible thing that could be considered cheating, I wouldn't word it in such a way that says "This is definitively the only thing that is cheating."
User avatar
Graeme Cole
Series 65 Champion
Posts: 2024
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 9:59 pm

Re: FOCAL Code of Conduct

Post by Graeme Cole »

Gavin Chipper wrote: Sat Jul 10, 2021 4:21 pm Some good work going on here, but one thing:
Graeme Cole wrote: Sat Jul 10, 2021 1:08 pmCheating is a player's use of artificial aid during the game to improve their performance.
I wouldn't word it like this. If anything I'd put it the other way round - a player's use of artificial aid during the game to improve their performance is cheating. While it's difficult to list every possible thing that could be considered cheating, I wouldn't word it in such a way that says "This is definitively the only thing that is cheating."
Apterous uses the more definitive "Cheating is...", and I think the code of conduct needs to have some kind of definition of cheating, even if it's a broad definition open to some reasonable level of interpretation.

Can you give an example of cheating that couldn't be called cheating under this definition?
User avatar
Graeme Cole
Series 65 Champion
Posts: 2024
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 9:59 pm

Re: FOCAL Code of Conduct

Post by Graeme Cole »

Graeme Cole wrote: Sat Jul 10, 2021 7:03 pm Can you give an example of cheating that couldn't be called cheating under this definition?
To answer my own question, here's one scenario I thought of earlier today: having qualified for the final of an event, a player manages to sneak a look at the final conundrum before the game starts, doesn't tell anyone, and instabuzzes on the conundrum with the right answer.

This is obviously cheating, but is it "the use of artificial aid during the game"? Arguably, by that definition it's no different from revising a list of stems before the game.

When I was drafting and redrafting my attempt at an example section 4 earlier today, at one point I had something like "Cheating is any dishonest action, or use of artificial aid during the game, by a player to improve their performance". Eventually I decided that perhaps that was too broad, and kept it simple to avoid ending up with a long and convoluted sentence which gets easier to misinterpret the longer it is.

Just goes to show that writing effective rules is much harder than you might think.
User avatar
Graeme Cole
Series 65 Champion
Posts: 2024
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 9:59 pm

Re: FOCAL Code of Conduct

Post by Graeme Cole »

It strikes me that all we're trying to do here is write a definition of the word "cheating". It further strikes me that it shouldn't have taken us this long to think of looking it up on Lexico.

cheat: Act dishonestly or unfairly in order to gain an advantage.

I still think it's worth explicitly mentioning that artificial aids such as solvers etc are banned, so in the context of a FOCAL event, the definition would read something like:

Cheating is any dishonest or unfair action by a player in order to gain an advantage in a game or event. This includes, but is not limited to, use of artificial aids such as dictionaries, word lists or numbers solvers during a round.

What about that? Is it too broad now? [Edit because I'm not making four posts in a row: it's possible we're just overthinking this and need to remember that we can probably trust FOCAL and event organisers to make a reasonable interpretation of the wording, such that we won't end up with people getting away with blatant cheating or getting banned for minor slip-ups.]
Gavin Chipper
Post-apocalypse
Posts: 13194
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm

Re: FOCAL Code of Conduct

Post by Gavin Chipper »

I agree about explicitly mentioning artifical aids, but also about leaving open the possibility that there are other forms of cheating. I think your current definition is largely good. As for my own examples (to answer your challenge):

Fiddling with the letters deck before your game, or colluding with the host to do so.

Deliberately misreporting your game score to be entered on the computer in your favour.

Lying about your declaration after realising you've messed up. E.g. you declare 1 away the wrong side in a numbers game and insist you declared 278 and not 276.

These are generally human-to-human cheating methods and so wouldn't come up on Apterous. Apterous in more "enclosed" so it's easier to have a simpler definition of cheating on there.
User avatar
Rhys Benjamin
Postmaster General
Posts: 3100
Joined: Thu Sep 09, 2010 4:28 pm

Re: FOCAL Code of Conduct

Post by Rhys Benjamin »

Given that 99% of tournament attendees will be fans of Countdown, perhaps you should note examples of things you cannot do at a co-event that you are allowed to do on TV. I can't think of anything off the top of my head, but it might avoid arguments around the lines of "but X did this on TV".
The forum's resident JAILBAKER, who has SPONDERED several times...
User avatar
Callum Todd
Series 69 Champion
Posts: 1122
Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2013 3:38 pm
Location: Leeds

Re: FOCAL Code of Conduct

Post by Callum Todd »

Well it's been two weeks and there hasn't been any objection to Graeme's proposed revision of the cheating section of the Code of Conduct so I'll implement it. Thanks for the feedback guys!
Mark Deeks wrote:Callum Todd looks like a young Ted Bundy.
Post Reply