I just found out about Got Stats.
Looks like the opponent I mentioned has lost about a quarter of his games due to timeout or ‘other’ which I’m assuming is probably disconnect?
Guess what I’ll be doing before every match now? 
Would be great if these stats were displayed on OGS profile pages.
I’m not sure I really agree that the question hasn’t been answered.
The original question raised was:
It seems that the general consensus has been that real, problematic escapes are fairly easy to distinguish from legitimate time outs. These should be dealt with, and anything questionable could be given the benefit of the doubt.
As for the joking, I don’t think that signifies that we don’t think of this as a serious issue. I just spent almost 15 minutes waiting for an opponent’s time to run out. It’s an issue. It’s just that sometimes a good laugh can help keep you sane when dealing with people who do things like this.
That is correct - that is what the original question was 
It has been useful to explore the other aspects of this (such as “is it even a problem?”)
I totally agree with your well considered position on this.
The definition has been worked out by what you are saying. But no legitimate line drawing has actually been done. Defining something indeed does have its merits in this csse… I don’t object to that at all, I’m simply saying that a solution to the issue largely hasn’t been put forward.
As to the point made about joking.
I must be honest and say that im largely not in a particularly jovial mood, so feel free to ignore what I said on that. (Currently unwell, cold or something, but when I’m I’ll, my mood shows it. So I do appologise if I came across as crass.)
Thank you for reading and considering. And even ignoring my sour mood. It’s very appreciated.
Long, annoying, talks like this are absolutely necessary when determining policy. Imagine what the world would be like if laws were less thought out and argued than this thread is.
Anyway, since there are already rules in place about leaving a game, the focus is now on changing behavior (not attitudes) and determining why the rules OGS has are ineffective.
Are players not even seeing the rules (that’s the first time I’ve seen that page)
Is OGS making assumptions about the nature of the players and their willingness to look up and read the rules?
Are players coming into OGS with the same expectations they have for other servers or online games?
Is there a cultural issue that needs to be addressed first?
Are players not really thinking of online opponents as human?
There’s lots to think about, and a good answer to a problem like this will take a lot of talk, evidence and analysis. The end result will also have to not be a burden on the mods, nor so impartial that there is no humanity in the decision. A tough question was asked, so an easy answer can’t be expected.
Who said they are ineffective?
The evidence of this thread is that they are effective: most people in this thread report not experiencing the problem for the most part. Arguably this is because it is policed well.
The people who do experience the problem report it, and it is dealt with.
The thread did not come into existence because of a problem of effectiveness.
The question posed by this thread is much less severe: it is simply “in the grey area, where do you think it is reasonable to draw the line?”.
Mostly I think moderators are happy to make the call - as Conrad and I have reported.
It is only the fact that there is this grey area where it is hard to tell if it is reasonable to time out in that amount of time that I personally would appreciate community guidance on.
At some point in this continuum, for me at least, the answer flips from “yes” to “probably not”.
Just reading the last few posts now…
I think in general it seems like everyone kind of agrees that it should still be a moderator decision, and that we all trust the mod team to make the right call.
If the mods have enough to think about and consider, then I don’t know if there is much more to be gained from talking about this more than we already have, before it inevitably de-evolves.
Mods exist to think through the grey areas and make a judgment call.
If you’re still asking us to give you a blanket definition you can apply and be at ease, then there isn’t one.
That’s one vote down for “whatever youse all reckon” 
Sorry, you aren’t feeling well 
Be sure to get plenty of rest and drink lots of water. I find ginger tea with honey to be a gift from the gods when I’m sick.
The thing is that there are rules in place about escaping. I doubt much can be done to prevent it from happening. It’s going to happen no matter how many rules, guidelines, algorithms, spells/charms/talismans are set. 
There will always be sore losers who don’t care that their opponent will have to sit and wait for the time to run out. Seems to me the only thing that can be done is to define what constitutes a legitimate timeout and deal with cases of obvious escapes.
I personally think that there is something to be said about removing the emotional response from this situation as I have said previously. What I mean by this isn’t that this isn’t a problem that evokes emotion, and I don’t even suggest that we should talk about it without emotion.
What I am trying to say is that the solution, if indeed one can be found, is one that should be emotionless.
An example of this would be speed limits on roads. Many people want to get to places fast, but they also want their streets safe, so there has to be a way of achieving both, but in a way that pleases the most people, while accepting that it’s going to anger some.
So, in residential area’s there are low-speed limits, and in places that are non-residential, there are larger roads, thus higher speed limits, to offer that speed that we need to get to the places we want.
What I propose is something similar. A limit. Something that is inherently without an emotional response, its something in place before it even happens again. thus providing a guideline on how to deal with a situation, and even as a means of prevention from this escaping thing from happening.
That being said. there is something to be said for awareness in the players of OGS. Whereby if everyone were made aware of this issue, that then the issue may become less of an issue.
The problem with that it, the majority of people will continue to ignore the rules. or ignore the attention being drawn to anything. Notifications that they don’t want to see are clicked out of existence and thus ignored.
So while there is a preventative measure to be put in to place, there is, of course, the need still, to have that gray are, become a little less grey and thus easier to moderate for in the future. Especially in terms of consistency amung moderators.
Moderators are servents of the users of OGS, in that they are guardians of OGS, and indeed the enforcers of the “Laws” of OGS. Standardizing different rules and such, while, seeming to be a bad idea to some, is actually a very good thing I think. Because it means that moderators are able to work more efficiently, and indeed have a ruleset to fall back on if and when they need to.
Yes, there should be leeway in all rulesets to allow for the discretion of the moderator, but discretion can also be abused. While I trust the moderators of OGS very much indeed. there is nothing to say that at some point moderators will disagree with the handling of a case of a broken rule, in which case, having a technicality to fall back on is only an advantage I think.
Edit:
Thank you @RubyMineshaft I am drinking a lot of tea. Keeping the lights and sounds on low so my head does not explode. Honestly I don’t even know why I’m here. It’s not as if debating is at all great for a sic person to engage in.
Thankfully I find it unusually relaxing. Debating, talking, discussing important topics.
Ideas are my strong point. And I love to talk in this way, putting ideas across and having them scrutinized, and indeed doing the same with other people’s ideas. It’s how we all learn. And indeed form new friendships and meaningful connections.
I’m blabbing on a bit here now. But I’m eternally greatful that you took a moment to think of me.
Ah, but you can get away with going a little above the speed limit, and there are times where cops will let you go for doing, say ,5-10 above the limit depending on where and when it is.
I remember a court case where a cop brought in someone for doing 70 in a school zone, when it was like 8pm and the guy was an immigrant pizza delivery man and wanted to get a big tip. The judge gave him a pass because it was well past the school zone time, he was an honest guy and he just wanted to pay for his families food and rent and stuff.
So the reverse is true, where someone just says “the rule says this and I’m not gonna think and just take you in”, which is also to be avoided. The Geneva convention is also really vague in some areas, because having an exceptionally well refined definition does more harm than good.
I can imagine that if leaving gets too refined, that people will simply “cut close to the edge”, and then point at OGS’s own rules and day “actually I wasn’t leaving by your own definition”.
Your absolutely right in your examples. Which is why it’s important to ‘legislate’ for circumstances that need leeway.
In the UK… You can drive 10% over the speed limit. And not any more.
So in a 70 zone… You can do 77. But in a thirst zone 33 and so on.
Sure that circumstances for time of day exist in these cases as well.
What I’m suggesting is to have that technically not fall back on. But… Ultimately there needs to be an element of final descision to be made by the moderators.
The technicality being a guideline, as opposed to a proper law.
Spot on.
Suppose all the cops start booking us as +1MPH.
We will start complaining and protesting and rioting.
As with this - I am interested where the grey line, past the law, is.
It is not reasonable to say “no live game shall be allowed to time out ever”.
Neither is it reasonable to think that a person should be allowed to escape with an hour on the clock.
So, allowing for circumstances, broadly where is the line?
If I may emphasise - I’m not looking to “encode this” to remove the grey line with new stricter law.
I’m interested in opinions about what is likely to be reasonable or not, to help moderators feel that their decisions are roughly in line with community sentiment.
I hope I have at least been attempting to answer and provide useful information for this endeavour of yours.
I agree. I do think however that the community is a little too demanding in that we seem to want to do it “properly” and take the time to argue it out and look at the evidence and whatnot, whereas that’s not what the OP seems to want.
This thread is not gonna be the quick "yep we all agreed that after x amount of time it is a ‘leave’ ".
I mainly agree. It’s not always easy to tell if a law was broken or even what a law means, that’s why we have courts and judges. Moderators are our judges on OGS and it’s up to them to determine whether a specific case is in violation of the rules.
I think the rules saying “It is not okay to leave a game without resigning” is good enough. I’m confident in the mod team’s ability to judge whether or not disciplinary action is warranted.
Well, at the moment it seems I have little more to add to the conversation as it stands.
I’ve made my points reletivly clear, if not long winded, and I have taken on and read everything that has been said so far.
I feel like we need more time, and indeed more voices to come back to this discussion.
It’s all well and good getting this far in a conversation when largely there has only been four people talking about it for the last however many messages.
That being said, I will of course be keeping an eye on this one, and indeed coming back should I have any further or contrary thoughts as to what is being said.
Maybe it’s worth noting that, after 78 posts and Eugene asking the same question a few times throughout, no one has even really attempted to answer the actual question in the manner asked of us.
I don’t know if any of us are comfortable or able to give you the opinion / answer you want
