A seperate challenge system..

[rex_b]

Just like the arcade challenge system but not for an aracade. Like if I want to challenge someone to a debate....

Is this possible?

[rex_b]

I guess I would be able to modify the v3arcade code and just take out the challenge part?

[Borgs8472]

Posting to show my support for such a hack.

[James T Brock]

It's simple things like this that people want but no-one ever wants to fill the request...

[rex_b]

Anyone willing to take apart the v3arcade and just give out the challenge system?

[Borgs8472]

Well let's design it from first principles.

The arcade hack works by:

1. Issuing a challenge that is public on the arcade page (I think??!?)
2. Sending a pm to a user that they have been challenged.
3. Playing a game, recording the score.
4. The other person plays, scores.
4a. A PM is sent at this point???
5. The result is posted.

Anyhow, something like that.

Obviously a 'debate' challenge would have to be settled by humans, either mods or polls. Both would be nice.

I'm assuming only 1 vs 1 debates for now.

So here's the hypothetical scenario:

A new type of post, rather than post or poll, let's call it 'debate'.

User clicks 'new debate'.

Mr X makes a debate saying e.g "[Debate, Mr X vs Mr Y] Why starwars is better than startrek"

Similar to a poll field, a debate field would require the following options:

1. Who the debate is against
2. When a conclusion will be reached by (or never - like with polls)

Now here's where things could get more tricky.

On 'posting' this thread, it actually sits in the moderation queue. An automated PM is dispatched to Mr Y saying "you have been challenged to a debate on "Why starwars is better than startrek" by Mr X.

There the user can accept or decline the debate.

If they accept, the post is posted, e.g removed from the moderation queue.

Users debate as normal, and so can anyone else.

However after 24, 48 or whatever hours, defined when the user makes his debate post, a poll is automatically added saying "who won the debate? Mr X, Mr Y, Draw".

When the poll goes a week or so without a reply, the poll closes and a winner is declared.

Hows that for principles?

[rex_b]

Originally Posted by wordforge.net

Well let's design it from first principles.

The arcade hack works by:

1. Issuing a challenge that is public on the arcade page (I think??!?)
2. Sending a pm to a user that they have been challenged.
3. Playing a game, recording the score.
4. The other person plays, scores.
4a. A PM is sent at this point???
5. The result is posted.

Anyhow, something like that.

Obviously a 'debate' challenge would have to be settled by humans, either mods or polls. Both would be nice.

I'm assuming only 1 vs 1 debates for now.

So here's the hypothetical scenario:

A new type of post, rather than post or poll, let's call it 'debate'.

User clicks 'new debate'.

Mr X makes a debate saying e.g "[Debate, Mr X vs Mr Y] Why starwars is better than startrek"

Similar to a poll field, a debate field would require the following options:

1. Who the debate is against
2. When a conclusion will be reached by (or never - like with polls)

Now here's where things could get more tricky.

On 'posting' this thread, it actually sits in the moderation queue. An automated PM is dispatched to Mr Y saying "you have been challenged to a debate on "Why starwars is better than startrek" by Mr X.

There the user can accept or decline the debate.

If they accept, the post is posted, e.g removed from the moderation queue.

Users debate as normal, and so can anyone else.

However after 24, 48 or whatever hours, defined when the user makes his debate post, a poll is automatically added saying "who won the debate? Mr X, Mr Y, Draw".

When the poll goes a week or so without a reply, the poll closes and a winner is declared.

Hows that for principles?

Sounds like a winner, except I would make the person except the challenge before all of the posting que stuff happens.

[Borgs8472]

The person would have to know what issue they were being challenged on however. So 'invite user to a debate' would have to have a small field where the user discusses the topic briefy to get their opponent's interest. That is then sent as a part of the automated PM.

But then who starts the thread?

The board? The challenger? The opponent?

Actually, a board generated challenge would be quite fun, posted by an automated user with the topic and introduction. (written by the challenger I guess).

Probably once accepted, then the person can choose 'begin debate X' within a time limit or something.

meh...

I prefer the initial post sitting in the moderation queue personally. :/

[rex_b]

Can someone please help us!!!

[Borgs8472]

Help us obie-wan kenobi, you're our only hope!!!!11