ForumsForum GamesCount to 100 Discussion Thread

248 234539
Gantic
offline
Gantic
11,889 posts
King

This is a discussion thread regarding rules and gameplay of 'Count to 100', so that the count isn't frequently interrupted and restarted when a mod posts.

Posts not on topic will be removed.

  • 248 Replies
HahiHa
offline
HahiHa
8,262 posts
Regent

@meaosome If we assume that everything else is done by the rules, then if for example 3 people ninja each other, only the first post saying 100 is relevant as it completes the count. The two other posts are mistakes but do not affect the finished count anymore. So the count would be valid.

HahiHa
offline
HahiHa
8,262 posts
Regent

Making a note here, I'll adapt the count's OP soon.

So, here's the deal:
For the time being and until further notice, mods are allowed to help users with the count, all other rules remaining as is.

Mods still have the ability to interrupt the count: whenever a mod makes a stopping post, i.e. a post without counting (not the same as a non-count post since they're technically still opposing teams), the count is interrupted and needs to restart.

Sounds fair?

HahiHa
offline
HahiHa
8,262 posts
Regent

Current full set of rules:

"Count to 100" is a community effort to flawlessly count from 1 to 100 by ones. It is an exercise in communication and teamwork to reach a common goal. Counters from the same team need to work together in order to accomplish this task, as it is not easy. Approximately 1 count succeeds every 500 pages. That is a 2% success rate.* Remember that this is just a game and counters should have fun, but not at the expense of others (except for the mods because we're evil).

* This is not entirely accurate. The success rate is much lower. However, there is approximately a 2% chance of landing on a page containing part of a successful count.

Count to 100
1.0 "Count to 100" is a counting game played by two teams, Team User and Team Mod, under the discretion of the Commissioner of the Count.
1.0.1 Team User consists of Knights and Users (and developers and Wardens)
1.0.2 Team Mod consists of Administrators and Moderators
1.0.3 Commissioner is the user or moderator tasked with interpreting the rules according to the "spirit of the game" as "Count to 100" has been understood for years, regardless of logical inconsistencies in its rules, under the ideals of Fun and Community.
1.0.4 For the time being, Moderators are allowed to help Users count, so as long as the other rules are observed you do not need to restart the count if you see a mod count. However, if a Moderator makes a stopping post, i.e. a post without counting (not the same as a non-count post since they're technically different teams), it is considered an interruption and the count will restart.

1.1 The objective of the game is to reach a count of 100 in accordance to the rules below.

1.2 A count is determined to be successful if a team reaches the objective. The active participants from that team from that count will be rewarded with 1 "Count to 100" quest and 1 merit if that participant does not already have the quest. Additional merits are conferred for each first successful count of the year, and for a participant's 10th successful count.

Core Game Rules
2.0 The core game rules must be followed for a count to be deemed successful. Should any rule conflict, the "spirit of the game" will be invoked by the Commissioner.
2.1 A count must start from 1 and increase by ones up to 100 for 100 consecutive posts, save for exceptions noted below.
Exception: Handicap rule. The challenging team, i.e. the team without the current win, may count up to 100 divided by wins by the incumbent team, i.e. the team with the current win, since the last win of the challenging team rounded up or to 100, whichever is lower.
If Team User wins once, Team Mod counts to 100. (100/1 = 100)
If Team User wins two in a row, Team Mod counts to 50. (100/2 = 50)
If Team User wins three in a row, Team Mod counts to 34. (100/3 = 33.333... ~34).
and vice versa.
Handicaps will be noted on the scoreboard if a team scores on a handicap.
2.2 No counter may count two consecutive numbers.
Case 1. Okay: P1 P2
Case 2. Okay: P1 restart P1
Case 3. Not Okay: P1 P1
2.3 No two counters may alternate for more than three consecutive numbers.
Explanation: This is derived from the original moderator interpretation of the back-to-back posting rule. In this way, no two users can complete the count without a third. This increases the challenge of reaching 100 and promotes the use of teamwork and communication. It also discourages use of the thread as conversation between two counters.
Case 1. Okay: P1 P2 P1 P3
Case 2. Okay: P1 P2 restart P1 P2
Case 3. Not Okay: P1 P2 P1 P2
Case 4. Not Okay: P1: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 19 10...
2.4 No counter may post only the number or gibberish with the number.
Case 1. Not Okay: 1.
Case 2. Not Okay: 1. sdiovpadac asdooi
2.5 No counter may post without a counting number or make a post without bolding that counting number if that number is not at the start of the post.
Case 1. Not Okay: We have to start back at the beginning.
Case 2. Okay: Uno. We have to start back at the beginning.
Case 3. Not Okay: We have to start back at 1.
Case 4. Okay: We have to start back at 1.
Case 5. Okay: Why are there no new posts here?
Clarification: "Wacky" non-Arabic numeral (i.e. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, etc.) counting is not prohibited, but it is not recommended, as it might confuse other counters.
Exception: Stopping posts (see 4.0.1), celebratory posts, posts from the Commissioner acting in the capacity of the Commissioner, and posts from moderators and administrators are exempt from this rule.
2.6 No counter may edit their post. If an edit tag shows in a count, the attempt is forfeit.

Supplementary Game Rules
3.0 Supplementary game rules may not affect the count, but they do affect the game, the spirit of the game, and the community.
3.1 No spoiling. Spoiling is the act of disrupting the count for counters of the same team. Spoiling includes, but is not limited to:
3.1.1 restarting the count for reasons not listed in Section 4.0.
3.1.2 intentionally posting the incorrect number.
3.1.3 intentionally breaking a core game rule.
Comment: Spoiling should be ignored and reported. Such behavior is disruptive to the community and will not be tolerated.
3.2 No cheating. Cheating is acting in a manner that does not align with the "spirit of the game". This includes breaking site rules, using deceit, or using underhanded tactics in order to reach a count of 100.
3.2.1 Team Mod is not allowed to modify the thread or the posts therein by locking, deleting, moving, the thread or posts or using Moderator or Administrator actions not in the capacity of enforcing the site's rules to reach a count of 100.
Clarification: The thread title may be edited, but not to the effect that users cannot find the thread at all by the title.
3.3 No spilping. Spilping is posting without fully reading the simplified rules in the first post of the "Count to 100" thread. While this may be disruptive, it will not reset the count except in the manner outlined in section 4.0. Users new to the count shall post "I'm new and here to count to 100."
Explanation: This rule is to make sure new users have read the rules, even if they might not necessarily understand all of them. Not reading the rules will very likely result in Case 1 of Section 2.4, which will restart the count.
3.4 No raging. Raging is posting in an extremely angry manner that may include flaming, badgering, and excessive swearing.

Restarting the Count
4.0 The count shall be restarted from 1 if:
4.0.1 a counter from the opposing team posts. The opposing team shall make a stopping post to interrupt the count for the counting team. A stopping post is not required to include a number.
4.0.2 a mistake is made in the count. A mistake consists of one of the following errors:
4.0.2.1 Double-counting. Counting the same number twice is a mistake, except in the case of counting 1 twice. If 1 is counted twice, normal counting will resume with 2.
4.0.2.2 Skip-counting. Counting a number that is not consecutive, except in the case of a restart.
4.0.2.3 Back-counting. Counting a number that was skipped.
4.0.3 an edit is made in the count. Any edit after thirty seconds from posting, except in the case of a moderator editing a user's post of site-rule-breaking content, will reset the count, regardless of what was edited.
4.0.4 back-to-back counting, defined in Section 2.3, occurs.
4.0.5 a spam post, defined Section 2.4, is made.
4.0.6 cheating occurs.
4.0.7 the count has reached 100. Once the count has reached 100, the next count will restart from 1.
4.1 The count shall NOT be restarted from 1 if:
4.1.1 a post without a number is made, except in the case of a stopping post.
4.1.2 spoiling occurs.

Validating the Count
5.0 The count shall be validated by the Commissioner upon reaching 100.
5.1 A count deemed valid will confer the "Count to 100" quest and a merit for each active participant in that successful count if that participant does not already have the "Count to 100" quest. Additional merits are conferred for each first successful count of the year, and for a participant's 10th successful count.
5.2 The count may be invalidated for the group for:
5.2.1 breaking core game rules listed in Section 2.0 to reach the goal.
5.2.2 spamming to reach the goal. Spamming is different from a spam post. Multiple short consecutive or semi-consecutive posts may not count for the purposes of reaching the goal.
5.2.3 cheating to reach the goal.
5.2.4 ignoring a non-spoil count.
5.3 The count may be invalidated for the individual for:
5.3.1 non-count posts in counting position.
Explanation: Non-count posts in a counting position should not be made. They are in a position where they should contain a number but don't to avoid being ninja'd or breaking a core rule. In this case, the non-count post in a counting position will noted as either (a) non-participation if such a post would not violate a core game rule if it was numbered, except for the case of being ninja'd or (b) violation if such a post would cause a violation a core game rule if it was numbered. The counter will not be scored.
5.3.2 spoiling.
5.3.3 cheating.

Widestsinger
online
Widestsinger
447 posts
Constable

I have read your rules and I don't see any major issues, the ones I have noticed are small and nit-picky.
Rule 1.2 should mention the other situations where a counter would get a merit in the case of a successful count or mention that it is mentioned in rule 5.1.
If a count is started in December on year 1 and ends in January the following year would the counters receive a merit for the count in the year of December or the following year? (assuming a count in the first year had already occurred making that years merit already claimed.) Personally I believe that they should receive a merit for the count of the original year and if a count has happened in that year then they get one merit only and a merit can still be rewarding for a count in the following year.
I (personally) believe that having two successful counts in a row deserves a merit in and of itself because of how rare it is (we haven't had a proper count in the past 18 months), and because its a cool thing to achieve requiring 200 numbers stated in a row. If this ever does happen again then it can only happen to a person once rewarding a double merit. If said person does this again in the future then the normal merit rules would apply and they cannot get another merit for a double count.

HahiHa
offline
HahiHa
8,262 posts
Regent

I have read your rules and I don't see any major issues, the ones I have noticed are small and nit-picky.
Rule 1.2 should mention the other situations where a counter would get a merit in the case of a successful count or mention that it is mentioned in rule 5.1.

Nice catch, rule 1.2 now mentions those cases too.

If a count is started in December on year 1 and ends in January the following year would the counters receive a merit for the count in the year of December or the following year? (assuming a count in the first year had already occurred making that years merit already claimed.) Personally I believe that they should receive a merit for the count of the original year and if a count has happened in that year then they get one merit only and a merit can still be rewarding for a count in the following year.

I would rather consider the date at which the count has been successfully finished, which in this case would mean you'd get the merit in January for year 2 even if it was started in December of year 1. It makes more sense to me that way, though I don't feel strongly about it. Either way, I don't think this is something that needs to be specifically defined as a rule.

I (personally) believe that having two successful counts in a row deserves a merit in and of itself because of how rare it is (we haven't had a proper count in the past 18 months), and because its a cool thing to achieve requiring 200 numbers stated in a row. If this ever does happen again then it can only happen to a person once rewarding a double merit. If said person does this again in the future then the normal merit rules would apply and they cannot get another merit for a double count.

That's an interesting idea. In the current state of the count/forums it sounds extremely difficult, but it could be an additional challenge for those who want.
Widestsinger
online
Widestsinger
447 posts
Constable

I have looked into the past and noticed that yes you are correct, merits for counts for the first one in a year is for the year of when the count ended and not for when it started. I asked about this as it happened to me where I had already had a merit for a count in 2023 and we had just finished a count in 2024 that started in 2023 and you gave me the merit for the first count in 2024. No it is not something major that needs to be mentioned in the rules (although I think it should be) but it could rob someone from a merit if not standardized.

HahiHa
offline
HahiHa
8,262 posts
Regent

Btw, in the past Gantic had tried the idea of special days (eg. mod-free mondays, see previous posts in this thread), though that didn't work out in the end; apparently, even then those days were barely used. So I'm not proposing this exact idea again, but I just wanted to put this out here; maybe someone has an idea for some special events or something similar, to occasionally spice up the count without adding more permanent rules.

Widestsinger
online
Widestsinger
447 posts
Constable

The thing that slows down counts more then anything else is 100% the b2b rule, maybe a day where b2b does not exist? since that would make the count go very fast (if people even bother to look) it could only work on every other X day of the week (twice a month). When that day ends the b2b rule starts again and every new comment is free from previous comments if you're catching my drift. Sadly, I don't see how this could match up with any current days name.

Showing 241-248 of 248