right now, when an admin closes a battle from someone else, the boons disappear no matter if it was a boonsave or not.

it makes sense that the host doesnt get the boons right away, but heres my request:

i think if an admin closes a battle for someone else, they shld get the boons instead and then can decide if they want to give it back to the host.

that way, for naughty parasites who forgot their battle, admins can keep it or donate to bank.

but in cases where the host informed the admins and is unable to close the battle because of IRL stuff that came up (etc), the admin can give the boons back to the host.

I support this idea!

also in support

what if i get all the boons instead

Yes!!!

on no planet should the admin get the boons whatttt are we talking about. a much better way for this to work: two buttons for closing, one labeled "close" and another "close without refunding". this way you're not giving someone free unearned money and then asking them nicely to give it back to the bank (dumb).

Admins are admins. If they wanted to steal boons there's probably already a zillion ways they could just hack themselves infinite monies if they wanted. :P

A "close & refund" admin-side button would be a handy shortcut probably, but we're already talking about a case where someone's manually intervening to circumvent the normal system (i.e. normal admin duties). The time taken to do the actual vote-closing & cleanup is probably longer than it takes to hit the "send boons" button :P

The only concern in my head would be if there's a worry that non-kleeder admins (present or future) won't know the process and forget to send the boons, but that's for the admin team to figure out for themselves and tbh this whole thing reads like kleeder leaving a note-to-self for future-kleeder anyway. :P

As much as I'd love free boons, I'm with blower on this one. It doesn't make sense for admins to get a whole bunch of boons that they never deposited just for closing a battle. The "close" and "close without refunding" buttons seem like a much better solution to me too.

I think in practice the result is the same, because I think we've got admins on the team who would treat this feature honestly and get people back their money. I already sometimes gift people boons after these situations, especially if it leaves them below hosting threshold. however it is also a totally reasonable argument to just build the system in such a way that it doesn't depend on the temperament of the staff as middlepersons, if that option is available. so, yeah maybe having an admin button on tally sheets for battles they aren't hosting that returns the boons to the host (assuming the battle boonsaved). that's a lot of qualifications, there's some checks needed to be sure it isn't abusable in other ways. but in theory it should work

even if I trusted all past, current, and future admins to be completely honest with regards to free money, building a system with the assumption of everyone being a good faith actor is something you just don't do.

just my 2c but i'd personally argue that puke wouldn't make people who weren't trusted long term for good faith admins to begin with

i have no say in how it's done, given i'm not an admin, as long as the system ends up working fine, then however it is achieved is fine, which i am in support for if i didn't make it clear already

It's bad for the BotBconomy for currency to be destroyed

The boons should definitely go to either the host or the bank. Unless the point is to reward admins for doing a good job (which I support), I feel like this just gives admins unnecessary responsibility for something that could be done automatically.

I don't get the point, blower.
do u say admins aren't trustworthy? maybe the issue is not my feature request but the selection of responsible people in that case.

a button on battle close cld usually be the cleaner option, but I think there's more to it. an admin can eventually see an abandoned battle but overlook the message where the host said that they have to leave unexpectedly. or if the host has something else happening to them that they cldnt control but were unable to inform beforehand? in that case, it would be possible for the admin to get the info even after closing the battle and handle it accordingly.

idk, are you that scared of yourself that you will abuse this feature to snipe open battles only to get some boons?

i dont like the prospect of a community where we all treat each other as liars and thieves, but aight

buttons wld be nice tho lol. clean and less room for misunderstanding, quite possibly my fav idea of this thread, other than the main one,

For me it's not about not trusting admins, but the imbalance of the economy. It's a bit random who happens to be around to close a battle and get the boons. I know that admins effectively have an unlimited boon pool collectively anyway, it just disturbs the economic balance in my mind for large amounts of boons to change hands at a whim. But actually now that I've written all this I find that I don't actually care that much so I guess change me to a neutral vote lol

yeah that's a good point kleeder

if someone hosts a XHB and can't be around due to something serious/sudden, like being hospitalised with no way to contact anyone on BotB, then it'd be nice that once they're back, they at least get those boons back, as especially for like 2 and 4hbs they're not cheap to host assuming they even boon save.

if we have only 2 buttons which either reimburse the host or reimburse the bank, in an instance like that where nobody initially knows, you'd return the money to the bank, only to be like, "ah shit I should've clicked the other button".

now granted, I also am of the opinion that we're a small enough community that we can moderate ourselves and make things right even when the behind the scenes workings don't work out all the time, like what has been happening already with dami reimbursing boons for battles he's had to close for others.

from my point of view, as a non-admin, whichever way it gets implemented doesn't affect me - i either get the boons back or I don't, if I'm not around to close the battle. i don't really see boons as anything other than a means to an end for changing avatars, bumping posts, creating bulletins/etc, and hosting battles, ergo it's not a real currency you want to save up for a mortgage. if you think about it, and this is a bit off topic, the idea of BotB needing a bank for its boons isn't something that is needed for the site to function, it's just a fun feature that makes this site and community fun and unique.

that being said, if this were a super large community and there were clear instances of mod abuse that occurred in the past, then that's where I'd agree with blower's approach as a token of trust in everyone's actions, as i think that's justified for the scenario, but from my past like 12 years on this site i haven't encountered anything of the sort. the community is large on paper but you only have a few handfuls of people active at a time, most of which have been here for long enough to know how things work, with few newbies learning the ropes and whatnot

and, again, veering off-topic, if we can instil a trust and sense of community via the way we operate and moderate this place, where the lines of "staff/mods" and normal users is more blurred than normal (as in, only stands out where absolutely necessary), i think that will lead to a better world and future in our real lives. it's wishful thinking on my part and irrelevant to the argument of "boons should be returned if admins close a battle for someone else", but it came to mind while writing this given world happenings and I thought it'd be important to mention, because how wonderful is it that we have so many different backgrounds all participating in this one community and getting along?

sorry. long post I know. I'll try to not be so long next time.

personally after reading everything i don't see why the close battle action and return boons to host/bank action can't be separated, making a 3rd option that i'd call boon return deferral where the boons aren't returned anywhere upon closing the battle but instead stay "attached" to the battle and can later be returned to the host/bank. this would be useful in that sort of unclear situation that some ppl brought up where there'd be an inherent risk of returning boons to the wrong place if there's only the host/bank options when closing the battle

p.s. to melonadem: it's okay to be long. we don't discriminate by size

I wasn't aware this was commonplace enough to need a change. I would personally prefer a "close and reimburse boons" and "close without" vs a "close and mod gets boons" option just because those are the only reasonable next steps either way and it streamlines the process.

This is the tl;dr but justification below:

If you want to think of it in terms of the kayfabe of the b00n economy, closing someone else's battle is extra work, but it's part of the job of a mod (an appointed but volunteer position), so I don't think it should be a source of revenue. A mod is a gov't employee and we don't want corruption. The two choice path is still discretionary but it keeps the system for trying to repair debt and deter parasites (i dont think bonloss should be a punishment, that already comes in the form of ailments) in place with a contemporary modification for equity with less potential for abuse.

Obviously realistically the mods have a lot of b00ns and are going to just give yours back if you play and ask nice, and others will sometimes pitch in even if you don't.... but again I'm thinking about what feels correct within this fictional economy. It's more fun that way.

IF YOU OR A LOVED ONE HAD A MOD KEEP YOUR B00NS AFTER MISSING A BATTLE, YOU MAY BE ENTITLED TO A SETTLEMENT!

Thank you BGO, "kayfabe of the b00n economy" is the perfect summary of what I was trying to express originally!

I also like luna's suggestion to just keep the boons attached to the batol to deal with later