To the Virginia officials ...

[Dad]

Originally Posted by crosscountry55

This is an interesting point. Happened a lot in the pre-internet era of assigning, but decreased when assignors gravitated to the monopoly that we know of as Arbiter. Now that Arbiter is experiencing some competition from other applications, it stands to reason that the "game-shopping" problem is on the rise again.

Integrity. If you accept an assignment, honor it. If you're lucky, your assignor has a policy where if you're offered an upgraded game, all you have to do is contact him/her to ask for relief. Good assignors are happy to provide relief if they have replacements available.

Game-shopping and turnbacks, without approval, are a reputation killer. Your short-term gain will turn into a long-term loss.

Some good points, especially reputations being at stake.

I'm wondering why this is such an issue. If you block a lot of people, you don't get games. If you send games back, you don't get games. If you're arbiter is up to date then take what you get.

I also don't believe in blocking partners. It's so rare for there to actually be a good reason. I guess some association may have a ton of people with freakishly horrible social skills who just block everyone. No games for you.