How about a Host Rating system?

[Johnnypenso]

I'm fairly certain that the majority of GT5'ers that spent more than a few sessions in Open Lobbies over the past 3 years would agree that really good hosts were hard to find. I'd define really good hosts as those that stuck to the room limitations as defined in the description, started races at regular intervals, dealt promptly and swiftly with the bad apples, had good communication with the particpants etc.

There is some talk of a driver rating system so I thought, why not a host rating system for GT6? What better way to encourage better hosts than to have them ranked by participants in their rooms? It might work something like this:

1. After you enter a room and run a certain minimum of races, you are eligible to enter a value for rating the host on a scale from 1-10. The reason you have to run a minimum number of races is to prevent someone from entering a single race, driving like a d-bag, getting reprimanded by the host and giving him a poor rating before they get booted from the room. You could use 3 races for example. Hosts would then have it in the back of their mind, any problem racer that they have to talk to over and over for 3 races, could potentially affect their "host rating" so they would think twice about letting a "problem" driver continue in their room

2. Drivers would only be able to enter a rating on a host while still in the room and having completed 3 races to prevent spiteful voting after being kicked.

3. To eliminate the stacking of voting, each driver would only be eligible to enter a vote on a host perhaps once a month.

4. Host rating would be under several categories, to provide hosts with useful feedback on areas they need to improve. Categories could be things like this:

1. Starting races at regular intervals.
2. Sticking to the paramters of the room description (hosts should be able to change that description as they take over a vacated room and the descriptions need to be much larger)
3. Dealing with problem drivers.
4. Communication with the room.

As well, using GT6's new community functions, there should be a "Hosts Forum" where regular hosts and those wishing to host Open Lobbies can gather and provide feedback to each other. Perhaps PD could chime in with some kind of guidebook to hosting, or it could be created by the folks here at GTP. Another part of this forum could be viewing the ranking of anyone that has hosted a minimum number of races (10?20?)

Anyone browsing Open Lobbies looking for a place to go, should be able to see the hosts rating as part of their search process. Higher rated hosts will then attract more drivers and since they'll get high ratings by doing a good job hosting, it'll encourage other hosts to do a better job and will make them think twice about not paying attention to drivers causing mayhem and ruining the experience for everyone involved.

Do you think this could be a useful tool for GT6? Should I immediately forward this to Kaz?...lol..

Note: Just to be clear, this has never been mentioned by PD, Kaz or anyone else to my knowledge.

 

[dr_slump]

I'll never again host a room.

No seriously, I often fall asleep or whatever similar happens and then that's it for me then.

 

[eran0004]

I suppose it could be nice. But I would prefer if the voting system only had "upvotes", because people are generally more likely to give feedback when they're not satisfied. To avoid ending up with a billion downvotes, I think it would be better if you could only rate the host if you think he/she did something exceptionally good. It could be like a facebook "like", which could also be tagged to the ID so that the next time you see that name in the list of open lobbies you also see that you "like" that host and it is a lobby that you might want to join again. The tag could stick until you decide to "unlike", but the rating would diminish over time so that it always stays up to date with the most recent "performance" of the host.

The difference between a tag and a friends request would be that the tag is just a marker, you don't actually add the host to your friends list and the host doesn't know that you tagged him/her. It's a way to "remember" good hosts without having them cluttering your friends list.

 

[Chrunch Houston]

If there were such a system, the host should choose whether or not the rating is displayed to those looking through the open lobby.

I think most good hosts would prefer to have open slots in their room so friends can join, rather than have a bunch of riffraff join because a high rating attracted them.

The difference between a tag and a friends request would be that the tag is just a marker, you don't actually add the host to your friends list and the host doesn't know that you tagged him/her. It's a way to "remember" good hosts without having them cluttering your friends list.

I like this idea – sort of a favorites tab in the open lobby you could check out first when you want to go online.

 

[Johnnypenso]

I suppose it could be nice. But I would prefer if the voting system only had "upvotes", because people are generally more likely to give feedback when they're not satisfied. To avoid ending up with a billion downvotes, I think it would be better if you could only rate the host if you think he/she did something exceptionally good. It could be like a facebook "like", which could also be tagged to the ID so that the next time you see that name in the list of open lobbies you also see that you "like" that host and it is a lobby that you might want to join again. The tag could stick until you decide to "unlike", but the rating would diminish over time so that it always stays up to date with the most recent "performance" of the host.

The difference between a tag and a friends request would be that the tag is just a marker, you don't actually add the host to your friends list and the host doesn't know that you tagged him/her. It's a way to "remember" good hosts without having them cluttering your friends list.

Although it would water down things a lot, I think if it ever did come to pass, that would probably be the way PD does it. PD would probably not restrict the amount of likes each driver could post (1 per session maybe but you can vote every session) in which case it would be pretty much meaningless as a result.

If there were such a system, the host should choose whether or not the rating is displayed to those looking through the open lobby.

I think most good hosts would prefer to have open slots in their room so friends can join, rather than have a bunch of riffraff join because a high rating attracted them.

I like this idea – sort of a favorites tab in the open lobby you could check out first when you want to go online.

In combination with the host rating system you might also be able to restrict access to your room via a driver rating system, which would eliminate the riffraff from being able to get in to begin with.

 

[masterrawad]

What if someone abuses the rating system? for example, someone has a great time, but dislikes the host for no particular reason and gives them a rating of 1. how would this be foolproof?

 

[eran0004]

Although it would water down things a lot, I think if it ever did come to pass, that would probably be the way PD does it. PD would probably not restrict the amount of likes each driver could post (1 per session maybe but you can vote every session) in which case it would be pretty much meaningless as a result.

It wouldn't give any in-depth rating, just a general "like", so in that sense you're right about it being watered down (as compared to ratings about different aspects of hosting). On the other hand, it would have the benefits of being easier to use and it would still produce the basic job of giving credit to the great hosts out there and make them stand out from the crowd.

What if someone abuses the rating system? for example, someone has a great time, but dislikes the host for no particular reason and gives them a rating of 1. how would this be foolproof?

That's why I propose that you can only up-vote (and up-vote by a value of 1, like a facebook "like"). It would be like tapping the host on the shoulder, saying "great job!" and everyone would see it.

 

[Johnnypenso]

What if someone abuses the rating system? for example, someone has a great time, but dislikes the host for no particular reason and gives them a rating of 1. how would this be foolproof?

Foolproof doesn't exist and can't be the goal or it will never get done. You design the system as best as possible to avoid it which is why I'd suggest you can't give a rating until you've done 3 races consecutively with a host. I can't see someone sticking around for 45 minutes just to give a bad rating but I guess anything is possible. In the long run the cream will rise to the top.

It wouldn't give any in-depth rating, just a general "like", so in that sense you're right about it being watered down (as compared to ratings about different aspects of hosting). On the other hand, it would have the benefits of being easier to use and it would still produce the basic job of giving credit to the great hosts out there and make them stand out from the crowd.

That's why I propose that you can only up-vote (and up-vote by a value of 1, like a facebook "like"). It would be like tapping the host on the shoulder, saying "great job!" and everyone would see it.

A general "up vote" will be completely meaningless because there's nothing to measure it against. Say Crunch hosts every other night for two months and gets 1000 likes. Say I also host every night for 2 months and get 1000 likes. Crunch is actually getting twice as many likes as me yet we'd both show up as 1000 likes to anyone wanting to enter our respective rooms. Likewise I could be a better host than Crunch, and have 1000 likes only hosting once a week, yet we'd still show up as the same. In time it'll just become a volume issue, hosts that are on more often, regardless of their competence, will have a lot of likes and it will actually be the wrong message to potential entrants.

For the system to have any meaning and value there has to be some meaningful way to compare hosts, some kind of ratio. Even a ratio of likes/participants would work in a crude way but I'd still rather see more detailed feedback working in conjunction with the whole "community" concept.

 

[Ills1999]

Some sort of host rating system would definitely be appreciated by myself. I've wasted enough time looking for decent hosts. Your suggestions seem like a pretty good place to start.

 

[Chrunch Houston]

If there is going to be a rating system I think it should be more passive.
I’ve said that I wouldn’t want a computer algorithm to rate a driver, but I do think one could be used to rate a host.

The room participants have already voted with their time. Obviously if you join a crappy room you aren’t going to stay for very long. I don’t think it would hard to rate a host from participant statistics.

 

[HBR-Roadhog]

Host rating could be a good thing. I haven't did much in public lobbies on GT5 but I used to do a lot on Forza 2. More often than not I ran a lobby and had several people who liked to run in my lobbies but I also joined others and some were very good where others were just horrible.

Would be nice to have an idea if the host does this a lot and people generally enjoy racing in his/her lobbies.

 

[eran0004]

A general "up vote" will be completely meaningless because there's nothing to measure it against. Say Crunch hosts every other night for two months and gets 1000 likes. Say I also host every night for 2 months and get 1000 likes. Crunch is actually getting twice as many likes as me yet we'd both show up as 1000 likes to anyone wanting to enter our respective rooms. Likewise I could be a better host than Crunch, and have 1000 likes only hosting once a week, yet we'd still show up as the same. In time it'll just become a volume issue, hosts that are on more often, regardless of their competence, will have a lot of likes and it will actually be the wrong message to potential entrants.

For the system to have any meaning and value there has to be some meaningful way to compare hosts, some kind of ratio. Even a ratio of likes/participants would work in a crude way but I'd still rather see more detailed feedback working in conjunction with the whole "community" concept.

If the idea is to find who is the best host, then that would be a problem. I still think it would do a pretty good job finding the good hosts, and it would show a difference between hosts that has earned some credit for their efforts and hosts that has not yet earned that. Likes per participant could work to get some kind of ratio.

Detailed feedback is always better feedback, but the more complex the form gets, the fewer people are going to use it. I guess the detail of the feedback has to be weighed against the amount of trouble the user is willing to go through to share his/her opinion.

 

[Johnnypenso]

If the idea is to find who is the best host, then that would be a problem. I still think it would do a pretty good job finding the good hosts, and it would show a difference between hosts that has earned some credit for their efforts and hosts that has not yet earned that. Likes per participant could work to get some kind of ratio.

Detailed feedback is always better feedback, but the more complex the form gets, the fewer people are going to use it. I guess the detail of the feedback has to be weighed against the amount of trouble the user is willing to go through to share his/her opinion.

If you call checking off 4 or 5 boxes to rank your host once or twice per evening, and then only the hosts you haven't ranked for a month, then yeah, it's complicated..lol. Granted some people are that lazy, but I'll take a little less information that's meaningful over a lot more information that's meaningless, anyday.

 

[bs13]

Anyone who hosts deserves credit. Furthermore nobody has the right to judge a host but someone that hosts a certain amount hours per month. Who better to rate a host than another host?

Hosts put up with a lot of crap and they are the ones that sacrifice when someone acts like an idiot. If you don't like the way a room is run then go start your own. It's that simple and it is what I do.

You also have the option to vote out the host if you don't like their hosting. If enough people vote he/she is gone.

Edit: My post is not directed at anyone in this thread. It is directed at those that tell the host how to run the room when they have never hosted or back out when they inherit the room.

 

[HBR-Roadhog]

Anyone who hosts deserves credit. Furthermore nobody has the right to judge a host but someone that hosts a certain amount hours per month. Who better to rate a host than another host?

Hosts put up with a lot of crap and they are the ones that sacrifice when someone acts like an idiot. If you don't like the way a room is run then go start your own. It's that simple and it is what I do.

You also have the option to vote out the host if you don't like their hosting. If enough people vote he/she is gone.

Having been both a host and a user I think that anyone can and should be able to rank a host, not just other hosts. Just because someone has hosted a race does not make them any more or less capable of rating a host than anyone else.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Anyone who hosts deserves credit. Furthermore nobody has the right to judge a host but someone that hosts a certain amount hours per month. Who better to rate a host than another host?

Hosts put up with a lot of crap and they are the ones that sacrifice when someone acts like an idiot. If you don't like the way a room is run then go start your own. It's that simple and it is what I do.

You also have the option to vote out the host if you don't like their hosting. If enough people vote he/she is gone.

Edit: My post is not directed at anyone in this thread. It is directed at those that tell the host how to run the room when they have never hosted or back out when they inherit the room.

No, anyone who hosts does not deserve credit. Can't tell you how many times I've been in a room and watched the original host disappear and very often one of the following happens.

1. New host is unaware they are host, so they do nothing.
2. New host immediately changes all the settings, allowing RS tires in a street tire room, turning SRF on etc...
3. New host leaves the room settings as is, eg. "Street Only" then hops into a race car.

The only hosts I've seen put up with any crap are the bad ones. The indecisive ones, the ones who listen to people whine and complain instead of just booting them. Good hosts are golden and deserve all the credit they can get. The bad ones need to be identified so we can avoid their rooms as best as possible. An empty room is good motivation to do a better job as host.

 

[bs13]

Having been both a host and a user I think that anyone can and should be able to rank a host, not just other hosts. Just because someone has hosted a race does not make them any more or less capable of rating a host than anyone else.

I just don't want to see myself and other good hosts getting penalyzed by the dude telling the host to go or start the race, the guy who can't read English or the guy that thinks we should only race with American drivers. Should their votes count as much as an experienced hosts?

No, anyone who hosts does not deserve credit. Can't tell you how many times I've been in a room and watched the original host disappear and very often one of the following happens.

1. New host is unaware they are host, so they do nothing.
2. New host immediately changes all the settings, allowing RS tires in a street tire room, turning SRF on etc...
3. New host leaves the room settings as is, eg. "Street Only" then hops into a race car.

The only hosts I've seen put up with any crap are the bad ones. The indecisive ones, the ones who listen to people whine and complain instead of just booting them. Good hosts are golden and deserve all the credit they can get. The bad ones need to be identified so we can avoid their rooms as best as possible. An empty room is good motivation to do a better job as host.

You want exclusivity and it's not going to happen on a console.
For points 1, 2 and 3 you can vote the host out or leave the room and start your own.

 

[Johnnypenso]

I just don't want to see myself and other good hosts getting penalyzed by the dude telling the host to go or start the race, the guy who can't read English or the guy that thinks we should only race with American drivers. Should their votes count as much as an experienced hosts?

You want exclusivity and it's not going to happen on a console.
For points 1, 2 and 3 you can vote the host out or leave the room and start your own.

Anyone who hosts has to put up with unruly drivers, people who don't speak english etc. It's no more likely to happen to you than to anyone else and since everyone would be affected the same, it's not really relevant. If you are starting races at regular intervals and someone is yelling for you to start the race faster, you can eject them from the room. If you aren't starting them at regular intervals and not communicating with the drivers as to why, then you should listen to the feedback and do something about it.

Voting the host out rarely works in my experience. Too few people are paying attention, many don't even understand what you are saying. Starting my own room is an option, but it's time consuming and most players are time limited. If you want to encourage people with limited time, which I think is most people, you want to give them ways to get online fast, with reasonable confidence they'll find a place that suits their racing goals, have a few races, and then leave. Having a host rating system is one way to do that, along with other thinks like a driver ranking system, matching etc.

 

[HBR-Roadhog]

I just don't want to see myself and other good hosts getting penalyzed by the dude telling the host to go or start the race, the guy who can't read English or the guy that thinks we should only race with American drivers. Should their votes count as much as an experienced hosts?

Yes everyones vote should count the same, just because you have hosted doesn't make you any better than anyone else and the good hosts are not as likely to enter your room as they may very well be hosting their own instead.

Also there is nothing to stop those same people you mention from hosting a few races and being considered a host anyway and if it requires you attain a certain host ranking to vote no one would ever get to the rank as no one could vote for them.

Sure you will sometimes get players who will vote for or against you unfairly but that is the nature of online gaming in the end it still comes out the right way.

 

[Ills1999]

I just don't want to see myself and other good hosts getting penalyzed by the dude telling the host to go or start the race, the guy who can't read English or the guy that thinks we should only race with American drivers. Should their votes count as much as an experienced hosts?


You want exclusivity and it's not going to happen on a console.
For points 1, 2 and 3 you can vote the host out or leave the room and start your own.

If everyone followed your advice, there'd be even MORE poorly hosted rooms and a MORE DIFFICULT time slogging through all the crap rooms looking for a decent one.

A host rating system doesn't mean people are telling hosts how to host a room.

A host rating system means people are telling other racers about a crappy waste of time poorly hosted room.

For that matter, suppose a friend of yours is a person whom you like to have as a host and enjoy his rooms, there is nothing proposed PREVENTING you from participating in a lame room.

Heck, maybe lame rooms are your thing. Maybe you like wasting time with a bunch of people doing donuts in the infield I dunno. A rating system seems like a great way to find that too.

 

[bs13]

Voting negatively against my hosting skills will not make me try to be a better host. It will make me less likely to host period. I'm sure I'm not alone.

What we need is more hosts and a system that encourages more hosts. More people would host if they didn't have to deal with backwards drivers. There should be room options that automatically boots someone stopping on the track for more than 5 seconds or who goes backwards for 3 seconds. The host should also be able to pause the race and have the option to boot a user on or off the track without quitting the race.

Hosting feels like babysitting sometimes and I'm not the type to boot for petty reasons. This probably makes me a bad host in some people eyes but in the end I know I'm doing the right thing and being fair. I've also made a lot of foreign friends that I wouldn't have if I discriminated against those with different flags and languages.

 

[HBR-Roadhog]

Pausing the race would be a horrible thing to do, Imagine being one of the poor users in the lobby 1/2 into a hard corner and suddenly the game pauses then a few seconds later starts up again while you are still in that corner, could be really bad.

Definitely not a feature that should be added in online racing.

Yes if given the option some people will vote negatively against you but if you are a good host more will vote for you and you will have a good rating. It really is that simple.

So don;t worry about it, host a good lobby and you will get a good rating and people will come host a bad lobby and you will not get a good rating and probably not have many people joining.

 

[bs13]

Pausing the race would be a horrible thing to do, Imagine being one of the poor users in the lobby 1/2 into a hard corner and suddenly the game pauses then a few seconds later starts up again while you are still in that corner, could be really bad.

I meant just for the host to pause his race like you would if you were changing audio or visual settings (gauges, maps, etc.). Everyone would continue racing but you would fall back. It's not ideal but it beats backing out of the race completely.

Now that I think about it pausing the game doesn't seem that bad in my eyes. There could be a brief countdown to pause and a countdown to restart racing to make the transition easier. I would have no problem with this if it means the host can do his job and still be able to race in his/her own room. I'm a firm believer that one bad apple shouldn't ruin an experience for one or all people. The bad apple should get what he deserves without anyone else being penalized including the host.

 

[Chrunch Houston]

I am afraid I am going to repeat myself here.

I don’t think the drivers should be called upon to vote. Let the numbers rate the host, they do not lie.

If a host’s room fills up every night, and drivers stay there for a long time, it means the room has a good host. There is no need to ask the drivers a thing. They were having fun.

If the room has people that come but don’t stay long that would indicate a lesser host. There is no need to ask them a thing. They were not having fun.

Sure some people might join a good room and not stay long, and some people might join a bad room and stay all night. But in the end the facts will come out in the statistics.

More important than the host, however, is the group of regulars that are in the room. A room with a bunch of great drivers that know each other and love racing together is contagious. A new comer can’t help, but have a good time, and he will stay longer. Hell, he may even come around the next night, or the next weekend. This is also why I believe a host’s biggest tool is his friend’s list.

 

[eran0004]

I am afraid I am going to repeat myself here.

I don’t think the drivers should be called upon to vote. Let the numbers rate the host, they do not lie.

If a host’s room fills up every night, and drivers stay there for a long time, it means the room has a good host. There is no need to ask the drivers a thing. They were having fun.

If the room has people that come but don’t stay long that would indicate a lesser host. There is no need to ask them a thing. They were not having fun.

Sure some people might join a good room and not stay long, and some people might join a bad room and stay all night. But in the end the facts will come out in the statistics.

More important than the host, however, is the group of regulars that are in the room. A room with a bunch of great drivers that know each other and love racing together is contagious. A new comer can’t help, but have a good time, and he will stay longer. Hell, he may even come around the next night, or the next weekend. This is also why I believe a host’s biggest tool is his friend’s list.

It doesn't have to be a good host, it could just be a popular track/car combo. There are lobbies where most people stay for hours and the host is not even there. A crowded room with lots of good drivers is probably more important for making people stay a long time than the way the host manages the lobby.

A good host can also host lobbies with car/track combos that are not very popular, attracting only a few players, but is managed in an excellent way by the host.

So the numbers can tell you how popular the lobby is, but it doesn't tell the whole truth about how good the host is.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Voting negatively against my hosting skills will not make me try to be a better host. It will make me less likely to host period. I'm sure I'm not alone.

What we need is more hosts and a system that encourages more hosts. More people would host if they didn't have to deal with backwards drivers. There should be room options that automatically boots someone stopping on the track for more than 5 seconds or who goes backwards for 3 seconds. The host should also be able to pause the race and have the option to boot a user on or off the track without quitting the race.

Hosting feels like babysitting sometimes and I'm not the type to boot for petty reasons. This probably makes me a bad host in some people eyes but in the end I know I'm doing the right thing and being fair. I've also made a lot of foreign friends that I wouldn't have if I discriminated against those with different flags and languages.

As mentioned above, there are plenty of ways those things you mentioned could be abused. Given the complaints you constantly see about hosts kicking people for no reason after a race, some will surely pause races just before they finish when people are in second place and boot them. It would only take a handful of people doing that to have a seriously negative effect on Open Lobby participation.

I don't get the last part about flags and languages. What does that have to do with hosting?

I am afraid I am going to repeat myself here.

I don’t think the drivers should be called upon to vote. Let the numbers rate the host, they do not lie.

If a host’s room fills up every night, and drivers stay there for a long time, it means the room has a good host. There is no need to ask the drivers a thing. They were having fun.

If the room has people that come but don’t stay long that would indicate a lesser host. There is no need to ask them a thing. They were not having fun.

Sure some people might join a good room and not stay long, and some people might join a bad room and stay all night. But in the end the facts will come out in the statistics.

More important than the host, however, is the group of regulars that are in the room. A room with a bunch of great drivers that know each other and love racing together is contagious. A new comer can’t help, but have a good time, and he will stay longer. Hell, he may even come around the next night, or the next weekend. This is also why I believe a host’s biggest tool is his friend’s list.

This tool is already available to some extent. One can already see how full a room is and join the busy ones and avoid the empty ones and it doesn't seem to be doing much good. As mentioned above, sheer volume doesn't make a good host. I've joined plenty of rooms that were busy with terrible hosts because they had the right combination I was looking for. It's just not an accurate enough number.

 

[VBR]

Not sure about this idea, it could be used or abused, making the usefulness of it questionable. What I would like to do is be able to bookmark good hosts in game, & then search for online rooms based on that list. That way, we could find out if any of our bookmarked hosts are online & running a room at any given time.

It might be a good idea to start a thread like that here on GT Planet in the Spot Races forum (& get it stickied), we could add good hosts with info on what type of rooms they run & when. Interested people could then send them a friend request, or look out for their PSN ID's/room names when browsing the online lobbies.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Not sure about this idea, it could be used or abused, making the usefulness of it questionable. What I would like to do is be able to bookmark good hosts in game, & then search for online rooms based on that list. That way, we could find out if any of our bookmarked hosts are online & running a room at any given time.

It might be a good idea to start a thread like that here on GT Planet in the Spot Races forum, we could add good hosts with info on what type of rooms they run & when. Interested people could then send them a friend request, or look out for their PSN ID's/room names when browsing the online lobbies.

Being able to bookmark good hosts and drivers would be a valuable tool. Being able to recognize better drivers especially without having to add them to a very limited friends list would be great.

Tracking good hosts on GTP would be helpful but GTP only represents a tiny portion of gamers in GT5 so I'm not sure how helpful that would be. It'll help some perhaps but not as much as I'd like.

 

[VBR]

Being able to bookmark good hosts and drivers would be a valuable tool. Being able to recognize better drivers especially without having to add them to a very limited friends list would be great.

Imagine if the online lobby filter search in GT6 had a "Bookmarked Hosts" option, & it found all good hosts you'd added to your list that were currently online.

Also, I'd like it if we could block an infinite number of bad drivers PSN ID's in-game. The PS3's blocked list gets full up after adding just over 50 names, mines already full to the brim. That way, we could keep out all unwanted drivers, making the lobbies better & better over time.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Imagine if the online lobby filter search in GT6 had a "Bookmarked Hosts" option, & it found all good hosts you'd added to your list that were currently online.

Also, I'd like it if we could block an infinite number of bad drivers PSN ID's in-game. The PS3's blocked list gets full up after adding just over 50 names, mines already full to the brim. That way, we could keep out all unwanted drivers, making the lobbies better & better over time.

Another tool that hosts could use would be a temporary ban. If someone is driving poorly but not wrecklessly, you could give them a 24 hour ban. Upon trying to re-enter the room on another day a message would pop-up for you and them that they'd been previously banned for 24 hours. You'd keep a closer eye on them and they'd be on their toes. If they drive poorly again, you still have the option of a 24 hour ban or permanent ban at any time.

Given the scope and longevity of the game, 50 is much too low a number for the block list for sure.