Games ending before they begin

Kind of, but it's just providing additional info that people can search out and interpret if they want (which some of your suggestions also are). Badges are basically GP telling people who they should play with (and therefore also who they shouldn't).
We're getting into some ethics discussions here xD Is utilitarianism really the only way to view this issue ;)
If when I signed up for GP, it had told me to install an app on my phone first, I would not have bothered. And if it had asked me to put in a phone number, I would have used one of those free online services where you get a one time use phone number to receive a message to for confirmation. Unless I already know this hobby/site is something I want to stick with long-term, those obstacles would be enough to make me reconsider.

2FA certainly isn't a full answer, though I'd argue it's not as easy to get a dummy number. Still doable, but none the less, just an idea to throw out there.

I do think community will always be the #1 answer, question just becomes what else we can use.

But it would make it harder for people to use sockpuppets to masquerade as different people.

Would I have signed up to look around if it was 2FA? I don’t know. I doubt it.

Conversely, if someone signs up and gets ghosted by a sock puppet GM after working hard on character creation, how likely are they to stick around? I doubt I would have given this site a second look if that had happened to me.

Absolutely agree. It's crummy we even need to have this discussion. Thanks for being thoughtful in your approach to finding solutions.

I'd be more inclined to use 2FA once I get a feel for the site, but I'm much less likely to sign up in the first place if I have to give out too much info.

That's a thought. What if 2FA is optional to create an account but required for certain options, like creating or GMing games? That way new users can still join and check things out if they're skittish, but sets a standard that asking people to invest time and effort in your game requires a little more trust.

If I were new to the site, I would've been deterred if I had to give my phone number. In general, I don't give my phone number out on the internet unless it's important.

I prefer 2FA for things that are of higher importance, like banking. When you weigh the cost and benefit of providing a phone number to a website, I generally think that whatever 2FA is supposed to protect me from should be more important than my phone number. I don't really see myself using 2FA for an entertainment site like GP.

Personally, I am not a fan of any ranking systems as it will always create a divide and some form of competition. I also noticed that in this discussion GMs and players are perceived as two different people, however, GM of one game can be and almost always is a player in another, so there would have to be two ratings: GM rating and Player rating. I personally would have a low rating on both as I GM only one game and currently am playing in three games.

I haven't read the already created guidelines in a while but I think that anything beyond that will be circumvented and will create more hurdles to genuine GMs and players. The best thing I think we can do is to make sure that new members are informed about possible ghosting from both players and GMs and that it should not spoil the impression of the platform.

Additional technical measures will make it harder for a more malicious intended user to do their nefarious deeds, but it will also make it harder for a new user to stick around. So, after jumping through all the hoops that we will set up to prevent ghosting, new player still gets ghosted, they will not try again.

As for 2FA, I change my phone numbers fairly often so it would be very inconvenient for me. I wouldn't really agree on submitting any info to a website I am not familiar with and I think I am not the only one.

EDIT: Entire discussion about my points happened as I was typing

That makes a ton of sense. Good point. Description is a better way than suggestion.

We could recommend that GMs post a link to a public game that they've run before, so that new players have an idea of their style/engagement/ruling etc. Seeing an actual game is way better than any stats.

And then provide the following recommendation to new players:

"As a new player, we'd recommend picking a game with a GM who posts a public "reference" game that you can browse through to see if their style/engagement/stats is reliable and the sort of game you'd be interested in.

We also welcome and encourage you to join games by new GMs too in order to support them, but be aware that GMing is challenging and for this reason many games stop prematurely. If this happens, please don't assume this is the norm. Instead, try joining a game by a GM with a public "reference" game that looks good to you.

We encourage experienced members to support the community by joining games run by new GMs to give them a chance to build a public record."

We could do oddtrail’s endorsements idea with no code changes. Create a forum called "endorsements" - users can add threads for people they endorse. Put a link to your endorsement thread in your profile.

I’d happily write endorsements for a bunch of people now.

I like this. It seems like a community based solution to a community problem.

I think I prefer something that keeps GP as close to as it is currently now. Maybe add the # of posts metrics, and a short note to new players about the usage of this metric in avoiding ghosts. I find this community is a lot better than most, so I feel that we should be able to handle these things if we're given enough information to do so.

Do people run many public games?

I like the endorsements idea too and would work well in combo with the public "reference" game. Game Ads could include a link to a public "reference" game and/or endorsement posts. Endorsements might be good for an established member who has never GMed before.

No. Relatively few.

I like this idea and I will probably do that for the next game I'll advertise. I don't think it works for everyone as not everyone might want to make their games public and it can't be expected of everyone. but it's an idea to give some reassurance.
I like this kind of disclaimer/suggestion (could also work with endorsement rather than public games, or both), I'm just not sure where to put it so that people read it. Maybe something short as an auto-reply to Interest Checks could work? But that might also be a bad idea, I don't know.
I think more people run public games than read them

I'd emphasize that there would be no requirement to post a reference game or endorsement. It would just be a suggestion particularly if you'd like to attract and support new members.

Most of my games are set to public 🤷‍♂️