|
On November 11 2011 05:57 DoctorHelvetica wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2011 05:50 chaoser wrote:On November 11 2011 05:49 DoctorHelvetica wrote:
I'm banned for requesting a replacement in Personality Mafia? That's hardly fair. Can I be removed please?
edit - and what is the (x2) for I think you were banned for asking for a replacement in LotR In the game thread I signed up for I was told it was Personality Mafia. I don't think it's fair to ban a player for 3 games because something came up in their personal life and they contacted a mod about a replacement. Banning is about preventing players from leaving games for no reason, not voting, not participating, cheating, etc. What happened was unfortunate for the game, but there is no reason to reprimand me for it. That's ridiculous.
It is banworthy if it becomes a problem for the host. Replacing and leaving right when the game started seems to have caused the host in Personality Mafia to have to look for 4 replacement players, right when the game began. This isn´t an isolated incident either, other players do the same, get a role PM then leave the game, some appear to make a habit of it even. It´s unfortunate but it´s a big problem, and until people take the games seriously, and only sign up when they have time to invest in a game, then hosts have to ban for this kind of behavior. Unfortunately it´s hard to distinguish between those with a legitimate reason and those who do it for fun, causing the host more work just for a piece of inside information on the games they spectate.
EDIT: Qatol explained this particular case, above is just how I view the problem, and why it is a problem.
|
Bah you reply too fast, Forumite. I hadn't finished composing my post yet! Too many posts to quote!
|
On November 11 2011 06:33 Qatol wrote:
Bah you reply too fast, Forumite. I hadn't finished composing my post yet! Too many posts to quote!
I know, I´m like Zoooooom, Reply!
From a players perspective, people leaving the game is never good, either we loose (most of the time) a Townies, or a player gets much, much harder to read. Getting a replacement is better, but if it takes a whole day for the new player to show up then it gets even harder to get a read. Also which solution is used is apparently random, either the host finds a replacement, or settle for killing the role and moving on if there´s no replacements left waiting/to be found. It´s this bad from the players point of view, so it must be many times tougher for the host who has to fix everything. If I ever host a game then I´ll probably just kill anyone dropping off, and compensate with extra nightkills or missed nightkills for Scum to make up for part of the loss of players.
|
United States22154 Posts
On November 11 2011 06:50 Forumite wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2011 06:33 Qatol wrote:
Bah you reply too fast, Forumite. I hadn't finished composing my post yet! Too many posts to quote! I know, I´m like Zoooooom, Reply! From a players perspective, people leaving the game is never good, either we loose (most of the time) a Townies, or a player gets much, much harder to read. Getting a replacement is better, but if it takes a whole day for the new player to show up then it gets even harder to get a read. Also which solution is used is apparently random, either the host finds a replacement, or settle for killing the role and moving on if there´s no replacements left waiting/to be found. It´s this bad from the players point of view, so it must be many times tougher for the host who has to fix everything. If I ever host a game then I´ll probably just kill anyone dropping off, and compensate with extra nightkills or missed nightkills for Scum to make up for part of the loss of players.
But that punishes scum unfairly, say there are three modkills, and you take away all of the scums KP to make for it, now the town basically gets a free day in exchange for three players who weren't contributing anything.
Replacements/modkills suck, but I think the way we handle it is the best way to do it.
|
On November 11 2011 06:54 GMarshal wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2011 06:50 Forumite wrote:On November 11 2011 06:33 Qatol wrote:
Bah you reply too fast, Forumite. I hadn't finished composing my post yet! Too many posts to quote! I know, I´m like Zoooooom, Reply! From a players perspective, people leaving the game is never good, either we loose (most of the time) a Townies, or a player gets much, much harder to read. Getting a replacement is better, but if it takes a whole day for the new player to show up then it gets even harder to get a read. Also which solution is used is apparently random, either the host finds a replacement, or settle for killing the role and moving on if there´s no replacements left waiting/to be found. It´s this bad from the players point of view, so it must be many times tougher for the host who has to fix everything. If I ever host a game then I´ll probably just kill anyone dropping off, and compensate with extra nightkills or missed nightkills for Scum to make up for part of the loss of players. But that punishes scum unfairly, say there are three modkills, and you take away all of the scums KP to make for it, now the town basically gets a free day in exchange for three players who weren't contributing anything. Replacements/modkills suck, but I think the way we handle it is the best way to do it.
Weakening scum kp at say 2:1, assuming only townies die, or similar seems more fair to me.
|
Here's an idea:
Either let hosts decide on rules to deal with inactive players (or those who request replacement) and modkills, or implement some sort of standard subforum-wide that deals with warnings and bans related to activity.
Or, some hybrid of the two.
The way I imagine a possible system is this:
If it is your first offense, a modkill/replacement results in a warning.
If you provide a good reason for being replaced, and are successfully replaced, you receive a warning, but no ban. You help the host find your replacement if that's what it takes.
If you receive two warnings, it becomes a single game ban. Warnings could expire after a set number of games played, or something, or just make it so they never expire.
A third warning is again just a warning, but a fourth would be up to two bans, and then up to three for six warnings.
if you get modkilled, it's a ban. The number of modkills you've received in the past should basically determine how many games you're banned for. Make it consistent and fair, perhaps one ban per game modkilled.
|
On November 11 2011 06:54 GMarshal wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2011 06:50 Forumite wrote:On November 11 2011 06:33 Qatol wrote:
Bah you reply too fast, Forumite. I hadn't finished composing my post yet! Too many posts to quote! I know, I´m like Zoooooom, Reply! From a players perspective, people leaving the game is never good, either we loose (most of the time) a Townies, or a player gets much, much harder to read. Getting a replacement is better, but if it takes a whole day for the new player to show up then it gets even harder to get a read. Also which solution is used is apparently random, either the host finds a replacement, or settle for killing the role and moving on if there´s no replacements left waiting/to be found. It´s this bad from the players point of view, so it must be many times tougher for the host who has to fix everything. If I ever host a game then I´ll probably just kill anyone dropping off, and compensate with extra nightkills or missed nightkills for Scum to make up for part of the loss of players. But that punishes scum unfairly, say there are three modkills, and you take away all of the scums KP to make for it, now the town basically gets a free day in exchange for three players who weren't contributing anything. Replacements/modkills suck, but I think the way we handle it is the best way to do it.
What scum would loose from this is the ability to choose the kills, so it should probably not be a 1-1 deal, rather every 2 modkills take away a nightkill. If 3 die, and scum have 3 KP, then they loose a nightkill and are left with 2 kills for the night. One less nightkill, which is a slight compensation to Town for the 3 members they lost.
EDIT: Ninja'd 
|
I've always been highly active in games I have the time for. I don't think my inactivity has ever been a problem. I don't remember dropping out of any games besides LotR and LotR was the only one I was modkilled for. Not because I was inactive, but because I couldn't continue to play.
A 3 game ban is just too much. Kills mafia for me. Games are so rare and unpopulated now I'm not gonna wait and be active in sitting out of games on the off chance that I feel like playing a game a month from now.
|
On November 11 2011 07:22 wherebugsgo wrote:
Here's an idea:
Either let hosts decide on rules to deal with inactive players (or those who request replacement) and modkills, or implement some sort of standard subforum-wide that deals with warnings and bans related to activity.
Or, some hybrid of the two.
The way I imagine a possible system is this:
If it is your first offense, a modkill/replacement results in a warning.
If you provide a good reason for being replaced, and are successfully replaced, you receive a warning, but no ban. You help the host find your replacement if that's what it takes.
If you receive two warnings, it becomes a single game ban. Warnings could expire after a set number of games played, or something, or just make it so they never expire.
A third warning is again just a warning, but a fourth would be up to two bans, and then up to three for six warnings.
if you get modkilled, it's a ban. The number of modkills you've received in the past should basically determine how many games you're banned for. Make it consistent and fair, perhaps one ban per game modkilled.
I wasn't modkilled for breaking the rules, I was modkilled for requesting a replacement. In fact if the host had communicated with me that it was impossible for him I may have found a way to stay in the game. That's not the same as a player who didn't vote or cheated and I'm annoyed I'm getting the same treatment.
|
Well even people who can't play from a certain point on are a problem.
I think the issue in this forum isn't occasional modkills or replacements. It's players who get repeatedly modkilled or replaced that cause problems. it also multiplies the amount of work the hosts need to do.
I felt really bad for GM, for example, cause he had to deal with 3+ modkills in both XLIV and in his newbie game.
IMO modkills and replacements should be rare and exceptional things, but there's always at least one person every game who gets modkilled or replaced. A lot of the time they're people who've had a history of such behavior.
|
I had to do it twice in very close succession. I've never had a precedence of replacements or modkills and my history as a player shows I'm usually one of the if not usually the most active player in a game. I'm done arguing about it but I'm not sitting out another 3 games when mafia is dying anyway. I guess I'm just done with this forum then.
|
I thought it was two games?
And I don't see how that's unfair at all. Mafia is a time commitment.
I think a one game ban for two modkills is fair. Perhaps two is too much. But ragequitting the forum over that is a little immature, IMO.
|
On November 11 2011 07:36 wherebugsgo wrote:
I thought it was two games?
And I don't see how that's unfair at all. Mafia is a time commitment.
I think a one game ban for two modkills is fair. Perhaps two is too much. But ragequitting the forum over that is a little immature, IMO.
I'm not ragequitting. I wanted to play one game this month and had no intentions of playing a lot after that and knowing how long it takes for games to get setup and finish, I'm not gonna sit out 3 games just to play 1 sometime down the road. I'm not raging.
I was modkilled once in LotR after asking to be replaced. I wasn't modkilled in personality mafia. Unless there is a second modkill I was never made aware of? And it isn't a one game ban it's a three game ban. If a replacement = a modkill now that's just ridiculous moderating.
|
On November 11 2011 07:39 DoctorHelvetica wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2011 07:36 wherebugsgo wrote:
I thought it was two games?
And I don't see how that's unfair at all. Mafia is a time commitment.
I think a one game ban for two modkills is fair. Perhaps two is too much. But ragequitting the forum over that is a little immature, IMO. I'm not ragequitting. I wanted to play one game this month and had no intentions of playing a lot after that and knowing how long it takes for games to get setup and finish, I'm not gonna sit out 3 games just to play 1 sometime down the road. I'm not raging. I was modkilled once in LotR after asking to be replaced. I wasn't modkilled in personality mafia. Unless there is a second modkill I was never made aware of? And it isn't a one game ban it's a three game ban. If a replacement = a modkill now that's just ridiculous moderating.
Right, I think Incog (or whoever hosted personality) said that you requested a replacement on day 1 or something.
Since I'm not fully aware of your situation I can't really comment on it any further, that's not fair to you or anyone else. However, it's my opinion that modkills and replacements should be very rare occurrences, and that the forum should develop a standard by which replacements and modkills should be dealt with.
Personally I think the onus is on the player to help find the host a replacement, and in a first-offense issue the player receives a warning. If replaced a second time the warning turns into a ban, likewise with a modkill.
To ensure these should be rare occurrences, I'd say that warnings should never expire (but some people might find that bad for people who play often) or expire after a set number of games. (that avoids the time issue, where a player gets modkilled, comes back 3 months later when his warning has expired and gets modkilled again, but doesn't get banned)
In my opinion it's clearly an issue the forum needs to deal with, and it's not something that can be easily solved that will make everyone happy, but something needs to be done IMO.
The activity level of the forum at large is a different issue and that'll hopefully be remedied soon with the recruitment stuff that's going to be going on.Hopefully more activity (and perhaps an overall skill increase?) will encourage more players, old and new alike, to play.
|
On November 11 2011 07:27 DoctorHelvetica wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2011 07:22 wherebugsgo wrote:
Here's an idea:
Either let hosts decide on rules to deal with inactive players (or those who request replacement) and modkills, or implement some sort of standard subforum-wide that deals with warnings and bans related to activity.
Or, some hybrid of the two.
The way I imagine a possible system is this:
If it is your first offense, a modkill/replacement results in a warning.
If you provide a good reason for being replaced, and are successfully replaced, you receive a warning, but no ban. You help the host find your replacement if that's what it takes.
If you receive two warnings, it becomes a single game ban. Warnings could expire after a set number of games played, or something, or just make it so they never expire.
A third warning is again just a warning, but a fourth would be up to two bans, and then up to three for six warnings.
if you get modkilled, it's a ban. The number of modkills you've received in the past should basically determine how many games you're banned for. Make it consistent and fair, perhaps one ban per game modkilled.
I wasn't modkilled for breaking the rules, I was modkilled for requesting a replacement. In fact if the host had communicated with me that it was impossible for him I may have found a way to stay in the game. That's not the same as a player who didn't vote or cheated and I'm annoyed I'm getting the same treatment.
To be fair the modkill was based around HOW the replacement was asked for. A lot of players asked in the thread and it was framed in a "I'm sorry town, I gotta get replaced" which made it seem like the players being replaced were townies which was kind of like using an outside the game mechanic (replacement) in a weird way. Replacements should be solely handled via PMs to hosts and there shouldn't be a mention of it in thread
|
United States22154 Posts
On November 11 2011 07:50 chaoser wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2011 07:27 DoctorHelvetica wrote:On November 11 2011 07:22 wherebugsgo wrote:
Here's an idea:
Either let hosts decide on rules to deal with inactive players (or those who request replacement) and modkills, or implement some sort of standard subforum-wide that deals with warnings and bans related to activity.
Or, some hybrid of the two.
The way I imagine a possible system is this:
If it is your first offense, a modkill/replacement results in a warning.
If you provide a good reason for being replaced, and are successfully replaced, you receive a warning, but no ban. You help the host find your replacement if that's what it takes.
If you receive two warnings, it becomes a single game ban. Warnings could expire after a set number of games played, or something, or just make it so they never expire.
A third warning is again just a warning, but a fourth would be up to two bans, and then up to three for six warnings.
if you get modkilled, it's a ban. The number of modkills you've received in the past should basically determine how many games you're banned for. Make it consistent and fair, perhaps one ban per game modkilled.
I wasn't modkilled for breaking the rules, I was modkilled for requesting a replacement. In fact if the host had communicated with me that it was impossible for him I may have found a way to stay in the game. That's not the same as a player who didn't vote or cheated and I'm annoyed I'm getting the same treatment. To be fair the modkill was based around HOW the replacement was asked for. A lot of players asked in the thread and it was framed in a "I'm sorry town, I gotta get replaced" which made it seem like the players being replaced were townies which was kind of like using an outside the game mechanic (replacement) in a weird way. Replacements should be solely handled via PMs to hosts and there shouldn't be a mention of it in thread
wait, what? How do I not remember any of this?
I could have sworn the issue was requesting replacement day 1, with no good reason given, but I could be wrong...
Either way if Dr.H has a good reason why he had to replace out, I wouldn't be adverse to rescinding the ban.
|
On November 11 2011 07:53 GMarshal wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2011 07:50 chaoser wrote:On November 11 2011 07:27 DoctorHelvetica wrote:On November 11 2011 07:22 wherebugsgo wrote:
Here's an idea:
Either let hosts decide on rules to deal with inactive players (or those who request replacement) and modkills, or implement some sort of standard subforum-wide that deals with warnings and bans related to activity.
Or, some hybrid of the two.
The way I imagine a possible system is this:
If it is your first offense, a modkill/replacement results in a warning.
If you provide a good reason for being replaced, and are successfully replaced, you receive a warning, but no ban. You help the host find your replacement if that's what it takes.
If you receive two warnings, it becomes a single game ban. Warnings could expire after a set number of games played, or something, or just make it so they never expire.
A third warning is again just a warning, but a fourth would be up to two bans, and then up to three for six warnings.
if you get modkilled, it's a ban. The number of modkills you've received in the past should basically determine how many games you're banned for. Make it consistent and fair, perhaps one ban per game modkilled.
I wasn't modkilled for breaking the rules, I was modkilled for requesting a replacement. In fact if the host had communicated with me that it was impossible for him I may have found a way to stay in the game. That's not the same as a player who didn't vote or cheated and I'm annoyed I'm getting the same treatment. To be fair the modkill was based around HOW the replacement was asked for. A lot of players asked in the thread and it was framed in a "I'm sorry town, I gotta get replaced" which made it seem like the players being replaced were townies which was kind of like using an outside the game mechanic (replacement) in a weird way. Replacements should be solely handled via PMs to hosts and there shouldn't be a mention of it in thread wait, what? How do I not remember any of this? I could have sworn the issue was requesting replacement day 1, with no good reason given, but I could be wrong... Either way if Dr.H has a good reason why he had to replace out, I wouldn't be adverse to rescinding the ban.
I think he's talking about LoTR.
Also, I completely agree with chaoser on the public replacement thing. It's incredibly frustrating to deal with as town when someone asks for replacement at a bad time and then you can't do anything about it.
For example, in XLV when Dropbear requested replacement Curu and I thought he was more town because he was requesting replacement for not being able to play but then at the same time he was PMing us and giving us reads. Turns out he was scum and the fact that he was requesting replacement threw us off.
The lesson might be that replacements aren't indicative of alignment, but honestly something needs to be done about that.
I think the outside-of-game administrative stuff should be handled strictly. If a player keeps repeating that he is requesting replacement (I even asked Kurumi in that game, if that was true, and there was no host response IIRC) in the thread then what is town supposed to do? Take the risk at lynching them?
|
My reason for coming out of LotR is highly personal and I refuse to discuss it. Personality Mafia came at a bad time and my schoolwork load increased really unexpectedly. I kind of waned with activity near the end of the last mafia game and didn't want to half ass that game so I asked for a replacement. It was Day1 and I was successfully replaced. I wasn't modkilled in that game. I was, however, modkilled in LotR mafia when I had a much better reason to leave.
I didn't ask for a modkill or replacement in the thread. I simply informed people that I was asking for one/leaving the thread. I think that's fair and courteous? In both cases I PM'd the moderator. I don't understand why that is even being discussed. I'm very confused as to whether my ban is related to Personality or LotR. Why is it 2x? I was replaced in Personality not modkilled. If 1 modkill over a SINGLE replacement with a good reason in one game is enough to warrant a 3 game ban then maybe the Mafia moderators should take a good hard look at the ban system because that is absurd
|
On November 11 2011 08:07 DoctorHelvetica wrote:
I didn't ask for a modkill or replacement in the thread. I simply informed people that I was asking for one/leaving the thread. I think that's fair and courteous? In both cases I PM'd the moderator. I don't understand why that is even being discussed. I'm very confused as to whether my ban is related to Personality or LotR. Why is it 2x? I was replaced in Personality not modkilled. If 1 modkill over a SINGLE replacement with a good reason in one game is enough to warrant a 3 game ban then maybe the Mafia moderators should take a good hard look at the ban system because that is absurd
bolded had nothing to do with you.
|
United States2186 Posts
I'm fine with giving Dr.H some leeway as he has a good history of being a very committed and active player. However players asking for day 1 replacements was a pretty big problem for awhile and shouldn't be treated lightly in general. Treating on a case-by-case basis is fine though because sometimes things just come up.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
