EPTAlso my aim for the leniency has to do with how the culprit responds rather than how much it affects in game. For example Zealos was pretty lazy all game and in the end just afked and didn't care. But you/rasta/ggq were much different and thus i think a different punishment should be in order as the former I would not want to play with while the latter just made honest mistakes. Of course this can't be an obvious policy or everyone will just fake it and do it, but you see where I'm going.
TL Mafia Ban List - Page 145
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
Ver
United States2186 Posts
Also my aim for the leniency has to do with how the culprit responds rather than how much it affects in game. For example Zealos was pretty lazy all game and in the end just afked and didn't care. But you/rasta/ggq were much different and thus i think a different punishment should be in order as the former I would not want to play with while the latter just made honest mistakes. Of course this can't be an obvious policy or everyone will just fake it and do it, but you see where I'm going. | ||
|
marvellosity
United Kingdom36161 Posts
| ||
|
Meapak_Ziphh
United States6789 Posts
On the other hand I don't think kurumi should be punished either. I don't think he was griefing RoL, I think he just played a bad hunch and it blew up (figuratively and literally) in his face. No input on the others, those seem like things best decided between the hosts and the impacted players. | ||
|
Mattchew
United States5684 Posts
On August 01 2012 04:49 Protactinium wrote: Bureaucracy mafia ended so we can discuss that stuff now. Zealos 1 game ban. inactivity modkill, no debate. GGQ. 1 game ban, inactivity modkill. Hopefully he'll use this as motivation to pick up the slack in the future. Austinmcc/Rastaban. Warning or 1 game ban for trying to confirm roles via host pm's. Both were repentant and it doesn't appear to have been a devious exploitation of the rules, merely an easy to make oversight. They did perfectly fine otherwise. On the other hand Mig took a 1 game ban for it in PYP Interesting with the same circumstances and behavior just to dissuade others from doing it. I know a lot of people were angry at RoL for fake nuking kurumi and going afk but I don't think that deserves anything, considering a) he might have believed kurumi was town or b) he thought Kurumi's nuke was fake too and simply was messing with him as well or c) believed it was real and was so unmotivated at getting nuked before he even got back and posted that he didn't want to bother. On that subject, I'm considering a warning for Kurumi for griefing RoL (by nuking him to death 12 hours after the game starting, with RoL not having made a single post). I don't think it warrants a ban because outside of that Kurumi played fine and clearly cared about the game, but this felt really excessive and hard to support. I'd like to hear other's views on this. I would flip this completely In no way shape or form did RoL play to his win condition. While if Kurumi could have random'd his selection and was basically day vig'n a lurker. | ||
|
Ver
United States2186 Posts
On August 01 2012 05:27 Meapak_Ziphh wrote: I don't think RoL should be punished as I imagine it must be pretty annoying to open up a game and find out you're already dead. On the other hand I don't think kurumi should be punished either. I don't think he was griefing RoL, I think he just played a bad hunch and it blew up (figuratively and literally) in his face. No input on the others, those seem like things best decided between the hosts and the impacted players. I agree with the kurumi thing. That's why I didn't want a ban. But at the same time I don't think it's fair for players to be shot within 12 or so hours of the game starting if they haven't been able to post yet because there is literally no way to distinguish alignment. Of course if he lurked for the whole cycle or had posted something, it'd be totally different as then there would be real evidence. My goal is more to get this 'frowned upon' than an individual thing, as otherwise kurumi was fine. | ||
|
HiroPro
United States2624 Posts
| ||
|
iGrok
United States5142 Posts
| ||
|
Mattchew
United States5684 Posts
| ||
|
Qatol
United States3165 Posts
Regarding austin/rasta (this is my personal opinion only now), I think they should get whatever we give a first-time ban under this time-based system (which I still hate btw). Their actions were bad enough to modkill; they should be bad enough for a brief ban. Is anyone arguing that they didn't break the rules? | ||
|
Kurumi
Poland6130 Posts
On August 01 2012 05:38 HiroPro wrote: I don't think Kurumi deserves a warning. He had his reasons (general inactivity, a belief that this fit RoL's scum meta) and put in a lot of effort despite most people calling him confirmed scum. Hola hola, I wasn't doing any good for a cycle. If I was lynched D1, that point would be moot. Anyway it depends on what RoL thinks. | ||
|
layabout
United Kingdom2600 Posts
On August 01 2012 06:05 Qatol wrote: GMarshal and I already talked about some of this a bit. Nothing for Kurumi (just don't pull this kind of thing again). While his actions were irresponsible and potentially mean-hearted, they aren't really bannable or even warnable, at least not this time. Nothing for RoL either - I still think he thought Kurumi's nuke was fake. Also, Layabout should be getting a 3 week ban (as in no signing up for a game for 3 weeks) for Wiggles' game. Regarding austin/rasta (this is my personal opinion only now), I think they should get whatever we give a first-time ban under this time-based system (which I still hate btw). Their actions were bad enough to modkill, they should be bad enough for a brief ban. Is anyone arguing that they didn't break the rules? I didn't contest the ban because i was in Bureaucracy but i would like to contest it so as to leave with a clean record. Now when i was banned i was not sure if it was for the edit or for what i said to Acrofales. Since co-host Drazerk sent me this: From: Drazerk [ 24425 posts | Profile | Buddy | Report ] Subject: Re: TL Mafia LVI Date: 7/3/12 02:10 If you can find your own replacement before wiggles gets back ill try to replace you before he mod kills you (I'll fight it anyway I think losing any player to mod kills screws up balance too much). It happens to the best of us I recently told Opz to go die in a fire so I can't really say its wrong or anything. I assumed it was because of the editing. If that was the case then i did not expect a ban since casualman had edited and been let off with a warning. As for behaviour, well it wouldn't be tolerated elsewhere on the site but it has been in the mafia subforum. When therapist called somebody a dick nobody batted an eyelid: On April 11 2012 09:37 iGrok wrote: Agree with Bill Murray. I don't think any other hosts would have even warned him. It seems that the other players all had really thin skin, complained, and you reacted to that rather than to the act itself. Sometimes you have to be a bit aggressive in mafia, and this was on the tame end of that. On April 11 2012 13:07 Curu wrote: I see nothing warranting punishment for Therapist or even close to it. A lot of players (myself very much included) become much more vehement than that throughout a game of Mafia. On April 11 2012 17:35 syllogism wrote: I, too, see absolutely nothing that even warrants a warning What i did isn't much worse if perhaps a bit more graphic I posted once in frustration. I did not post with the intent to do anything malicious as far as the game was concerned. I posted because i realised that i was sick of TL mafia and sick of people screwing me over or making the worst play possible when i went to sleep. + Show Spoiler + eg, bang bang 2, hammer mini mafia, death factory 2 + Show Spoiler + At this point you may be wondering why i signed up for Bureaucracy Mafia afterwards, my reason was that i wanted to finish on a high note before leaving. I was also invited after being modkilled. Unfortunately once it started i wasn't enjoying it and i could not motivate myself to post as much as i would normally. I am sorry if i caused any offence to Acrofales. And as i said here i will not be playing again for a long time if at all. | ||
|
BloodyC0bbler
Canada7876 Posts
On August 01 2012 06:05 Qatol wrote: GMarshal and I already talked about some of this a bit. Nothing for Kurumi (just don't pull this kind of thing again). While his actions were irresponsible and potentially mean-hearted, they aren't really bannable or even warnable, at least not this time. Nothing for RoL either - I still think he thought Kurumi's nuke was fake. Also, Layabout should be getting a 3 week ban (as in no signing up for a game for 3 weeks) for Wiggles' game. Regarding austin/rasta (this is my personal opinion only now), I think they should get whatever we give a first-time ban under this time-based system (which I still hate btw). Their actions were bad enough to modkill; they should be bad enough for a brief ban. Is anyone arguing that they didn't break the rules? To my knowledge Kurumi did something that has been done in different variants of games for years. RoL and I are both guilty of day 1 "accusing" people of being scum and in one case forcing a host to remake a game due to player ragequit and myself winning the game via wincon while setting up mafia to rape 2-3 medics during day 1. As an easy example to remember. We have day 1 dts auto outing people hours into game thread, players abusing game mechanics to get wins, telling hosts what they can and can't do in their own games etc.... Nothing Kurumi did was mean hearted nor do I think irresponsible. Joe flips red often and lately is the most apathetic player as red. In this game he may have appeared and stepped up had he not been nuked so early but given the fact he has pulled the "blah is red" and forcing a host to remake their game I don't see harm or foul in it -_- as for rasta and austin, I'd let it slide. Game was basically over and neither of them seemed to actually attempt to ruin the game and both apologized profusely for their actions. Everyone has made mistakes. | ||
|
VisceraEyes
United States21171 Posts
People have to understand that this is NOT okay. While austin and rasta may not have known they were breaking the rules, why do you think that is? Because people do it in a lot of games and never see punishment for it. Some form of punitive measure should be taken imo, if for no other reason than to disuade action like that in future games. But because of the circumstances surrounding the offense (it was over already, pretty much) I don't think actual bans should be issued. Obviously if the same offense is repeated then further action should be taken. I think this is possibly worse than inactivity, and feel strongly about it. IMO all Role PMs should be public knowledge, excepting closed setups. No warning for Kurumi imo...we punished him in-thread. (  ) | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
On August 01 2012 07:57 VisceraEyes wrote: I knew. Only in the back of my head when I posted that, but I've read the rules and had that thought. I was going to post other PM-related things later in that cycle but held back after double checking rules to confirm that feeling.While austin and rasta may not have known they were breaking the rules, why do you think that is? Because people do it in a lot of games and never see punishment for it. | ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
rastaban
United States2294 Posts
As for myself I definitely broke the rules, and in retrospect it should have been obvious to me. I even searched the OP for "PM" first as I knew I was skirting the edges but sadly forgot that it was using the master list from another thread and those rules were not in the OP. I deserve a ban but if possible I would ask if it could start after the AOE mafia game, I have been waiting for it since WBG announced it a while back and as it is a special type of themed mafia possibly not run again I would hate to miss out. I would be willing to have my ban count inflated if need be. pretty please let me play in AOE mafia  | ||
|
iGrok
United States5142 Posts
| ||
|
VisceraEyes
United States21171 Posts
Just FYI | ||
|
GreYMisT
United States6736 Posts
On August 02 2012 00:02 iGrok wrote: We used to make dayvigs not able to shoot until day 2. maybe we should start doing that again. I know one player who would agree with this | ||
GMarshal
United States22154 Posts
| ||
| ||
