|
On May 04 2011 04:49 Qatol wrote:
After discussing things with people on IRC, I am going to switch youngminii's sit out game from Survivor to Sleeper Cell because Survivor is looking like it will last an extremely long amount of time (to the point where it seems unfair to make him wait for it to finish).
THANK GOD
|
|
|
Ok, so basically what happened is that Zorkmid rage quit from the game cause sandroba (who is mafia) tunneled/put a lot of pressure on him. He just said "/out" in the thread and didn't even PM me or iGrok. I PMed him and asked him if he wanted a replacement or what? And he's like yeah, and after a few exchanges he said TL Mafia wasn't for him
I don't mind aggression, it's blind stupid aggression. Get it constantly from Sandroba, not havin any fun.
yea im out
I'll stick to mafiascum.net
He then signed up for Node's XXXIX game a day after his rage quit and proclaimed leave for MS. When I, and a few other players, pointed out that it's kinda fucked up that he left one game and went to sign up for another he says he'll out and asked a TL admin to revoke his right to view the mafia forum and said he was 100% going to MS.
At this point bum had replaced Zorkmid in the Sleeper game and Zorkmid contacted bum and basically said/slipped that sandroba was mafia and tried to pressure bum to use his DT check on him that night when bum stated that he was going to check Jackal.
Zorkmid then signed up for Node's game AGAIN and posted in the Sleeper Cell Thread that bum wasn't the CL and hinted that Ace was lying and he was the Cell Leader.
At this point I PM-ed him to edit and stop posting in the game thread and his excuse was "I didn't know I couldn't say stuff after I left the game" even though if he had an ounce of common sense he should have known this, especially since he knew the roles.
I proceed to ask Hot_Bid to ban him to prevent him from ruining the game any further.
From bum:
And about sandroba... I sent igrok a message explaining everything but I tried to just ignore zorkmid's stuff. I had a red read on sandroba, but nothing strong. Zorkmid messaged me telling me to check him. I told him that was a decent check, but I was going for jackal. He then told me he had a conversation with sandroba, and leaked he was scum. I froze my thoughts on sandroba, but I felt it would be unfair to town if I didn't give them what I had mustered before zork's message.
Yeah, the guy is a d-bag, but hopefully I didn't royally fuck up anything.
|
United States22154 Posts
Also he PMed me this right after ragequitting in sleeper cell, but before posting his "if I was cl why would I quit" post
Original Message From Zorkmid: ill stick to mafiascum.net Show nested quote +Original Message From GMarshal: Thats actually not within my power, if you want to be unaccessed you need to PM Plexa and request that. That said, it saddens me that you are leaving us, I thought you had a lot of potential, and seeing a mafia player leave like this is always sad. Best of luck ~GMarshal Original Message From Zorkmid: Can I be, "un-accessed" from Mafia forums plz? Original Message From GMarshal: You have been granted access to the mafia forums, congrats! Unfortunaley it turns out that Mafia XXXVIII is full, so instead I invite you to participate in a mini version of it that is ideal for a new player to get his feet wet http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=211489is the url. Just post /in in the thread if you are interested ~GMarshal
EDIT: iirc someone also told me that he originally did not post about not being the CL and then edited his post to say that at a later point.
|
On May 06 2011 13:21 GMarshal wrote:
EDIT: iirc someone also told me that he originally did not post about not being the CL and then edited his post to say that at a later point.
I can vouch that this is true. The original post was only a quote from someone else, which is why I did not instantly demand a ban for him. He then went back and started talking about the CL bullshit.
I would like t orequest a permanent ban for him, for all the bullshit he's caused lately, intentionally ruining games & his attitude in general.
|
On May 05 2011 09:23 Jackal58 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2011 12:22 Qatol wrote:
Time based bans aren't going to happen for 2 reasons:
1. I'm not keeping track of that. At least with game-based bans, I only have to take people off the ban list when games end. I'm not checking the ban list every day to see which players I have to take off. That's too much work. For the same reason, I don't like jaminiz's suggestion.
That's the thing though. They get banned and you put a date on it. The date passes and they're no longer banned. Much less work for you actually.
The problem with that is that they could be given a ban during a time where there's not even any games starting, making the ban useless.
On May 04 2011 12:43 Mr. Wiggles wrote:
My only objection to this system, is it seems that if you get a 1 game ban, you aren't being punished very much if you can just sit-out one game, and play in another at the same time. Sure, if you were planning on playing in both it's a bit of a punishment, but it seems like the severity of it is greatly lessened because you don't really get banned from playing at all. That will only come once you get your second ban for 3 games.
Also, would this allow sitting out multiple games at the same time? The maximum would be two, because that's the amount of games you can play in at once. I feel this would help with bans after the first for members who are active and want to play, but have to sit out three game and higher bans.
That's the main point I want to discuss here: would people want 3/5/higher game bans to be able to sit out two at a time, or do we feel like that's to light a punishment for a repeat offender?
Possibly you could even make a rule where people that have played over 10 clean games (no modkills/anything) would be allowed to sit out two games at once, to slightly lower the punishment for veterans?
As for the part where one game bans become much less severe: that's the intention.
|
Wow, I'm very dissapointed at zorkmid's behaviour. At first I felt really bad about his rage quit, because he was so sure I was town and blindly tunneling him, so I pm'ed chaoser and he said I could msg him explaining the sittuation as soon as he got subbed out of the game. So I sent him a msg so he can feel better and he proceeds to try to ruin the game. Not very nice.
|
from what I have read I am fine with the semi perm list on zorkmid. Thanks for the explanation.
|
Also, thank you bum for being so mannered, you handled the situation in the best way possible. Props to you man.
|
On May 07 2011 00:30 Rean wrote:Show nested quote +On May 05 2011 09:23 Jackal58 wrote:On May 04 2011 12:22 Qatol wrote:
Time based bans aren't going to happen for 2 reasons:
1. I'm not keeping track of that. At least with game-based bans, I only have to take people off the ban list when games end. I'm not checking the ban list every day to see which players I have to take off. That's too much work. For the same reason, I don't like jaminiz's suggestion.
That's the thing though. They get banned and you put a date on it. The date passes and they're no longer banned. Much less work for you actually. The problem with that is that they could be given a ban during a time where there's not even any games starting, making the ban useless. Show nested quote +On May 04 2011 12:43 Mr. Wiggles wrote:
My only objection to this system, is it seems that if you get a 1 game ban, you aren't being punished very much if you can just sit-out one game, and play in another at the same time. Sure, if you were planning on playing in both it's a bit of a punishment, but it seems like the severity of it is greatly lessened because you don't really get banned from playing at all. That will only come once you get your second ban for 3 games.
Also, would this allow sitting out multiple games at the same time? The maximum would be two, because that's the amount of games you can play in at once. I feel this would help with bans after the first for members who are active and want to play, but have to sit out three game and higher bans. That's the main point I want to discuss here: would people want 3/5/higher game bans to be able to sit out two at a time, or do we feel like that's to light a punishment for a repeat offender? Possibly you could even make a rule where people that have played over 10 clean games (no modkills/anything) would be allowed to sit out two games at once, to slightly lower the punishment for veterans? As for the part where one game bans become much less severe: that's the intention.
But it seems to me that it doesn't just make it less severe, it makes it inconsequential. That's my only problem. If you get people who can just hop in a different game after they die, I think that we're going to get a lot more repeat offenders. For example, what happens when someone gets their first ban, sits out a game, joins another right away, and then gets modkilled there before their first sit-out is even over? This probably wouldn't happen with the older players, but I think it could be a problem with newer ones, because they won't learn anything from being modkilled the first time, and will go and do it again right away.
|
On May 07 2011 00:53 sandroba wrote:
Also, thank you bum for being so mannered, you handled the situation in the best way possible. Props to you man.
Well it seems for every iffy player we come across, a shining star emerges with them. If you've learned anything about Ace, he doesn't throw compliments easily. I think you should take that to heart and use that experience to your advantage. You're a very good player and I hope to play with you again.
|
Just to get my ban's cleared for some later point in time.
Sitting out pick your power insane.
|
irish_punk13, beneather, lyter, and takuna were all modkilled in Team Liquid Mafia XXXIX and need das bans.
As far as I know this is everyone's first modkill except for Beneather.
|
Aw BC, you can't be in PYPI to make sure I dont make a bad fakeclaim again?
|
On May 09 2011 13:01 bumatlarge wrote:
Aw BC, you can't be in PYPI to make sure I dont make a bad fakeclaim again?
Sadly no 
|
A few things:
Zorkmid
Thanks to chaoser for summarizing what happened in Sleeper Cell. The only thing I would like to add is that he was warned to be on his best behavior for RoL's experiment game, but he still pulled this. Regardless, he's on the semi-permanent list for now, but if he wants to come back, he can post here and we can discuss what to do then.
Punishment change
I haven't seen enough discussion of this to really feel comfortable with changing the system yet.
Rean wants a system where people can play in a game while sitting out another if that other game is the last game of their punishment.
Jackal wants a ban system based upon time. Kenpachi and jaminiz talked about potential sentence lengths. I still think this system will result in too much work for me and it doesn't punish the players who only play every now and then.
Mr. Wiggles is concerned about allowing people to play in games while they are still sitting out other games. I am inclined to agree with this. Beneather's situation (see bans below) confused me, but I think this is how it should work out, even though he was modkilled in XXXIX before Sleeper Cell ended. However, it took too much thought. 
Misc sitting out
Should be updated. Let me know if I forgot anything
Bans
With the end of Sleeper Cell Mafia, Beneather and youngminii were removed from the ban list. Beneather then gets a 3 game ban for being modkilled in XXXIX. irish, lyter, and takuna get 1 game bans.
|
United States22154 Posts
Oh, oops, I think we didn't realize Beneather was on the ban list when we let him into XXXIX or he would not have been allowed to play, sorry about that, I should have double checked -__-
|
i sat out sleeper cell and its over. take me off.
|
On May 10 2011 02:38 Coagulation wrote:
i sat out sleeper cell and its over. take me off.
how very polite lol
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
