|
Message GMarshal if you request a ban please ^_^
Also when the game you're sitting out is over! ~GMarshal |
ahhhh seems like scum voted really late.
Kinda lame to end then.
Even though I can see that the activity was horrible.
Hmm no wait.
Scum should not be forced to vote fast in IML due to the insane information it gives. So yeah. Scum should never be modkilled for activity in IML lylo.
tbh IML is already hard enough for scum. They should be allowed to lurk like mofos if they ever reach lylo.
|
right play wrong play doesn't matter if the host tells you you have to vote you vote. If you disagree with that rule that's fine just bring it up post game.
|
Blazinghand
United States25550 Posts
Look, now both SnB and Tehpoof claim they weren't actually inactive, they just didn't post for the last 48 hours and it didn't make sense for them to vote. What if ET shows up and makes the same argument? That would mean all 3 town are saying "yeah, nobody is town was posting, so I didn't post. I wasn't actually inactive despite doing nothing for 96 hours..." This is obviously not a real argument.
The questions at hand imo are:
1. Did the players fail to vote? Yes, they did not vote. The rules make it clear voting is mandatory. 2. Were the players inactive? Yes, they clearly were inactive, so you can't argue that they were active and just chose not to vote or should be spared for violating the letter of the law and not the spirit.
You knew what the rules were when you signed up for them; I pmed you, snb, twice about your inactivity and posted in the thread twice. You gave no indication that you received any PMs, you made no posts in thread, and if we're gonna be real here, I posted the bans and modkills and endgame post basically simultaneously, and you didn't post in the post game thread or the ban list thread for like 8 hours after the game ended. Tehpoofter is the same way. You guys claim you were watching over the thread but there's like zero evidence you were even aware the game ended until a while after it did.
I will not withdraw my ban requests.
|
Pretty sure I agree with bh his judgement. Didnt know there was a known deadline.
|
Also the rules in OP gives us a lot of time. I think we should not hammer mderg. Weekends always bad so we should drawn out the day. Drawn means make it very long.
|
this is precisely why I dont play IML, its a shit format
|
Blazinghand
United States25550 Posts
Just to be clear, the day ended with a clearly defined 72 hour deadline. There was absolutely no confusion about when the deadline was, nor was there confusion about whether or not voting was mandatory.
|
Regardless of the fact that having activity requirements in instant majority is a silly format, the two of you did agree to those rules when you signed up for the game. I don't see anything wrong with a ban here considering your overall activity levels and direct violation.
|
YOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO this shit is simple.
I haven't specifically outlined what exactly I find unacceptable because I'm lazy, but I'm not too lazy to modkill people for violating rules that only exist in my head and nobody knows about. As a general rule, I basically moderate entirely on my discretion. My goal is for everyone to have a good time. My co-hosts will also moderate entirely on their own judgement. Most of the time you will be warned directly and personally if you step out of line before any bigger actions are taken. The golden rule here is don't do anything I don't want you to do in terms of behavior, and act so that everyone has fun.
This was taken from the rules section of the fire upon the deep.
The players signed up for this game and you have to read the rules, so they deserve a ban if they did not read this.
So assuming they read this. It is clear and exactly what happened. The only way I see the actions as not ban worthy is if BH rules are wrong(as in his rules are too strict or he should have more defined rules) , but it seems hosts have quite some leeway.
Anyway if the above paragraph was not about activity here are other quotes from the thread.
ALSO meet the arbitrary activity requirement that exists entirely in my mind.
I'm not going to explain what I constitute inactivity-- I'll know it when I see it. You will probably be warned before being modkilled.
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
While I agree with thr bans for activity or w/e, how can you have a non voting thing ban in IML. If half the players vote the same guy and some others hadn't voted yet don't half the people then receive bans??
|
On July 12 2014 05:37 Holyflare wrote: While I agree with thr bans for activity or w/e, how can you have a non voting thing ban in IML. If half the players vote the same guy and some others hadn't voted yet don't half the people then receive bans?? it was lylo. So if you are town you always have to vote before the 72 hours are gone. Unless scum is bussing you will never lynch scum and proceed to lose during the night.
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
Oh they didn't vote at all and arbitrary time ran out?
|
Blazinghand
United States25550 Posts
On July 12 2014 05:37 Holyflare wrote: While I agree with thr bans for activity or w/e, how can you have a non voting thing ban in IML. If half the players vote the same guy and some others hadn't voted yet don't half the people then receive bans??
That's now how the voting rules worked in A Fire upon the Deep. The rules are not what people normally use, but were outlined super super clearly in the thread, so if there's any further confusion about what's allowed, please check the thread. Here's how it worked
1. Each day lasts 72 hours. You must vote before the deadline.. 2. If no majority is reached before the end of the day, the day ends in a no-lynch. 3. If a majority is reached before the deadline, the day ends instantly. In this circumstance it is not required to vote.
What happened was Day 3 ended due to deadline, rather than majority. The requirement is "when days end due to the deadline, it is require dto lynch". I PMed the players and also posted in thread (for some of them, more than once) reminding them of activity requirements. During previous days people were reminded numerous times. There was no confusion.
|
On July 12 2014 05:37 Holyflare wrote: While I agree with thr bans for activity or w/e, how can you have a non voting thing ban in IML. If half the players vote the same guy and some others hadn't voted yet don't half the people then receive bans??
You only receive the ban if you did not vote and there was no majority reached.
|
Blazinghand
United States25550 Posts
It's really simple. Each day lasts 72 hours, and you must vote before the 72 hours are up (unless someone hammers before that time). The day length and deadline are always specified. Everyone knew the day was 72 hours.
|
On July 12 2014 05:47 Holyflare wrote: Oh they didn't vote at all and arbitrary time ran out? yes
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
Oh, why the fuck would anyone contest that?
|
On July 12 2014 06:00 Holyflare wrote: Oh, why the fuck would anyone contest that? *shrugs*
|
|
United States22154 Posts
On July 09 2014 14:14 Blazinghand wrote:A Fire Upon the Deep Mini Mafia Bans Game link: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/mafia/460423-a-fire-upon-the-deep-mini-mafia1 game ban requested for Tehpoofter for failing to vote, and for inactivity. 1 game ban requested for EchelonTee for failing to vote, and for inactivity. 1 game ban requested for strongandbig for failing to vote, and for inactivity. Players were aware of the rule that you must vote before the (very generous 72 hour) deadline. I also PMed them a clearly marked official warning all at least once (snb and ET were pmed twice) and posted in the thread reminding them of the mandatory voting. The Day 3 was only 1 page, there's no way they missed it. Approved, especially after the clarification that players let the deadline run out, rather than getting screwed over by an early hammer.
On July 11 2014 21:12 strongandbig wrote: Well I'm sitting out noir mini.
Noted, PM me when its over so I can remove you.
|
|
|
|