Mafia Discussion

[Megar]

perhaps my suspicions were correct after all
well, can't win 'em all

[Cedur]

Vote count is still at 4:3 (or 5:3 if you wanna count Mech's faulty BBcode), so we still need a few more people before the phase change

Also I agree with ZM that what MosaicMario did is definitely not enough for a game ban.

[Valentine]

Allright, let me get things straight. First you act like a complete baby about the fact you do not like mafia and wanna ragequit the minute things go wrong. Then you fail to follow the rules and make a random thread begging for forgiveness. I hope you get banned from mafia for this.

Well, by now, i kind of deserve to be banned for this. I think your right.
I doubt anything i say can fix what i have done, i feel like the Game masters have the right to ban me
since you can't fix past mistakes no matter what.
why do i do everything wrong?

You don't do everything wrong, don't be so hard on yourself. I don't necessarily like the way you went about things, but I'm glad you had the decency to apologize. If you don't want to play Mafia due to lack of interest, then you don't have to. I don't think you've done near enough to warrant a game ban, just make sure that next time you play, you actually want to play.

EDIT: The "you should be banned from Mafia" talk needs to stop. It's not up to anyone but the GMs to decide who needs a game ban and who doesn't. MosaicMario already feels bad, kicking him while he's down isn't something I'd like to see from here on out.

So you're just gonna let MosaicMario continue being manipulative? He broke a rule which caused a reroll, and then he wanted to quit playing after things didn't go his way. After people found that annoying he went out and started whining about it.

[Thehelmetguy1]

^^^^^
I learned from personal experience. Not being harsh on people for bad stuff is guarantee that it will be repeated.

[Cedur]

The reroll thing was an accident that could also have happened to others just as well, and for the second thing, please, be a bit forgiveful.

However, I think we should explicitely forbid self-votes for the future though. Those are always pointless indeed.

[PixelPest]

The reroll thing was an accident that could also have happened to others just as well

But it could have been avoided if the rules were read and understood. When you have a special role, it should be able to be taken for granted that you'll know all of its implications

[PersonNamedUser]

Are you guys really still arguing over this? It's done, over with. You don't need to contuine disscussing it.

[Zeldamaster12]

Just to clarify, I deleted Doesntpostverymuch and thehelmetguy1's posts regarding the game because they are either dead or not playing, so they are not allowed to discuss the current game. Carry on.

[Valentine]

Inactivity should seriously get you at least a 1 game ban and like a way longer hosting ban.

[Thehelmetguy1]

^
Inactive players don't help anyone

[Zeldamaster12]

Inactivity has been ruining so many games lately, so I think the GMs should be a little more strict with game bans, and the future hosts need to replace inactives.

[Cedur]

That's for the future. It's not cool to ban people already who couldn't know they would run a risk of getting banned. So far it's only said that repeatedly and notoriously inactive players would be banned at some point. So first, lay out some stricter guidelines on banning, and then hand out bans.

[Zeldamaster12]

That's for the future. It's not cool to ban people already who couldn't know they would run a risk of getting banned. So far it's only said that repeatedly and notoriously inactive players would be banned at some point. So first, lay out some stricter guidelines on banning, and then hand out bans.

I'm not saying to ban new players who don't know the basics of the game yet. Game bans would (and should) be used for repeat offenders.

Also I second making an announcement regarding Mafia punishment.

[Cedur]

Inactivity should seriously get you at least a 1 game ban and like a way longer hosting ban.

Hosting bans for inactivity don't serve any purpose. Usually only people who are really ready to host actually participate, and then there's additionally a poll.

[Zeldamaster12]

Host signups when

[PersonNamedUser]

Though i'm ban until M38, i just wanted to state why i started playing mafia, some may find this a bit weird.

But i starting playing mafia because i wanted a chance to host a game, but it hasn't happened yet, that kinda sucks.

[Thehelmetguy1]

Wait, you actually got a game ban for that?

[PersonNamedUser]

Wait, you actually got a game ban for that?

No, it was because of my behavior in M36

[Thehelmetguy1]

Your behavior was what I meant with "that".
So it actually got you a game ban? That was seriously unexpected from me

[Cedur]

Spoiler: show

<Shroom96> I find the frequent shifting of votes really awkward
at this point I'm more in favor of having non-changeable votes
so, take your time and think before you vote, and if you decide to self-vote early, you can't play tipping the scale if other games are voted up
<Danny> That's why we have a deadline
<Shroom96> one week is plenty of time for many things to happen though
<Danny> It's not a week
It's 3 days
<Shroom96> well, 4 days actually(edited)
<Danny> It was 3 days for the voting period
<Shroom96> well it practically ends on the 19th for US fellas
<Danny> Yea
I know
<Shroom96> for me it shows "20th 1:55 am"
but still, even a couple of days allow for plenty of voteshifting if people do that
<Danny> And?
<Shroom96> isn't it a bit annoying and confusing?
<Danny> If there wasn't voteshifting there would be plenty of stalemates
It isn't really either
I'm not really paying attention to it until the voting period ends
<Shroom96> what do you mean with stalemates
<Danny> Because most hosts will self-vote and then things will split if there's no clear cut winner
<Shroom96> well, how do you handle a tie in general?
<Danny> Revoting
You eliminate games that didn't get a certain level of votes
And then rebroadcast the votes
<Shroom96> ok, a runoff
<Danny> If it's still a tie, you use coinflip methods
Or in this case
<Shroom96> and it wouldn't work with no voteshifting?
<Danny> A random number generator
If there wasn't voteshifing, people would even out
Lets put it this way
At least 5 people voted for my gams, but they all shifted to pseudo
And pseudo had 10 last I checked
And thg1's game has 5
If you weren't allowed to change your vote, we most likely would have ended up with a tie
Voteshifting lets people gravitate toward a game that gains popularity or interest and that game can be finalized
I think we need to employ a rule where you can only resubmission a game twice
Or even three times
I've been seeing a lot of the same get posted
<Shroom96> I still don't see how not changing votes will make ties very likely to happen
<Danny> Because people will be stuck with what they voted with
Lets be honest, nobody is going to think out their votes
Besides, allowing the changing of votes promotes activity and suspense
The scaling is pretty interesting to watch
Especially when games unexpectedly gain momentum
You cant get that kind of interaction with static votes
If there were static votes however, I'd give the ability to vote for two games
<Waddle Derp> honestly the best way to vote is to allow everyone to vote for which games they would tolerate
<Max> @Waddle Derp Do you mean voting on multiple games with multiple votes?
<Waddle Derp> Yes

Anyone else have an opinion on this? Do you agree its best to let people vote whichever game they want to play, and/or should votes be disallowed to be changed?