It's just not appropriate as a community to bully people into accepting a closed mindset on anything different from a certain norm that in and of itself borders on racism and ableism. That's never been socially healthy. Heck, there was a pretty big war due to that about 75 years ago. There's problems around the world all the time due to that sort of attitude. But I suppose we don't care. We'll just be another dying forum that wants to play Mafia but doesn't want others to do so.
As a host, if several players approached me saying that the game was not enjoyable for them with a certain player posting as they were, I would go to that player and bring it up with them. I would expect that instead of people destroying game sanctity by taking modkills into their own hands.
Besides, I can easily extend the hard-to-read argument to its logical conclusion and it's not pretty. If someone legitimately has difficulty with English such that their posts were similarly hard to read to the drunken style, but the players could not tell, "Oh well, it's a policy lynch." If someone is from another community and they aren't used to claiming their role, "Oh well, it's a policy lynch." And so on. You might as well be openly rejecting of anyone not from MTGS originally. Between that attitude and the phase lengths, it's no wonder that the site isn't retaining people.
As for "can't ban policy lynches", it is a very simple point to warn once for someone saying that they will lynch someone for non-game reasons and then modkill if they follow through with that lynch without giving real reasons or having progressed their reads/vote. And I take intentionally breaking the rules that a host has set forth very seriously.
Policy lynching require half the players to agree that the game would be better without the lynchee. It stops being the voters fault and becomes the fault of the one getting voted. We also told you to stop. I also don't like policy lynching, but when that's the only option, you use it.
I also don't agree with the mod intervening. You didn't break any mafia rule. It was just that you were so annoying that I'd rather waste a lynch so I know you stop posting than actually keep seeing your posts.
Okay "No matter what, if at least half the players vote that a player should be modkilled, whether or not they would actually want to see that player lynched, then they should be modkilled." Sounds like a plan going forward. No it doesn't. That's a miserable rule. You might as well get rid of the host entirely at that point and waste the game having the players argue all the time and then each player can get voted out purely based on how toxic they are. Oh wait, a lot of our games are devolving into that anyways. I'd never implement that. I absolutely can and would include lynching for reasons outside of your win condition, aka policy lynching, under game throwing in things for which I'd modkill.
You know, having already read what Voxxicus had to say about posting restrictions in the spider game, this just sounds like a less reasoned version of that.
Honestly, most complaints about post restrictions just ring as "Wahh, wahh, I can't metaread as well." At which point you might as well just ban multis and require everyone to post their previous games in their first post each game to facilitate metareads or eat a "community modkill". If site growth is slow, maybe pushing away anything that differs from some "ideal" of site meta doesn't help...
Besides, this is literally the only game as far as I can remember at least that I've seen in 2 years of playing here in which a player has been lynched because most of the players on the wagon were not playing to their win conditions. Good luck on the argument that my posting style this game was somehow more obnoxious than EVERY SINGLE posting restriction ever before, or at least in the past two years.
Actually wanted to ask you guys why you went with the "make Bur king and never kill him" strategy rather than the "make a strong player king and kill them each night" one. I guess as long as Bur is king you can just keep killing a strong player anyway and it sort of neutralized the double vote, but was there another reason?
I personally think that the better scum strat this game is to minimize killing the king in general. I think killing the King each night keeps the options a little too low. But I could be wrong there.
I strongly disagree with the sentiment of policy lynch being the same as gamethrowing, I absolutely played to win, but I will play to make games better if I have to, and your PRs made the game less playable, and I didn’t want to go into any sort of LyLo where I had to try and both understand and sort you. There is a line where it works, and one where it doesn’t, and telling me that having that line is akin to throwing is just wrong.
But is it really your responsibility? If it's causing a problem for game health then bring it to the mod, no? Lynching is using game mechanics to solve a problem that they aren't meant to solve.
I decide on PRs before alignment. I had decided I was going to switch between PRs on some regular basis with trend towards artistry. The first two styles were thought out, the third style was a backup idea that I had thought I would use later.
Post 7/9: Drunken "We don't have a cop so we should lynch Shadow Day 1. Hi everyone. Let's have a great game! Love you all!"
Post 12: Stilted (Sophisticated?) "Of course I'd record myself. And Bur has high mislynch equity that he could otherwise use to his advantage."
Post 20: Falsetto "I'm not drunk. How's it going, Shadow?"
Post 21: Laughing Bass "I've drunkpost in roughly 2-3 games."
Post 22: Cringy Nasal Falsetto "I'm so confused about Shadow trying to metaread me."
Post 25: (Blowing a Raspberry)
Post 26: Old "What's your experience with Highroller? Also, why DV?"
Post 32: Singing Flamboyant "Can't stop, won't stop. Grapefruit, what's your experience with DV and Highroller?"
Post 33: Mustache & Monacle "Back to your old self, DV? This sounds more like old you. I like it."
Post 35: Overly-Casual Singing "Trying to figure out if Shadow's pushing a mislynch or not. I think he is. My RVS vote is now serious."
Post 36: Shakespeare's Knight "I chose this gimmick in pre-game."
Post 39: Southern "I'm Alexander the Great. Nice to finally play with you, Highroller."
Post 44: Nasal "Tamerlane or Amir Timur?"
PR Switch - Images:
Post 50: Readlist, Daychat Gambit
Post 60 (Re: 51, 52, 55, 56) Shadow vote is 50% RVS and 50% Serious. DV is a meaniepants. Reasoning for Shadow vote. Grape hasn't been pushing me.
Post 66 (Re: 61) Policy Lynches are gamethrowing. Lots of scum equity for Shadow.
Post 81 (Re: 64) All I was saying was that you weren't pushing me.
Post 82 (Re: 70) Reads Reasoning.
PR Switch - Drunken Posts:
Post 101: "Sleeping through the PR change was a good idea. I think your ATE is pretty bad but I think you've done similar in a game so I don't know if it's scummy or not, but it's definitely bad enough that Shadow can wait until day 2 even if I still want to see him lynched. You can die, scum. Vote: Vezok"
Post 104: "ur rong."
Post 105: "Or just scum. I think it's you and Vez and you're trying to pull the wagon off of Vez to me."
Post 110: "Shadow might be town for this tunnel; it seems a bit strong for scum Shadow."
Post 111: "Can't he speak for himself or did he tell you he was busy?"
I was not expecting that gamethrow/lynch with the timing that it happened (Seriously, if you're going to policy lynch, you might as well just roll a die every time instead of playing the game. It's gamethrowing and bad sportsmanship. I don't mind that I got lynched as scum but I wish it was for real reasons), but I eventually resigned myself to that and, in the end, shrugged and figured DV could get some town equity off of my lynch.
%%%
Other than slips, I think I'd never kill the king unless they hard suspected me.
%%%
I am not sure that my thought to have the two mafia members interact with as little serious thought as possible in pre-game actually made sense. I think it helped a bit, but in the long run it might have been better to try to plan out the game between the two of us. Of course, that might have been more likely to get us caught.
I say go for it. See what comes out of that, but you're just going to be wrong.
sleep at 2 thru pr chang wa good ides i tink ur ate is petty vad but i thinl u do simiat in a game so i dunno if scummy u or no but bad ate shadow i guess wait for d2 even tho i dont lik it so u can die scum
Osie, I know you’re not trying to tone read me. Because we both know that tone is probably my number 1 best faking skill, and saying “oh it’s tone” is such a bull crap line anyway. So try again.
Still not fond of the pictures, it’s a lot of work for you with very little actual thought put down in thread.
Mafia have a Nightkill, not a daykill.
Given recent Perpetual-MyLo situations, the general solution has been to make the nightkill optional.
Besides, I can easily extend the hard-to-read argument to its logical conclusion and it's not pretty. If someone legitimately has difficulty with English such that their posts were similarly hard to read to the drunken style, but the players could not tell, "Oh well, it's a policy lynch." If someone is from another community and they aren't used to claiming their role, "Oh well, it's a policy lynch." And so on. You might as well be openly rejecting of anyone not from MTGS originally. Between that attitude and the phase lengths, it's no wonder that the site isn't retaining people.
As for "can't ban policy lynches", it is a very simple point to warn once for someone saying that they will lynch someone for non-game reasons and then modkill if they follow through with that lynch without giving real reasons or having progressed their reads/vote. And I take intentionally breaking the rules that a host has set forth very seriously.
Okay "No matter what, if at least half the players vote that a player should be modkilled, whether or not they would actually want to see that player lynched, then they should be modkilled." Sounds like a plan going forward. No it doesn't. That's a miserable rule. You might as well get rid of the host entirely at that point and waste the game having the players argue all the time and then each player can get voted out purely based on how toxic they are. Oh wait, a lot of our games are devolving into that anyways. I'd never implement that. I absolutely can and would include lynching for reasons outside of your win condition, aka policy lynching, under game throwing in things for which I'd modkill.
You know, having already read what Voxxicus had to say about posting restrictions in the spider game, this just sounds like a less reasoned version of that.
Honestly, most complaints about post restrictions just ring as "Wahh, wahh, I can't metaread as well." At which point you might as well just ban multis and require everyone to post their previous games in their first post each game to facilitate metareads or eat a "community modkill". If site growth is slow, maybe pushing away anything that differs from some "ideal" of site meta doesn't help...
Besides, this is literally the only game as far as I can remember at least that I've seen in 2 years of playing here in which a player has been lynched because most of the players on the wagon were not playing to their win conditions. Good luck on the argument that my posting style this game was somehow more obnoxious than EVERY SINGLE posting restriction ever before, or at least in the past two years.
I personally think that the better scum strat this game is to minimize killing the king in general. I think killing the King each night keeps the options a little too low. But I could be wrong there.
But is it really your responsibility? If it's causing a problem for game health then bring it to the mod, no? Lynching is using game mechanics to solve a problem that they aren't meant to solve.
Explaining my posts this game:
I was not expecting that gamethrow/lynch with the timing that it happened (Seriously, if you're going to policy lynch, you might as well just roll a die every time instead of playing the game. It's gamethrowing and bad sportsmanship. I don't mind that I got lynched as scum but I wish it was for real reasons), but I eventually resigned myself to that and, in the end, shrugged and figured DV could get some town equity off of my lynch.
%%%
Other than slips, I think I'd never kill the king unless they hard suspected me.
%%%
I am not sure that my thought to have the two mafia members interact with as little serious thought as possible in pre-game actually made sense. I think it helped a bit, but in the long run it might have been better to try to plan out the game between the two of us. Of course, that might have been more likely to get us caught.
cant he spek fo hinself or he tel u he bsy?
or jus scum i tink its u an vez and u try to muv from paetne to me
ur rong
sleep at 2 thru pr chang wa good ides i tink ur ate is petty vad but i thinl u do simiat in a game so i dunno if scummy u or no but bad ate shadow i guess wait for d2 even tho i dont lik it so u can die scum
vote vezokpiraka