PSK

New Mafia Rules and Punishments

255 posts in this topic

11 minutes ago, mark said:

 

Which is what I did, I self-voted as scum at MYLO so it's essentially worse than what Markus did, by your own definition 

I will say that I didn't see the retracted posts Markus and Silver made after day ended and after they were dead - so I assume that to play a part in their ban as well

Self-Voting is not the issue. Self-Voting As Maf to Actively fuck over your teammates is the issue. Teamwork is crucial to maf. You can't win without it. 

 

I told Slickz why I was bussing him, but he would have none of it and because he was mad he self-voted in an effort to fuck us over (if you read the logs, I told him I figured my vote would draw heat off and get markus lynched) 

 

Self-voting as town is dumb and arguable game throw, but at least its understandable in the sense that town is an individual game. Yes you need to convince and persuade people, but you never truly know the other's alignment or what they are thinking. You have no reason to trust them. 

 

That doesn't apply to Slickz who knew exactly why what was being done was done and actively tried to fuck it up. 

 

If you had intentionally voted yourself so that maf could win. Different story

 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it was posted somewhere or other that slick wasn't being suspended.

 

here, if you want more punishment handed out then everyone can pm me every grievance and i will go over them!

 

you all complain about horrific behaviour in this section and now you are defending the ones creating/attributing to a toxic environment?

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

tumblr_inline_ommklsRd5o1t9we3b_500.jpg

 

Hey guys! Im all ready to go back and start playing with you guys! Its gonna be gr-

12

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*reads this and that other thread*

9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

tumblr_nkeonwVmPm1shfb6eo3_540.png

 

 

Nvm have fun lol

10

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(jk i just saw a great chance to use that image and couldnt control myself tbh)

9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

is this really less petty than letting hosts decide whether behavior in their own games is infraction worthy?

 

ASKING 4 FRIEND

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...hi nelrick!

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mascis i had a dream where you and me were having dinner with other dg members and id like to think in some other reality we all met up for lunch.

 

God (Malcolm) bless.

4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

had good times, 3/3 with all the dgz people i've met irl

 

i may be mean in mafia and mean in real life too but it comes from a place of love !!!!

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Look guys, no one wants to deal with moderating people losing their minds in a game most of us play for fun. Our system we used before isn't perfect and no system of humans judging other humans in a social setting is going to be perfect, but we are honestly trying our best. I think it is safe to say that we have tried to be as lenient as possible and that has resulted in some people being unhappy with decisions and others being glad we gave extra chances.

 

The warnings and suspensions just being handed out are justified and arguing about retroactively punishing is just a giant waste of time. We are not going to go back and change the punishments unless a mistake was made.

 

Yes, we need to be more transparent but that does not mean we are going to post chat logs of the discussion between mods or chat logs of conversations between the members in question. The rules/suspensions thread was a mess before and this section has largely been a shit show in terms of moderation, everyone knows that. The point is we are trying to change it for the better so instead of arguing, it would be nice to work together for a change. On the matter of inconsistency - Inconsistency /=/ preferential treatment even though I can see how it can come across that way, but I think that most of the decisions have been fair ones.

 

Discussion about the rules is one thing, but crusading against them as some sort of protector of justice is another. If you really want to be involved then do so in a productive manner. There are a few people in here (you know who you are) who have had an opportunity to voice their concerns but chose not to because "you didn't have time".

 

I really love this little community and if I didn't enjoy you people then I wouldn't be spending any of my valuable time trying to make the section better. If there is a particular instance you want looked at, send me a message and I will look it over with you and we can talk about it. If you want any constructive criticism and you feel you are not getting it from the after game threads, message me and I will offer it when I have the time.

 

Please try to keep in mind that we all have lives too. We are dedicating more than a fair amount of time to looking over games, talking about improvements to the section, moderating our collection of angry individuals, and listening to all the complaints made in our community.

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Uh I have a warning point because "JAZZ FUCKING SUCKS" is game-relevant???? 

 

LOL is this a meme? Did I miss something here?

I mean I don't care it's 1/3 strikes and I'm not retarded enough to act like a clown and get more strikes but this has to be a joke...

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

tbh, both warnings given for "game relevant" OMGUS are ridiculous. 

If those were game relevant then this post is as well I guess.

Edited by The_Be(a)sT
1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Gemstone Mine said:

You guys need to stop pretending like these rules just came out of the blue.

 

Funny I feel like I've had a little bit to do with mafia rules and regulations 

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, SageRhapsody said:

Uh I have a warning point because "JAZZ FUCKING SUCKS" is game-relevant???? 

 

 

Yeah how the fuck is this game relevant? It's an objective fact regardless of the circumstances in the game.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

i love you jazz :wub:

Edited by SageRhapsody
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Jazz said:

 

Yeah how the fuck is this game relevant? It's an objective fact regardless of the circumstances in the game.

1

I did this with MBA and scum rei (then known as Island) thought the same things. Essentially it goes into reading too much into it. Some people read that as believing you are calling them bad town rather than scum because they would not suck if you thought they were scum since they did their job. It's somewhat valid and does alter the game if its construed as a read on a player and factored in to analysis, but as I've said with a number of things, people just read too much into it. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, PSK said:

I feel like there's some misunderstanding to the timeline for these rules. 

 

We have been giving suspensions to players for misconduct based on rules that existed in the section. For clarity, we decided to draw up a list of rules to make it easier for players to reference so that they would not be blindsided by a suspension. While most of the rules should be self evident, there were still complaints and instances of "but it doesn't say that in the rules". 

 

Drunk Mafia was an absolute mess. It felt like having to babysit some people. There was obscenely personal attacks used, claiming as a strategy being discussed and then implemented later, people forgetting that omgus posts are to remain a neutral force, and people actively attempting to throw the game. I do not think some of you understand the level of shit game hosts have to put up with at times, and unfortunately, Faint was made very aware of this. I only hope he will continue to host games as I thought he did a great job for his first time but I would also not blame him if he was dissuaded by the actions of people playing. 

 

Following from Drunk Mafia, I discussed the suspension of multiple players with the other Mafioso. I raised the issue of not being sure whether to provide them a suspension or just talk to them about it. I was edging towards suspension because the section has been getting progressively worse in terms of people showing any amount of self control. This is when the idea was put forward to use warnings. It coincided with the rulings being redone and allowed for us to reevaluate the punishment imposed on those we were already going to suspend. 

 

Perhaps it is due to the fact that we released the rules first and then followed up with the game punishments after that people are questioning the order? Let me ensure you, those that are currently sitting on a warning or a suspension were to be in that position regardless of the new system. 

 

Some of those that have warning points are individuals that usually show some level of restraint and we accept may have simply had a lapse of judgment. Others have shown some restraint after being contacted by a member of the Mafioso. 

 

Those on a suspension have shown a pattern of destructive behaviour or clearly showed intent during Drunk Mafia to take a rule breaking action before doing so. 

 

As the rules and punishments system was created after decisions were discussed about the Drunk Mafia game, previous games were not taken into consideration. If people acted poorly in a previous game, they were handled at that point in time, whether that be publicly or privately. I would seriously question the motives of someone seeking punishments for previous games given what I have just explained as the order of events. 

 

Those of you with warnings, as stated in the OP, they will be removed after three games of normal play. As others have said, these rules are not difficult to follow; you would have to go out of your way to commit a rule break imo, and as I have said myself, I suspect these were just cases of lapse of judgment and have full faith those on warnings will have them removed within that three game timeframe. 

 

big big BIG shoutout to psk for keeping me sane during drunk mafia and coaching me through some of the shitstorms occuring

 

am very happy with these rules in place. maybe one day i will host in future but with a more experienced member as co-host idk

 

like if you have problems with the bans from drunk mafia, just suck it up. it's only a one game suspension or a warning, it's not like a perma-ban from all future mafia games. such a big deal being made over so little when people have made a conscious effort to improve the game that we all enjoy playing

 

 

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

basically we should be thanking the mafia mods for taking the time to write up and implement these rules, rather than just going "omg this is unfair and inconsistent lol". the last game of mafia is a good place to start the "official bans" and as I said if you got one, then just suck it up - it's just one game after all

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Jazz said:

 

Yeah how the fuck is this game relevant? It's an objective fact regardless of the circumstances in the game.

i'm sure you posted this with sarcastic intent but im choosing not to take it as such

 

#justice4sage ;)

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sage/Soph warnings reversed. I think miscommunication was had when relaying exactly what was said as we were trying to sort through everything. 

 

After going through the posts myself and speaking to both of them, it has been decided to just rescind the warns. 

 

We are going to ask that any problem posts are screenshotted before redaction so we have exactly what was said, when it was said. Yes, mods can see what was edited but this just saves time for everyone  and allows us to be able to deal with it faster. 

5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

jazz: 3 game suspension for personal attacks. 

 

The situation surrounding this was discussed and, while slickz or others could have been more considerate or aware of what consequences their comments would incur, they were not punishable and not inflammatory to the point of being intentionally or personally harmful. Jazz's comments however were malicious and far beyond what is acceptable in the section. Provocation does not entitle a player to lash out in this fashion and I hope everyone playing and watching understands the harm this does to the victims' and onlookers' willingness to play what is intended to be a fun game. 

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We now return you to your regularly scheduled punching bag. Please refer all your rioting to Human Resources (ie me)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

why cant you host a successful game? are you just a shitty host? not even just one time, gemstone? 

rei and malcolm never saw day 3 as players but you never see it as a host elegiggle 

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ah shit im gonna get banned now 

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.