Another Mafia Game Needlessly Ruined: Please Read.

[Maz Medias]

It was stupid to react like that - absolutely retarded, in fact.

And I mean that on

your

part, Katy.

What Meta did - unless I missed him quoting a mod PM - was a steel-balls gambit, similar to one that Vesuvan did in Star Wars Mafia on Tings. A godfather, going down, "blows his cool" and "outs his partners". If you hadn't made it clear he was telling the truth, the town would not have know if he was simply fingering people

who were not actually his scum partners

as scum.

Think!

[Maz Medias]

I dont think you read the whole thread. Tarhalindur also made it clear that Metatron was telling the truth before I could even get my last post in.

Again, you didn't have to corroborate anything. As a mod, you have to let

anything

short of posting a mod PM be simply gameplay. If you had just said "Metatron is lynched, he is GF, night", the game would have been very, very interesting, rather than ruined. Was Tar WIFOMing because Meta fingered both him and false scum (as happened in the gambit I referenced)? Even if Meta

wasn't gambitting

, he didn't do anything that technically called for a stop of the game. Tar was dumb to buy in, yes, but the game was by no means dead.

[Maz Medias]

For the record, I've also done something like this in a #mafia game. As GF with two goons, I was about to by lynched, and lashed out "angrily", fingering one real goon (my vanilla mafioso) and one townie. The town proceeded to lynch both, and the third goon (a daykiller) blasted his way to the end game.

[Maz Medias]

Again, you didn't have to corroborate anything. As a mod, you have to let

anything

short of posting a mod PM be simply gameplay. If you had just said "Metatron is lynched, he is GF, night", the game would have been very, very interesting, rather than ruined. Was Tar WIFOMing because Meta fingered both him and false scum (as happened in the gambit I referenced)? Even if Meta

wasn't gambitting

, he didn't do anything that technically called for a stop of the game. Tar was dumb to buy in, yes, but the game was by no means dead.

Tarlindur made it way too clear. And with Tar outed, the other guy was dead as well. It had no future.

Also, I think faking breaking the rules is just as bad as breaking them.

He didn't fake breaking a rule. He didn't post a PM or post anything he claimed to be a PM. He just said "I'm the godfather and my partners are X, Y, Z". The town would have eventually figured out that you can't trust a dead mafioso's claim and dismissed it as WIFOM (if Tar hadn't supported it, of course).

[Maz Medias]

And from an ethical viewpoint, I disagree heavily with play like that, Maz.

Respected - but why? Aren't chaos and confusion the mafia's prime tools?

[Maz Medias]

Also, you agree with me that if this thing is serious then the game's as good as done, right? Ruined beyond repair. Then either the game would be ended on the spot, as it was ruined, or it would continue, in which case everyone knows the guy was lying.

This is why we should establish a policy of maximal mod laissez-faire. If the mod steps in and says "aw now it's ruined" every time someone does something crazy or out-of-the-box, innovation is stifled.

[Maz Medias]

My main point has been that Metatron did not actually break any rules - he did not post a PM, nor did he pretend to post a PM. Katy did have the power to call the game there, but she did not

have to

; Metatron could have been gambiting. Even though we now know he wasn't,

nobody in the game besides Katy and the scum themselves

knew that he wasn't.

I will answer your question about the cop, Glork - as a cop, yes, I'm going to investigate and confirm that the GF's claimed goons are scum. I never claimed that the hypothetical gambit was super-awesome or that it was infallible, simply that it was potentially existent - it's rather disingenuous for you to say that the game 100% dead simply because the town had a correct play.

The point here is not necessarily that Meta's play was good or had a chance of turning the game around, simply that it's not a good policy for the mod to swoop in and stop any out-of-the-ordinary behavior, including inter-factional conflict.

Let me counter exemplify:
If Meta had been GF and fingered a townie and a scum, and you, as cop, investigate the one that was a townie, what is your reaction then? If he's fingered two townies, he's gotten you to waste two investigations. It's not an altogether useless play.

Finally, I want to point out that in the other two instances, PMs were posted. Meta did not post a PM, or break

any rules whatsoever

.

EDIT: The fact that the town set out the correct play that you provided simply means that the game could have wrapped up and Meta's behavior held at fault for the scum loss.

[Maz Medias]

Again, you're ignoring what I'm saying and railing on "but he ruined the game!!1".

We know now that he ruined the game. The scum knew it, but did not have to revealed that they knew it (obviously intending to try and play it out). Most importantly, the town had no way of knowing that he was necessarily telling the truth. There are still the issues of town misplay and excellent/lucky mafia play that could have made the game finishable.

What if a dying GF does what Meta did when the cop is dead/there's a scum roleblocker holding him down? Is it now a legitimate play simply because it's more effective?

Metatron WAS throwing a hissy-fit.
Metatron DID out his scum partners.
Metatron SHOULD NOT be allowed to play in games for a while, because it wasn't a gambit - it was petulant childishness.

However, there should not be a policy of mods being helicopters, waiting to move in at the slightest sign of strange.

If Metatron HAD been gambiting, would Katy end the game? No?

Knowing that she ended the game in this circumstance, a failure to end the game in a later, similar circumstance would be metagamable as "he is lying". This restricts players' options in gambiting and is against the spirit of the game, just as an intentional loss is.

We're discussing two different things, and you seem to be implying that I am defending Meta's actions. I'm not. I'm saying that Katy's action was not the wisest (though probably fine since one fingered buddy fessed up to the truth of the accusations).

[Maz Medias]

Maz, I'd like an answer to my question: Do you believe that Metatron broke the "let everyone have fun" rule with his behavior?

A simple "yes" or "no" will suffice.

Unfortunately, it won't.

Yes, he did. Katy knew this.

However

, that's a reason to punish him, not to end the game. More importantly, it was not a reason for Katy to mod-confirm a player's in-game speech. In the hypothetical that Tar had not chimed in and admitted to being scum, the game could have continued. Metatron would still be punished

after

the game for his petulance.

I'm talking about macro-game policy, you're talking about policy with a single player.

[Maz Medias]

I'm talking about macro-game policy, you're talking about policy with a single player.

How do you know what Hurrikaty would have done if Tar didn't post? You never actually got to see this scenario in action.

I'm talking about what she should have done. My understanding from her posts was that she would have done so anyway. If that's not the case, I'm glad.

[Maz Medias]

I dont think you read the whole thread, Maz. Tarhalindur also made it clear that Metatron was telling the truth before I could even get my last post in.

Doesn't this mean that she went to make the post but got beaten to the punch by Tar, thus meaning that she intended to make the post without having seen Tar's?

[Maz Medias]

You just said the exact opposite of what I said in my post. You don't punish people for game-throwing until the game is over - that way, the players don't know whether or not it was a gambit or a real hiss-fit until after the game. Since you can't metagame the game after the game is over, that point is moot, and I don't understand how you come to that conclusion.

If you modkill someone for throwing or pretending to throw, the gambit's still possible, anyway. GF fingers some combination of townies and scum, gets modkills, shows up GF. This is actually MORE powerful if the town still gets their lynch, as the ensuing chaos may cause a mislynch that otherwise would be averted by the next night's copping. (That's all assuming a cop's alive and unopposed.)

[Maz Medias]

How do you punish a player once the game is over? You can't replace or modkill them, and it's quite apparent that the bad blood would prevent them from joining your future games.

After the game, you would punish them with a blacklisting or part/perma/tempban, like was suggestion. I want to emphasize that I am not advocating a lack of punishment for this behavior, just a delay to allow for proper gambiting options.

Additionally, postponing the punishment does not solve the "Ruining the game" problem. When all is said and done, the game's fun factor is destroyed. The way you're coming across to me, with this whole "postpone the punishment until after the game" policy, is that you're willing to allow the games to be ruined for the sake of allowing gambits. I would rather pre-empt

any possible ruining of games for any reason

because game integrity and enjoyability are of the utmost importance.

If someone really wants to ruin a game, a rule isn't going to stop them, anyway. The punishment is the only true deterrent, and that's present in both of our plans. Also, I'm 100% sure that a game that's no longer going has much less potential fun factor than a game that is after a strange event.

[Maz Medias]

ADD: And in the future, I don't think a meltdown should be a component of the gambit, but rather a rational, "Fine- you all believe the cop that says I'm guilty. If I'm guilty, then so are X,Y and Z."

The meltdown is the single most component of the "OMG FUCK U GUYZ" gambit. It doesn't have to be done by a GF, by the way, just by any highly-pressured and historically volatile scum.

Last post in thread. My points are on the table.

EDIT: Forgot to mention one thing. The Meltdown Gambit is an extreme inverse form of a normal scum tactic - distancing. Is voting your scum partner to make yourself look good also a bannable offense? This is all a matter of degree, and - in my opinion - a scum who's going down anyway should do what he can and be ALLOWED to do what he can.

[Maz Medias]

In response to Maz's last paragraph... The reasoning is impossible to follow. If distancing and having a meltdown differ only in degree, what is it a degree

of

? One is an "

inverse

" form of the other after all (not to say I understand what he means by that).

I said I wouldn't post any more, but seriously, don't just skip parts of my posts just to make "points" against me. The line before the degree statement asked if it was scummy to bus a partner by hammering them. Melting down and saying "they are scum!" is just a more extreme bussing, with the benefit going to them and not you.

[Maz Medias]

glork talks a lot and says absolutely nothing --

maz is right and everyone else is wrong --

finally, jesus christ, people -- it's a fucking game. get over yourselves. metatron should not have to apologize, hurrikaty should quit bitching and acting like she's "tough" and "hard nosed", and the rest of you should quit debating over whether or not this guy should be banned

because he shouldn't

because you guys need to quit being little girls

get off of my side

[Maz Medias]

Seriously, get off my side. You're embarrassing me.

I'm still amazed at how many people seem to think I'm defending Metatron or saying that people should get away with this kind of stuff. My only point has been, the whole time, that MS's policy should not be overreactive. If somebody in the future does something like Meta did, they should be punished AFTERWARD, and the game should continue unless a party concedes.

I do like the idea that was proposed somewhere of "if you're trying this gambit, PM the mod and let them know". That seems to compromise the two positions quite nicely. It would still be mod's decision on if you're telling the truth, but at least then you've got your intent on the board.

[Maz Medias]

aggressive trolling

off.
my.
side.