Mafia TBT Mafia General Thread 3.0 - Newbie Info/Hosting/Discussion

[Geoni]

Unless hosts are committed to modkilling for people saying things like what was said in Kingmaker, using language at another person, getting overly personal in arguments, or being toxic outside of games to the point where it seeps into them, I feel the recent issues are going to remain pervasive.

This requires a banlist and the blacklisting is going to have to be given the exception here if you want people to truly think about consequences before they decide to get personal in a game. If you don't want a mafia banlist then the alternative is to give people a forum tempban or ban...the work is the same.

Apologies if I'm placing a conclusion ahead of time but I do feel this is in part more difficult because nobody on staff is invested in mafia anymore so it's just an extra duty added to being a mod and it would be easier to cut that duty off completely. I would be in no way surprised if this decision is made and I've been telling people that this was coming if they weren't serious about modkilling so if this thread doesn't make it a serious threat then it will happen.

We'll work with you, but you have to be willing to at least meet us on some sort of banning system if you don't just want to get rid of the Cellar altogether. I don't feel your blacklisting rule should be applied if the blacklisting in question (ban list) has to do with the person being tempbanned/banned for violating site rules to begin with. Should maybe just be seen as a term of agreement when it comes to playing the game here in addition to being on the forum in general.

But again, if there's nobody on the modteam invested in mafia and we can't take preventative measures then like...what can we do to really save ourselves if not enough if us are being serious about modkilling? That's really the most we can do and past games have had multiple incidents where they should have been, with some people being offenders multiple times. If leaving it up to host discretion isn't stopping the issue a more concrete solution needs to be implemented.

As for what constitutes being insulting other members it should be seen this way: you can denounce another person's reads or takes on the game, but you cannot denounce them as a person. In denouncing them do so in a way that's not abrasive and/or demeaning towards them.

I think the issue at hand currently is that a lot of members of the mafia community are talking about each other behind DMs and it bubbles to the surface when they end up in the same game. Having to hear about people wanting to WotC this person or that person is...less optimal than a banlist, because the act of approving or denying a WotC creates further drama that festers.

Like no matter what this game comes with tension and has to be moderated at some capacity but I still implore you guys to leave us alive even if it means more work on your part because this has been a sub community for a long time that a lot of people have put so much into. Arguing for a banlist and ensuring that I as a host will modkill rule breaches while also reporting it is the most I can do to help make it just a little bit easier to moderate.

Sorry if that's long-winded and may be seen as arguing about a decision but I have been watching the games and community closely ever since you had to step in on the Renaissance game and get to the point of mod-editing posts @Vrisnem and that's my judgement of the situation, what I think it calls for.

Also I assume the blacklisting rule has more to do with a group of people excluding a person because of personal dramas and/or picking on the person. I understand it's personal in a vacuum but if it's outlined as 'if you had to be modkilled/reported or have had a moderator edit your post, you are banned from playing X amount of games'

Or

'if you clearly and purposefully throw a game you are banned from playing a game in the cellar (temporary or permanent)'

I don't think it's in any way personal to temporarily 'blacklist' members from playing a game when it's an established thing worded this way in the rules whereas if hosts are accepting or denying WotC requests behind the scenes it's a much more icky thing for the individual on the receiving end.

If the reason for the 'no blacklisting' is not what I assume and it's just the concept of blacklisting happening to begin with I'm not sure what to say, it's going to remain a bit more difficult to moderate or the decision will be made to shut it down because mafia is mafia.

Knowing what has happened in the past when more orderliness was proposed I can understand why you lot are unanimous about there being no cellar moderator but...it would be helpful. I understand that it's weird to have a staff member just for one subforum but we are at a 'it needs to be able to moderate itself or we get rid of it' but...I honestly don't think it has been going well ever since the ban list was abandoned and there were no longer any mods interested in mafia. But we're going to continue accumulating more players because of New Horizons and games may get slightly larger so it gets that much more taxing for you Vrisnem. I also understand you'd need the right person to begin with even if you did change your minds, someone who hasn't had any incidents and won't have periods of IRL busyness and doesn't have a personality where it would get to their head.

So yeah this is tough. Again, sorry ahead of time that this will be long and rambly, the TL;DR is that I'm still saying we need 'hosts must modkill for (insert rule breach)' and that a banlist can be made to be impersonal enough to not feel like an icky type of blacklisting.

I already feel like I should have made this post more presentable/easy on the eyes.

 

[Chris]

Hi @Geoni, if a list of offences is necessary to ensure consistency between hosts then we are prepared to provide one.

We will not be making any exceptions from our regular forum rules for mafia players and this includes public blacklisting. If a user shows signs of being problematic in games then we can discreetly remove their posting privileges, just like we would with problematic users in other areas of the forum. If we did make the decision to restrict a user's posting rights then it is not something we would publicise.

We will be standing by our decision not to add a cellar moderator.

 

[Geoni]

Hi @Geoni, if a list of offences is necessary to ensure consistency between hosts then we are prepared to provide one.

We will not be making any exceptions from our regular forum rules for mafia players and this includes public blacklisting. If a user shows signs of being problematic in games then we can discreetly remove their posting privileges, just like we would with problematic users in other areas of the forum. If we did make the decision to restrict a user's posting rights then it is not something we would publicise.

We will be standing by our decision not to add a cellar moderator.

Fair enough on the no Cellar moderator thing, I was just addressing it.

If we create a set of established rules that moderators approve of, and apply it in a strict and straightforward manner, then effectively we as players aren't blacklisting and the ban list is to be considered a moderator action and not a member action.

Rule:

"If your posts are insulting and disrespectful enough to require moderator action you will automatically be replaced or modkilled and disallowed from joining the next 3 games.

If a host does not enforce this rule their game will be ended and the thread locked."

Rule in action:

Geoni: *gets super nasty with someone in the game and it is reported*

"Geoni has been rude and disrespectful towards another player to the point where posts had to be edited or deleted. This constitutes a breach of forum rule 1.1. Geoni has been substituted/modkilled and will now be disallowed from joining the next three games, as per The Cellar terms of agreement."

(Speaking of which we could literally make Cellar rules as terms of agreement, require everyone to post acknowledgement of the consequences of not following them before being allowed to play, and keep it pinned. Not only that but being put on a public tempban list could even be part of the agreement.)

At which point you might as well be utilizing a public ban list because it was announced in the thread. If it is not announced in the thread it would be an unfair confusion for those who are putting the effort in. But if you wouldn't budge there that's just something that'll have to be assumed and PM'd to the player and next three hosts in the queue. It's less organized and takes away from the preventative quality of behaviors that constituted the tempban. It's a learning tool that helps us better ourselves as people and as a community, when we can see how -not- to go about things.

If you are against even disallowing players from being banned from joining games after having to have been moderated in one, then you will be giving yourself more work and have to hover around like a hawk the next game they join, which is not what you seem to want to do. And it's not beneficial to go about it that way in the long run if we don't want the team to just throw their hands up and close the Cellar.

I'm also going off the assumption that if you have to mute a player they would of course be getting replaced/modkilled. If I'm wrong in this assumption I am unwaveringly proposing it be accepted as it would be highly unfair to everyone involved if the alternative is them continuing the behavior after the muting ends and the game is shut down. That almost happened to one of the most high effort games TBT has seen, kinda.

 

[Chris]

Hi @Geoni,

I feel you misunderstood my post. If we think we need to ban a user from participating in mafia, we will enforce this without informing the community. You'll be none the wiser. Hosts won't hear a thing. It'll be as if that user simply lost interest and walked away. This is how we handle problematic users throughout the rest of the forum.

 

[Damniel]

Hi @Geoni,

I feel you misunderstood my post. If we think we need to ban a user from participating in mafia, we will enforce this without informing the community. You'll be none the wiser. Hosts won't hear a thing. It'll be as if that user simply lost interest and walked away. This is how we handle problematic users throughout the rest of the forum.

in an instance where a player is banned, how should hosts go about finding a replacement/modkilling the slot? if a player just disappears, then i think it can be tricky as a host trying to figure out what to do with the slot. though i suppose that if a player is being banned from mafia, it should be fairly obvious why that player just suddenly disappeared

 

[Chris]

in an instance where a player is banned, how should hosts go about finding a replacement/modkilling the slot? if a player just disappears, then i think it can be tricky as a host trying to figure out what to do with the slot. though i suppose that if a player is being banned from mafia, it should be fairly obvious why that player just suddenly disappeared

They will likely already have been removed from the game via modkill before a decision is made to ban them from mafia, so I doubt this scenario would occur.

If you mean in the scenario that a user is banned from the forum outright (for any reason) you will not be informed. In this case usual mafia inactivity rules would apply.

 

[Ace Marvel]

@Vrisnem you said in the game thread that post have to be in English only, I read the rules and it's not really clear, I found this to be the closest, but I would like to suggest if possible to put it more clearly so it doesn't happen again. Thank you.

• Incoherent threads or posts with purposely poor grammar.

 

[Jacob]

I didn't see the rule-breaking posts in question, but I cannot understand why this is such a common issue here. I always found it super easy not to bring in personal attacks to a game. I'd be crushed if the cellar got closed so I will be reporting posts from here on

 

[Chris]

@Vrisnem you said in the game thread that post have to be in English only, I read the rules and it's not really clear, I found this to be the closest, but I would like to suggest if possible to put it more clearly so it doesn't happen again. Thank you.

• Incoherent threads or posts with purposely poor grammar.

I'll pass this onto Jeremy, thank you. We have had a number of 'unwritten rules' in the past that we've been making an effort to get down in writing more recently and I guess this one slipped our minds!

 

[Geoni]

Doesn't their avatar disappear if they are banned?

 

[Chris]

Doesn't their avatar disappear if they are banned?

Since the upgrade to TBT 3.0 there are no indicators on a users account to show they are banned.

 

[Geoni]

Well... I've thrown the suggestions into the thread in case y'all ever change your mind about not making a blacklisting exception for mafia.

 

[epona]

I didn't see the rule-breaking posts in question, but I cannot understand why this is such a common issue here. I always found it super easy not to bring in personal attacks to a game. I'd be crushed if the cellar got closed so I will be reporting posts from here on

+1 to this and i think we all just probably need to be more diligent about reporting posts. even if you're not the one doing the insulting or the one at the receiving end of it, the toxicity and personal attacks in recent games really really ruin it for everyone else too because it's uncomfortable to read, impossible to ignore and difficult to play around.

would be a shame if the cellar closed because it has such a long history on the site (that i personally have dipped in and out of over the years) so if this is what we have to do then i guess that's that

 

[Chris]

What I have taken in from my discussion with some of you is that while this is simplistic and straightforward for us, because we will be enforcing our existing procedures, it seems complex to you because you aren't familiar with the nuances of how we operate.

We will have a post up by Friday that builds on the post I made previously, and the discussion here, that makes it clear how The Cellar needs to operate to be brought in line with the forum guidelines. This will be approved by multiple staff members before it is made public. Ideally, our goal is that this will be straightforward enough that it will reduce rule-breaking—because everyone will be on the same page about what constitutes a rule break—and in turn can reduce the need for staff intervention in games. If staff intervention is needed, the action(s) we will take will be outlined. It won't be as strict as you are potentially imagining (e.g. we're not going to suggest the host remove you from a game for a minor offence when you otherwise have a clean slate) so please don't worry about that.

A few of you have shown you have a good understanding of what it is we are looking to achieve here so thank you for the reassurance that you will comply.

 

[Antonio]

What I have taken in from my discussion with some of you is that while this is simplistic and straightforward for us, because we will be enforcing our existing procedures, it seems complex to you because you aren't familiar with the nuances of how we operate.

We will have a post up by Friday that builds on the post I made previously, and the discussion here, that makes it clear how The Cellar needs to operate to be brought in line with the forum guidelines. This will be approved by multiple staff members before it is made public. Ideally, our goal is that this will be straightforward enough that it will reduce rule-breaking—because everyone will be on the same page about what constitutes a rule break—and in turn can reduce the need for staff intervention in games. If staff intervention is needed, the action(s) we will take will be outlined. It won't be as strict as you are potentially imagining (e.g. we're not going to suggest the host remove you from a game for a minor offence when you otherwise have a clean slate) so please don't worry about that.

A few of you have shown you have a good understanding of what it is we are looking to achieve here so thank you for the reassurance that you will comply.

Would this be an announcement thread or a cellar-exclusive thread?

 

[Chris]

Would this be an announcement thread or a cellar-exclusive thread?

It would be posted in The Cellar so that it can be easily referenced.

As I've just posted over in the queue thread, I'd be willing to run a small game as a 'trial run' starting this weekend if anyone thinks it would help to have a staff-led game with feedback on conduct. It might make everyone feel more comfortable with easing into the changes in rule enforcement. If you do not think this will be helpful that is fine too. Just let me know what you think is best.

 

[Chris]

Our Guidelines for TBT Mafia are now up.

 

[Trent the Paladin]

Our Guidelines for TBT Mafia are now up.

"This would include playing against your win condition,"

Would this fall under something for hosts to report then? IE Most games probably consider voting to elim/lynch yourself against wincon, would that mental game of chicken be forbidden? Or is this specific instances where like say I leak mafia team to a town aligned buddy cuz I hate my teammates?

 

[Chris]

"This would include playing against your win condition,"

Would this fall under something for hosts to report then? IE Most games probably consider voting to elim/lynch yourself against wincon, would that mental game of chicken be forbidden? Or is this specific instances where like say I leak mafia team to a town aligned buddy cuz I hate my teammates?

Yes, this is something we would expect the host to report to us.

The latter example, of leaking the mafia team, is what we would consider playing against your win con. Someone voting for themselves wouldn't warrant us interfering.

 

[Damniel]

thank you for posting the rules vrisnem!



unrelated to rules and guidelines, can we begin to normalize locked thread nights? i feel that having the thread open during the night is stressful to both alignments. for town i find silent nights beneficial to preventing blues from unknowingly softing their roles and also allowing them to revisit old topics instead of catching up on new content made. as mafia i find silent nights as a good way to take a break from faking lynch reactions and reads, and focus purely on coordinating kills. in both cases, i find locking the thread just a nice way to allow all players a break when players can be in games for almost 2 weeks

thoughts on this? i know open nights have been the norm here but I’m liking games that lock it up