Scummies Ideas, Suggestions and Comments Thread

[Psyche]

how will the changes make it more fun and why would we want to quantify fun anyway

[Psyche]

actually all my complaining was based on the mistaken idea that kodak moment had been removed
there's still enough rewarding of actually interesting work that i don't care to complain anymore

[Nachomamma8]

...what?

[Nachomamma8]

i think that i read something that said that team awards were eliminated to make the scummies more legitimate, and think that i will probably reread in the morning when i can parse things better because that's the type of thing that's too ridiculous to be true

[zoraster]

more meaningful perhaps, not really more legitimate.

[SleepyKrew]

One of the team awards. The scumteam one is still there.

[T-Bone]

I agree that getting rid of the entire town award was a good step. I also agree an award should have replaced it (or as with Don Corleone, rolled in with the best mafia catcher award). So that at least we have the option of saying 'this group of players in this game played extraordinary'. Not that we necessarily have to give it out if someone is nominated like that, but if the option is there I think that's a fair enough compromise.

Really I think the problem (at least this year) is not enough people were nominated that there are discussions of "ugh, none of these people/things deserve, why weren't there more nominations?"

Even with an increased workload, we should encourage nominations rather than discourage it. How many good games with maybe nomination worthy performances have been left off because either the playerlist is newer/less known, or there are vocal players within the game arguing against the merits of some performance or event. We've put nominations on a pedestal, and we really shouldn't. It also doesn't help that when nominations get made in the thread there are sometimes arguments about the merits of that nomination. "oh they shouldn't be nominated, they suck". We should also trust the judging process into awarding the best to the best rather than discouraging nominations from the beginning.

[zoraster]

I have an easier-to-use (for us at least) nomination form that's ready to rock whenever the steering committee decides to use it. One idea I had was to have the locking listmod link to the nomination form/description when they move/lock the game post. I think that'd probably result in more nominations.

[wgeurts]

Nominate this thread for "Silent Hill"

[Venmar]

Thanx

[Nachomamma8]

Best Pro-Town Team: Yeeeesh. We tried to find a way to make this one work, but it feels rather wrong. In mafia, there's really no "cohesion" among town -- with no information, there's no way for people to reliably "team up". In theory, this award was a counter balance to the Best Pro-Scum Team award. In practice, this wound up being given to a town team where about 50% of the team (or less) really deserved the award, while everyone else got carried. Having that many banners floating around for what basically amounts to "congratulations on getting a town role PM while X, Y, and Z were your alignment" devalues the Scummies all around, so the award has got to go.

The two significant points seem to be these:

-It's hard for town players to team up; true cohesion between town players rarely exist.
-It's unfair for undeserving players who got carried to win an award, and it's more likely for players who got carried to exist in a "best town".

The first part I absolutely agree with; it's much harder to have good cohesion as town than it is as scum because you can't truly trust one another, but I'd also argue that the cohesion is much more valuable/impressive. It's harder to judge, sure, but there are times when a town team is dragged by one player's excellent play and everyone else just sort of follows, and there are times when the town win is more a result of a group of players using each other as sounding boards, pushing different reads at different times.

The second part seems like a weird concern. Yes, there are undeserving players who get the award when they didn't actively contribute to the town win, but not every single town player will contribute to a town win even in an amazing game because that's not how playing town works. When a movie wins "Best Picture", people who didn't contribute positively to the creation of the movie can still say that they worked on a "Best Picture" winning movie and it's not a huge deal. I also think that most people involved in the game knows who deserves the "Best Town Win" banner and who doesn't; the only time I ever saw anyone touting a best town performance they didn't deserve seriously was Metal Sonic.

In my previous skimming (didn't read the whole thread, don't have time to finish but wanted to write something within a month), I also noticed an argument that Paragon already rewarded good town cohesion, which I don't think is a very good one because it's recognizing an individual and not a group of players. Yes, great people don't build themselves and blah blah blah, but an individual reward recognizes an individual.

I think a lot of the other changes are strong - I disagree with the removal of Best Scum Group for along the same lines I disagree with the removal of Best Town Group, but I think cutting out the dying Professor Mafia was an excellent move, changing Best Replacement also great along similar lines, swapping Don Corelone to single game is a great idea that I'm surprised didn't happen earlier, etc. I didn't mean to make this an afterthought but have to leave and am hoping that half-baked thoughts make me more likely to return in a near future than empty promises will.

[Psyche]

the only time I ever saw anyone touting a best town performance they didn't deserve seriously was Metal Sonic

only part of the post i could focus on

[xRECKONERx]

When a movie wins "Best Picture", people who didn't contribute positively to the creation of the movie can still say that they worked on a "Best Picture" winning movie and it's not a huge deal.

Sure, and that's why we have Game of the Year.

[xRECKONERx]

Best Pro-Town Team: Yeeeesh. We tried to find a way to make this one work, but it feels rather wrong. In mafia, there's really no "cohesion" among town -- with no information, there's no way for people to reliably "team up". In theory, this award was a counter balance to the Best Pro-Scum Team award. In practice, this wound up being given to a town team where about 50% of the team (or less) really deserved the award, while everyone else got carried. Having that many banners floating around for what basically amounts to "congratulations on getting a town role PM while X, Y, and Z were your alignment" devalues the Scummies all around, so the award has got to go.

The two significant points seem to be these:

-It's hard for town players to team up; true cohesion between town players rarely exist.
-It's unfair for undeserving players who got carried to win an award, and it's more likely for players who got carried to exist in a "best town".

The first part I absolutely agree with; it's much harder to have good cohesion as town than it is as scum because you can't truly trust one another, but I'd also argue that the cohesion is much more valuable/impressive. It's harder to judge, sure, but there are times when a town team is dragged by one player's excellent play and everyone else just sort of follows, and there are times when the town win is more a result of a group of players using each other as sounding boards, pushing different reads at different times.

But by its nature, working

as a group

is written into scum roles, whereas it's NOT possible to achieve that in every town -- the entire idea of mafia is "a team of informed individuals" versus "a majority of uninformed individuals". Town teams are a collection of individuals, and yes, sometimes they can come together / work together and truly make a cohesive performance, but playing well as town is not something that should be viewed in isolation. I stated elsewhere in this thread that

consistency

is one of the most important factors in town play, so awarding a single game performance is something we want to avoid, and it's something we would have to do if we gave out a town team award.

The second part seems like a weird concern. Yes, there are undeserving players who get the award when they didn't actively contribute to the town win, but not every single town player will contribute to a town win even in an amazing game because that's not how playing town works. When a movie wins "Best Picture", people who didn't contribute positively to the creation of the movie can still say that they worked on a "Best Picture" winning movie and it's not a huge deal. I also think that most people involved in the game knows who deserves the "Best Town Win" banner and who doesn't; the only time I ever saw anyone touting a best town performance they didn't deserve seriously was Metal Sonic.

This isn't winning "best picture", and it doesn't really translate. The Best Picture award is given to the

producers

of the film, not the entire cast and crew, and the

producers

are directly responsible for the film's quality. Someone claiming, "I worked on a Best Picture nominee!" is more similar to someone saying, "I played in a game that had a Best Town nominee!" which is acceptable, as both are functionally meaningless. We're also not really concerned with the people

in the game

knowing who "deserves" it and who doesn't -- the Scummies are a

sitewide

recognition of achievement.

In my previous skimming (didn't read the whole thread, don't have time to finish but wanted to write something within a month), I also noticed an argument that Paragon already rewarded good town cohesion, which I don't think is a very good one because it's recognizing an individual and not a group of players. Yes, great people don't build themselves and blah blah blah, but an individual reward recognizes an individual.

See: argument about consistency. If players come together, great, fantastic -- that's one example of exhibiting one characteristic of good town play. If they carry that across multiple games, they deserve the nomination. If multiple people on those "teams" carry it across multiple games, they all deserve to get nominated

individually

. We cut dead awards to stop giving out participation trophies, and best town team is ACTUALLY LITERALLY giving out participation awards.

[SleepyKrew]

Now that the Scummies thread no longer has nomination posts, why can't policy discussions take place there?

[hiplop]

as both are functionally meaningless

ur a little off with the meaningless part about working on something that won best picture

[wgeurts]

Let's face it, no matter how many protest nothing will ever change

[xRECKONERx]

Now that the Scummies thread no longer has nomination posts, why can't policy discussions take place there?

People still can post support/nominee information there. We're not locking the thread. We're just aggregating information from the spreadsheet/form instead.

as both are functionally meaningless

ur a little off with the meaningless part about working on something that won best picture

I'm not particularly interested in arguing semantics over a metaphor that really broke down the second you apply any scrutiny to it.

Let's face it, no matter how many protest nothing will ever change

Things change almost yearly, actually, with the Scummies.

[fferyllt]

I am posting to register a "do not like" regarding the dropping of the team awards. I think those awards are beneficial to the spirit of cooperation and community that takes place in many MS games, and that I've loved in many of the games I've played at MS, whether my team won or not.

I realize that there is a lot of work involved in judging the Scummies, and people unhappy with the discontinuance of these awards should probably make a commitment to help in that regard if needed. The year I volunteered, I semi-flaked after my dad's terminal cancer diagnosis, and wasn't able to get back to the games my group was assigned until that December. At which time I learned I'd been removed from the judging group without notification or query as to why I'd been quiet.

I'm posting that explanation mostly because I don't want my "do not like" to be disregarded because I'm all criticism and no volunteerism.

I'll be happy to volunteer again, whenever needed, and I hope I never have another year like 2014 in terms of unexpected but lengthy family crises.

[xRECKONERx]

Are people just posting in this thread without reading the already EXTENSIVELY laid out points as to why changes were made? If you're going to comment you "don't like" something, explain why you don't agree with the changes and the stated reasoning for the changes.

For what it's worth, ffery, you were removed because it had been a very long time without any activity. This was the year we tried year-round judging, and people were selected and expected to be consistently active.

Here's the timeline from our point of view:

• We added you in February 2014. You made a welcome post, and that was it.
  
• We kept gently nudging/prodding the judges from February until early Summer.
  
• You finally posted in early June to let us know it would be a week or two until you could get serious about it.
  
• We PMed you about your inactivity about two weeks later to ask what was up, and you said you were busy.
  
• After another six weeks without any word in the forums, you posted in early August to tell us it would be another few days before you could dig into it.
  
• Exactly one month later, you posted again, asking "how should we start the judging process" that had been ongoing for six months at that point.
  
• Two weeks after that, you posted and let everyone know your laptop charger was down and you couldn't judge until you got a new one.
  
• One month after that, you posted and started asking questions about whether you should recuse yourself from several categories due to your participation in the games nominated.
  
• Six weeks after that, you finally posted an opinion after the other judges had already discussed and decided on a winner

From the span of February 2014 until December 2014, you made a total of 7 posts in the Scummies forums: one welcome post, three posts saying you'd get to it eventually, two posts asking about procedures and policies that had already been discussed and laid out since February (which showed us you weren't bothering to read the threads), and one post with an actual opinion in it that just said "I agree with everyone else".

We needed active judges, and we made several attempts to prod people along and give multiple opportunities for people to get back on board and contribute. When the end of the year came and there was still almost no activity from some people, we cut them loose and brought in a fresh batch of judges to hammer out the awards in crunch time. I am totally sympathetic to real life problems taking over, and the only reason I'm pointing this out is because it feels very disingenuous to say we "removed you without notification or query" when it had been an 11 month cycle of "prod ffery, promises of activity, then nothing".

[fferyllt]

I knew what I was asking for when I made my post. I know what my participation generally looked like, though I don't have the ability to actually review it. My point mostly was that as someone who would like to see the awards continue, I'm willing to put my time where my interests are, and to assure you guys that I am not anything resembling a habitual flake. I was pretty upset with myself about the scummy judging, and contacted UT about it and apologized as soon as I discovered I'd been removed.

I've read the explanations for why the committee removed the team awards. I think the awards are worth the hassle personally, because I think encouraging and rewarding cohesive behavior from teams results in better-played games, and in overall better atmosphere in games.

My offer to help stands. I seriously doubt I'll ever have another personal year like 2014, and if I do, I won't repeatedly kid myself about getting to things in a couple weeks.

If people are by and large ok with or indifferent about these changes then this thread will attest to that.

If I (and others) don't actually come here and say "do not like", then you guys are making decisions in a vacuum that is not of your devising.

[xRECKONERx]

I think encouraging and rewarding cohesive behavior from teams results in better-played games

literally this exact talking point has been gone over and rebuked in this very thread

[fferyllt]

I don't agree with the rebuttal. :/

And that is why I've posted.

Now you know. Thanks for listening.

[xRECKONERx]

And you didn't address the rebuttal so how were we to know you read it.

[Untrod Tripod]

My offer to help stands.

If your main goal was to offer to help judge, this is not how you should have gone about it.

At which time I learned I'd been removed from the judging group without notification or query as to why I'd been quiet.

and I really don't appreciate having my actions publicly misrepresented the way you have done.