Newbie Setup (Matrix6 implemented)

[borkjerfkin]

3 weeks for a 9p has always seemed really long to me.

[TheButtonmen]

I just make up my own deadlines.

yolo?

[zoraster]

well, actually I think what zach is saying is give mods leeway to make that choice.

[quadz08]

That's how I thought it was at the moment, actually.

SO

[Zachrulez]

@Quadz

But umm... the 3 week deadline is a maximum, there's nothing actually stopping newbie mods from running a shorter deadline.

Actually there is--supposedly? It's a weird thing. I asked singer whether I could cut them down to two weeks, and she said no.

It looks like 3 weeks is being currently enforced as a mandatory deadline, not a maximum.

[quadz08]

I have been told otherwise, I belieeeeeeve more recently than Tierce was told that (I PMed Tierce to ask).

But I don't really remember, so.

[callforjudgement]

The rules definitely used to be "mods cannot extend deadlines to beyond 3 weeks regardless of the circumstances". That seems to have warped into "deadlines must be 3 weeks exactly" at some point.

[Mr. Flay]

Christ, this argument again?

I've only recently seen 3 week deadlines in newbie games. And that's cause they're compulsory.

This is incorrect, actually. VRK just requires that Days be

no longer than

three weeks; I asked.

[Faraday]

And yet...

[Mr. Flay]

Yes, and? singer got shoved into the job with little training. I doubt she has thought much about that particular rule.

Speaking of which, someone should compile a list of 'suggestions' from this thread for her to consider. I can't imagine she'll have time to read all 20 pages right away.

[Tierce]

Flay, the point is that if that is what the listmod tells me to do, I don't contradict her directions. Whether or not she was "shoved into the job with little training" and whether those directions should or should not be followed is obviously not for me to decide, thus why I'm bringing it up as a rule she

did

enforce when asked about it.

[Faraday]

Citing a VRK post in April 2011 (or communication with VRK) and it taking precedent over what the current list mod said is weird, expecting people to think it would take precedent without knowing is even more weird. Basically the argument came up because things were unclear; I've no idea why that would/should surprise.


There's quite a lot to summarise? fake e: I think the main points were a few new set-ups were proposed, people wanted to know about newbies not being started in batches. That seems to be the gist but there's probably a bit more there as that's off the top of my head.

[Tierce]

a) New set-ups being proposed;
b) Why do new games not start in batches more often (while still letting a one-game allowance for replacement potential);
c) What is the final say on how deadlines are supposed to work in the Newbie queue.

[N]

I just finished a vengeful with four newbies in which I was scum. I feel like I strongarmed them into a townie lynch/vengekill combo, so I don't think having it as the actual newbie set up would be fair; if the IC rolled scum, the newbies wouldn't stand much chance.

[Mr. Flay]

Flay, the point is that if that is what the listmod tells me to do, I don't contradict her directions. Whether or not she was "shoved into the job with little training" and whether those directions should or should not be followed is obviously not for me to decide, thus why I'm bringing it up as a rule she

did

enforce when asked about it.

I know, and I'm speaking from my alabaster throne as Newbie List Mod Emeritus. I think

if

when she DOES think about it, she'll make the sensible choice.

[Jennifer]

Comments like this don't encourage participation in other queues either:

I want to in... but there's too many first starters... We have a newbie zone for a reason. No offense, but flakers are my fear, not necessarily the inexperience, although that's a pain too.

Not that I don't sympathize or understand where Benmage is coming from. But it does discourage new people from feeling welcomed to join in Mafiscum games outside of the Newbie queue.

[CityElectric]

Comments like this don't encourage participation in other queues either:

I want to in... but there's too many first starters... We have a newbie zone for a reason. No offense, but flakers are my fear, not necessarily the inexperience, although that's a pain too.

Not that I don't sympathize or understand where Benmage is coming from. But it does discourage new people from feeling welcomed to join in Mafiscum games outside of the Newbie queue.

I think he's specifically mentioning first-timers, for whom it's great to play a newbie game. The problem is: how to get those people out after they've played that first game.

[mastin2]

Bumping this again.

I checked the Road to Rome again, and saw that--as far as I can tell--the 2of4 setup is

still

the only one being run, which means that changes have

still

not been made.
We've been talking about this for months. Surely there has to have been some progress, so I was wondering if I could get a status update on what's being done.

[Ether]

I'm not really clear why more SEs and ICs aren't put into games when there's a fair amount of backlog? I know that we can't go back to the 3:4 IC:newbie games of my childhood, but the signup lists seem long enough to get at least a few games with a better ratio when it builds up.

[zoraster]

Because the games aren't for ICs and SEs? Having a backlog of willing participants in those categories is a great thing, not something to be "fixed"

[Ether]

You could use that argument to cut out SEs and ICs entirely. The games are

for

newbies, sure, but more ICs and SEs is a good goal if we're trying to get those newbies educated, interested in all the odd theory and potential and playstyles the game has to offer, and start them up with some contacts.

I think the newbie queue is an important gutter to keep the demographic that is statistically most likely to flake out of other queues. But if I wanted to introduce somebody I liked to mafia, and keep them around, I would probably tell that person not to bother with it.

[zoraster]

Well, not really. I'm saying that the numbers we have are sufficient, and increasing them just to get through that backlog is a mistake. I'd much rather have a long SE/IC backlog that not have one at all.

[Ether]

I don't really agree that they're sufficient. (I wouldn't think this even if every individual IC has gotten much better since I last paid attention to the Road to Rome, but I kind of suspect they haven't.) I think the long/none backlog comment is pretty obviously a false dichotomy, too; when it actually got short, you could go back to rationing until more ICs showed up. That would strictly be an improvement over the current situation.

[zoraster]

It probably hasn't. But if it hasn't, then there's no reason to increase the number of ICs in the game, is there? The amount of "good" that comes from increasing IC supply in a game is fairly limited. The goal of a newbie game is to (1) expose new players to new concepts (2) provide an area where newbies feel more at home being newbies and (3) create a newbie quarantine, so to speak. Those aren't really furthered by increasing the number of experienced players in the game.

[Ether]

Strongly disagree. The amount that an extra IC, even a less competent one and certainly a strong one, can help and encourage newbies just by being there and demonstrating that every IC is an individual and that there are all sorts of techniques that different ICs will swear by and that Mafiascum produces all sorts of players, is huge. And when the one-IC system doesn't always have good ICs to showcase, as you've agreed, that demonstration is more important than ever!