Mafiascum.net

I think there's been a bit of discussion about the role of spectators - especially having posting access within confessionals. I've only really seen them here on this website and I know there are varying degrees of enthusiasm for them. I enjoy the role but I actually am not sure as a mod how I feel about the necessity for spectators to post in confessionals.

So without revealing any ongoing games, I guess it would be good to ask the following questions specific to the role of spectators posting within the confessional. I think there's little concern for spectator being allowed a separate forum for discussion.

A) how did spectating start here in the first place?
B) what specific roles do mods see for the spectators?
C) what roles have spectators believe they have filled in games before?
D) as a player, how likely would you post your thoughts without seeing posts from spectators?

D) Not at all

A) I don't know
B) I think they're seen as a good way to get players to post in their confessionals more. Some mods are motivated enough to keep asking confessional questions and also good at thinking of questions, but most have enough to do with the running of the game.
C) see above. Also, the spectators having a place to chat with each other keeps people interested in the community and in survivor while they're not playing imo.
D) I'd post no matter what. I like talking about myself, and writing my thoughts out helps me think.

D) I would be way less likely to

I enjoy seeing spectators post or give feedback in my confessional, so I try to reciprocate that when I spectate.

A) Spectators were somewhat bored, and wanted to ask questions. They didn't feel like they were getting the full story. We tried it out in a game with some restrictions, and it's stuck.
B) I think the role of specs is pretty well defined. I like that they can go about and ask questions and are occasionally important to a challenge or such.

A) how did spectating start here in the first place? idk
B) what specific roles do mods see for the spectators? I think they keep the game fun, exciting and give an audience aspect.
C) what roles have spectators believe they have filled in games before? idk
D) as a player, how likely would you post your thoughts without seeing posts from spectators? None. They are the reason I do it.

Spectators form an important function. As long as what they say is only said on the board and not in private, I think they are a benefit to the community in every way

I actually think it would really actively harm the confessional process if they were removed for a lot of people, which would not only affect specs but also players who want to see other players thought processes post game

As a player specs have asked me questions that got out info I otherwise wouldnt have even considered sharing. Even if there was incentive to post in confessionals without spec prompting (like in LoL) I feel specs enhance confessional posting

If anything I would want specs to post more and have more incentive

Like I wish we had some way to express gratitude to people who have consistently enriched games as specs

In post 5, animorpherv1 wrote:A) Spectators were somewhat bored, and wanted to ask questions. They didn't feel like they were getting the full story. We tried it out in a game with some restrictions, and it's stuck.
B) I think the role of specs is pretty well defined. I like that they can go about and ask questions and are occasionally important to a challenge or such.

I won't disagree that specs enhance a game, but I think there's a line between what is needed for post game analysis and what is needed for spectator needs. That's why I'm not sure the role is defined.

I actually would like to hear more about the importance to a challenge, as that's a point not yet brought up.

In post 6, hiplop wrote:
Spectators form an important function. As long as what they say is only said on the board and not in private, I think they are a benefit to the community in every way

Benefit yes, but is it a necessity?

Why does it have to be a necessity? Is being a benefit not good enough?

We don't see it but I believe in actual confessionals on the show, the contestants get asked a lot of questions to answer. We only see the answer portions but it's not like they go off to randomly rant about Ozzy five hundred times just because he's always on their mind. People are more likely to talk when they're not talking to themselves, that's just psychology.

If the cost of spectators outweighs the benefit that would be something to process. I think it's important to discuss the intent of having spectators inside confessionals to improve the process.

I think my question is why do spectators uniquely fill a role which mods or players can't fill.

You didn't outline a cost to having specs. The cost to not having specs is clearly less community engagement.
(something I think mafia games suffer from too, not being able to talk about a game for months is in general infuriating.)

Mods are inherently different from specs because they have to run the game. Some mods ask lots of questions, some don't. Specs don't technically have a vested interest in the game being completed and don't have to spend a lot of their time worrying about other things, so while mods can fill this role, they don't always and if they have to or feel the need to, then it could end up interfering with other things in their lives.

Players are extremely different from specs because players have an agenda. When you talk to a spec, that spec may or may not be rooting for you, but cannot actively cause your downfall or help you succeed. Talking to players is work, effort. Talking to specs in a confessional is rest, it's more for synthesizing thoughts, organizing your head, cooling off from the work that it takes to play these games.

mods can fill the role but that's another burden on them and don't always, players can't because they're just different.

Yeah I don't see what cost there is to specs

conclave had no spec posting and it was fucking shit

specs could communicate through the mods, but yeah it wasn't ideal

A) how did spectating start here in the first place?
-idk
B) what specific roles do mods see for the spectators?
-theyre people to talk to other than your comods. it's fun to see people get excited about the game & talk about it because nobody's gonna go back after the game and reread everything to be excited about it then. it's the only sense of a "omg live" feel

C) what roles have spectators believe they have filled in games before?
-i usually dont spectate because it's hard for me to keep up with players without knowing who they are.

D) as a player, how likely would you post your thoughts without seeing posts from spectators?
-almost literally zero chance. maybe for certain mods

One of my fave parts of the game is seeing everyones confessionals after

A) how did spectating start here in the first place?
Mass Effect was the first game I spectated, and a quick look over that shows that was possibly one of the main games that popularized spectators posting in confessionals, as there were a massive amount of active ones there. The only reason it's allowed though is because Xalxe mentioned that being a feature of Mushroom Kingdom, which is basically the beginning of anonymous Survivors on MS. Before my time, so I don't know for sure, but anything recent, such as the ELOs or the rankdown, treats it as the first one. So basically the same IDK that everyone else is giving, with the bonus mention that it has been something that was done.

B) what specific roles do mods see for the spectators?
I'm not a mod, but in terms of official roles sometimes spectators are used as judges in challenges that need them.

C) what roles have spectators believe they have filled in games before?
Usually as a spectator, I'm honestly mostly amusing myself. Sometimes I ask specific questions if there is a particular thing that is unclear, but usually it's just joking around and being sarcastic. I do want to say though, is that I don't remember the ability of spectators to post in confessionals ever causing a problem, despite that being a thing for a long time. I'm pretty sure the recent problem with spectators is solely about their actions in the spectator forums.

D) as a player, how likely would you post your thoughts without seeing posts from spectators?
The first time I played a game of Mafia on this site, I kept a QT where I posted whatever my thoughts were at the time. I would talk in my confessional even if no one could actually see it, as I find it to be a good way to organize my thoughts and keep records of things. (And I kind of enjoy posting in my confessional FAR more than actually sending PMs, but I'm probably in the minority there. Sometimes I think I just like to hear myself type. Kind of like what I'm doing now.)

In post 16, Drench wrote:conclave had no spec posting and it was fucking shit

yeah it was bad. spec posting makes me enjoy my confessional a lot more.

In post 20, KingdomAces wrote: I do want to say though, is that I don't remember the ability of spectators to post in confessionals ever causing a problem, despite that being a thing for a long time. I'm pretty sure the recent problem with spectators is solely about their actions in the spectator forums.

yeah the recent stuff was just us being dicks in the spec forum. I do remember some drama in PSV with some specs crossing anonymity rules/expressing in strongly worded terms their opinion on the situation. Let's not mention that ever again.

In post 0, pablito wrote:A) how did spectating start here in the first place?
B) what specific roles do mods see for the spectators?
C) what roles have spectators believe they have filled in games before?
D) as a player, how likely would you post your thoughts without seeing posts from spectators?

A) Personally i started spectating when I was cut from a player list. It's just a thing that happens here. I'm yet to play any offsite, but I believe all the ones I've located have something similar, whether they have posting access in confessionals or not (as I haven't looked at them harder than that). For in general, probably just someone asking if they could watch after a game filled, that or it was based on the same type of information that dead threads in mafia do, and how those sometimes attract additional spectators.

B) Keep the players engaged with finding out what is happening in the game, modding without information such as that just means we don't get as good games as the mods aren't able to deliver to the same quality of service.
They're also helpful in being able to occasionally help run challenges, and can also playtest things beforehand, and have an unbiased opinion without generally knowing who is behind each of the players. (although this lately isn't true)

C) I think I just answered this with my answer for B, probably because until I run a game with an additional use for them, the above answers are what i see as a spectator that generally hasn't actually done most of that stuff.

D) Based on how much I have posted in my confessionals between each of my games, I think how much I post in my confessional has actually become due to what I've seen in other people's confessionals after games have ended. I don't believe having the spectators there has directly help me post more than I otherwise would have, but it is hard to tell.
Like my first survivor (Mario Bros), I would probably have just avoided a confessional if I was actually given one. (PTs didn't exist yet on site, so it would have been a quicktopic), This is probably because I basically never actually messaged many people privately, and instead was just using tribe chats. After learning about that information about the need to message for my second game (Doctor Who), I think I utilized my confessional with the help of the spectators. Even just a couple of posts right at the start of the confessional (even if it's in the Welcome thread) probably help everyone get to using them.
I consider any confessional I have my personal blog, and will use them even if we took spectators away from access to posting in it.

I guess something I didn't think about much when I made the original post is that players are playing not just for themselves and the thrill of the game, but also because this is a public game. Survivor is on tv, and some players shill to the audience just as much as to themselves. Mafia games sometimes are spectated, but often not until afterwards - and dead threads are now more commonplace. Makes me wonder if any player who enters a large social game is not playing to the audience at all?