Yggdrasil - Stratum FINAL -


User avatar
Something_Smart
Something_Smart
He/him
Somewhat_Balanced
User avatar
User avatar
Something_Smart
He/him
Somewhat_Balanced
Somewhat_Balanced
Posts: 23112
Joined: November 17, 2015
Pronoun: He/him
Location: Upstate New York

Post Post #7550 (ISO) » Sat Jun 26, 2021 4:35 am

Post by Something_Smart »

Well, for one, Toogeloo didn't accurately paraphrase, so there's that.
It's always the same. When you fire that first shot, no matter how right you feel, you have no idea who's going to die. You don't know whose children are going to scream and burn. How many hearts will be broken. How many lives shattered. How much blood will spill, until everybody does what they're always going to have to do from the very beginning... SIT DOWN AND TALK!
User avatar
jjh927
jjh927
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
jjh927
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 12096
Joined: April 16, 2017

Post Post #7551 (ISO) » Sat Jun 26, 2021 4:45 am

Post by jjh927 »

In post 7549, Dunnstral wrote:You are making two different arguments right now jjh. You are saying that this mod kill was in error, and you are also that the bar for paraphrasing role pms should be changed

If you think that the bar should be changed, that is a fair discussion to have for future cases, but it doesn't have bearing on this game. The bar is back there in a place you don't agree with, and you can't get mad at all three of the people who agreed with where the bar was, just because you think it should be in a different place. These are different conversations. Basically, you can say that the Mastina kill shouldn't have happened because you don't agree with the rules, but you can't say that the ruling was applied incorrectly.

That's my take, I didn't want Mastina to have been modkilled either.
I don't think they're mutually exclusive- I think the mod kill was in error and that the rule regarding paraphrasing role PMs needs to be more clearly clarified for the sake of consistency and avoiding unnecessary modkills

As far as I'm aware, this wasn't ran by all the listmods, just one
"As best I can tell, jjh is some kind of wizard with mind control powers." -Jingle
User avatar
Dunnstral
Dunnstral
he/him
Goodfellas
User avatar
User avatar
Dunnstral
he/him
Goodfellas
Goodfellas
Posts: 39786
Joined: April 2, 2016
Pronoun: he/him

Post Post #7552 (ISO) » Sat Jun 26, 2021 4:49 am

Post by Dunnstral »

It sounds like you're asking for the rule to be changed, not clarified
User avatar
jjh927
jjh927
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
jjh927
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 12096
Joined: April 16, 2017

Post Post #7553 (ISO) » Sat Jun 26, 2021 4:55 am

Post by jjh927 »

I don't think people understand what "quote" means in "Do not quote communications with the moderator"
"As best I can tell, jjh is some kind of wizard with mind control powers." -Jingle
User avatar
Bingle
Bingle
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
Bingle
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 10078
Joined: July 21, 2019
Location: Bad Player Jail

Post Post #7554 (ISO) » Sat Jun 26, 2021 6:16 am

Post by Bingle »

In post 7550, Something_Smart wrote:Well, for one, Toogeloo didn't accurately paraphrase, so there's that.
Not saying that Toog should've been modkilled, but accuracy of the quote isn't really an issue. The appearance of quoting mod communications is just as bad as actually quoting mod communications, rightfully so, because mod confirmation via lack of action is an abusable concept.

Toog's was likely accepted because the formatting for it didn't resemble a role PM as much.


This whole discussion is why I use specifically relaxed quoting rules and try to provide complete information about role PMs/the ability to have a mod generated claim of whatever role they desire for my scumteams, FWIW, although I'm aware that mine is also not a perfect solution.
User avatar
Something_Smart
Something_Smart
He/him
Somewhat_Balanced
User avatar
User avatar
Something_Smart
He/him
Somewhat_Balanced
Somewhat_Balanced
Posts: 23112
Joined: November 17, 2015
Pronoun: He/him
Location: Upstate New York

Post Post #7555 (ISO) » Sat Jun 26, 2021 6:24 am

Post by Something_Smart »

In post 7554, Bingle wrote:The appearance of quoting mod communications is just as bad as actually quoting mod communications, rightfully so, because mod confirmation via lack of action is an abusable concept.
I would argue that the appearance of quoting is what actually matters. I didn't think mastina was trying to confirm her abilities by using the mod's phrasing. I don't think anyone did. The fact that a couple of phrases happened to match exactly doesn't really matter at all.
It's always the same. When you fire that first shot, no matter how right you feel, you have no idea who's going to die. You don't know whose children are going to scream and burn. How many hearts will be broken. How many lives shattered. How much blood will spill, until everybody does what they're always going to have to do from the very beginning... SIT DOWN AND TALK!
User avatar
Toogeloo
Toogeloo
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Toogeloo
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 8437
Joined: October 21, 2009
Location: Jusenkyo

Post Post #7556 (ISO) » Sat Jun 26, 2021 6:26 am

Post by Toogeloo »

For what it's worth, I would have never known that mastina had quoted much from her role pm. I just assumed she was stating how she interpreted her role. It wasn't until unwnd posted her role that I thought to myself, yeah there are a few lines of text in there that are verbatim, but I still would never have guessed it.
User avatar
Lukewarm
Lukewarm
Paragon of Mafia Hunters
User avatar
User avatar
Lukewarm
Paragon of Mafia Hunters
Paragon of Mafia Hunters
Posts: 9098
Joined: March 21, 2021

Post Post #7557 (ISO) » Sat Jun 26, 2021 8:00 am

Post by Lukewarm »

Just my two cents, as a spectator.

If Unwnd saw something he thought my be breaking the rules, and took it to a list mod, and the list mod decided it deserved a modkill - then unwnd has nothing to apologize for. The final decision came from the list mod, and if you think that the listmod's decision was incorrect, that is the person you should address with the issue.

You claim to want uniformity in how the decisions are made across games, but having this conversation with Unwnd does nothing to achieve the outcome you claim you want. That consistency is in the hands of the list mods.

Like, make a topic about the rule, say you want the list mods to clarify / adjust the metric they use to make modkill decisions. Have that discussion publicly, see how the rest of the player base feels about the rule, and see if you can get the list mods to weigh in.
User avatar
Lukewarm
Lukewarm
Paragon of Mafia Hunters
User avatar
User avatar
Lukewarm
Paragon of Mafia Hunters
Paragon of Mafia Hunters
Posts: 9098
Joined: March 21, 2021

Post Post #7558 (ISO) » Sat Jun 26, 2021 8:11 am

Post by Lukewarm »

But even then - Don't make it about Mastina or Unwnd

If you want consistency, it should probably be about the rule itself and how it is arbitrated by the list mods.
User avatar
Bingle
Bingle
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
Bingle
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 10078
Joined: July 21, 2019
Location: Bad Player Jail

Post Post #7559 (ISO) » Sat Jun 26, 2021 8:52 am

Post by Bingle »

^
User avatar
Bingle
Bingle
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
Bingle
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 10078
Joined: July 21, 2019
Location: Bad Player Jail

Post Post #7560 (ISO) » Sat Jun 26, 2021 8:54 am

Post by Bingle »

FWIW, I definitely think that conversation is one worth having, having seen this kind of situation come up twice very recently. (Here, and in yes's Lovers and Losers which thankfully only resulted in a reroll as an Open.)
User avatar
mastina
mastina
She/Her
False Prophet
User avatar
User avatar
mastina
She/Her
False Prophet
False Prophet
Posts: 16670
Joined: October 7, 2016
Pronoun: She/Her
Location: Between Snohomish and Monroe, WA
Contact:

Post Post #7561 (ISO) » Sat Jun 26, 2021 11:59 am

Post by mastina »

In post 7523, unwnd wrote:I'm not engaging in that conversation, either of you. You wanna be right? Be right. I don't fucking care. Don't sign up for my games in the determined future. That's your freedom and I will not take that from you.
For the record--this is rather unprofessional of you. If there is valid criticism to be had, it is valid criticism to be had and rejecting it in this way is rather unprofessional. (It did not slip past my notice that after I raised my, valid, criticisms of the decision, you blocked me on discord.)

I recognize that once a modkill is made, it cannot be undone--that does not mean that the modkill was the correct decision and one which is above being debated.
mastina wrote:I would like to voice my disagreement with the decision as I WAS very clearly paraphrasing--it wasn't word for word. I said exact key phrases because they were key phrases.

I said,
I target a player and they are Charmed
, but I didn't say I CHOOSE a player and the target BECOMES Charmed.
The former is a paraphrase of the latter.

I did verbatim say
bind the target, negating all support to them
but there's no way to paraphrase that wording. Bind, Negating, and Support are all key words, and the words used to support them were not ones I had ways to find workarounds/substitutes for. I did however break up the info the best I could, in this case that I didn't say "choose a target". I left info out of the original ability.

I said
I ensnare my target in a circle--anyone targeting that player takes 2 HP in damage
, but I didn't say I CHOOSE a target, I didn't say "that player", I didn't say "and any user" (I said anyone, which is a paraphrase!), I didn't say "who targets that player" (I said anyone targeting, which is a paraphrase!), and I didn't mention "for that stratum" at all. I also said 2 HP in damage, when the original role just said "2 damage". I added a word not there, because that's part of paraphrasing.

I said
I curse my target to be unable to be healed by utility abilities
, which is about as far away from
Choose a target. You will enact a curse upon them, where they may no longer be healed by utility abilities.
as you can get. It has the words 'target' 'curse', and then 'be healed by utility abilities' in common, and that's it. And Curse, Healed, Utility Abilities, are all key words that I can't substitute because they are game terminology that I would expect to be pertinent and relevant.

I said
My fourth ability, Dispel, 2-SP, is dispelling the curse circle. Doing so heals me for 2 HP.
, which has basically nothing in common with
Dispel (2 SP) [Active, Self-Targeting] Choosing to dispel your Curse Circle will cause you to heal for 2 damage instead.
. I said Dispel, Curse Circle, and '2'; everything else is paraphrased including heals instead of heal and HP instead of damage.

I said
My passive, Enlightenment, makes me gain 1 SP every time I successfully mark someone.
, which is a paraphrase of
Enlightenment [Passive] - Each successful mark will grant you 1 additional SP.
I didn't say 'each', I said 'successfully' instead of successful, I said 'gain' instead of 'grant', I didn't say 'additional', etc.

I said
I win when I mark 5 players. (Which means had I gotten a N0 action in I could've won on D5 but now it's pushed back to D6 at the earliest.) A target doesn't need to be alive to count.
, both breaking up the wincon with the parenthesis and very much not being verbatim
You have an individual win condition where you will win once you have marked 5 or more players. A target does not need to be alive in order for them to count.
. I didn't say "I have an individual win condition where I win once I mark 5 or more players", I paraphrased it heavily. The second half is closer, but even there wasn't verbatim. I said "doesn't" instead of "does not", and said "to count" instead of "in order for them to count".

I think it was pretty apparent I was making a good faith to paraphrase because this wasn't something I copy pasted at all. I manually typed it all up, no copy-pasting at all, and did paraphrase it as much as humanly possible while retaining key information.


I realize the decision has been made and cannot be unmade--but I would again voice my disagreement with the decision as
I WAS paraphrasing, the evidence is right there in how much unwnd redacted from the image shown. If I wasn't, there wouldn't have been the need to redact anything at all.
If I wasn't paraphrasing, there wouldn't have been any black text there at all.


But I WAS paraphrasing. I literally paraphrased, even just from the black text, over half of the PM. If you go into exact wording, it was much much much MORE than half of the PM. I paraphrased more than I didn't. I didn't copy-paste anything, I hand-wrote it all out in my own wording.

Claiming the exact name of mechanics is something that shouldn't break the game--I was under the impression that not saying the correct verbiage of the abilities would lead to others who had similar abilities thinking I was lying about them, because they are verbiage.

Like say this was on a site that had never run a mafia game--phrases like 'cop', 'investigate', 'innocent', 'result failed', etc. Might genuinely be things that you're comparing to 'marking', 'healing', etc. They are phrases that should be okay to SAY if you are otherwise making efforts to not verbatim quote.

I was trying to retain key information and make it clear while also making it be done in my own wording. I can't substitute out words that might be important key information crucial to understanding what I am describing. Like, I don't even know what marks do. I don't even know what curses do. I don't even know what supports are. I don't know any of that--so I have no gauge for what is 'forbidden' to say and what isn't forbidden to say.

If the game relies on you not saying certain phrases from your role when claiming, and requires you to be modkilled when you say those phrases but otherwise are stating things in your own words--that is poor design.

Especially since scum should have that sort of info available to them in fakeclaims.

There shouldn't be any advantage had in saying a phrase like 'mark', 'heal', 'support', etc.


I would like to even further back this by pointing out: I was under the impression what I did was okay, because someone else did similar earlier:
In post 138, Toogeloo wrote:unwnd is totally stoned face for this. I joked if I should roll a d20 for a skill check on my night action... Didn't even get a "lol" out of them.

Anyways. I have a pretty questionable innate action, and even more questionably use SP skill.

My innate skill is I can check people's current HP. I checked Save The Dragons last night (random.org). They have 3 HP. Comparatively, I have 5 HP.

My other ability, which costs 2 SP is to check a target and see if they are using SP as well the same night. I didn't use it last night.

My "class," is called Sovereign. I'm royalty or something.
Toogeloo wasn't modkilled for this. He was paraphrasing, but he used words like 'skill', 'innate', 'action', 'SP', 'check a target', etc.

Why was my offense modkill-worthy but Toogeloo's wasn't?

unwnd defended his decision to modkill me with,
unwnd wrote:you were a special designed role with certain phrasings and mechanics that were special to this game
claiming exact verbatim verifies mechanics and phrasings that could either confirm you are telling the truth
or give you an unfair advantage
And yet Toogeloo wasn't modkilled by this logic.

Toogeloo is a special designed role with certain phrasings and mechanics that were special to this game, and he claimed some of them verbatim, verifying mechanics and phrasings confirming that he was telling the truth.

In fact, at least two players townread Toogeloo specifically for this. I can point to morph the cat's townread on Toogeloo and its later backing, as well as Farkran here doing similar.

I was modkilled for the CHANCE I gained an unfair advantage, when Toogeloo who did this before I did actually GAINED said alleged unfair advantage and
wasn't
modkilled.

I again reiterate that I am aware that what is done cannot be undone.
But I will state again it was a very poor decision--one I am apparently meant to go to you, MariaR, about.
MariaR's response wrote:After reading over a post in question I was contacted by the mod and co-mod of a game asking for permission to modkill a player and after reading over the post and talking to the mod for I want to say around half an hour came to said choice that said post did 2 main things leading to the ok of a mod kill:

A) Make direct quotes from the role PM in question
B) Give an unfair advantage to the player in question/hurt the integrity of the game
(I will admit my one mistake here was I was under the assumption that other list mods were msg'd about this as well considering the game wasn't in my q)

If you would look at the site rules: https://wiki.mafiascum.net/index.php?ti ... Guidelines

One of the main rules is to not quote directly from your role pm. If we look at your post this very obviously breaks the rules. Taking out and replacing it with one word (And that word means the exact same thing as the one replaced) does not make the action taken okay.

Regardless of mechanics or not. If a Town Doctor made the same kind of post the same action would be taken. I hope this clears up any misunderstandings
my response wrote:I was not directly quoting. I was paraphrasing. I never said I was quoting my role PM. I never presented my quote as a quote. The longest string of exact wording was seven words in a row. And behind that, four. And behind that? Two. I literally reworded everything within the best of my abilities.

As for giving an unfair advantage to me, I would like to reiterate that Toogeloo gained townreads for his paraphrase yet no action was taken against him--he did so before I did. I can point to the posts in question where people directly townread Toogeloo for his paraphrase of his role, and yet no "giving an unfair advantage/integrity" modkill was issued to him.

His came first--and that led to the impression that paraphrasing in the way I did was acceptable. Because I was rewording things.

I never quoted from my role PM. I put things in my own wording. I hand-typed literally every word and I put it in my own wording. There was more paraphrased in the role PM than the was exact wording (as proven by literally over half the PM being redacted). The only exact wording copied were either important terms that I can't paraphrase (names of abilities, names of key phrases) or areas where there wasn't any word I could think of to reword it because the worded area was already worded in the most succinct/direct way possible and I couldn't think of extra flair to make it less so.

(To give an example, if a cop PM says, "During the night, target a player; you will learn their alignment", it's hard to say anything when paraphrasing other than "During night, I'll learn my target's alignment"--the latter is almost word for word a quote of the former, but the former is already so succinct that basically anything could be considered directly quoting. If a role is already in the simplest, most direct terms, then you can't reword it into simpler terms with a paraphrase and re-complicating it to be less simple/direct is something that is difficult to do.)

Again to reiterate--when unwnd posted my role PM publicly redacting the parts that weren't exact wordings: literally over half of the role PM was blacked out. Literally
over
half. And even in the half which was shown, the majority of it wasn't exact word for word carried over.
I didn't present my post as a quote of my role PM. I was paraphrasing. I was under the belief that my paraphrase was okay because Toogeloo had made a similar paraphrase earlier, one which gave him an actual tangible benefit that I can point to, and yet he wasn't modkilled for the advantage that I allegedly would've gained that justified mine.

And I changed almost everything. Yes, there were some words that I didn't change. By and large, those were words that couldn't be changed because they were already stated in the simplest, most succinct, most direct way possible, and it was difficult to break them up even further. Yet even there, even with the succinct role PM, I still made that effort to break it up anyway. I altered wording at every stage.

There is no realm where that is not the definition of paraphrasing.

I was writing it in my own words.

In fact even for the longest string of seven. I didn't even realize I was doing seven word for word of a copy.

Because I was typing it all up myself.

I was paraphrasing it, looking at the role PM and then typing it up in my own words.

So I didn't even know there was a seven word for word copy to be had.

That was a case of my own words matching the PM word for word seven times in a row.

Because, to reiterate.

I was not copying, I was not quoting. I was paraphrasing.

You can't tell me in all of your games as a player. When paraphrasing by hand. You haven't had a string of words in your own wording match up to the original role PM.

Especially
when given an already succinct role PM.
I never received a response back.
User avatar
mastina
mastina
She/Her
False Prophet
User avatar
User avatar
mastina
She/Her
False Prophet
False Prophet
Posts: 16670
Joined: October 7, 2016
Pronoun: She/Her
Location: Between Snohomish and Monroe, WA
Contact:

Post Post #7562 (ISO) » Sat Jun 26, 2021 12:06 pm

Post by mastina »

In post 7528, unwnd wrote:The fact you believe that I wanted to modkill mastina upsets me. I never want to modkill anyone. I stand by this and will defend my claim in a hundred different timelines. I did not want to modkill mastina, I merely did what I felt was right at the time.
I recognize and acknowledge that.
But while it may have felt right at the time, recognizing that it was not the right call and was a mistake is important, and your handling of the criticism of people pointing out it was a mistake is itself also poor.
In post 7528, unwnd wrote:So why exactly do you have it against me?
The only thing I have against you is that you think I have something against you in making criticism over a decision I believe was wrong, voicing that criticism, backing it, and then you thinking it's a personal attack on you rather than a criticism over a decision I believe was incorrect.
In post 7528, unwnd wrote:What are you personally gaining or what is the site enriching upon having this.
Better moderation, for a start--what's done is done and cannot be undone even if it felt right at the time. But acknowledging after the fact that there's a fair amount of evidence suggesting it was a wrong call isn't unproductive.
User avatar
mastina
mastina
She/Her
False Prophet
User avatar
User avatar
mastina
She/Her
False Prophet
False Prophet
Posts: 16670
Joined: October 7, 2016
Pronoun: She/Her
Location: Between Snohomish and Monroe, WA
Contact:

Post Post #7563 (ISO) » Sat Jun 26, 2021 12:10 pm

Post by mastina »

In post 7555, Something_Smart wrote:
In post 7554, Bingle wrote:The appearance of quoting mod communications is just as bad as actually quoting mod communications, rightfully so, because mod confirmation via lack of action is an abusable concept.
I would argue that the appearance of quoting is what actually matters. I didn't think mastina was trying to confirm her abilities by using the mod's phrasing.
I don't think anyone did
. The fact that a couple of phrases happened to match exactly doesn't really matter at all.
*anyone who was a player.

Important distinction to be made here. :P
User avatar
mastina
mastina
She/Her
False Prophet
User avatar
User avatar
mastina
She/Her
False Prophet
False Prophet
Posts: 16670
Joined: October 7, 2016
Pronoun: She/Her
Location: Between Snohomish and Monroe, WA
Contact:

Post Post #7564 (ISO) » Sat Jun 26, 2021 12:12 pm

Post by mastina »

In post 356, mastina wrote:I am the third party.

I'm an Arcanist.

My non-SP ability is Charm Eye. I target a player and they are Charmed. (No clue what Charmed means, my role PM doesn't specify.) Charming counts as a form of marking. (And is the only form of marking I have.)

My 1-SP ability is Chain Circle. I bind the target, negating all support done to them--useful for the town if I target scum, but harmful to the town if I target town, because it's by my understanding basically negating buffs to the target. Preventing scum buffs pro-town, preventing town buffs anti-town.

My 2-SP ability is Nerve Circle. I ensnare my target in a circle--anyone targeting that player takes 2 HP in damage. This basically turns my target into a form of PGO. Incredibly pro-town if I target a player scum target as it damages scum. Incredibly anti-town if I target a player town target.

My 3-SP ability is Curse Circle. I curse my target to be unable to be healed by utility abilities. Again, incredibly pro-town if I target scum to stop them from healing, but incredibly anti-town if I target town to stop them from healing.

My fourth ability, Dispel, 2-SP, is dispelling the curse circle. Doing so heals me for 2 HP.

My passive, Enlightenment, makes me gain 1 SP every time I successfully mark someone.

I win when I mark 5 players. (Which means had I gotten a N0 action in I could've won on D5 but now it's pushed back to D6 at the earliest.) A target doesn't need to be alive to count. So basically if nothing causes my marks to fail I automatically would win on D6 if I got five marks off.

But, *shrug*, "mastina just admitted to not being town", "mastina isn't town", "mastina could be lying", "mastina might end the game in a solo win", "mastina could be scum fakeclaiming 3p", etc. Pick your choice in ways where I'm guaranteed to die before I win, likely by the town elimination.

Since I've taken the "oh what the hell" approach of claiming, may as well go on to scumhunting now.
VOTE: morph the cat

Call it gut if you must but the insistence on hunting 3p as scum pinged me as probably being scum. As the third party in question who knew that I wasn't malevolent, the odd obsession with insisting the game had seven scum and hunting for seven scum stuck out as being a scum mindset.
unwnd wrote:
Arcanist -
A race of casters from unnamed lands. Their circles inflict crippling effects, and can be released to attack or heal.

--
You are
THIRD-PARTY.


HP: 7
ATK: 0

Charm Eye [Active] - Choose a target. That target will become
Charmed.
Charm is a form of
marking.


Chain Circle (1 SP) [Active] Choose a target. You will bind that target, negating all support done to them.

Nerve Circle (2 SP) [Active] Choose a target. That player will be ensnared into a circle, and any user who targets that player for that stratum will take 2 damage.

Curse Circle (3 SP) [Active] Choose a target. You will enact a curse upon them, where they may no longer be healed by utility abilities.

Dispel (2 SP) [Active, Self-Targeting] Choosing to
dispel
your Curse Circle will cause you to heal for 2 damage instead.

Enlightenment [Passive] - Each successful mark will grant you 1 additional SP.

You have an individual win condition where you will win once you have marked 5 or more players. A target does not need to be alive in order for them to count.


Please confirm by adding me on discord at unwnd#1668.
Here are the two side by side for what it's worth.
User avatar
unwnd
unwnd
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
unwnd
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 9456
Joined: June 12, 2019

Post Post #7565 (ISO) » Sat Jun 26, 2021 2:35 pm

Post by unwnd »

Please stop. I'm locking this thread. Let it go or bring it up with the list mods. I'm not a professional I'm a guy who wanted to run a fun mafia game.
Stop
Locked

Return to “Completed Large Theme Games”