Town voting themselves

[implosion]

Not really. You just put it in your rules: 'Self-votes won't be counted. If you vote yourself it will be treated as if you are not voting.'

This removes the ability of scum to self-hammer, though. And there's no good way to loophole it in.

I agree that town selfvotes are often detrimental to the town wincon, but what's important in determining if the player in question is playing to their wincon isn't whether it's actually detrimental, it's whether they perceive it to be detrimental. And there are tons of possible town motivations for selfvoting that are actually motivations that are trying to further the town win condition:

-A townie selfvotes to garner reactions and base reads off of those reactions
-A townie selfvotes in an attempt to be read as town, because they perceive it as an effective way to show that they are town
-A townie selfvotes near deadline to avoid a NL
-A townie selfvotes for role-specific reasons: some have been mentioned, but another good example is a vengeful townie who thinks they have a good shot or who knows that their lynch will restore parity.
-A townie selfvotes to end the day earlier than deadline because they perceive the remaining time in the day as detrimental to the town (for instance, if they see their lynch as inevitable and see the town wallowing away in inactivity waiting for a flip)

etc etc. This is just a smattering
The important common thread in all of these examples is that the townie in question believes that their actions promote the town win condition, and so they are not playing against their win condition. Certainly there are cases where townies selfvoting is playing against their win condition, but just as certainly banning selfvotes removes or punishes a slew of legitimate strategic options.

[zMuffinMan]

people who are arguing about edge cases are missing the point

regardless, nothing should be done about it outside of just never playing with the idiots who do it for idiotic reasons again

EDIT: how you *think* you'll be read for it and "reactions" are NOT good reasons, these fall under the banner of idiocy

EDIT2: fenchurch's idea isn't *bad* per se, but there are legitimate reasons why self-voting might be allowed in games (as either alignment), so a rule about it might limit certain roles or mechanics (and if you have the rule in some games but not others, you're basically broadcasting that there's a reason for this, which isn't necessarily a bad thing but meh)... it also kind of requires a lot of mods doing this, and a lot of mods are stupid, so *shrug*

[Davsto]

I mean town voting themselves is a bad play

But if we started modkilling people for bad play then it'll just get stupid

I mean, if a town pr like a cop or doctor actively refuses to take an action should they be modkilled? I mean, in a game with no PGOs or millers or godfathers it's always better for the cop to take an action as it gets them info therefore not doing so could be argued as being against their wincon

(especially since a lot of "bad plays" as town are good plays as scum and punishing them basically makes it impossible for scum to do them)

[zMuffinMan]

relevant: http://forum.mafiascum.net/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=59109

and i assume this thread will be relevant in 1-2 years when it's still an issue

[Zachrulez]

I mean I've banned self voting before, and I stopped doing it because after seeing games play out with the practice banned, it seemed dumb to have it banned and didn't really change the outcome of a player meltdown. (Except that it kinda prolongs the agony.)

[chilledtea]

Self-voting is an important part of the game, definitely no mod killing. Maybe disallow self-voting in the rules but self-voting should be allowed as the kill is decided with majority. As a leader is allowed to elect himself, a lynch target should be allowed to elect himself.

The counter argument is that in a village where a lynch is decided, no body would actually vote himself, right? I don't know but such emotional reactions should be allowed.

In one game I voted myself, and subsequently I got lynched without voting myself. My lynch almost confirmed two people as scum and I think there was some relation to the self-vote.

Self-vote is generally a bad play though, especially self-hammering.

[kuribo]

I've said before and I'll say it again


There are times when the move most conducive to a town wincon is to remove a toxic element from the game

If that toxic element is yourself, so be it.

[kuribo]

You're talking about people voting town when they KNOW they are town? I've never seen this at all.

I have, however, been reported recently for guessing wrong and voting town while in lylo. But that's because the person I voted acted like scum in every way.

Since when is playing, even playing badly, reportable?


Whoever reported you for that shouldn't fucking play mafia and should out themselves now so we can ridicule such a stupid thought process.

[Fenchurch]

I mean I've banned self voting before, and I stopped doing it because after seeing games play out with the practice banned, it seemed dumb to have it banned and didn't really change the outcome of a player meltdown. (Except that it kinda prolongs the agony.)

That's interesting to know. Well then I don't have a better solution than the one already suggested, i.e. where possible, avoid playing with people who do this.

[Accountant]

We shouldn't ban people from voting themselves, but we should tell them that it's an idiotic move and treat them like idiots if they do it.

[Nero Cain]

vote:Nero

sorry but you have been wotm'd from all my games.

[Zachrulez]

You're talking about people voting town when they KNOW they are town? I've never seen this at all.

I have, however, been reported recently for guessing wrong and voting town while in lylo. But that's because the person I voted acted like scum in every way.

Since when is playing, even playing badly, reportable?


Whoever reported you for that shouldn't fucking play mafia and should out themselves now so we can ridicule such a stupid thought process.

I know we don't punish for making reports that don't result in action, but this is a case that makes me wonder if we should.

[kuribo]

You're talking about people voting town when they KNOW they are town? I've never seen this at all.

I have, however, been reported recently for guessing wrong and voting town while in lylo. But that's because the person I voted acted like scum in every way.

Since when is playing, even playing badly, reportable?


Whoever reported you for that shouldn't fucking play mafia and should out themselves now so we can ridicule such a stupid thought process.

I know we don't punish for making reports that don't result in action, but this is a case that makes me wonder if we should.

Well, I mean, if someone reports something in good faith and the mods decide it's not actionable that's one thing


but this is a frivolous use of a necessary tool, and if people are doing this it infuriates me more than anything that's ever been posted in a game. It's disgusting and makes a mockery of gameplay. If we banned everyone who we felt played sub-optimally, there'd be no one left to play with BECAUSE GOOD GAME PLAY IS FUCKING SUBJECTIVE

so if whoever did that is reading this, please contact me so we can fight in real life

[Accountant]

I once reported cheetory for being a humorless old coot because we were singing the pokemon theme song in a thread and he didnt go along with it, should I get banned?

[kuribo]

Yes.

[Accountant]

The correct answer is no

[kuribo]

From a certain viewpoint maybe. But from the correct viewpoint, the answer is yes.

[MagnaofIllusion]

I once reported cheetory for being a humorless old coot because we were singing the pokemon theme song in a thread and he didnt go along with it, should I get banned?

So to be sure I understand what you are saying -

You and others were doing some goofy thing in a thread.

Cheetory posted and didn't do the same goofy thing you were doing.

The thread was not a "Let's Sign the Pokemon Theme Song" thread.

You reported him.

Is that correct?

If so make a new account because you are embarrassing accountants everywhere ...

[McMenno]

aren't we all

[Accountant]

I once reported cheetory for being a humorless old coot because we were singing the pokemon theme song in a thread and he didnt go along with it, should I get banned?

So to be sure I understand what you are saying -

You and others were doing some goofy thing in a thread.

Cheetory posted and didn't do the same goofy thing you were doing.

The thread was not a "Let's Sign the Pokemon Theme Song" thread.

You reported him.

Is that correct?

If so make a new account because you are embarrassing accountants everywhere ...

No the pokemon theme song was related to the thread somehow it wasnt completely off topic iirc

[Seraphim]

I once reported cheetory for being a humorless old coot because we were singing the pokemon theme song in a thread and he didnt go along with it, should I get banned?

Definitely not bannable per se but definitely an abuse of the report function. The report function for me is an analogue to calling the cops. While the scope is very different here, I feel that you only use it when you mean it, and you mean it when the circumstances involved extend beyond the realm of discourse, of working things out like adults. Reporting something to the mods means that the mods need to look at it and formulate a response. Frivolous use of the report function is a waste of resources and also undermines the seriousness of using it.

So, no bans. Cone of shame will suffice.

[kuribo]

[Accountant]

Her lips aren't moving, she isn't saying shame

[kuribo]

Because she doesn't ding the bell as she says shame, she says "Shame," pauses for a second, then rings the bell, then another pause

[Accountant]

Wouldn't the "shame" litany get drowned out by the bell? Like, the bell would be so loud that any "shame"s would be impossible to hear, so she would just look like a mad woman ringing a bell for no reason