Ethics of Scumplay

[Alchemist21]

So a couple threads recently have posed questions on what's the ethical decision for scum in certain situations. I think it would be a good idea to have a thread where we talk about such questions and scum ethics. Even when you search ethics on the wiki, it gives you a list of specific threads, so I think in addition to this thread, it would also be a good idea to have a wiki page to serve as a guideline on general scum ethics, and to list the schools of thought for different scenarios on that page.

For the first set of questions, I'll start with something that was discussed in a recent thread - activity.

If the game is already inactive, do scum have an ethical responsibility to try making the game more active?

If the game is already active, is it ethical for scum to try to encourage Town apathy?
-If you answer no to this question, would you also consider it unethical for scum to perform a Night Kill knowing that it will kill the game's activity?

My second set of questions focuses on toxicity.

If you're like me, being scum can give you a natural tendency to be more toxic to players. Though in the past I've apologized for such transgressions, and was typically forgiven on the basis that I was playing scum, I still wonder if simply being scum-aligned should ever be a valid excuse for toxicity, however slight it may be?

Suppose you are scum and see two Town players behaving in a toxic manner towards each other. It's intense enough that they may end up hating each other if it continues, but neither will replace out and the mod won't intervene. As scum, you believe you can be the voice of reason and calm then down while not giving yourself away, but you also believe that in the long-run calming these players down could allow the Town to become more cohesive, which may cost your team the game. So, is it ethical for the scum player here to allow the players to continue being toxic towards each other to serve their wincon, or is it more ethical to calm them down and create a more enjoyable game for everyone.

[McMenno]

If the game is already inactive, do scum have an ethical responsibility to try making the game more active?

no

If the game is already active, is it ethical for scum to try to encourage Town apathy?
-If you answer no to this question, would you also consider it unethical for scum to perform a Night Kill knowing that it will kill the game's activity?

it's not unethical

If you're like me, being scum can give you a natural tendency to be more toxic to players. Though in the past I've apologized for such transgressions, and was typically forgiven on the basis that I was playing scum, I still wonder if simply being scum-aligned should ever be a valid excuse for toxicity, however slight it may be?

no

Suppose you are scum and see two Town players behaving in a toxic manner towards each other. It's intense enough that they may end up hating each other if it continues, but neither will replace out and the mod won't intervene. As scum, you believe you can be the voice of reason and calm then down while not giving yourself away, but you also believe that in the long-run calming these players down could allow the Town to become more cohesive, which may cost your team the game. So, is it ethical for the scum player here to allow the players to continue being toxic towards each other to serve their wincon, or is it more ethical to calm them down and create a more enjoyable game for everyone.

not sure

[GuyInFreezer]

Mafia win condition does not include being nice to people and making the game enjoyable.

Major stuff that distracts the game too hard is usually contained by mod rules and site rules.

[Raskolnikov]

The only things I'd consider unethical are hardcore AtE that actually makes people feel bad or when people try to use out-of-game things as excuses.

Like I'm talking about if you ARE the one in a situation being toxic to people to go what you want but like going super far and making the game not fun for anyone.

[Firebringer]

If the game is already inactive, do scum have an ethical responsibility to try making the game more active?

No, but I think if scum want to have gloating rights. As in, "I just completely got you guys" they need to be active in actually deceiving the town. I personally never felt a win was a win if I won it because nobody was hunting for me and I didn't try to deceive them.

If the game is already active, is it ethical for scum to try to encourage Town apathy?

I don't know what you mean by this.
Do you mean just complaining about the game state?
No. Town do it too.

If you're like me, being scum can give you a natural tendency to be more toxic to players. Though in the past I've apologized for such transgressions, and was typically forgiven on the basis that I was playing scum, I still wonder if simply being scum-aligned should ever be a valid excuse for toxicity, however slight it may be?

Yes in certain circumstances.
I don't know how to say this because every person is different, but if a player tells you "Stop, seriously" you should stop.

Suppose you are scum and see two Town players behaving in a toxic manner towards each other. It's intense enough that they may end up hating each other if it continues, but neither will replace out and the mod won't intervene. As scum, you believe you can be the voice of reason and calm then down while not giving yourself away, but you also believe that in the long-run calming these players down could allow the Town to become more cohesive, which may cost your team the game. So, is it ethical for the scum player here to allow the players to continue being toxic towards each other to serve their wincon, or is it more ethical to calm them down and create a more enjoyable game for everyone.

No, I don't think a scum player has responsibility to do so.
Those are 2 peoples interactions and if they can't sort themselves out and see each others alignments properly, thats on them.

[Alchemist21]

I don't know what you mean by this.
Do you mean just complaining about the game state?

I'm not even sure it's possible, but I imagine there are scum players who could find a way to stifle discussion during the Day which would promote Town apathy.

[Fenchurch]

A bunch of this probably depends who you're playing with. Making the game more enjoyable for others, whether you're town or scum, makes them enjoy playing with you and more likely to want to do so again.

That said, different people find different elements and styles of game more/less enjoyable, and so there isn't a one-size-fits-all approach to what makes a good game.

Personally, I find apathy and toxicity unpleasant regardless of your alignment, and prefer to play with players for whom those are not major elements of their playstyle.

[McMenno]

I don't know what you mean by this.
Do you mean just complaining about the game state?

I'm not even sure it's possible, but I imagine there are scum players who could find a way to stifle discussion during the Day which would promote Town apathy.

then they deserve the win tbh

[Firebringer]

I don't know what you mean by this.
Do you mean just complaining about the game state?

I'm not even sure it's possible, but I imagine there are scum players who could find a way to stifle discussion during the Day which would promote Town apathy.

then they deserve the win tbh

[Vi]

Beyond the site/game rules the "ethics" you're discussing are merely ways to handicap yourself. I had one scumpartner try to totally shut the game down/drag it into unenjoyable confusion in the same game my other scumpartner claimed that he was in and out of the hospital after a self-harm incident (falsely). This was in like 2008; there's nothing new about this line of thought. (Also, good on SpyreX for being awesome enough to openly doubt and call out the second scummo on his bullshit.)

Stuff like this is why, at risk of sounding repetitive,

Mafia is a terrible game and you should do more positive things with your life.

[Firebringer]

Isn't it already against site rules to bring personal things into the game?

[Randomnamechange]

I would say that scum have no obligations to play in any particular way as long as they aren't being straight up horrible.

[Vi]

Isn't it already against site rules to bring personal things into the game?

No. You are not allowed to being anything into the game that would imply that you are not willing or able to play to your win condition, but etc.

@above: do you have any idea how small the community would be if we banned people who performed straight-up horrible scum play

[SpyreX]

When I'm not on a phone i have novels to put on the subject but the gist is:
There isn't competitive mafia. In theory you want people to play worth you again. Don't be a total toolbag. Id rather lose a fun game then win an emo slog fest.
Scum apathy wins are almost entirely a function of allowing apathy to not be a death sentence. If you say the words well they don't do anything as town you should lynch them and then yourself. This is why meta is bad and you should feel bad.
It's not a dick move to go hey that sounds awful you should replace out and when they dont see above.

[SpyreX]

I mean if in my old age i think back i think of winning on a fake hider claim and then fate and kuribos after game heartbreak. I never go man that game where i just did nothing but just a little less nothing then everyone else that was sooooooo good you guys.

[Vi]

"Just rope them" is surprisingly difficult advice to get half the player list to follow. That's part of why slogs are so tough to get out of.

Disclaimer: I am not Fate.

[SpyreX]

Yea that's the rub now isn't it. Maybe if every person does their part and helps lynch one lurker we can get that much closer.

Or just remember ultimately scum need to blend in. The scum lurkaderps can only be because of your lurkaderping

[Zachrulez]

There are ethics to scumplay?

(Besides crossing the line via site rules obv.)

[GreyICE]

I mean I don't make up real life stuff. If I'm talking about my life it's true, and not alignment indicative.

But other than that, no. There's no ethics to scumplay. An ugly victory is better than a beautiful defeat. And another site had a very good reminder about Mafia that I liked: "The game isn't always fun all the time. By signing up you stick with it." I think too often people go "this isn't fun right now" and they stop posting or putting in effort, then the game dies and it really isn't fun. Whereas if they stuck with it for the day or two that it was like grinding teeth it would go back to being fun rather than dying out.

[Expedience]

Any appeal to emotion as either alignment is out of game influence to some degree, when it's too extreme I feel like it's against the spirit of the game. Same with townslipping, it sucks and I think it's just as bad as when scum try to angleshoot.

[Alchemist21]

I do think scum's job blending in gives them a reason to not try and get an apathetic Town up and running again. And if making a single kill silences the whole game, there's something wrong with the Town as a whole that isn't the scum's responsibility to fix.

I don't think scum should be allowed to be more toxic or mean just because they're scum. Ultimately this is still a game and allowing yourself to become more disrespectful just to win seems unsportsmanlike.

I'm not sure I would consider it unethical for scum to lie about personal matters to lurk for a couple of days (though I would say falsely claiming self-harm is definitely crossing the line), but the thing is if site meta shifts towards scum making a habit of it then Town would start getting lynched when life really happened to them.

I can see why people would prioritize winning one game over having fun in that same game, but there are things that extend beyond the game. Like Fenchurch said, you want people to want to play with you again, and for this I think even scum shouldn't do things that would make everyone think you're a POS. That said, seeing two players at each others throats in toxic ways isn't fun even for observers. I do think scum should try to reconcile personal issues between two players in a game when possible, not just for the sake of fun in that game but also for the sake of the personal relationships that last beyond the game. Not too long ago I was in a game where two players couldn't agree on the proper plays to make, and it spiraled into a toxic shit fest and I felt terrible seeing it because one of the players was right, and a person I like, but I couldn't really do anything to stop them because it would have given too much away. Still, I do wish I could have said something to maybe stop the personal attacks between them, because it wasn't fun to watch and I'm sure their personal friendship suffered as a result of it. Maybe everyone else disagrees, but I feel like scum have the same responsibility to keep the game at a basic standard of respect as Town.

tl;dr I think some things have an effect beyond the scope of a single game, and you have to think about those consequences beyond the game. Trust tells are banned partly because it's against your scum wincon in games you haven't even played yet, and I think there are arguments where decisions as scum potentially effect future games as well (maybe not to the same magnitude as trust tells).

[SpyreX]

I've also won games as scum under the 'well scum spyrex would have no reason to keep us from each other's throats' too.

It's fairly fluid

[Papa Zito]

My only major "scum ethics" issue is when people replace out under fire.

[SpyreX]

The way i look at it in the imaginary scoreboard of mafia life every replace even valid is a big ol L

[BrainpanSonata]

1) I think inactivity is a mixed bag for scum. On the one hand, players who aren't around to vote can lead to failure to achieve majority, which can give you an advantage in the night phase. On the other hand, you have to tread a fine line between falling back on the mod for replacement and looking like a lurky lurking scum who lurks.

1a) Of course, it's different (and more dire) if your scumpartner is the inactive player. I personally consider it somewhat equivalent to Weekend at Bernie's, except you're also trying to hide the fact that you even know Bernie in the first place.

1b) Replacements are a mixed bag that can make or break the game for you. If a strong player subs into Town, your best laid plans are usually kaput. (o/ Hi, Aquanim.)

2) Toxic behavior is a disadvantage since you're trying to act the same way you do when you play Town. (Also, toxic behavior is a disadvantage all around since severely toxic behavior can disrupt and even shut down a game.)