Curbing abusive behavior in games

[Gamma Emerald]

http://forum.mafiascum.net/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=68279
Yeah toxicity is a scum strat

[callforjudgement]

@CFJ: I don't think that was an issue with the mechanic so much as it being a combination of a lot of people online, some super-fresh anger, and a charismatic leader.

Nah, it worked out that game. The issue is that pretty much every time something like that is tried, it tends to lead to a Day that's over in less than 24 hours, which is awkward for people who can't make the thread. (Of course, town were trying to do that intentionally, to get in before scum could submit the kill, but…)

It's annoying to sign up for a typical game and discover it's somehow turned into a Blitz.

[Aeronaut]

I think it's harder to curb toxicity in a game like mafia over a game like League because Mafia inherently is about harassing players and arguing. I generally try to attack the play and never the player, but I've had times like most where I cross that line.

I honestly think we have a pretty good community here as opposed to most; it's just that mafia is inherently going to create toxicity

[RadiantCowbells]

http://forum.mafiascum.net/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=68279
Yeah toxicity is a scum strat

I've never seen a scenario where toxicity was pro town. Not snark or heated debates, but down right toxicity. In a perfect world, toxicity would be a 100%scum tell

Remember when I won that NY despite mechanical autoloss because I was sufficiently douchey on day 1 to be townread beyond a shadow of a doubt?

[Majiffy]

It's not about like abusing people as much as it's about being generally salty and uncooperative while seeming vs being positive that your reads are right as town/scum.

Confident individualism.

Yes, it is great if you're right. But >50% you probably aren't. So that hurts town.

It has clear benefits from a scumplay perspective I don't think we need to get into.

-------

But now if town is

working together

against confident individualism, the play is eliminated. It becomes much harder for scum to hide when they can't hide behind literally leading the game by the nose.

So yes, I would say that cooperation is the better end-game for town, in the long run.

[Majiffy]

I think it's harder to curb toxicity in a game like mafia over a game like League because Mafia inherently is about harassing players and arguing. I generally try to attack the play and never the player, but I've had times like most where I cross that line.

I honestly think we have a pretty good community here as opposed to most; it's just that mafia is inherently going to create toxicity

I totally get it but I think there's room for improvement. And I rarely ever play here anymore.

[RadiantCowbells]

I just did a quick compilation of games. In short,

There's been two games where if I had been less of a stubborn dick we'd have won.
There's been 27 games where if I'd been more of a stubborn dick we'd have won.

[petroleumjelly]

Mafia is ultimately a party game (put to text). Players who intentionally play like a jerk in order to win are not players I would invite to a party. Even if one might argue their win percentage would be higher if they were more abrasive/toxic, that does not seem to be an appropriate measuring stick. After a game is over, whether you win or lost doesn't really matter that much -- it was just a game, and nothing

real

rides on it. But lessening everybody's enjoyment of that game because of the way you act

does

matter.

[BrainpanSonata]

Mafia is ultimately a party game (put to text). Players who intentionally play like a jerk in order to win are not players I would invite to a party. Even if one might argue their win percentage would be higher if they were more abrasive/toxic, that does not seem to be an appropriate measuring stick. After a game is over, whether you win or lost doesn't really matter that much -- it was just a game, and nothing

real

rides on it. But lessening everybody's enjoyment of that game because of the way you act

does

matter.

[Aeronaut]

Mafia is ultimately a party game (put to text). Players who intentionally play like a jerk in order to win are not players I would invite to a party. Even if one might argue their win percentage would be higher if they were more abrasive/toxic, that does not seem to be an appropriate measuring stick. After a game is over, whether you win or lost doesn't really matter that much -- it was just a game, and nothing

real

rides on it. But lessening everybody's enjoyment of that game because of the way you act

does

matter.

[Realeo]

Insted of ML algorithm of deciding what is toxic or not, make ML algorithm of deciding does this post comes from scum or not.

That I will support.

[rb]

I agree with whatever Majiffy said he's the best at stuff.

[kuribo]

Toxic players are more likely to be Policy Lynched (often in the same day that toxic behavior is displayed), which usually hurts Town more than scum.

I've been policy lynched exactly one time in nine years for toxic behavior

And that was by a guy who didn't realize it LYLO. He dropped his vote, scum ended the game.

[Flubbernugget]

How the fuck do you policy lynch anyone past day 2

[callforjudgement]

Policy lynches are much easier in lylo because you often only need the one vote. At that point, scum will quickhammer, and you got your lynch!

Note: just because it's easy, it doesn't mean it's a good idea.