Mafia 105 - Caught in the Crossfire (Game Over)

[hiphop]

It doesn't matter how we won, but that we did it. I didn't think we would when we started, but we had the right people in the scum group. Just think about if pads was in and pops was out. I don't think we would have made it very far.

Zoraster you asked in the dead qt, why I was worried about pops voting for me. The answer is because two scum have more likely chance of reaching the end than one.

[popsofctown]

I didn't think we would when we started, but we had the right people in the scum group. Just think about if pads was in and pops was out. I don't think we would have made it very far.

I'd probably avoid statements like that.

In general.

[zoraster]

Nominations for the 2010 Scummies are up. I've nominated pops for Don Corleone if anyone wants to second that nomination: http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... 13#2069213

Feel free to nominate anyone else you thought did an excellent job in the game.

[Vi]

I disagree with Vi, I like zoraster's lurking policy. It would have replaced out Bridges & Baloons in the one normal I played where he won as scum by just posting, "I might post later, but i have some real life problems right now", thus breaking the spirit of the lurking rule. The spirit of the lurking rule isn't "police everyone's play and make them have a certain playstyle", it's "remove the ambiguity between a choice not to post in the thread and people who are too busy to post". I don't want people cracking the spirit of the rule in half by posting snippets about funerals and weddings, if they don't have enough time to post game content they need to be replaced.

The game you mentioned also had a moderator that didn't appear to believe in an activity policy. He might have noticed if he checked who was active more than monthly.

[popsofctown]

B&B said after the game that he posted something about "woe is my poor meatworld life" everytime he got prodded. If he was prodded more frequently he'd have just done it more frequently.

[Vi]

B&B said after the game that he posted something about "woe is my poor meatworld life" everytime he got prodded. If he was prodded more frequently he'd have just done it more frequently.

which is the point where the mod says "look, you've been out of the game for a month, what say I give you one less thing to think about"

The exception is for mods that allow malicious lurking, which I guess you have to know about ahead of time.

[popsofctown]

^^^^ itt vi recommends uber subjective methods of lurker policy.


Hey, let's cut to the chase and have the mod kick out killa 7 at game start.

[zoraster]

Lurkers are one of those areas that there are many different approaches to handling. I have respect for the way Vi likes to have lurkers handled, though I differ in my own. Similarly, I have respect for Spyrex's method (i.e. kill them all), though I'd never use it in a game of my own.

The hope I have for my games is mostly to put good stuff in so that I get good stuff out. If I don't want lurkers in my game, the onus is on me to make sure that I get players who won't lurk as their default setting. But everyone lurks from time to time, and the way I deal with it has been laid out. I think it has a lot to recommend it: it's not particularly subjective, it lets players play at their own pace (though with my push of strict deadlines), and it's seemed to be fairly good at getting lurkers to play.

But it's certainly not the only way. Vi and my approach differs based on our view of what lurking is. I don't want to put words in his mouth, but I think Vi views lurking as simply a strategy. I view it as insidious to the whole of the players having fun.

[Vi]

^^^^ itt vi recommends uber subjective methods of lurker policy.

...

Hey, let's cut to the chase and have the mod kick out killa 7 at game start.

yes

I don't want to put words in his mouth, but I think Vi views lurking as simply a strategy. I view it as insidious to the whole of the players having fun.

It's both.
Lurking is a strategy that kills games if overdone. While I don't prefer it, I don't want to outright disallow it.

Aside from rigorous prodding - which don't get me wrong, I like - I think there are two different ways of dealing with lurkers that I'm interested in trying out.

1) BaM's policy. It doesn't punish lurking so much as flaking. (If you don't post for seven days, you've probably flaked.)

2) A variant on Phate's policy where prods are done by request and can be met with replacement if they are not picked up... but players can pick up prods and still not post. Again, this comes with a few hitches:
*the mod has to actually show up onsite to notice prod requests
*the mod actually has to replace people who don't pick up prods
...but other than that, it allows lurkers essentially full rein to do as the Town lets them.
The downside is that it's quite possible for a Townie to take advantage of this and essentially fail at life, proving once more that Mafia is a team activity. This is why you proactively find good players before the game begins.

it's not particularly subjective,

It's more subjective than every other policy I know of.

[zoraster]

Because someone can't post "I'll post later" and have it count? I don't think that's particularly subjective unless I were to expand it to include posts that were light on content but could theoretically be about the game. If a post is simply (a) an apology for not posting or (b) a promise to post later, it's really no better than someone refusing to post. In any case, I was referring to my policy on not prodding unless asked to by players but allowing prods at any time for the objectivity of it.

You were critical of the rule from the beginning, but I don't think anything I did showed it to be particularly faulty. Don't get me wrong, one game cannot tell whether this is a passable policy or not, but I don't think it validated your concerns.

I don't mean to dismiss your concerns at all. But I think this comes down to conceptualizing the game differently. Because I see and understand Hoopla's concern with plurality voting, and I get the concern with the traitor vigil. Both criticisms are something I'll take into account the next time i do a game where it's relevant.

But I have to be clear that the more I can reduce lurking and flaking, the more I will. I consider "i'll post later" (IPL?) to be just another form of lurking. Now, if you tell me that my policy is not the most efficient way of reducing lurking, including IPL lurking, then I'm all ears. If you just don't think IPL is lurking, we're on different pages and it's going to be much harder to reconcile our views.

[Vi]

Forced replacements are for

flakers

(not lurkers).
Someone who posts "I'll post later" is by definition not a flaker, because they're evidently still onsite. However, IPL IS a weak form of active lurking... which I don't think the mod should deal with.

[CSL]

However, Vi, if a player says that twice, once for each prod, and is eligible for another prod, I'm forcing them out.

[EmpTyger]

Success breeds last posts.

[StrangerCoug]

Sorting bump.