Long term health of mafiascum

[Zachrulez]

Touching on newbie games, if you're really looking to appeal to a variety of users, the setup is probably less the problem than the fact that the deadline rules are uniform. Some people are maybe looking for phases that are a few days long, some maybe a week, some maybe more? Perhaps it's worthwhile to offer different deadline structures there?

I also think the setup should be simple enough that an IC can easily explain it, and on that thought, we shouldn't be frequently changing the setup as that's actually one of the things that can throw IC knowledge off. It kinda throws a curveball into explaining a setup flawlessly when the setup is new to you. I know personally in the F11 era I was never worried about screwing up in explaining that setup... when the setup was changed, that comfort was gone. I don't know if there's anyone else on the site that feels that way, maybe I'm the only one.

[Zachrulez]

Based on what I see in those numbers, our user retention rate looks like it's gone up not down. The primary problem in need of fixing is that new users has MASSIVELY dropped off.

That's different then. That's not us doing anything wrong, that's people not finding us.

I just opened a private browser and Googled "Mafia Game". We don't show up on the first three pages at all. "Mafia Roles" we're the first listing. "Mafia Online" we're number seven, with epicmafia as number one.

Bing: "Mafia Game", not in the first three pages. "Mafia Roles", third on the list. "Mafia Online", towards the bottom of page 3.

Google again: "Werewolf Game", not in first three pages. "Werewolf Roles", not until page 3.

Search engines aren't finding us well enough I think.

Getting at least to the first page on common mafia searches would definitely help. If you're on page 3 on common mafia searches, you aren't being seen.

[Zachrulez]

What about a new queue?

Most would-be-hosts don't slink off because they can't host C9++ or Fire and Ice; they want to host large games with new roles and flavor.

Could we try something like our Large Game queue that has much relaxed modding requirements, in exchange for requiring much shorter deadlines? Could we have a queue that works like players are used to from other sites?

Players who want the style we're used to with week-long phases would still, of course, create demand and supply for the kinds of games we're used to. And if deadlines are much shorter (say, 48 hours), would we need such heavy requirements on modding?

Bumping this.

(now on the other hand, if a new queue for slightly more quick-paced games were to be introduced, which is an idea I would support but which would deserve a separate thread for discussion

Is there interest in something like this? Longer games are the norm here, but there's no reason why we couldn't have a queue with shorter games and fewer restrictions (that isn't limited like the Micro queue).

Something like this could be an easy fix that doesn't destroy the queue system while offering new games to attract more players.

I ran a faster paced game not that long ago actually. It seems to be a somewhat untapped type of game. All it really needs is more mods willing to do it and accept not having a game last all that long. Personally I don't have a problem one way or another. A faster game has the advantage of me needing to tend to it over a shorter period of time.

I don't think it's the type of thing we need a policy/queue for. This is one of those things that moderators have the power to do literally right now.

[Zachrulez]

Yeah, but if we create a queue for every different idea we have, we'd have a lot of different queues, and the fact of the matter is unless I'm mistaken there's no queue outside of the newbie queue that actually mandates any deadline requirements. If you want that trend bucked in any meaningful way, it's probably more prudent to start with the newbie queue itself. That's where we're introducing that trend if anything.

And again, that's where I think the newbie queue might need some reform. We've been pretty firm on forcing newbies to play to our kind of deadline standards, but maybe we should be having different paced games there and worrying less about the setup. (Certainly sanctioning the idea of both faster and longer paced games there encourages that a variety of deadlines is acceptable in other queues.)

[Zachrulez]

On the surveys:

Not sure why anyone would object to someone collecting data. I don't think I'd do it in the form that it's done now via pm, but if Zor or whoever gave me specific data to collect, I would have no problem asking for it in the endgame and asking people to pm me their responses or what not. In that situation it's easy for those who want to give feedback to easily do so and for those who don't want to not to be annoyed by being pmed a survey or whatever. Seems like a good way to collect the survey data without the annoyance?

[Zachrulez]

I don't think I've ever actually used the vote tag. I know it's better than bolding, but I didn't learn how to vote that way so I'm just old and stuck I guess...

I also wouldn't qualify enforcing vote tags over bold voting as large scale improvement. I would hate to be forced to enforce that as a mod because I think I would be stepping into the game way too often to correct votes. I prefer to qualify votes my own way.

[Zachrulez]

I guess my point is why should that be dictated by administration rather than by game mods?

I get that it offers advantages, but I don't find them to be significant enough to want to bother to step in for the many times that people will vote some other way that is otherwise perfectly acceptable.

[Zachrulez]

I have a hard time accepting that standardization is necessary given that the site has run mafia games just fine for over a decade without automation.

It's a tool, and if mods find it beneficial that's great. But requiring it over other methods that work and other mods might be more comfortable with doesn't make sense to me.

[Zachrulez]

I gave an opinion on a particular proposed change. I have not offered an opinion on any of the other changes he is referring to.

I think this particular change is an over reach because it makes the adoption of automated vote counting and vote tags required. I went back to the last game I ran in June and found 6 instances where I would have had to step in on bold tag voting in the first three pages of that game. If I am going to be required to enforce a rule I don't feel is necessary, I'm just not going to bother to mod at all, and I would submit that it could be precisely that administration is becoming more heavy handed that interest in the site is declining as this thread is stated in the OP.

[Zachrulez]

I have a hard time accepting that standardization is necessary given that the site has run mafia games just fine for over a decade without automation.

I have a hard time accepting that democracy is necessary given that humanity has survived just fine for centuries without common basic rights.

That is not a strawman of Zach's position because it is actually an argument against democracy. Zach's argument is actually an argument against automation.

I'm not sure you understand the metaphor. His argument is one against progress for the sake of stasis.

How exactly am I opposed to progress? I have no problem with automated vote counting, and I actually would expect it to be heavily adopted. My problem is with requiring it. I don't think it's necessary or justifiable to require it. A moderator does not require these tools to successfully moderate a game, but they are certainly welcome to use them. How is that such a horrible position?

This is rather a pointless argument. Why not let Zach doomsay until chamber presents his work?

Because his doomsay is counter-productive know-nothing fear mongering.

Sure it is.

[Zachrulez]

The adjustment would likely be required for older players. (I've never used the tag for example.) I don't know how much of an adjustment it would be, but I don't think it would be a minor adjustment for me. I would probably still accidentally be voting in bold a year or more from now if I was playing and forced to make that change.

To be honest if I was in the situation as a mod I would probably edit the bold votes so that they count. When I was using Thesp's vote counter, I edited everything I ruled a vote (But the vote counter didn't.) into something the automated vote counter would count. What chamber is proposing I believe also intends to take away my freedom to do that.

Also Thesp's vote counter counts both bold and vote tag votes. If the reason for requiring this is an unwillingness to put the effort into designing something that counts both... then... wow.

[Zachrulez]

How exactly am I opposed to progress? I have no problem with automated vote counting, and I actually would expect it to be heavily adopted. My problem is with requiring it. I don't think it's necessary or justifiable to require it. A moderator does not require these tools to successfully moderate a game, but they are certainly welcome to use them. How is that such a horrible position?

This is about lessening the workload on the already

over-worked, unpaid

moderators that are keeping this site running. Less mod errors, better efficiency in running games, etc. What is your real issue with

vs VOTE: ?

I don't think you understand that in order for something like automated queues and the like that have been tossed around as potential future implementations, it has to be an all-or-nothing change. You can't half-ass it, or else it'll become even more of a nightmare for the queue mods, game mods, administration etc.

This kind of useless bickering just creates doubt in the ability to implement these changes effectively.

No this is about the site telling me how to moderate

my

games to their satisfaction. If it was about lessening the workload, that can be accomplished by offering the tools voluntarily.

If I'm fine with a workload that doesn't depend on automation, why should I not have the right to choose to mod my game that way?

I'm even fine using automation, but I don't feel I need the rules to "make it easier" to implement because I don't think I'm ever getting to the point where I'm going to allow automation to be the end all be all in games. I want the power to count votes I think are votes and the power to make those votes count and I think it's well within my rights as a moderator to say what does and doesn't count as a vote and how those votes are counted. I don't feel efficiency is so important that it has to be required to be this way, especially when I have the ability to correct mistakes.

[Zachrulez]

More to the point there are some theme ideas I have that would use voting systems that would be different to what an automated/standard system is using and be counted differently by design. Am I now not able to run those kind of games because of this?

[Zachrulez]

I think we'll be enforcing the use of vote tags over bolding soon anyway. Don't fret too much.

So after arguing with me that this is the way things should be, you're telling me that it's actually going to work some other way because you want to be able to call me a moron.

Enforcing the use of vote tags site wide means I will not be able to count votes the way I want to.

Yeah, I'm done here.

[Zachrulez]

I think we'll be enforcing the use of vote tags over bolding soon anyway. Don't fret too much.

Zach I'm starting to gather by what you're saying that you have no idea what a site-wide implementation of automatic vote counts in threads looks like.

So I'm just going to leave it at the case of "Ok, you're a moron who is talking out his ass" and wash my hands of this.

So after arguing with me that this is the way things should be, you're telling me that it's actually going to work some other way because you want to be able to call me a moron.

Enforcing the use of vote tags site wide means I will not be able to count votes the way I want to.

5 years on this site and the last two I have felt more hostility from users than I ever felt in the first five. I think this site needs to take a real long hard look at how it treats people who have dissenting/different opinions. Can't speak for why so many are no longer here, but I would imagine that among people that aren't here anymore they are also people who have differing opinions but don't want to be treated the way I am being treated here for having a different viewpoint.

Yeah, I'm done here.

[Zachrulez]

If your objection is as a moderator, it is baseless. For a player, at least you are talking about your long-ingrained habits. As a moderator, you are objecting to a white background because to the moderator that is the sole difference.

Please don't go after our hard working coder with your knee-jerk reaction until there's something to actual knee-jerk about. This isn't an academic issue: it makes it significantly less rewarding for those coders when they have people second guessing and whining about changes before they have even reached the point where they are revealing something. And in turn that makes it less likely that they'll help us in the future.

Thanks.

If there wasn't talk of requiring it. I wouldn't be complaining about anything.

Just because you build something that you think is great and will sell doesn't mean you should require everyone to buy it. Let people chose to.

[Zachrulez]

5 years on this site and the last two I have felt more hostility from users than I ever felt in the first five. I think this site needs to take a real long hard look at how it treats people who have dissenting/different opinions. Can't speak for why so many are no longer here, but I would imagine that among people that aren't here anymore they are also people who have differing opinions but don't want to be treated the way I am being treated here for having a different viewpoint.

>He says to a person who is no longer allowed to play or mod games on-site anymore.

Fuck off, prick.

Wasn't really referring to you in that response, but I think it's pretty obvious why you're not allowed to play or mod anymore.

[Zachrulez]

"There's talks of a site-wide implementation that will change absolutely nothing for the typical user except potentially having to get used to typing VOTE: where they used to have to type

! As a moderator, absolutely nothing will change! Look at how bad this site has gotten! I'm surprised people even stay!"

That's a lie because I would actually be forced to enforce that rule as a mod, but OK.

[Zachrulez]

Zach, do you know something about this that we don't?

Chamber made reference to enforcing the use of vote tags over bold sitewide in order to work with also mandating an automated vote count system that I'm assuming would only read vote tags and not bold. If we're mandating automated vote counting and enforcing vote tags only so that it works, it stands to reason that as a mod I will no longer have the discretion to count votes any other way because the site is deciding that only vote tags count as votes and that all voting is automated.

That is how I am interpreting it anyway.

[Zachrulez]

If your objection is as a moderator, it is baseless. For a player, at least you are talking about your long-ingrained habits. As a moderator, you are objecting to a white background because to the moderator that is the sole difference.

I think the bigger objection is the amount of site wide fake voting (intentional and unintentional) that is going to occur if it gets implemented as required for mods to use instead of optional. Probably some accidental "that was really supposed to be a vote" scenarios near deadlines too. That is what I am not looking forward more if it happens and is probably the biggest objection of both players and mods.

Either way it likely ends in a situation where its mandatory and there is a long time situation of it being an annoyance to old players who don't use vote tags (I don't think I have EVER used them) and mods who have to deal with both intentional and unintentional fake votes. Or it is a situation where some mods choose to use them and it takes longer for an adaptation to occur, but the magnitude isn't as extreme.

If its not required there really is no qualm to be had. Maybe the wording from chamber was required as in "required to use automated vote counter"

The fake voting is actually my biggest concern. My moderator policy is that I determine voter intent and what I'm worried about is site wide implementation of automated voting and enforcement of the vote tags superseding my own rule set. As a mod I am even willing to go as far as to edit bold votes to vote tags to make them count on the basis of voter intent but I am worried that the idea is to take the discretion away in favor of automation deciding what a vote is.

[Zachrulez]

From what Chamber has said, that is the impression I have gotten about how it will work.

[Zachrulez]

How is this different from the whole "I didn't unvote, nananana" fake shenanigans?

I don't require unvoting so that type of fake voting can't happen in my games?

[Zachrulez]

So if someone votes in bold will I be able to count that as a vote, yes or no?

[Zachrulez]

From what Chamber has said, that is the impression I have gotten about how it will work.

Except your impression takes a lot of wild assumptions that I have never seen in an automated vote counter, ever.

Which brings me back to my "you have no idea what an automated vote counter looks like" statement. That you continue to prove with every post.

Why don't you go ahead and run me by what you think this evil automated fascist vote counter machine cyborg AI doomsday machine would look like and how it would operate.

The IRC site xyl made a long time back and I use has automated vote counting. Some people do try to exploit and do quick voting or trick voting to lure out scum in those games. And they do it in ways similar to the one i described in my last post. Use of a vote counter to your advantage takes the scum hunting out of finding scum and has a software do it for you. And thats wrong

Me and Zach are on the same page even though we simul post and I type slow

Though neither of us does know how chamber will implement his counter so I state the idea of allowing mod to edit auto counter results as a good suggestion to avoid this stuff from happening

I still don't think it should be required even with mod discretion, but I would at least be able to live with it if I still have the power to eliminate any possibility of players exploiting the auto vote counter in a way I don't like.

[Zachrulez]

Is it really insane to say that an auto vote counter should be able to count bold and vote tag votes as votes? (With an option to have it count either form or both?)

Also in the past I have counted non bold votes (While advising the player to vote according to my rules next time.) and even a vote for one of the heads of a hydra as a vote for the hydra. I don't like strict vote counting rules. I prefer having more flexibility with it and I really don't want a game to come down to some stupid mind game of whether something actually was a vote or not, so if it could be reasonably interpreted as a vote, it is.

[Zachrulez]

If they had existed from the beginning of time there wouldn't be one, but there's a whole load of users who came to the site and learned how to vote differently.

[Zachrulez]

Part of the reason I don't play as much any more is because I fear too much of the playerbase

isn't

playing to win.

Using incivility, etc., as tactics isn't fun to play with, and I'd prefer people wouldn't (I don't, or at least try not to). But not putting in effort is even less fun, and tends to drive away the people who would put in effort.

I mostly just feel like site culture has passed me by and even attempting to play again would show just how out of place I am in this era of site culture.

[Zachrulez]

It’s like someone saying “team mafia will ruin the site,” it’s absolute nonsense.

Any arguments about people using it to show off or whatever are dumb arguments anyway. Any of us who have played league or over watch or whatever games know the “my stats are better, you play support.” But that shouldn’t stop ranked games it’s really not that big of a deal and that sort of thing happens at this site already so it won’t be any different.

I mean the idea that a ranked queue getting popular enough that it might get difficult to find an unranked game could be a legitimate worry. I just see all this clamoring for a ranked queue and my thought is... why? Do people think it will actually measure player skill in any meaningful way? It's possible to play a great game and still lose just as it's possible to play an absolutely awful game and still win. There's probably even an argument for it making players more toxic as their rage level builds on that unreasonable player that just won't listen

because their rating is riding on this!

I mean I don't even hugely care and it didn't take me long to think about these potential issues.

[Zachrulez]

Unless I'm unaware of something, deadline lengths are mostly up to each individual moderator. If a moderator wants to run games with 8-day (or less) deadlines, they can, can't they? (I guess there's some unofficial rule that you shouldn't use really short deadlines but I don't think it's written in stone anywhere.) Just find moderators who are willing to do this.

People tend to want to swim with the tide so if the tide is 14 day deadlines that's what most mods are going to run. It's actually quite difficult to get people to run something else without designing something specifically to be run that way. (Like the Blitz queue)

You could make deadline length a qualifier in the queues. Something a mod has to answer and advertise when they put a game up for signups. Even the mere act of thinking about deadline length might mitigate people choosing to simply go with what the "accepted site culture" is.

[Zachrulez]

It's a mod-supply issue. If more mods wanted to run them, they'd be more visible.

If you're active in moderating and you want to see more blitz games... RUN THEM! It definitely won't hurt the cause.

[Zachrulez]

The last time I modded a blitz game half the players apparently didn't even notice it was a blitz game despite the word Blitz being in the game title, and this has turned me off from wanting to run another one

If players aren't paying enough attention to know what the deadline structure is for a game, there's likely to be a lot of other things about the game they're also not aware of. It's really amazing on a site where reading is tech in the games... people aren't reading the ruleset of the game... or even the description of the game.