Mafia Rule Updates Discussion Thread

[D3f3nd3r]

Then what is the expected answer if you end up forming a read based solely on play in ongoing games and are asked why? Do you have to just ignore the question? And then does ignoring the question become the ongoing games option?

I feel like there should probably be something codified along the lines of “you may not mention any read on a player for which you only have ongoing-game related reasons”

[D3f3nd3r]

Do not use cryptography, invisible text, or otherwise take any action that attempts to create a private communication channel in plain sight to communicate with some but not all players in a mafia game.

What is the intent behind this rule change? What kinds of posts are now not okay? Is vaguely referring to things now not ok?

Example: "Hey, remember how we got that person eliminated in game x? I think we're seeing the same thing here"

Would that post be allowed? Is it near the line?

Nah I think this is literally just finding ways to communicate in the game thread that can’t be fully parsed as English things being said unless you have specific information that’s private.

For example, sending messages with a cipher that only one player knows the key for, or telling someone like “we should push a vote against the player whose name ends with the 15th letter in the PM that I sent you nine days ago”. Your example is obtainable by someone else that looks at that other game, so it should be fine.

And for what it’s worth, that was on the list of things that the majority of mods had on their individual rulesets already (in fact, I know that I have it on mine and have force replaced a player for it).

[D3f3nd3r]

Is replacing back into a slot still permitted if the ruleset says so?

Yes, except the approach has changed slightly. Instead of this particular rule being specifically noted as supsersedeable by game mods, now all (or at least, most) of the player rules can be superseded by game mods if they have listmod approval. The replacement rule would fall under that umbrella.

If I want to do what Gamma suggests here, am I obliged to get listmod permission for every game that I run with it? Or if I get it the first time am I okay to avoid having to ask permission every time in the future?

Would it be beneficial to have a list of pre-approved modding rule deviations like that one, just to save a step of having to actually go to a listmod and get it approved every time a game mod wants to do something like this for something “generic”?

[D3f3nd3r]

This is exactly the kind of thing that worries me here. There needs to be a mod approved way of handling this besides not giving a read,

Why does there need to be a work around?
Why is it ok to reference one ongoing game in another in this specific way, but not any other way?

+1

There does not need to be a mod approved way of giving a read that is based solely on content from another ongoing game because you should not be able to have that read in the first place.

[D3f3nd3r]

pagetop

maybe it's more valuable to just

not play more than one game at once and not read ongoing games so that you'd never have this problem?

[D3f3nd3r]

It’s not meant to be an exception, so thank you for bringing this up. Players can’t mention activity in ongoing games if it relates to a read, but they would be allowed to do so if it’s not related to a read. That seems confusing though, so it might be more straightforward to remove this clause altogether.

OKAY:

"Zoraster is alive in 4 games and is posting in those games, but he hasn't posted here in 3 days."

This is from the OP of the Ongoing Games rules post. I struggle to think of a case where this post would be made but would *not* relate to a read of some sort. So yes, agree that this is confusing.

The only contexts I can think of are “Has this person siteflaked? Nah, they’re posting in their other games” or “This person’s on V/LA, but they’re posting in another game so they should be able to post soon.”

[D3f3nd3r]

You should define ellitelling for the masses because I have no clue what you’ve been talking about

[D3f3nd3r]

I mean I figured that much, but beyond Elli’s username I had no clue where to begin. Thanks Koba

[D3f3nd3r]

it is their job as scum to be as convincing as possible, so why wouldn't they exploit the gullibility of other players in believing that their trust tell is genuine?

The problem with trust tells is that people sacrifice their play as one faction so that their trust tell can be used when the other faction. If someone says they only use italics as town, they won’t use them as scum without a care in the world what that does to how they are read in the scum game.