Private Topics Discussion (Now with Mish Mash)

[Jake from State Farm]

If you are so worried about cheating or whatever, Can't you just have the list mod or one of the reviewers randomize the rolls?

[zoraster]

Are you talking about him telling friends that are actively playing the game, or friends that aren't playing that they might be calling on to be somewhat of a backup mod or a friend that just wants to follow along the game knowing all the rolls without actually playing in it?

I was talking about telling friends in the game. But again, my point is that I DON'T think mods are doing this, whereas I DO think mods are manipulating results.

Whether or not manipulation is technically allowed seems besides the point. We as listmods have announced and as of now have no intention of requiring use of the private threads like this. I can just say that I think it's a worthwhile thing to do. I am harshly critical of anyone who chooses to manipulate, so I reject the "Acceptable way to do it as long as players don't know." No. This simply isn't true. Acceptable from the standpoint that I'm not going to take action, but not beyond that. That goes for someone who'd regenerate because they think all scum in the first 3 on the list looks bad too.

I'm sure it's viable, but I'm not sure there's interest among the people who do these sorts of things in putting in the work to do it. We're talking marginal gains here, whereas there are other things that offer larger ones.

[GuyInFreezer]

Just use random.org and screencap it?

[zoraster]

I could generate 100 random.orgs and screencap the one that I liked best.

[Jake from State Farm]

I could generate 100 random.orgs and screencap the one that I liked best.

This

So my suggestion is awesome

[zoraster]

I have no problem with people asking someone else to generate (reviewer/backup is obvious solution), though I'm not so eager to do so as the listmod. The issue is that it just pushes the temptation to manipulate to a second person. That person may not be as invested in the game, but that doesn't mean there won't be that temptation.

[Jake from State Farm]

If the list mod can't be trusted we have bigger issues lol

[Zachrulez]

When it comes down to it, at some level you do have to trust the mod to be honest about what they're doing.

It doesn't matter how many mechanisms of verification you put in place. You still have to trust that the mod is not interested in pulling one over on you.

[Jake from State Farm]

When it comes down to it, at some level you do have to trust the mod to be honest about what they're doing.

It doesn't matter how many mechanisms of verification you put in place. You still have to trust that the mod is not interested in pulling one over on you.

qft

[zoraster]

oh it wasn't that i don't trust the listmods. I do. I just meant alternate people like reviewers. I just think that the listmods aren't going to want to do dozens of generations.

And yes, at a certain point, you do. But total blind trust isn't necessary and won't happen.

[RichardGHP]

Why would you not trust the mod?

[Faraday]

Don't trust anyone!!!

[Jake from State Farm]

Don't trust anyone!!!

[zoraster]

Why would you not trust the mod?

I do the randomization way before sign ups even take place. Removes pretty much all temptation to tinker with the assignment. If you get a list which is not strictly desirable (e.g. the entire scum team taking up one single section), you will obviously want to reroll that. On that basis, I am not entirely opposed to zoraster's example a). But I think that altering the distribution any more specifically than that is just not good modding practice. Having said that, it absolutely should not be incumbent on the mod to prove that the distribution is random.

what do you mean a single section?

I mean, if the scum team is taking up three spots on the list right next to each other, for example. Or any such situations where the distribution isn't considered to "look" particularly random.

[Zachrulez]

I do the randomization way before sign ups even take place. Removes pretty much all temptation to tinker with the assignment. If you get a list which is not strictly desirable (e.g. the entire scum team taking up one single section), you will obviously want to reroll that. On that basis, I am not entirely opposed to zoraster's example a). But I think that altering the distribution any more specifically than that is just not good modding practice. Having said that, it absolutely should not be incumbent on the mod to prove that the distribution is random.

what do you mean a single section?

I mean, if the scum team is taking up three spots on the list right next to each other, for example. Or any such situations where the distribution isn't considered to "look" particularly random.

Not really sure what he meant by that not looking particularly random because when you draw randomly a distribution like that is bound to happen from time to time.

[zoraster]

he means that if that happened, he'd reroll. in which case, he manipulated it. He treated that choice as "obvious." So I have a hard time believing that he doesn't understand why I wouldn't trust mods when he's admitted he would do so and thinks it's an obvious choice.

I'm not trying to pick on Richard here at all as I like him and would play in a game he ran. But I am trying to dismiss this idea that manipulation doesn't happen as well as defend against this kind of absurd "why don't you trust the mod! if you don't trust him to do this, you wouldn't trust him to do anything!" argument I'm feeling. Because I am pretty sure it happens regularly. Whether that's a real problem or not is probably an open question, but I choose to do things to improve my reputation with my players, and I think they appreciate that. At worst they simply don't care.

[Zachrulez]

I mean yeah, I get that he said he would reroll in those cases. The reasoning just seems silly, because the distributions he wants to "fix" are a natural part of random drawing.

Also in that kind of game if you get a player list where known alignment on list goes

scum
unknown 1
scum
town
unknown 2
ect.

You're going to argue that unknown 1 isn't scum because Richard is known to reroll because the first 3 players being scum doesn't look random by his definition.

[zoraster]

i'm not arguing anything other than richard manipulated the results. whether or not players can divine anything, the manipulation occurred. and now that introduces a new outguess the mod element.

[RichardGHP]

I think it was you, zoraster, who talked about mods rerolling until they get a setup that they think "looks right". That's more or less what I was meaning; I would do it in some circumstances and I believe a lot of mods do it all the time, and it is not something which personally bothers me. It's altering specific players that I oppose (in non-bastard games, anyway). The idea that someone might now go out of their way to avoid my games is a bit saddening.

P. Edit: Zachrules, that is just my natural inclination. It's not based on mathematical reasoning, it's just the way I think. If I were a player in that game, I would be looking for scum outside of Player 2 by the same reasoning. And as I said, players would nonetheless be unwise to use this discussion to clear someone because a) there's no clearly defined line separating what I would and would not reroll, and b) I can make exceptions in either case.

Also, I think "manipulation" is an overly strong word. It is certainly not appropriate to describe what I do. I often reroll setups a few times anyway to get what I view as the best possible distribution. Again, this is not based on mathematical reasoning, just my thought process. For the same reason you might shake a pair dice for longer than usual or shuffle a deck of cards more thoroughly than usual, if you want to make sure that the result is "more random" (don't yell at me).

[Bert]

My game just ended last night, so today I released the private topics to the public. Is this a bad idea? I'm worried about clogging up the Private Topics forum. I had a habit of releasing Quicktopics in my past moderated games, so I did the same with the private topics postgame.

I also have gotten feedback from several this afternoon that worried that maybe they weren't supposed to be seeing those private topics.

Maybe I should only release them to the players involved in that particular game? The topic stays in Private Topics after being made public.

Any help would be appreciated!

[zoraster]

no, it's not bad. we'll clean up the private topics made public occasionally and put them in the archives.

[SleepyKrew]

Also, I think "manipulation" is an overly strong word. It is certainly not appropriate to describe what I do. I often reroll setups a few times anyway to get what I view as the best possible distribution. Again, this is not based on mathematical reasoning, just my thought process. For the same reason you might shake a pair dice for longer than usual or shuffle a deck of cards more thoroughly than usual, if you want to make sure that the result is "more random" (don't yell at me).

Just jumping in on this:
What you are describing is absolutely manipulating otherwise random results. It doesn't matter how much you shake the dice, the chance of any given outcome never changes. What you're saying is "oh I got three 2's, not random enough try again". Your dice and card examples are to assure randomness before getting a result. The modding practice you're describing is changing things

after

a result.

[tn5421]

I feel that randomizing the order of the role, randomizing the order of the players, and putting together results in better randomization than simply randomizing one or the other. Why do you feel that it isn't worth the effort?

Just use random.org and screencap it?

I could generate 100 random.orgs and screencap the one that I liked best.

When it comes down to it, at some level you do have to trust the mod to be honest about what they're doing.

It doesn't matter how many mechanisms of verification you put in place. You still have to trust that the mod is not interested in pulling one over on you.

oh it wasn't that i don't trust the listmods. I do. I just meant alternate people like reviewers. I just think that the listmods aren't going to want to do dozens of generations.

And yes, at a certain point, you do. But total blind trust isn't necessary and won't happen.

Just use random.org and screencap it?

I could generate 100 random.orgs and screencap the one that I liked best.

This is why I didn't consider it. My setup is intended to perform 2 tasks. 1, use an acceptable method of provable randomness to assign roles. 2, ensure that tampering would be difficult to do. I intend to build a good reputation for myself from the word go (June 31st, my 3 month anniversary)

When it comes down to it, at some level you do have to trust the mod to be honest about what they're doing.

It doesn't matter how many mechanisms of verification you put in place. You still have to trust that the mod is not interested in pulling one over on you.

Have you ever heard the phrase "Trust, but verify"? Because it fits this situation.

But total blind trust isn't necessary and won't happen.

This also fits with what i said above.


If anyone can suggest a better way to achieve my 2 goals, then please let me know.

[Cheery Dog]

Most manipulation of results done by mods would be accidental unthinking.

I've occasionally decided to random the roles and then also the playerlist after glimpsing the roles. While I don't think I was actually posting attention to where they indeed up, it's still some manipulation on my part.

Knowing that randomization shell exists now, I believe provided I can be bothered finding the link (i should bookmark it now I guess) I'll n bbe using it for future randomization.

Also why do the archived private topics appear in active discussions?

[zoraster]

i mean, it might be, but if it's accidental and truly unthinking, that's not really much different than closing your eyes and hitting "Randmize" 6 times before opening them.

as to the question: what do you mean?