Mafiascum.net

y'all remember the days when I was too cute to lim?

yup

Was there a Dead Thread for this game?

yep

I wouldn’t mind mod PT access either

Dead
Mod

Any issues with releasing the wolf thread?

In post 69, Bingle wrote:Dammit mt, don't defend me to get paranoid over my partner. Bad bat.

(≧▽≦)

Subject: Micro 1029: 8-Ball (but with Wolves) MOD PT

Save The Dragons wrote:

RE: Taly's quote vote

I've decided to rule that as not a valid vote, because of intent.

In post 290, Taly wrote: Fucking quotes. This was

Imaginality

voting NOT ME.

Since Taly didn't intend to vote Alisae, Taly just messed a quote tag, I've decided to rule this way. It's not an easy call to make because Taly messed up but I am willing to give the benefit of the doubt here.

Happy to discuss this ruling further after the game, if you have any issues with it, please don't hesitate to contact me or a listmod, just note the difficult position a mod is placed in when something like this happens.

I think this is the wrong call specifically because you're using intent. Like, as a mod you should never be trying to figure out the intent of a player because you have additional information and thus can modspew players as certain alignments. Particularly in this case, modspewing Taly as town.

I think the action itself (choosing not to count a vote because it was in broken tags) is reasonable, but the second you as a mod are looking at the intent of the players something is wrong.

fair enough

i think there was an intent not to vote that applies to either alignment though. the intent was to quote a vote, not to vote, and regardless of alignment it's possible to see that as the intent. I'm not trying to talk intent from a town player who had town intents with their actions.

it also sucks that this vote wasn't just a lolrandom vote that could just be unvoted but one that would have lim'd the 8 ball and as a mod it's really hard to take yourself out of the consequences of such an action.

Well if Taly were scum they could have been faking intent to not vote and the only way you as a mod could tell is because you know alignements. I always register votes as a machine looking from line to line would for that reason

But yeah I think it would have been a difficult judgement call to make because it was so consequential

I have a rule in my ruleset that I think covers it pretty well:

No vote trickery. Votes inside spoiler tags and obviously broken quotes will not be counted. Don't attempt to confuse other players over whether your vote was valid.

Situations like this are exactly why I have it laid out in my rules ahead of time.

But if you have to make a judgement call, I think going with implicit intent is fine-- in this case it was clearly presented as a quote fail, and going by only the presentation does not leak any information. If Taly were scum who intended to make a real vote look like an accident, he would deserve to have it not counted, because that's shady.

I believe that i wouldn't treat that as a vote if scum!taly were to try and sneak it in "accidentally" and would encourage people not to try that (as it is not fun to have be in this situation!).

it also matches with Taly's broadcasted intent in the thread, which tbf could be faked but if he were faking it the previous point stands

i can certainly see reading votes as a machine and accepting that vote but i also don't want to penalize anyone if the site blips

I believe the mod did fine. I think another good response for the mod would just be to confirm with me in PM if my vote was intentional... which it wasn't. I had a quote error that I mentioned the post after.

I didn't think vote trickery was a thing people did or thought to do. Definitely agree with on having a rule like that.

Also intentionally hammering would've been so out of character that I'd definitely not think to do it as scum unless we were the team, which would still otherwise be gamethrowing on my end.

It's rare, but I've seen it come up. Also sometimes people deliberately do things like "VOTE: Taly]/vote]" and I just want to discourage that because it's not in the spirit of the game.

In post 2088, Taly wrote:I believe the mod did fine. I think another good response for the mod would just be to confirm with me in PM if my vote was intentional... which it wasn't.

My stance isn't that not counting the vote is wrong. My stance is specifically that basing whether the vote counted on the intent of a player is a bad way to make the call.

Better ways:

1. An explicit rule like SS's.
2. Asking someone who isn't spoiled as to the alignment of the voter to make the call. (Presumably a listmod who is not in the game.)
3. Making a value call that you universally wouldn't accept votes inside of broken tags.

I tend to lean the opposite way having thought about it since it happened (if an automated votecounter would count it I would) mostly because I wouldn't always notice broken tags especially in a fast paced game, but the what is not at all what I think was wrong. Nor am I blaming STD for his choice. I am explaining why I think the way he went about making the choice was a bad set of criteria because I want to have better games in the future.

Don't get me wrong, STD did a great job and town deserved the win. I just always think it's worth talking about what could be done better so that it is, in fact, done better. Even if that's by someone entirely unrelated to the game who just happens to see it.

Sorry for causing that situation in the first place.
I didn't expect the mod to read it as a vote and was fine with that. I think town would have more reason to be aggrieved if it had been counted than we do that it wasn't.
I do agree that having that scenario explicit in the ruleset would be a good idea though.
Thanks for the Dead Thread link, that was a fun read.
On reflection I agree with Taly that we should have pushed House more earlier, could have made him a better mislim possibility by endgame. Though once suspicion came my way I was hoping me not pushing him and him defending me might bring him under suspicion after I flipped.

Sorry for causing that situation in the first place.
I didn't expect the mod to read it as a vote and was fine with that. I think town would have more reason to be aggrieved if it had been counted than we do that it wasn't.
I do agree that having that scenario explicit in the ruleset would be a good idea though.
Thanks for the Dead Thread link, that was a fun read.
On reflection I agree with Taly that we should have pushed House more earlier, could have made him a better mislim possibility by endgame. Though once suspicion came my way I was hoping me not pushing him and him defending me might bring him under suspicion after I flipped.