Mafiascum.net

In post 74, Papa Zito wrote:What if you already did all that previously.

And then they join a game you're already in anyway.

I know this is purely hypothetical and NEVER EVER happens but indulge me.

Lol

Dat sarcasm

I sense zero sarcasm in that post.

Really??

I sense zito sarcasm in that post.

My person "Do Not Play" blacklist and Mod "Cannot Play" blacklist are very different lists, surprisingly. If there is a game I am interested in and too many of the players I don't prefer to play with are involved before I am I just generally choose to miss the game as opposed to trying to use WOTC. I've not personally ever faced the situation Zito describes but understand it can happen.

I have only ever had to exercise WOTC once. It was for a player who I knew had strategically replaced in a game and benefited from it. In fact I'm not even sure there was an offiicial WOTC involved I just directly messaged the Mod about my issue.

Lastly I think WOTC probably are best done via PMs between the Mod and affected players.

In post 74, Papa Zito wrote:What if you already did all that previously.

And then they join a game you're already in anyway.

I know this is purely hypothetical and NEVER EVER happens but indulge me.

Then they have been incredibly discourteous to you and it's perfectly reasonable to be 'rude' in return, not that it would be in this instance.

what acronym is it if i don't want to play with myself?

W-E-I-R-D-N-E-S-S?

In post 81, Hoopla wrote:what acronym is it if i don't want to play with myself?

WOTS, Wisdom of the self

In post 81, Hoopla wrote:what acronym is it if i don't want to play with myself?

R, for Retirement

The best solution is for the mod to have good enough of a handle on the player base that they can say "no" to players so everyone else doesn't have to.

I disagree with WOTC being private, it should be public so it is transparent to everyone and there is no mystery. We are all adults here.

In post 61, RadiantCowbells wrote:WoTC should be a thing but it should also be considered extremely rude to WoTC someone without first sending them a PM saying 'hey I don't want you in this game for reasons X Y and Z please leave it.'

Agreed. Transparency is key.

In post 85, Ranmaru wrote:We are all adults here.

I don't think this is true, and I'm not talking about how many scummers have reached the age of majority.

In post 87, Vi wrote:

In post 85, Ranmaru wrote:We are all adults here.

I don't think this is true, and I'm not talking about how many scummers have reached the age of majority.

Ooooh Buuuurn! XD

In post 88, Aristophanes wrote:

In post 87, Vi wrote:

In post 85, Ranmaru wrote:We are all adults here.

I don't think this is true, and I'm not talking about how many scummers have reached the age of majority.

Ooooh Buuuurn! XD

I keep wanting to pun this into "Elbirn" but can't figure out how.

But seriously, imagine what would happen if you were excited to play some game, but then some arse like me drew my long pointy nose to bear down on you and pointed an accusatory finger, loudly proclaiming that YOU SUCK on a substantial societal level. You would probably get remarkably pissed off and start a war of words that no one else wants to deal with. At least if I were saying this as the game's mod, I'd have some authority to do something about it (in not letting you play the game), whereas if I were some random other player I would have no power over you that could stop you from saying "then get your own game and leave me alone".

That's why I think it's best for the players to privately take their grievances to the mod and let them decide.

Furthermore, WOTC can be applicable where a player would prefer not to play with another player, but is willing to accept that player if noone else has a problem with him/her. If such an 'I prefer not to play with this player' has to be stated publicly, the ensuing fight guarantees that they won't be able to play together peacefully.

In post 89, Vi wrote:

In post 88, Aristophanes wrote:

In post 87, Vi wrote:

In post 85, Ranmaru wrote:We are all adults here.

I don't think this is true, and I'm not talking about how many scummers have reached the age of majority.

Ooooh Buuuurn! XD

I keep wanting to pun this into "Elbirn" but can't figure out how.

But seriously, imagine what would happen if you were excited to play some game, but then some arse like me drew my long pointy nose to bear down on you and pointed an accusatory finger, loudly proclaiming that YOU SUCK on a substantial societal level. You would probably get remarkably pissed off and start a war of words that no one else wants to deal with. At least if I were saying this as the game's mod, I'd have some authority to do something about it (in not letting you play the game), whereas if I were some random other player I would have no power over you that could stop you from saying "then get your own game and leave me alone".

That's why I think it's best for the players to privately take their grievances to the mod and let them decide.

I won't ever play with that mod and player list ever again cause I count that secrecy a direct insult to me and my wit.

Ok , yes it will cause drama. Are you saying cause it might cause drama, we must just complain about how bad someone else is and accuse them and get their right for joining the game without even telling them why? and without even telling them who we are?

assume courts do this. There won't be any fights in courthouses anymore. Noone will now who is the accuser and what are they accused of. That is beautiful isn't it? No drama. Everything will be in its rightful place.

or not?

How dare you take someones right for joining a game without telling them why? That is not even cowordish... its not being human.

sorry for aggression.

Its just that I'm this solidified and tunneled vision in my opinion in this matter. Take my opinion or leave it. After all neither I know you , nor you know me. We are just a bunch of starngers talking in the internet about whats just and whats not.

Its completely ok to not achieving same conclusion and having different correct views with paradoxes on the same matter.

I'm not trying to offend anyone . not in my last post nor in any other posts I did in this thread.

In post 87, Vi wrote:

In post 85, Ranmaru wrote:We are all adults here.

I don't think this is true, and I'm not talking about how many scummers have reached the age of majority.

I kind of like the idea, though, of communicating to teens as if they're adults. I kind of feel that having a double standard is condescending to kids.

In post 91, Frozen Angel wrote:

In post 89, Vi wrote:

In post 88, Aristophanes wrote:

In post 87, Vi wrote:

In post 85, Ranmaru wrote:We are all adults here.

I don't think this is true, and I'm not talking about how many scummers have reached the age of majority.

Ooooh Buuuurn! XD

I keep wanting to pun this into "Elbirn" but can't figure out how.

But seriously, imagine what would happen if you were excited to play some game, but then some arse like me drew my long pointy nose to bear down on you and pointed an accusatory finger, loudly proclaiming that YOU SUCK on a substantial societal level. You would probably get remarkably pissed off and start a war of words that no one else wants to deal with. At least if I were saying this as the game's mod, I'd have some authority to do something about it (in not letting you play the game), whereas if I were some random other player I would have no power over you that could stop you from saying "then get your own game and leave me alone".

That's why I think it's best for the players to privately take their grievances to the mod and let them decide.

I won't ever play with that mod and player list ever again cause I count that secrecy a direct insult to me and my wit.

And since that's what the mod and (at least some part of) the player list wanted to start with, everyone walks away with the situation resolved as well as can be.

More to the point, I was actually advocating for the offended player to privately take it up with the mod and let the mod decide whether to unilaterally bar the offending player or tell the offended player to deal with it. This way it's not an anonymous player who has the grievance so much as a moderator who previously had no information, makes their own decision, communicates their own decision, can enforce their own decision, gets to embrace any blowback from that decision, and may choose to reconsider that decision - all of this at least partly in public if they decide to bar someone. Please read strangers' posts more carefully before assuming what they say and taking gratuitous umbrage.

@Kuroi: I'm pretty sure Ranmaru meant "we're all mature, rational people here", and I interpreted it that way. That statement is patently untrue.

In post 35, hiplop wrote:only people who oppose WOTC are awful people to play with

i agree with this post yes yes

This is why mods can choose whether to allow WotC or not.

Vi: I think what Frozen Angel is trying to say is that she feels that when it's done privately and without any reason it feels hurtful because no one actually confronted the offending player at all and instead chooses to secretly shove offending player out without any say or constructive feedback. I did mean mature/rational, and even if we aren't I feel we must try to be. Isn't that what we strive for? I feel if it's public and constructive it'll be fine just as if it was private, as long as the reasoning is there and is again, constructive. If there was a reason that said 'cuz u sux' then I'd be like 'crap reasoning wotc denied' or whatever. This is just a suggestion I mean we'd really have to think more on it but I still am for transparency.

And that's why I want to push it to a single person who has the final say.

MOD: I'm rejecting this entry.
PLAYER: baaaaaaaaaaw why
MOD: Because <embarrassing links>
PLAYER: baaaaaaaaaaw not fair
MOD: Yet I'm the mod. Sorry or something.

Also IME most people who dislike someone enough to blacklist them have either told this to them previously or seen multiple people they respect tell this to them. Post 95 is correct in practice.

that is way better than resolving it privatly

your assuming the wotc'ed person is a sheep not a human being