Extreme Policing by Staff of Legitimate Play

Since any criticism is removed:

Regarding the report: https://www.sc2mafia.com/forum/showt...1-S2-1-9757360

Arrow and Auwt's extreme illogical conclusions are a danger to this game.

Vincukas intent is extremely clear, he was attempting to improve his standing.

It backfired. Mistakes happened. This is not griefing or gamethrowing, this is extreme policing of play and opens up a huge can of worms around future reports.

If this occured in FM, it would be celebrated as a BIG BRAIN move.

Whether or not the DH knew is totally irrelevant.

Auwt and co are now saying YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED TO IMPROVE YOUR STANDING AT THE EXPENSE of OTHER TRIAD.

This means: as triad:

you can never vote up a triad member, you have to inno a triad member on trial.

Vincukas and Eragon used to cheat in this game as well as Parasite by pre-teaming. So I stopped reading when I saw Vincukas. I may not have the evidence to prove it any more, it was blatant many months ago.

Bussing is fine in mod if they communicate their intention clearly and the team mate is ok with it. This isn't triad trying to look town by voting up and guilty voting a suss team mate, which has never been punished btw. There is a difference

Why does communication have anything to do with it? It is totally independent of the intent, which apparently is the chief deciding factor.

Whether or not the DH knows doesn't affect the validity of the play.

It's generally expected to not be shit cunt and use your big boy voice if you want to do something that has a good chance of negatively affecting your team mate who you probably have had very little or no interactions with before. In FM which is more relax on yolo bussing this type of play is done by people who have built up personal relationships for months, if not years.

Then why i got bussed once as an newb by an experienced player that casually insulted my play and told me i suck, before bussing me. :(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Renegade

Why does communication have anything to do with it?

---

It's not fun to be lynched by your scummate who didn't tell you that it was going to happen ahead of time. I hope you play because you have fun.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stealthbomber16

It's not fun to be lynched by your scummate who didn't tell you that it was going to happen ahead of time. I hope you play because you have fun.

---

It may not be fun, however, if you're experienced enough to figure out "hey, this guy is trying to make a play to win us the game" most of the time happy about it or not you'll go along.

Or at least I would (I've been on the dealing and receiving end of bussing both planned and unplanned before). In the end it can leave a bad taste in your mouth as well as make you angry maybe if you end up losing because it somehow didn't work, but reportable and punishable? At least imo there are a multitude of other things (for example failing as gov by only lynching town accidentally or not) that could be considered throwing/griefing to a more severe extent.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rumox

In FM which is more relax on yolo bussing this type of play is done by people who have built up personal relationships for months, if not years.

---

The concept is the same, the stipulation of "it's okay because you know them" shouldn't really by a factor here. I am all for bussing in both FM and mod, adds more dynamic gameplay for players in potentially tough positions. Just my thoughts.

in the end this boils down to a person unhappy because a risky play did not work.

I have not reviewed the report at all, but since FM is being brought up, I am intervening anyway, be it just about that part (doesn't mean much about the report itself, though):

In FM, big brain bussing is not bussing against your teammates without their consent, it is bussing with a plan and with their agreement so that they may anti-spew, so that the busser is actually townread afterwards (which has quite obviously not happened here). Please do not corrupt our healthy FM bussing with arcade "bussing" considerations (because I have very rarely seen real arcade bussing) :P. However, Rumox, this has nothing to do with "long established relationships". FM is not "more relax", it's just that bussing is a much bigger part of the game due to its longer and more rational nature. People coming from other sites won't refrain from bussing because they don't know most people in the game they're playing, unless they're more shy than usual players.

@Renegade , your post reads exactly like American politics: you call those with whom you disagree extremists and dangerous, and then proceed to scream in capital letters things that NOBODY SAID IN THAT THREAD (just use ctrl + f for proof...). I let you draw your own conclusions about who you're acting like right now. Clue: he looks like an old silly blonde carrot. If you have a legit point to make about "should punishments be strictly about intent, and was this respected in the judgment", I'm sure you're able to do better than that.

Also, mandatory disclaimer because of my red name: this is just my point of view, prompted by noone but myself, and doesn't represent staff's views as a whole, the word of God, the will of Santa Claus, or any other third party's take on the matter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Varcron

It may not be fun, however, if you're experienced enough to figure out "hey, this guy is trying to make a play to win us the game" most of the time happy about it or not you'll go along.

Or at least I would (I've been on the dealing and receiving end of bussing both planned and unplanned before). In the end it can leave a bad taste in your mouth as well as make you angry maybe if you end up losing because it somehow didn't work, but reportable and punishable? At least imo there are a multitude of other things (for example failing as gov by only lynching town accidentally or not) that could be considered throwing/griefing to a more severe extent.



The concept is the same, the stipulation of "it's okay because you know them" shouldn't really by a factor here. I am all for bussing in both FM and mod, adds more dynamic gameplay for players in potentially tough positions. Just my thoughts.

in the end this boils down to a person unhappy because a risky play did not work.

---

This is a very good point and is what should be discussed here, rather than "BUT FM!!". Generally speaking (and not related to any specific case), I feel like poor play that ends up costing games in the Arcade probably shouldn't be punished, especially considering how unfortunately common they are lol.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marshmallow Marshall

This is a very good point and is what should be discussed here, rather than "BUT FM!!". Generally speaking (and not related to any specific case), I feel like poor play that ends up costing games in the Arcade probably shouldn't be punished, especially considering how unfortunately common they are lol.

---

Agreed.


EDIT: The only stipulation to that would be if a case is severe and blatant enough (like calling out your teammates D1) that there should be a punishment.

If you consider bussing your teammate without consent to be a legitimate strategy, then you should accept the fact that reactionary gamethrowing in this case should not be punished either.

You now have situations where a mafia is selling out their teammate, and then they react with" "yea.. my teammate is throwing the game, 2 7 10 are mafia. I'm joining next lobby".

the guy tried to make the justification "Why did I do that? I thought that indicting 6 as rb immune would be harmless and would even give a boost to triad. Considering that I rbed 12, I expected him to claim escort and claim that he rbed 12 "

First of all, that plan is just stupid. it will be obvious at least one of you is lying 1 day later when you only roleblock 1 person and not 2.

That being said, that might fly if he said anything like that to his teammate during n1 (reminder spy can't read night chat anymore).

Instead he just said he was going to do something dumb and be ready for it. There is a reason for that that anybody reading can acknowledge is true - he knew if he actually explained his plan, his teammate would not be on board. This is why he just said he's going to do something dumb instead of explaining the plan. I'm not really sure how that's defensible but sure, w/e, staff giving a warning watchlist (AND NOT A BANLIST) is the bad thing here, not a guy who has been warned repeatedly about excessive hostility and toxicness once again finding a way to shit on others and act like it's morally okay (yes that's you renegade).

I second the post Mostache made.
That point was brought up on discord and I clearly told you Renegade that leaving this kind of bussing unpunished would ultimately open the gate to larger and more complex issue.

As much as you likely don't like Frozen, he pointed out an alike situation that is depicting quite well this weird situation.
Liaison, without known real intent, pushed a lead on his DH.
DH did not like this and believe Liaison is trying to throw game (which is a thing way more common in the arcade game compared to FM, although MM already made a post about FM explaining with deeper and more complete insight.)
DH then betray the Liaison by telling everyone that this player is Liaison before or while dying on trial.

You do not need to be extremely smart in order to see how this plays out and how unhealthy this situation might be.

I've myself asked, also on the discord, what would you do in this situation.
According to how lenient you are agreeing with bussing :

PUNISH THE LIAISON - No, big outplay that failed, can happen.

PUNISH THE DH - You did not address that point, though I hope that is not a thing either, you might tell me.

PUNISH BOTH OF THEM - No, big outplay might fail.

Therefore, which conclusion can be drawn?

PUNISH NO ONE IN THIS SITUATION.

You would allow those unhealthy situations to repeat all over again.

The only way to be certain that both parties are satisfied by the bussing, is to communicate beforehand.
Communication is crucial and has become a easier task to achieve since Spy's removal of the game.

At this point it's Griefing because of refusing to communicate in a critical situation and is worth in my opinion as much as someone who purposely doesn't defend himself on trial (especially when they have a role that is strongly confirmable) because of I don't know what this person could think of.

Now that this is clear, comes in second place the intent.
Here it was Vincukas.
If you take a closer look at line number 2 in the report audit, you should see what I am talking about.
Basically he is not the kind of guy to throw intentionally by doing such play.
Thus the charge of Gamethrowing was changed for a more adequate one.

Always defining the intent might become handy.
Here we, as staff, knew what to expect and how this person has acted the past years.
From a person to another, it could really be different, to a point where some players' real intent would be indicernible. Hopefully that was not the case here.

To conclude, the way I'm seeing this would be that depending on the intent, it can either be considered as Griefing, should the intent not be malicious as well as not communicating, or Gamethrowing, if the intent is a thing, or Innocent if the communication and the approbation of both players come live.

I signed in to say a whole bunch of shit but I realized I really don't give a fuck enough to go into it. At the end of the day, if the guy never offends again... what's the big deal? Reviews are done by a case by case basis and just because there's precedent for people being "punished" (and I say that lightly because a first time WL is nothing) for big brain moves, doesn't necessarily mean they will be prosecuted for such each and every single time. I've always been a big believer that dumb ≠ gamethrowing, but sometimes you make dumb moves and there's repercussions for it.

Anyway, this would be a whole other discussion if this person got the ban hammer over this. A WL is nothing. And if this were FM and it clearly backfired, I don't think this would be celebrated as an attempt on a big brain move... more like a glimpse into the dumbass plays people try and fail at.

Finally, the main reason I signed in is literally to say that Arrow is probably the most logical person and kind person in this community. He has done more for this community than half the current active members of this community have ever done. There is literally no decision he will ever make that would be a detriment to the game.

okay, back under my rock I go

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stealthbomber16

It's not fun to be lynched by your scummate who didn't tell you that it was going to happen ahead of time. I hope you play because you have fun.

---

This is a weak argument. Why don't we start punishing people who make really bad jokes in the game? Aka half the population

(I don't really care cuz I barely play mafia much anymore but yeah)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marshmallow Marshall

I have not reviewed the report at all, but since FM is being brought up, I am intervening anyway, be it just about that part (doesn't mean much about the report itself, though):

In FM, big brain bussing is not bussing against your teammates without their consent, it is bussing with a plan and with their agreement so that they may anti-spew, so that the busser is actually townread afterwards (which has quite obviously not happened here). Please do not corrupt our healthy FM bussing with arcade "bussing" considerations (because I have very rarely seen real arcade bussing) :P. However, Rumox, this has nothing to do with "long established relationships". FM is not "more relax", it's just that bussing is a much bigger part of the game due to its longer and more rational nature. People coming from other sites won't refrain from bussing because they don't know most people in the game they're playing, unless they're more shy than usual players.

@Renegade , your post reads exactly like American politics: you call those with whom you disagree extremists and dangerous, and then proceed to scream in capital letters things that NOBODY SAID IN THAT THREAD (just use ctrl + f for proof...). I let you draw your own conclusions about who you're acting like right now. Clue: he looks like an old silly blonde carrot. If you have a legit point to make about "should punishments be strictly about intent, and was this respected in the judgment", I'm sure you're able to do better than that.

Also, mandatory disclaimer because of my red name: this is just my point of view, prompted by noone but myself, and doesn't represent staff's views as a whole, the word of God, the will of Santa Claus, or any other third party's take on the matter.

---

I'm Lumi and I support this message.

Also, mandatory disclaimer because of my red name: this is NOT just my point of view, it is prompted by MM, it doesn't represent staff's views as a whole, but it does represent both the word of God and the will of Santa Claus.



What is allowed and works in arcade, isn't necessarily allowed in FM and vice versa. They're two different environments with two different sets of rules. There are parallels between them leading to many similar rules, but any argument based on "it's allowed in X, therefore it should be allowed in Y" is not logically sound.

As MM pointed out the core concept in question here is whether or not punishment should be based solely on intent.


I also reviewed the case and believe the correct decision was made, and would be more than willing to discuss it with anyone who wishes, just message me on Discord.
Making this thread about "should punishments be solely based on intent, or should other factors be considered as well?" would also be neat.

I think the case for punishing on intent AND other factors is a pretty easy conclusion to reach.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MrMostache

If you consider bussing your teammate without consent to be a legitimate strategy, then you should accept the fact that reactionary gamethrowing in this case should not be punished either.

You now have situations where a mafia is selling out their teammate, and then they react with" "yea.. my teammate is throwing the game, 2 7 10 are mafia. I'm joining next lobby".

---

This is a stupid point. Anything could lead to reactionary gamethrowing because people are different and complicated. You don't punish Godfathers who fuck up even though it could result in throwing by salty mafia players.

Why is it not allowed to bus people?? Also, from the sounds of it, it doesn't even sound like bussing was the intent. It also doesn't sound like a strategy someone would disagree with: "claim escort and that you Rb'd whoever I actually Rb'd". Why is this such an extreme play? Its actually valid.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lumi

I'm Lumi and I support this message.

Also, mandatory disclaimer because of my red name: this is NOT just my point of view, it is prompted by MM, it doesn't represent staff's views as a whole, but it does represent both the word of God and the will of Santa Claus.



What is allowed and works in arcade, isn't necessarily allowed in FM and vice versa. They're two different environments with two different sets of rules. There are parallels between them leading to many similar rules, but any argument based on "it's allowed in X, therefore it should be allowed in Y" is not logically sound.

As MM pointed out the core concept in question here is whether or not punishment should be based solely on intent.


I also reviewed the case and believe the correct decision was made, and would be more than willing to discuss it with anyone who wishes, just message me on Discord.
Making this thread about "should punishments be solely based on intent, or should other factors be considered as well?" would also be neat.

I think the case for punishing on intent AND other factors is a pretty easy conclusion to reach.

---

Why would you punish for anything other than intent? Intent is all that counts. If the guy didn't mean to bus and was just executing a strategy, I actually see nothing wrong with what he did. Its not like he's gonna throw every game away or something

The argument here isn't even valid, because it's based on the faulty assumption that the guy wanted to bus his Dragon Head. Here he explains his intent:

"thought that indicting 6 as rb immune would be harmless and would even give a boost to triad. Considering that I rbed 12, I expected him to claim escort and claim that he rbed 12 or town roleblock immune. And as such, increasing trust in case of one of us dies. I never expected 6 to be lynched d2."

So it isn't even about bussing. He was trying to improve triad position by calling basically both him and the dragon head escorts. There is no bussing here lol

The crux of why the player in question was watch listed is because he made 0 effort to communicate to his team mate he is going for a high risk play that forces said team mate to be a part of it. Let's stop blowing past this.

Whether he intentionally meant to bus or not isn't relevant because bussing is fine, as long as it's communicated and agreed upon. The only reason I brought up bussing is because Renegade implied bussing is not allowed at all in the OP, and also for some reason implied you are not longer able to vote up sinking team mate.

Before any further discussion takes place I'd just like to say please actually consider why we watch listed the player originally. He made 0 effort to communicate to his team mate he is going for a high risk play that forces said team mate to be a part of it. The logic behind this stance is the same as punishing Kidnappers/Interrogators who jail and execute their team mates for town cred when said team mate isn't sus to begin with (looking at you Frinckles). The logic behind the play is FINE. The execution is NOT.

Communicate your plan if it involves others dirrectly. Ask for consent.

If you simply think players shouldn't need to ask for consent and communicate these kind of plans with their team mate, just say so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marshmallow Marshall

@Renegade , your post reads exactly like American politics: you call those with whom you disagree extremists and dangerous, and then proceed to scream in capital letters things that NOBODY SAID IN THAT THREAD (just use ctrl + f for proof...). I let you draw your own conclusions about who you're acting like right now. Clue: he looks like an old silly blonde carrot.

---

Renegade is like the DNC-worshipping plebbitor on /r/politics screaming about the incoming fascist takeover of America

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Grakylan

Renegade is like the DNC-worshipping plebbitor on /r/politics screaming about the incoming fascist takeover of America

---

For the sake of peaceful discussion can we all agree not to throw direct insults at eachother?

I know I am not a staff, however it makes everything a lot easier to speak about if neither side gets riled up.

Man, I saw "lets not insult each other" and wanted to wade into this juicy thread, but decided to just skip straight back to returning under the rock.

Renegade is absolutely correct though. That guy was not throwing or griefing. Further, I don't think people should be punished for this kind of this thing. Its a legitimate strategy to bus your scummates, consent notwithstanding. If someone bussed I would mind it, but at the end of the day their goal was to win, same as mine. There is nothing reportable there lol

Also, the real issue here, since the guy wasn't bussing his teammates, is that now potentially you can get infracted for pulling off a big brain move that fails for 'griefing' (lol)

The question staff should be asking themself is whether it's worth it to start punishing people more now, seeing as SC2 is dying. Some of these punishments I am pretty sure I have never heard of before and I've been here a long time.

Exeter got infracted for leaving multiple lobbies because he didn't like the save. He specifically said in discord he might stop playing now. So that's one more player that's not coming back, in an already dying game. That's not to mention the myriad players who got banned for pedophiliac and racist names (lol). Maybe I'm just a retard, but I'm there to play the game; I don't give a rat's ass about some guy with Tourette's spamming dumb shit in the game. I play Mafia to win

Who are our enemies and who are our friends? These are the questions of first importance when revolting

I like how staff makes decisions based on macro observations rather than one guy's personal experience :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Oberon

The question staff should be asking themself is whether it's worth it to start punishing people more now, seeing as SC2 is dying. Some of these punishments I am pretty sure I have never heard of before and I've been here a long time.

Exeter got infracted for leaving multiple lobbies because he didn't like the save. He specifically said in discord he might stop playing now. So that's one more player that's not coming back, in an already dying game. That's not to mention the myriad players who got banned for pedophiliac and racist names (lol). Maybe I'm just a retard, but I'm there to play the game; I don't give a rat's ass about some guy with Tourette's spamming dumb shit in the game. I play Mafia to win

---

Exactly. I already saw one community I was involved in for years (DivinityRP in Gmod) die off b/c of admins focusing on the wrong issues consistently and alienating the regulars of the community (who themselves constantly alienated the newcomers). I fear the same fate for SC2Mafia.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Voss

I like how staff makes decisions based on macro observations rather than one guy's personal experience :)

---

If this is an attempt to get me to react it's a very weak one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Oberon

If this is an attempt to get me to react it's a very weak one.

---

But- you did react.

-_-

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Grakylan

Exactly. I already saw one community I was involved in for years (DivinityRP in Gmod) die off b/c of admins focusing on the wrong issues consistently and alienating the regulars of the community (who themselves constantly alienated the newcomers). I fear the same fate for SC2Mafia.

---

What do you think moderation should be focusing on?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Unknown1234

But- you did react.

-_-

---

Not in the way I was expected to, I think. I think I was expected to freak out so I could get banned again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DJarJar

the guy tried to make the justification "Why did I do that? I thought that indicting 6 as rb immune would be harmless and would even give a boost to triad. Considering that I rbed 12, I expected him to claim escort and claim that he rbed 12 "

First of all, that plan is just stupid. it will be obvious at least one of you is lying 1 day later when you only roleblock 1 person and not 2.

That being said, that might fly if he said anything like that to his teammate during n1 (reminder spy can't read night chat anymore).

Instead he just said he was going to do something dumb and be ready for it. There is a reason for that that anybody reading can acknowledge is true - he knew if he actually explained his plan, his teammate would not be on board. This is why he just said he's going to do something dumb instead of explaining the plan. I'm not really sure how that's defensible but sure, w/e, staff giving a warning watchlist (AND NOT A BANLIST) is the bad thing here, not a guy who has been warned repeatedly about excessive hostility and toxicness once again finding a way to shit on others and act like it's morally okay (yes that's you renegade).

---

"Anybody reading can acknowledge is true"
No, you can acknowledge it's true. I cannot. Perhaps the guy was thinking so intensely that he literally forgot to talk to the guy about his strategy. Maybe he was super excited about what he was going to do...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Oberon

"Anybody reading can acknowledge is true"
No, you can acknowledge it's true. I cannot. Perhaps the guy was thinking so intensely that he literally forgot to talk to the guy about his strategy. Maybe he was super excited about what he was going to do...

---

Given that he told his teammate that he was going to do something, but not specifically what he was going to do, I think this can be safely ruled out as a possibility.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Unknown1234

Given that he told his teammate that he was going to do something, but not specifically what he was going to do, I think this can be safely ruled out as a possibility.

---

If you're convinced you've discovered some big-brain play you may feel so excited you will literally forget about everything else. For example, Fermat's last theorem took 378 years to prove, and Fermat stated he had discovered a proof of it (but the particular page (he was writing on the margins of a book) he was using wasn't wide enough for him write the proof down on it), but since his proof was never discovered people now assume he deluded himself into thinking he had discovered a proof whereas he hadn't. This is a relevant example because pretty much the same thing could've happened to this guy

It honestly seems like people are more upset about him being an asshole to his teammate, and not about actually Griefing. Sure it’s done in poor taste and it definitely did not help his team, but should it really be considered Griefing? I don’t really think it was him trolling, and it looks like he was trying to win the game (simply with a really bad strategy).

I kinda wish the player in question would come and discuss it in here. If nothing else to hear their input more.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Oberon

If you're convinced you've discovered some big-brain play you may feel so excited you will literally forget about everything else. For example, Fermat's last theorem took 378 years to prove, and Fermat stated he had discovered a proof of it (but the particular page (he was writing on the margins of a book) he was using wasn't wide enough for him write the proof down on it), but since his proof was never discovered people now assume he deluded himself into thinking he had discovered a proof whereas he hadn't. This is a relevant example because pretty much the same thing could've happened to this guy

---

This could be a possibility, but the way that he wrote out his appeal makes me think he just genuinely didn’t care enough to tell his teammate, not that he forgot to because he was excited.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Voss

I like how staff makes decisions based on macro observations rather than one guy's personal experience :)

---

Staff could also try and talk to Exeter and see why he left... and then use their brains & knowledge of people to see if it's applicable to many people. But even so, 1 player when there's probably 100 people who play mafia, at most, is A LOT.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Oberon

Staff could also try and talk to Exeter and see why he left... and then use their brains & knowledge of people to see if it's applicable to many people. But even so, 1 player when there's probably 100 people who play mafia, at most, is A LOT.

---

ppeeewwwww is the sound of my point going over your head :]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Oberon

Staff could also try and talk to Exeter and see why he left... and then use their brains & knowledge of people to see if it's applicable to many people. But even so, 1 player when there's probably 100 people who play mafia, at most, is A LOT.

---

Dropped in to catch up on things and saw my name.

I didn't leave, I'm taking a break. I still participate in the community Discord. And my reasons for the break is (afaik from quick skimming) different from what's being discussed here.

Tl;Dr: Quality of saves has gone down the drain and I do not want to be held hostage to setups that waste my time. I'd rather spend my time on things that I actually enjoy.

For the record I understand where staff is coming from on the frequent leaving issue. "Shit save" is a common complaint and what constitutes one differs by person. If everybody started quitting over it, we would never get a game going.

wrekt

I absolutely agree that he should have informed his team of his intent. But if you are using his failure to inform his team as a justification for the punishment, then we need to look at the replay. He did in fact inform them he was making a strategy move, but he failed to inform his team what that move was. Still, his intent was to inform his team, he was just bad at it. It was a poor strategy but being an idiot should not be punishable. Furthermore, he had no mal (bad) intent going into his play. He was trying to win. So it comes down to whether or not you believe that an incredibly stupid honest mistake should be punishable via griefing. I do not.

Now, if he has other reports which indicate a pattern of behavior counter to our community rules and guidelines, that would sway me to say this was not an honest mistake. Does he have any reports? Has anyone played with him and can speak to his usual behavior.