Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 2 3 ... 5 [All]

Author Topic: The "QT issue"  (Read 10714 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11800
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (。 ω 。`)
    • View Profile
    • Birds of Necama
The "QT issue"
« on: February 02, 2016, 06:47:39 pm »

For those of you who might not have been following the game and its speccy, this is an issue that arose in Mafia 74: X-Shots 2: Apocalypse Now!. Basically, the issue in that game was that all players had individual QTs and they were freely allowed to quote those QTs in the main thread.

The problem with this is that a townie who likes to use a QT for the purpose of "thinking out loud" can just post the entirety of his QT's contents to the main thread and instantly have a believable town narrative. Meanwhile, scum is essentially required to maintain a fake QT per each possible fake claim they might want to do at some point in the game in order to play optimally. That is a ton of effort that they have to put in, most of which will end up being completely irrelevant because you'll only ever post one of those QTs, and I believe that doing it will just feel like an annoyance, not like the kind of rewarding work that playing Mafia usually involves.

The issue is not limited to QTs, though. Most (presumably all, but I haven't actually checked it) Mafia games so far have not forbidden creating a Word document to keep track of your thoughts during the game or copypasting its contents into the main thread, it just wasn't a thing that people did.

My proposed solution is to extend the "Direct or verbatim quoting of mod-provided information is strictly forbidden. Paraphrasing is okay." rule or its equivalent to include quoting of anything outside the main thread. I think that the "Personal multimedia, such as video or audio recordings, are not allowed in the game thread." rule already technically prohibits creating your own QT (or other similar "private" web page) and then just linking that in the main thread. As far as I can tell, this solution doesn't prevent you from doing anything non-QT issue related that you might actually want to do in a Mafia game. The "problem" with this solution is that you can still keep a Word document and paste everything from it because nobody can tell the difference, but that's not really a problem since you still have to claim that you have paraphrased your text, and as long as the other players are under the impression that you actually paraphrased it, you won't gain an unfair advantage over someone who just fabricates the entire thing on the spot.

Thoughts?
Logged
Bomb, Cannon, and many of the Gunpowder cards can strongly effect gameplay, particularly in a destructive way

The YouTube channel where I make musicDownload my band's Creative Commons albums for free

Roadrunner7671

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1845
  • Shuffle iT Username: Roadrunner7672
  • Forum Mafia Record: 18-33-2
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #1 on: February 02, 2016, 06:48:21 pm »

I'm doing this anyway, regardless of rules.
Logged
Oh God someone delete this before Roadrunner sees it.

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11800
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (。 ω 。`)
    • View Profile
    • Birds of Necama
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #2 on: February 02, 2016, 06:49:44 pm »

I'm doing this anyway, regardless of rules.

You're doing what?
Logged
Bomb, Cannon, and many of the Gunpowder cards can strongly effect gameplay, particularly in a destructive way

The YouTube channel where I make musicDownload my band's Creative Commons albums for free

Roadrunner7671

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1845
  • Shuffle iT Username: Roadrunner7672
  • Forum Mafia Record: 18-33-2
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #3 on: February 02, 2016, 06:50:44 pm »

I'm doing this anyway, regardless of rules.

You're doing what?
If I ever mod a game I'm implementing this rule, and I already refuse to quote from a QT.
Logged
Oh God someone delete this before Roadrunner sees it.

Teproc

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 765
  • Shuffle iT Username: Teproc
  • aka Le Teproc
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #4 on: February 02, 2016, 06:51:30 pm »

I'll link to the the X-Shots speccy, because a lot of this discussion already happened there.

Obviously up to the mods' discretion, but I think I will favor games that forbid QT quoting from now on.
Logged
Mafia play advice: If you are not content with the way the game is going, always assume that it is your fault.

Teproc

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 765
  • Shuffle iT Username: Teproc
  • aka Le Teproc
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #5 on: February 02, 2016, 06:53:15 pm »

So, I agree with your proposed solution, as I said in the X-shots speccy.
Logged
Mafia play advice: If you are not content with the way the game is going, always assume that it is your fault.

silverspawn

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5283
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #6 on: February 02, 2016, 06:59:11 pm »

As you know, I of course agree, but I want to elaborate a bit on what the problem is, because I'm not sure your OP makes it clear (and I've read a couple of arguments that miss the point).

Suppose you are someone who posts a lot in QTs. Now let's suppose you start a game and roll scum. And then let's suppose you do not start multiple QTs or prepare in any other way.

Here is why that will get you lynched

At day 4 in the game, town will request that every player post the entirety of his QT in the thread. Now, what do you do?

- Refuse - will get you lynched
- Claim you happen to not have posted anything in your QT this game - will probably get you lynched, because players will know it's probably a lie
- Fabricate an entire wrong QT after you're asked - even if you manage to do this believably and have the time, it doesn't solve the problem, because now you did put in the work after all

So there is no shortcut. You either have to put in the work every game, or you have to stop using QTs in all games, or you have to get lynched whenever town requests that everyone quotes his QT content, which should happen every game as it's in town's interest.

If you are someone who doesn't use QTs in general, then it doesn't affect you directly.

silverspawn

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5283
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #7 on: February 02, 2016, 07:03:06 pm »

I also agree with the solution, and - really, this shouldn't be an issue. It has never been an issue before, because quoting from QTs has never been allowed, and if we make the intent clear for the future, then there's no reason why it should be different in the future. The only way that it can be a problem is if you allow it in your games.

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11800
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (。 ω 。`)
    • View Profile
    • Birds of Necama
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #8 on: February 02, 2016, 07:08:01 pm »

- Fabricate an entire wrong QT after you're asked - even if you manage to do this believably and have the time, it doesn't solve the problem, because now you did put in the work after all

I don't think this is a problem, because "paraphrase your QT" is not fundamentally different from "explain what kinds of thoughts you had at the time when you hammered X and chose to jailkeep Y etc" in that regard the only difference is that in the former case, you're supposedly doing it based on the notes that you've taken rather than from memory. It's simply something that every scum player has always had to do in every game, and I think it is not necessarily unfun because all of that effort is directly making an actual difference and not just being there just in case.

It's only a problem if the town player can confirm that his QT is actually his QT by copypasting it and sending the message extremely shortly after he was asked to do so.
Logged
Bomb, Cannon, and many of the Gunpowder cards can strongly effect gameplay, particularly in a destructive way

The YouTube channel where I make musicDownload my band's Creative Commons albums for free

silverspawn

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5283
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #9 on: February 02, 2016, 07:10:32 pm »

I don't think this is a problem, because "paraphrase your QT" is not fundamentally different from "explain what kinds of thoughts you had at the time when you hammered X and chose to jailkeep Y etc" in that regard

I said 'fabricate a QT'. I mean write an entire QT after you're asked, the same that you don't want to do from the start of the game. Paraphrasing won't help you if town ask that you post your QT literally.

gkrieg13

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 509
  • Shuffle iT Username: gkrieg
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #10 on: February 02, 2016, 07:10:58 pm »

People can post rereads of the game, which are done from the perspective of the present.  It is hard to fabricate things from the past, because they require less knowledge than you already have, which is why mafia is hard sometimes in the first place!

All it will take is one scum posting one of these QTs in thread and no one will think it is necessarily townie.  Or just always refuse to post things from your QT in thread as either alignment
Logged

yuma

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 695
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #11 on: February 02, 2016, 07:20:06 pm »

I will bring this up once again as it applied specifically to me:

At one period my place of work blocked access to the forums. So while I was at work, during times of downtime of which there were many, I could not access the forums. However, I did have access to my email through which I was able to receive subscription updates to the threads in question. As a result I would write down thoughts in a separate document to post at a later time when I had access to the forums. I would direct quote what I had already typed at this time period.

In addition to inform people of what I was doing, as it was obvious that I was replying in a very rapid fashion to multiple posts in a row I described this process in detail so everyone knew that I was quoting from an outside source.

My question is thus: would my behavior, which was required for me to play the game during this time period as I would often only have 30 minute increments to actually post content each day, be allowed. Because my interpretation of the above ruling would disqualify it. Obviously this is an exception, but other such exceptions could arise. And if it is allowed how is it distinguished from what is done in posting to QTs?

What of the shared google document used in MV that everyone agreed to use? What of grujah's bread crumbing in... MIX I think??

I think there are other examples as well.

I understand the concerns listed above, but personally I think self policing is better than creating hard rules that may restrict or deter people from being able to play the game in unusual situations.

Dependent upon my workplace I may need to resort to using this posting method again in the future.

Also isn't the paraphrasing issue just as, or nearly as onerous, for scum to have to deal with if one posts a lot in a QT and needs to paraphrase multiple posts for credibility?

That said I think the rules are fine for individual mods to use as they please, but coming from my background and perspective, I think it is a concern.
Logged

gkrieg13

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 509
  • Shuffle iT Username: gkrieg
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #12 on: February 02, 2016, 07:22:30 pm »

I think people just need to follow the golden rule.  I just put the rule in my rule set so that people don't demand that everyone post their QT into the thread, which I think breaks the golden rule
Logged

silverspawn

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5283
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #13 on: February 02, 2016, 07:25:41 pm »

My question is thus: would my behavior, which was required for me to play the game during this time period as I would often only have 30 minute increments to actually post content each day, be allowed.

Of course it would.

There is really no point to discuss the literal phrasing of the rule. Everyone knows what the problem is, and what isn't. I don't see anyone wanting to disallow what you're describing here.

Roadrunner7671

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1845
  • Shuffle iT Username: Roadrunner7672
  • Forum Mafia Record: 18-33-2
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #14 on: February 02, 2016, 07:30:05 pm »

Just get rid of direct quoting after saying it's a direct quote. Feel free to copy/paste from your QT, but don't quote it! Probably don't tell anyone it's from your QT, either.
Logged
Oh God someone delete this before Roadrunner sees it.

silverspawn

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5283
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #15 on: February 02, 2016, 07:33:00 pm »

Just get rid of direct quoting after saying it's a direct quote. Feel free to copy/paste from your QT, but don't quote it! Probably don't tell anyone it's from your QT, either.

er... no. that doesn't solve the issue of mass quoting from the QT.

If you really want to have a rule for it, disallow literal quoting of everything that's more than 10 hours old or something to that effect.

gkrieg13

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 509
  • Shuffle iT Username: gkrieg
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #16 on: February 02, 2016, 07:35:22 pm »

I know you have a problem with my cuteness Awaclus, but you didn't have to make a thread out of it.
Logged

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11800
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (。 ω 。`)
    • View Profile
    • Birds of Necama
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #17 on: February 02, 2016, 08:16:10 pm »

I know you have a problem with my cuteness Awaclus, but you didn't have to make a thread out of it.

In this case the QT in question was WW, though.

My question is thus: would my behavior, which was required for me to play the game during this time period as I would often only have 30 minute increments to actually post content each day, be allowed. Because my interpretation of the above ruling would disqualify it. Obviously this is an exception, but other such exceptions could arise. And if it is allowed how is it distinguished from what is done in posting to QTs?

Well, it's pretty much up to the mod to determine if it looks like a player is breaking that rule, so in practice I imagine it would be allowed.
Logged
Bomb, Cannon, and many of the Gunpowder cards can strongly effect gameplay, particularly in a destructive way

The YouTube channel where I make musicDownload my band's Creative Commons albums for free

yuma

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 695
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #18 on: February 02, 2016, 08:25:51 pm »

My question is thus: would my behavior, which was required for me to play the game during this time period as I would often only have 30 minute increments to actually post content each day, be allowed.

Of course it would.

There is really no point to discuss the literal phrasing of the rule. Everyone knows what the problem is, and what isn't. I don't see anyone wanting to disallow what you're describing here.

I don't either and I am not suggesting anyone would. I guess my concern is the gray area between and the area that has been described as "mod determines."

I know that is part of being a mod, but if possible I like to stay away from making one sort of decisions when possible. But if others are willing to do so I can't fault them for that.
Logged

yuma

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 695
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #19 on: February 02, 2016, 08:29:01 pm »

Just get rid of direct quoting after saying it's a direct quote. Feel free to copy/paste from your QT, but don't quote it! Probably don't tell anyone it's from your QT, either.

er... no. that doesn't solve the issue of mass quoting from the QT.

If you really want to have a rule for it, disallow literal quoting of everything that's more than 10 hours old or something to that effect.

That could work.

And I am not trying to be a pain, I mean this thread is the place to discuss this right??

But simply state why I don't think the solutions being promoted as the ultimate solution actually are the ultimate solution. I don't have the answer either. It is a work in progress. But I still think the ideal would be to not have need for a rule but more for a group who refuses to participate in it, which I, personally, have said I would do.
Logged

gkrieg13

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 509
  • Shuffle iT Username: gkrieg
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #20 on: February 02, 2016, 08:31:17 pm »

I know you have a problem with my cuteness Awaclus, but you didn't have to make a thread out of it.

In this case the QT in question was WW, though.

My question is thus: would my behavior, which was required for me to play the game during this time period as I would often only have 30 minute increments to actually post content each day, be allowed. Because my interpretation of the above ruling would disqualify it. Obviously this is an exception, but other such exceptions could arise. And if it is allowed how is it distinguished from what is done in posting to QTs?

Well, it's pretty much up to the mod to determine if it looks like a player is breaking that rule, so in practice I imagine it would be allowed.

But I'm such a QT (cutie)
Logged

Roadrunner7671

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1845
  • Shuffle iT Username: Roadrunner7672
  • Forum Mafia Record: 18-33-2
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #21 on: February 02, 2016, 08:33:35 pm »

If enough of us outright refuse to post things from our QT in the game, we're good. Sign a petition or something.
Logged
Oh God someone delete this before Roadrunner sees it.

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11800
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (。 ω 。`)
    • View Profile
    • Birds of Necama
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #22 on: February 02, 2016, 08:41:30 pm »

I know you have a problem with my cuteness Awaclus, but you didn't have to make a thread out of it.

In this case the QT in question was WW, though.

My question is thus: would my behavior, which was required for me to play the game during this time period as I would often only have 30 minute increments to actually post content each day, be allowed. Because my interpretation of the above ruling would disqualify it. Obviously this is an exception, but other such exceptions could arise. And if it is allowed how is it distinguished from what is done in posting to QTs?

Well, it's pretty much up to the mod to determine if it looks like a player is breaking that rule, so in practice I imagine it would be allowed.

But I'm such a QT (cutie)

Thanks for explaining the joke, I already got it though.

If enough of us outright refuse to post things from our QT in the game, we're good. Sign a petition or something.

But that's bad play if you're town in a game where posting things from your QT is allowed.
Logged
Bomb, Cannon, and many of the Gunpowder cards can strongly effect gameplay, particularly in a destructive way

The YouTube channel where I make musicDownload my band's Creative Commons albums for free

Roadrunner7671

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1845
  • Shuffle iT Username: Roadrunner7672
  • Forum Mafia Record: 18-33-2
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #23 on: February 02, 2016, 08:45:38 pm »

I think pisting from your QT is like posting a screenshot of your PM. They're both something I'll never do.
Logged
Oh God someone delete this before Roadrunner sees it.

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11800
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (。 ω 。`)
    • View Profile
    • Birds of Necama
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #24 on: February 02, 2016, 08:49:12 pm »

I think pisting from your QT is like posting a screenshot of your PM. They're both something I'll never do.

In a game where the former is allowed and the latter is not, the difference is that the former is allowed and the latter is not. You should do whatever it takes to win the game, even if you have to use tactics that feel "cheap", as long as they're allowed in the rules.
Logged
Bomb, Cannon, and many of the Gunpowder cards can strongly effect gameplay, particularly in a destructive way

The YouTube channel where I make musicDownload my band's Creative Commons albums for free

Teproc

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 765
  • Shuffle iT Username: Teproc
  • aka Le Teproc
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #25 on: February 02, 2016, 08:49:26 pm »

If enough of us outright refuse to post things from our QT in the game, we're good. Sign a petition or something.

Why not change the rules ?

The problem with yuma's approach, or more accurately the reason it doesn't work for me personally, is that I think quoting your QT is just a great move for town, especially PR!town. Not doing it feels like losing a huge opportunity to make my faction more likely to win (if I'm at risk of being lynched).
Logged
Mafia play advice: If you are not content with the way the game is going, always assume that it is your fault.

yuma

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 695
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #26 on: February 02, 2016, 08:58:46 pm »

If enough of us outright refuse to post things from our QT in the game, we're good. Sign a petition or something.

Why not change the rules ?

The problem with yuma's approach, or more accurately the reason it doesn't work for me personally, is that I think quoting your QT is just a great move for town, especially PR!town. Not doing it feels like losing a huge opportunity to make my faction more likely to win (if I'm at risk of being lynched).

I guess I don't understand the attitude of doing things that are harmful for the overall enjoyment of the game for the sake of winning the game.

But we seem to disagree on this point on multiple fronts...
Logged

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11800
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (。 ω 。`)
    • View Profile
    • Birds of Necama
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #27 on: February 02, 2016, 09:17:36 pm »

I guess I don't understand the attitude of doing things that are harmful for the overall enjoyment of the game for the sake of winning the game.

Not doing everything in your power to win the game is more harmful for the overall enjoyment than anything else. If you're not trying to win, why even play the game?
Logged
Bomb, Cannon, and many of the Gunpowder cards can strongly effect gameplay, particularly in a destructive way

The YouTube channel where I make musicDownload my band's Creative Commons albums for free

Teproc

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 765
  • Shuffle iT Username: Teproc
  • aka Le Teproc
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #28 on: February 02, 2016, 09:24:54 pm »

If enough of us outright refuse to post things from our QT in the game, we're good. Sign a petition or something.

Why not change the rules ?

The problem with yuma's approach, or more accurately the reason it doesn't work for me personally, is that I think quoting your QT is just a great move for town, especially PR!town. Not doing it feels like losing a huge opportunity to make my faction more likely to win (if I'm at risk of being lynched).

I guess I don't understand the attitude of doing things that are harmful for the overall enjoyment of the game for the sake of winning the game.

But we seem to disagree on this point on multiple fronts...

The fact of the matter is : it's not that harmful. All it does is make the game harder for me (and a few other people) when I roll scum. I believe playing in a way that allows you to be more comfortable in future games at the cost of your win percentage in the game you're currently playing is fundamentally against the spirit of the game, which assumes everyone is trying to win. This is important also because this is generally a team game, so you're not only playing for your own chances to win, so not doing the QT thing because I don't want to have to do it when I'm scum would feel like a betrayal of everyone else on my team, to me.
Logged
Mafia play advice: If you are not content with the way the game is going, always assume that it is your fault.

yuma

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 695
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #29 on: February 02, 2016, 09:50:30 pm »

If it isn't that harmful then what is all the fuss about?

And I wouldn't do it because most of my thoughts posted in a QT wouldn't be worth sharing. Anything worth sharing would have already been posted in a QT. and if I am not posting things in the main thread to try and save them for my QT then that certainly is not benefiting my alignment.

And stop with "doing everything possible to win the game" crap. This is a fun, mildly interesting game not some sort of life or death match. Sometimes I reread. Sometimes I don't. Depends on what I have going on, how interested I am (how much I would enjoy it). No one cares if someone doesn't post a lot or doesn't do a full reread. Goodness, we even give town red when people don't read the setup. So I think people will live if I don't try and squeeze every last drop of benefit for town that when taken full advantage of practically ruins the whole premise of the game.

And the premise that I would only not reveal all of my QT posts just for the benefit of my scum games and at the expense of my town games is a gross misrepresentation of my reasons and frankly reveals a viewpoint of me that I don't think I ever did anything to deserve.
Logged

Teproc

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 765
  • Shuffle iT Username: Teproc
  • aka Le Teproc
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #30 on: February 02, 2016, 10:00:01 pm »

I'm just answering your question as to why I see it that way, not saying anything about you.

I do assume people play with the intention to win the game, because not doing so basically breaks the game; THis is true of pretty much any game too.
Logged
Mafia play advice: If you are not content with the way the game is going, always assume that it is your fault.

yuma

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 695
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #31 on: February 02, 2016, 10:42:14 pm »

If enough of us outright refuse to post things from our QT in the game, we're good. Sign a petition or something.

Why not change the rules ?

The problem with yuma's approach, or more accurately the reason it doesn't work for me personally, is that I think quoting your QT is just a great move for town, especially PR!town. Not doing it feels like losing a huge opportunity to make my faction more likely to win (if I'm at risk of being lynched).

I guess I don't understand the attitude of doing things that are harmful for the overall enjoyment of the game for the sake of winning the game.

But we seem to disagree on this point on multiple fronts...

The fact of the matter is : it's not that harmful. All it does is make the game harder for me (and a few other people) when I roll scum. I believe playing in a way that allows you to be more comfortable in future games at the cost of your win percentage in the game you're currently playing is fundamentally against the spirit of the game, which assumes everyone is trying to win. This is important also because this is generally a team game, so you're not only playing for your own chances to win, so not doing the QT thing because I don't want to have to do it when I'm scum would feel like a betrayal of everyone else on my team, to me.

The bolded is why I interpreted what you said was directed at me, but I see that could be more of just a way of phrasing things
Logged

sudgy

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3431
  • Shuffle iT Username: sudgy
  • It's pronounced "SOO-jee"
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #32 on: February 03, 2016, 12:48:21 am »

The problem with saying that you can't post anything not in the main thread is that it disallows things like mafiascum.  Shouldn't it be "You can't quote anything the mod or any player posted not in the main thread, but ask the mod if you think you have an edge case [for things like yuma]"?

Also, whatever is the result of this, I'll probably put it in the rules if nobody objects too strongly.
Logged
If you're wondering what my avatar is, watch this.

Check out my logic puzzle blog!

   Quote from: sudgy on June 31, 2011, 11:47:46 pm

ashersky

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2343
  • 2013/2014/2015 Mafia Mod of the Year
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #33 on: February 03, 2016, 02:58:00 am »

Also, whatever is the result of this, I'll probably put it in the rules if nobody objects too strongly.

I'd object about as strongly as possible, but I assume you are talking about the sudgy rules thread, which doesn't impact me.

As most of you know, I'm (again) in the minority opinion on a fairly important tidbit for f.ds mafia.  In fact:

Obviously up to the mods' discretion, but I think I will favor games that forbid QT quoting from now on.

Here's one of our most respected, and successful, mafia players specifically stating he will be less likely to play in ashersky-created games (and games by other mods who disagree, such as yuma).  I think it's fairly clear that some other major players (silverspawn, Awaclus) agree to do the same.

This is basically the start of a schism in f.ds mafia, and to me it seems like a schism for such an insignificant thing.  Part of this may be that some of you didn't play with the original crew here, but there were players who specifically tracked all sorts of things in separate Word documents to analyse and post at a later date.

Your proposed ruling would ban, just off the top of my head:

--tracking the voting records of yourself or other players anywhere outside of the game thread for posting at a later date, requiring that a player either do the tracking and analysis on the spot in the game thread (or lie and said they did).
--keeping track of what they see as scummy posts in a separate location with their thoughts as to why for posting later as part of a case
--any statistical analysis based on posting patterns based on time of day, etc.

I know for a fact that some players used to do this when they played.

The fact of the matter is, by banning the use of another location/document/save file to keep track of anything related to the game is closing off creative space for both town and scum.  It reduces the number of tools at anyone's disposal, and it shrinks design space for mods.

I find Awaclus an add proponent of this rule, given he's not the most talkative or active poster in any game anyway, and no one would expect him to have a QT.  I do think the people raging against this tactic are the ones who already like to write a lot, and feel like they need to write more to stay on top.

I disagree.  Refuse to post your QT, even if you have one.  Get mislynched once for it and there's a track record.  Berate town for their stupidity afterward.  Or, as soon as one scum successfully replicates this (which is legitimately so incredibly easy to do), whoever out there is giving out too much town cred for the QT paste will stop.

And again, what's to stop the forced paraphrasing of QTs?  "Teproc, paraphrase every single one of your QT posts or we will lynch you for being anti-town."  That's just as "valid" as "Teproc, quote every single one of your QT posts or we will lynch you for being anti-town."  In fact, I could promise to do that.

My next game, Walking Dead RMM, will have personal QTs.  You know I won't implement this rule you are discussing -- should I stop working on it because it won't fill due to that?  I've put in hours already, and still have hours to go.  I don't want to waste that time if my lack of a rule means no one will play.
Logged
f.ds Mafia Board Moderator

2013, 2014, 2015 Mafia Mod of the Year
2015 f.ds Representative, World Forum Mafia Championships
2013, 2014 Mafia Player of the Year (Tie)

11x MVP: M30, M83, ZM16, M25, M38, M61, M76, RMM5, RMM41, RMM46, M51

ashersky

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2343
  • 2013/2014/2015 Mafia Mod of the Year
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #34 on: February 03, 2016, 03:09:01 am »

Logged
f.ds Mafia Board Moderator

2013, 2014, 2015 Mafia Mod of the Year
2015 f.ds Representative, World Forum Mafia Championships
2013, 2014 Mafia Player of the Year (Tie)

11x MVP: M30, M83, ZM16, M25, M38, M61, M76, RMM5, RMM41, RMM46, M51

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11800
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (。 ω 。`)
    • View Profile
    • Birds of Necama
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #35 on: February 03, 2016, 03:35:53 am »

The problem with saying that you can't post anything not in the main thread is that it disallows things like mafiascum.

You can still link to it.
Logged
Bomb, Cannon, and many of the Gunpowder cards can strongly effect gameplay, particularly in a destructive way

The YouTube channel where I make musicDownload my band's Creative Commons albums for free

ashersky

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2343
  • 2013/2014/2015 Mafia Mod of the Year
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #36 on: February 03, 2016, 03:40:59 am »

The problem with saying that you can't post anything not in the main thread is that it disallows things like mafiascum.

You can still link to it.

Unless the player himself created that page.
Logged
f.ds Mafia Board Moderator

2013, 2014, 2015 Mafia Mod of the Year
2015 f.ds Representative, World Forum Mafia Championships
2013, 2014 Mafia Player of the Year (Tie)

11x MVP: M30, M83, ZM16, M25, M38, M61, M76, RMM5, RMM41, RMM46, M51

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11800
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (。 ω 。`)
    • View Profile
    • Birds of Necama
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #37 on: February 03, 2016, 03:52:57 am »

Your proposed ruling would ban, just off the top of my head:

--tracking the voting records of yourself or other players anywhere outside of the game thread for posting at a later date, requiring that a player either do the tracking and analysis on the spot in the game thread (or lie and said they did).
--keeping track of what they see as scummy posts in a separate location with their thoughts as to why for posting later as part of a case
--any statistical analysis based on posting patterns based on time of day, etc.

It wouldn't ban any of those. You just can't use the exact same wording, which hurts nobody.

I find Awaclus an add proponent of this rule, given he's not the most talkative or active poster in any game anyway, and no one would expect him to have a QT.

The problem is not that people would give me scum reads for not doing it, the problem is that a townie can be given a town read for doing it, which means that I'm inherently disadvantaged unless I update 10 fake QTs every time someone makes a post in the main thread. Since I like to think very carefully about the wordings I use, that might take easily take me five hours. There are things in my life that I would like to do a lot more than updating fake QTs (most of which I'm never even going to actually post) such as sleeping, studying, and a whole bunch of other stuff that I would simply be unable to do if I actually played a scum game without a rule that prevents QTs from being copypasted.

I disagree.  Refuse to post your QT, even if you have one.  Get mislynched once for it and there's a track record.

Getting mislynched does not help me win that particular game.

And again, what's to stop the forced paraphrasing of QTs?  "Teproc, paraphrase every single one of your QT posts or we will lynch you for being anti-town."  That's just as "valid" as "Teproc, quote every single one of your QT posts or we will lynch you for being anti-town."  In fact, I could promise to do that.

Nothing. Being forced to paraphrase a QT is not a problem because you don't actually need to have the QT in that case.

My next game, Walking Dead RMM, will have personal QTs.  You know I won't implement this rule you are discussing -- should I stop working on it because it won't fill due to that?  I've put in hours already, and still have hours to go.  I don't want to waste that time if my lack of a rule means no one will play.

Well, I can join the game if I'm allowed to /out if I roll scum.
Logged
Bomb, Cannon, and many of the Gunpowder cards can strongly effect gameplay, particularly in a destructive way

The YouTube channel where I make musicDownload my band's Creative Commons albums for free

ashersky

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2343
  • 2013/2014/2015 Mafia Mod of the Year
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #38 on: February 03, 2016, 03:57:52 am »

It wouldn't ban any of those. You just can't use the exact same wording, which hurts nobody.

This can be applied to the QTs you are discussing banning already.
Logged
f.ds Mafia Board Moderator

2013, 2014, 2015 Mafia Mod of the Year
2015 f.ds Representative, World Forum Mafia Championships
2013, 2014 Mafia Player of the Year (Tie)

11x MVP: M30, M83, ZM16, M25, M38, M61, M76, RMM5, RMM41, RMM46, M51

ashersky

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2343
  • 2013/2014/2015 Mafia Mod of the Year
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #39 on: February 03, 2016, 03:58:28 am »

My next game, Walking Dead RMM, will have personal QTs.  You know I won't implement this rule you are discussing -- should I stop working on it because it won't fill due to that?  I've put in hours already, and still have hours to go.  I don't want to waste that time if my lack of a rule means no one will play.

Well, I can join the game if I'm allowed to /out if I roll scum.

No.
Logged
f.ds Mafia Board Moderator

2013, 2014, 2015 Mafia Mod of the Year
2015 f.ds Representative, World Forum Mafia Championships
2013, 2014 Mafia Player of the Year (Tie)

11x MVP: M30, M83, ZM16, M25, M38, M61, M76, RMM5, RMM41, RMM46, M51

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11800
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (。 ω 。`)
    • View Profile
    • Birds of Necama
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #40 on: February 03, 2016, 03:58:41 am »

It wouldn't ban any of those. You just can't use the exact same wording, which hurts nobody.

This can be applied to the QTs you are discussing banning already.

Being forced to paraphrase a QT is not a problem because you don't actually need to have the QT in that case.
Logged
Bomb, Cannon, and many of the Gunpowder cards can strongly effect gameplay, particularly in a destructive way

The YouTube channel where I make musicDownload my band's Creative Commons albums for free

ashersky

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2343
  • 2013/2014/2015 Mafia Mod of the Year
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #41 on: February 03, 2016, 04:01:33 am »

It wouldn't ban any of those. You just can't use the exact same wording, which hurts nobody.

This can be applied to the QTs you are discussing banning already.

Being forced to paraphrase a QT is not a problem because you don't actually need to have the QT in that case.

You realize this is ridiculous, right?

If town forces everyone to paraphrase tens or hundreds of QT posts, it's infinitely worse than just copy/pasting tens or hundreds of QT posts.

If you have seventeen posts in your QT, it is going to be more work attempting to paraphrase them than just copying them.
If you have to fake seventeen posts in your QT, it is equal work to fake paraphrase them or writing them before so they are around to copy.

You are asking for a rule to forbid the easier of the two options, thereby forcing everyone to prefer the much more onerous option for more players.
Logged
f.ds Mafia Board Moderator

2013, 2014, 2015 Mafia Mod of the Year
2015 f.ds Representative, World Forum Mafia Championships
2013, 2014 Mafia Player of the Year (Tie)

11x MVP: M30, M83, ZM16, M25, M38, M61, M76, RMM5, RMM41, RMM46, M51

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11800
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (。 ω 。`)
    • View Profile
    • Birds of Necama
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #42 on: February 03, 2016, 04:15:59 am »

You realize this is ridiculous, right?

If town forces everyone to paraphrase tens or hundreds of QT posts, it's infinitely worse than just copy/pasting tens or hundreds of QT posts.

If you have seventeen posts in your QT, it is going to be more work attempting to paraphrase them than just copying them.
If you have to fake seventeen posts in your QT, it is equal work to fake paraphrase them or writing them before so they are around to copy.

You are asking for a rule to forbid the easier of the two options, thereby forcing everyone to prefer the much more onerous option for more players.

You don't "have to fake seventeen posts in your QT". The "QT" is not a singular. In a closed setup, you would need to update hundreds of fake QTs. Having to fake 17 posts in each of them means having to fake thousands of posts in total.
Logged
Bomb, Cannon, and many of the Gunpowder cards can strongly effect gameplay, particularly in a destructive way

The YouTube channel where I make musicDownload my band's Creative Commons albums for free

ashersky

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2343
  • 2013/2014/2015 Mafia Mod of the Year
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #43 on: February 03, 2016, 04:58:13 am »

You realize this is ridiculous, right?

If town forces everyone to paraphrase tens or hundreds of QT posts, it's infinitely worse than just copy/pasting tens or hundreds of QT posts.

If you have seventeen posts in your QT, it is going to be more work attempting to paraphrase them than just copying them.
If you have to fake seventeen posts in your QT, it is equal work to fake paraphrase them or writing them before so they are around to copy.

You are asking for a rule to forbid the easier of the two options, thereby forcing everyone to prefer the much more onerous option for more players.

You don't "have to fake seventeen posts in your QT". The "QT" is not a singular. In a closed setup, you would need to update hundreds of fake QTs. Having to fake 17 posts in each of them means having to fake thousands of posts in total.

What hundreds of QTs are you faking?

There's the personal QT you are either given by the mod or you created yourself.  That's it.  No one, and I mean no one, is creating hundreds of QTs a game for their own use.
Logged
f.ds Mafia Board Moderator

2013, 2014, 2015 Mafia Mod of the Year
2015 f.ds Representative, World Forum Mafia Championships
2013, 2014 Mafia Player of the Year (Tie)

11x MVP: M30, M83, ZM16, M25, M38, M61, M76, RMM5, RMM41, RMM46, M51

Haddock

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 725
  • Shuffle iT Username: Haddock
  • Doc Cod
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #44 on: February 03, 2016, 05:29:16 am »

My two cents - I'm completely with ash on this one.  People have always been allowed to quote verbatim from notes they've made themselves, and it's right that they should be allowed to do so.  QTs are no different.

The question of whether or not scum are going to have to fake loads of QTs is irrelevant.  As far as I can see, it's going to be just as hard to "paraphrase" an imaginary QT as it is to "quote" an imaginary QT. 
So, if it becomes a meta thing that people will often be asked to quote/paraphrase a QT, then scum who are usually QT-using-townies are going to have a lot of work to do.  That's going to be the case whether or not QT quoting is allowed.

I do agree that such a meta change would be unfortunate. 
But
a) I don't believe that control of the overall meta is or should be in the hands of the mods and
b) I don't think that that will actually happen, for various reasons.  Ash has already made a solid point on this front.  Let's take Teproc for instance.  As the first person to do this, we all know he writes quite a bit in QTs.  So there's a good chance he'll be asked to do this in games if this starts to become a thing.  Now either he carries on doing so, in which case he puts a lot of work on himself as scum.  Or, if that thought is not appealing, he can stop willingly posting his QT, in which case he might get mislynched once and then the practice will stop because people realise it's not an alignment tell.
In reality I think people are sensible on the whole anyway, and are going to realise already that not posting your QT is not an alignment tell at all.  On the flipside, posting a long and convincing QT seems like an advantage to townies until one person fakes it once - and then people will realise that it's not reliable either way, and we'll all move on.

gkrieg (I believe it was) made a solid point as well.  This is something that can only be controlled by the Golden Rule and shouldn't be governed by mods.

Those are my thoughts on it anyway.  I don't see that this should cause a huge great schism in forum mafia if we're sensible about it.  The fact is that some games will be played with rules we don't entirely agree with.  I think on the whole people who play forum mafia here are mature enough not to stay out of a game just because they disagree with one mod rule about QT posting.
Logged
The best reason to lynch Haddock is the meltdown we get to witness on the wagon runup. I mean, we should totally wagon him every day just for the lulz.

M Town Wins-Losses (6-2, 75%): 71, 72, 76, 81, 83, 87 - 79, 82.  M Scum Wins-Losses (2-1, 67%): 80, 101 - 70.
RMM Town Wins-Losses (3-1, 75%): 42, 47, 49 - 31.  RMM Scum Wins-Losses (3-3, 50%): 33, 37, 43 - 29, 32, 35.
Modded: M75, M84, RMM38.     Mislynched (M-RMM): None - 42.     Correctly lynched (M-RMM): 101 - 33, 33, 35.       MVPs: RMM37, M87

Haddock

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 725
  • Shuffle iT Username: Haddock
  • Doc Cod
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #45 on: February 03, 2016, 05:31:35 am »

Oh crap.  Someone who can, feel free to delete that.  I thought I was modifying that "can (be controlled by the Golden Rule)" to a should.  I'm an idiot.
Logged
The best reason to lynch Haddock is the meltdown we get to witness on the wagon runup. I mean, we should totally wagon him every day just for the lulz.

M Town Wins-Losses (6-2, 75%): 71, 72, 76, 81, 83, 87 - 79, 82.  M Scum Wins-Losses (2-1, 67%): 80, 101 - 70.
RMM Town Wins-Losses (3-1, 75%): 42, 47, 49 - 31.  RMM Scum Wins-Losses (3-3, 50%): 33, 37, 43 - 29, 32, 35.
Modded: M75, M84, RMM38.     Mislynched (M-RMM): None - 42.     Correctly lynched (M-RMM): 101 - 33, 33, 35.       MVPs: RMM37, M87

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11800
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (。 ω 。`)
    • View Profile
    • Birds of Necama
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #46 on: February 03, 2016, 06:53:05 am »

What hundreds of QTs are you faking?

There's the personal QT you are either given by the mod or you created yourself.  That's it.  No one, and I mean no one, is creating hundreds of QTs a game for their own use.

You are faking the VT QT, the Cop QT, the Doctor QT, the Jailkeeper QT, the 1-shot Bulletproof QT, the Roleblocker QT, the Vigilante QT, and another QT for each of the possible fake claims you might want to use at some point during the game. If you don't do that, you are playing suboptimally on purpose, and at that point, you might as well not play at all.
Logged
Bomb, Cannon, and many of the Gunpowder cards can strongly effect gameplay, particularly in a destructive way

The YouTube channel where I make musicDownload my band's Creative Commons albums for free

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11800
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (。 ω 。`)
    • View Profile
    • Birds of Necama
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #47 on: February 03, 2016, 06:56:08 am »

Oh crap.  Someone who can, feel free to delete that.

Done!

Mostly I just wanted to try it out since I've never had the power to delete other people's posts before.
Logged
Bomb, Cannon, and many of the Gunpowder cards can strongly effect gameplay, particularly in a destructive way

The YouTube channel where I make musicDownload my band's Creative Commons albums for free

silverspawn

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5283
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #48 on: February 03, 2016, 06:59:01 am »

My next game, Walking Dead RMM, will have personal QTs.  You know I won't implement this rule you are discussing -- should I stop working on it because it won't fill due to that?  I've put in hours already, and still have hours to go.  I don't want to waste that time if my lack of a rule means no one will play.

Well, I for one will join your game either way

ashersky

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2343
  • 2013/2014/2015 Mafia Mod of the Year
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #49 on: February 03, 2016, 06:59:56 am »

What hundreds of QTs are you faking?

There's the personal QT you are either given by the mod or you created yourself.  That's it.  No one, and I mean no one, is creating hundreds of QTs a game for their own use.

You are faking the VT QT, the Cop QT, the Doctor QT, the Jailkeeper QT, the 1-shot Bulletproof QT, the Roleblocker QT, the Vigilante QT, and another QT for each of the possible fake claims you might want to use at some point during the game. If you don't do that, you are playing suboptimally on purpose, and at that point, you might as well not play at all.

Um, okay.

You could use one QT and label each post as "fake cop" or "fake doc" or whatever, and then cut and paste as appropriate.  Then it's only one QT.

Or there are a million others ways to do it.  Having a fake QT for every possible fakeclaim in a game is just your way.
Logged
f.ds Mafia Board Moderator

2013, 2014, 2015 Mafia Mod of the Year
2015 f.ds Representative, World Forum Mafia Championships
2013, 2014 Mafia Player of the Year (Tie)

11x MVP: M30, M83, ZM16, M25, M38, M61, M76, RMM5, RMM41, RMM46, M51

ashersky

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2343
  • 2013/2014/2015 Mafia Mod of the Year
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #50 on: February 03, 2016, 07:00:54 am »

My next game, Walking Dead RMM, will have personal QTs.  You know I won't implement this rule you are discussing -- should I stop working on it because it won't fill due to that?  I've put in hours already, and still have hours to go.  I don't want to waste that time if my lack of a rule means no one will play.

Well, I for one will join your game either way

I am also not making my participation determinations based on this rule, fwiw.
Logged
f.ds Mafia Board Moderator

2013, 2014, 2015 Mafia Mod of the Year
2015 f.ds Representative, World Forum Mafia Championships
2013, 2014 Mafia Player of the Year (Tie)

11x MVP: M30, M83, ZM16, M25, M38, M61, M76, RMM5, RMM41, RMM46, M51

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11800
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (。 ω 。`)
    • View Profile
    • Birds of Necama
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #51 on: February 03, 2016, 07:02:04 am »

Um, okay.

You could use one QT and label each post as "fake cop" or "fake doc" or whatever, and then cut and paste as appropriate.  Then it's only one QT.

Or there are a million others ways to do it.  Having a fake QT for every possible fakeclaim in a game is just your way.

It's not the number of QTs that's the problem. The problem is that you have to write posts for each different fake claim.
Logged
Bomb, Cannon, and many of the Gunpowder cards can strongly effect gameplay, particularly in a destructive way

The YouTube channel where I make musicDownload my band's Creative Commons albums for free

silverspawn

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5283
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #52 on: February 03, 2016, 07:23:36 am »

Is there really a problem with making a rule saying:
Quote
you aren't allowed to quote from QT's or anything that causes this problem that we all know and understand

faust

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3366
  • Shuffle iT Username: faust
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #53 on: February 03, 2016, 07:29:38 am »

Well, that escalated quickly.

I think many people who are against QT quoting overestimate the difficulty of making up QT quotes in the spot. Just because it has not been done yet doesn't mean it is impossible. I mean, you will have your game notes, just modify them a bit and you'll get a decent series of quotes.

My games have this rule:

Quote
1. You may not quote information (either real or fabricated) from any source other than the thread you are posting in. This means no quotes from PMs and no quotes from QTs in the main thread or in another QT. Paraphrasing is acceptable. If you are unsure whether a post is legal, please ask the moderator before posting.

which disallows QT posting because that is just the simplest phrasing to work for all the various RMMy cases. But I have no qualms if someone want to allow QT quotes. I disagree with people on far more substantial levels, like does a Roleblocker block a Strongman, and still happily play their games.
Logged
You say the ocean's rising, like I give a shit
You say the whole world's ending, honey it already did

Teproc

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 765
  • Shuffle iT Username: Teproc
  • aka Le Teproc
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #54 on: February 03, 2016, 09:19:16 am »

Look, I'm not saying I'll boycott ash's games on principle or something, but I won't enjoy having to do it as scum, and if I don't anticipate enjoying playing in a game, why would I do it ? I've played in very few RMMs and no one has taken this to be a stance against RMMs, this is no different.

It is entirely possible I overestimate how hard it will be for scum to fake it. If that is the case, then the towncred from it will disappear pretty fast and it won't be a problem anyway. But, well... I'll believe it when I see it.
Logged
Mafia play advice: If you are not content with the way the game is going, always assume that it is your fault.

Teproc

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 765
  • Shuffle iT Username: Teproc
  • aka Le Teproc
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #55 on: February 03, 2016, 09:25:09 am »

I think the whole "this prevents people from taking notes about vote counts and stuff" thing is preposterous. Not only do I know that people used to do this, I've done this as recently as Marvel Heroes. All you need to do is not say "I've quoted this from a word document", or you could even ask the mod beforehand if it's okay, he will obviously say yes and there you go.

The paraphrasing thing is not a big worry to me, because I'll feel fine refusing to do that as either alignment, just because I don't think paraphrasing goes completely against the whole idea of QT quoting fortowncred, which is to show your train of thought. Once you're paraphrasing, you're very visibly adding a filter whichmakes it mean very little, because it clearly is fabricated regardless of alignment.
Logged
Mafia play advice: If you are not content with the way the game is going, always assume that it is your fault.

Teproc

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 765
  • Shuffle iT Username: Teproc
  • aka Le Teproc
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #56 on: February 03, 2016, 09:25:45 am »

because I think paraphrasing goes against etc.*
Logged
Mafia play advice: If you are not content with the way the game is going, always assume that it is your fault.

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11800
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (。 ω 。`)
    • View Profile
    • Birds of Necama
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #57 on: February 03, 2016, 09:26:39 am »

I think many people who are against QT quoting overestimate the difficulty of making up QT quotes in the spot. Just because it has not been done yet doesn't mean it is impossible. I mean, you will have your game notes, just modify them a bit and you'll get a decent series of quotes.

The problem is not that it's difficult, the problem is that it takes time. If a townie is asked to copy paste his QT, he can do so in two minutes. You can't fabricate an entire game's worth of QT in two minutes, and then you'll get lynched because the townie's QT quotes were confirmed to be real while yours were not.
Logged
Bomb, Cannon, and many of the Gunpowder cards can strongly effect gameplay, particularly in a destructive way

The YouTube channel where I make musicDownload my band's Creative Commons albums for free

ashersky

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2343
  • 2013/2014/2015 Mafia Mod of the Year
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #58 on: February 03, 2016, 11:08:27 am »

I think many people who are against QT quoting overestimate the difficulty of making up QT quotes in the spot. Just because it has not been done yet doesn't mean it is impossible. I mean, you will have your game notes, just modify them a bit and you'll get a decent series of quotes.

The problem is not that it's difficult, the problem is that it takes time. If a townie is asked to copy paste his QT, he can do so in two minutes. You can't fabricate an entire game's worth of QT in two minutes, and then you'll get lynched because the townie's QT quotes were confirmed to be real while yours were not.

That's true.

I think what you (and others) really want is for the asking of QT copying to stop.  It's not the fact that it's allowed that matters.  All sorts of stuff are "allowed" simply because they are not disallowed.  I could post McFiggleBump over and over again while playing a game and while it'd be annoying and useless, it would't be "against the rules" to do.  No one would say all mods should add a rule disallowing the word McFiggleBump from games.

Town players shouldn't lean on the crutch of copied QT posts to determine towniness.  It's easily manipulated and clearly not a popular tool.
Logged
f.ds Mafia Board Moderator

2013, 2014, 2015 Mafia Mod of the Year
2015 f.ds Representative, World Forum Mafia Championships
2013, 2014 Mafia Player of the Year (Tie)

11x MVP: M30, M83, ZM16, M25, M38, M61, M76, RMM5, RMM41, RMM46, M51

yuma

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 695
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #59 on: February 03, 2016, 11:10:13 am »

Town players shouldn't lean on the crutch of copied QT posts to determine towniness.  It's easily manipulated and clearly not a popular tool.

This. Just. Be cool guys. Be cool.
Logged

Witherweaver

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6476
  • Shuffle iT Username: Witherweaver
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #60 on: February 03, 2016, 11:14:19 am »

I should point out that in that game, neither Egor (town) nor RR (scum) posted anything of content in their personal QT.  I somewhat anticipated this, but I still asked them to post anyway.  This wasn't only for the purpose of seeing what they put in their QT (it may or may not have helped), but it was also something from which I could gauge reactions.
Logged

Teproc

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 765
  • Shuffle iT Username: Teproc
  • aka Le Teproc
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #61 on: February 03, 2016, 11:17:30 am »

Yet again, you guys just see this as a crutch and a useless thing anyway, and yet again I must disagree. Could be wrong, but I'll believe scum can succesfully fake it when I see it. ash's analogy doesn't work because posting nonsense isn't particularly helpful, whereas QT posting is.

THe problem with the "just don't do it guys" stance is that it's completely arbitrary. Why should we ask people to not do something that helps them win when it's not against the rules ? Let's say scum screws up and posts something they intended for the scum QT in a neighborhood QT. Should the neighbor not post in in thread because that's "not cool" too ? If I saw someone was online and they later say they weren't, should I not say it because that's not cool ?

The problem with these considerations is that they are completely arbitrary. Rules are arbitrary too, but at least thy're clearly stated at the beginning of the game.
Logged
Mafia play advice: If you are not content with the way the game is going, always assume that it is your fault.

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11800
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (。 ω 。`)
    • View Profile
    • Birds of Necama
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #62 on: February 03, 2016, 11:18:02 am »

That's true.

I think what you (and others) really want is for the asking of QT copying to stop.  It's not the fact that it's allowed that matters.  All sorts of stuff are "allowed" simply because they are not disallowed.  I could post McFiggleBump over and over again while playing a game and while it'd be annoying and useless, it would't be "against the rules" to do.  No one would say all mods should add a rule disallowing the word McFiggleBump from games.

Town players shouldn't lean on the crutch of copied QT posts to determine towniness.  It's easily manipulated and clearly not a popular tool.

The difference is that posting McFiggleBump over and over again is not beneficial for your alignment, while asking people to copy their QTs and also copying your own QT are very much the correct play in every game where it's allowed. Even if town doesn't lean on it, scum still has to spend basically 24 hours a day 7 days a week writing fake QT posts just in case town decides to do it this time, if it's allowed.
Logged
Bomb, Cannon, and many of the Gunpowder cards can strongly effect gameplay, particularly in a destructive way

The YouTube channel where I make musicDownload my band's Creative Commons albums for free

Witherweaver

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6476
  • Shuffle iT Username: Witherweaver
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #63 on: February 03, 2016, 11:19:05 am »

I have also, in the past, written posts in emails to myself or notepad for the purpose of posting them later, by literal copy and paste.  There is nothing in the rules that prevents this, and I don't think there should be.

The issue I could see with the QT is it's something given by the mod that the mod can see; there is a slight gray area with "mod communication".  For example, my first post that QT was something like "I'm thinking of doing something crazy this game".  Was it directed at the mod, or to the general aether?  It could have easily been "Hey, Yuma, I'm thinking of doing something crazy this game".

You could have the rule be something like, you can't post anything from any medium of open communication (including QTs), but you can compile messages ahead of time just for yourself and copy them in (e.g., notepad, email to self).
Logged

yuma

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 695
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #64 on: February 03, 2016, 11:20:03 am »

THe problem with the "just don't do it guys" stance is that it's completely arbitrary. Why should we ask people to not do something that helps them win when it's not against the rules ? Let's say scum screws up and posts something they intended for the scum QT in a neighborhood QT. Should the neighbor not post in in thread because that's "not cool" too ? If I saw someone was online and they later say they weren't, should I not say it because that's not cool ?

...

I can't have this conversation with you any more. I don't know if I can have any conversations with you anymore.
Logged

Teproc

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 765
  • Shuffle iT Username: Teproc
  • aka Le Teproc
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #65 on: February 03, 2016, 11:24:37 am »

I know those examples are quite different than QT posting, but what I'm arguing is more that "let's agree not to do it" doesn't really work.
Logged
Mafia play advice: If you are not content with the way the game is going, always assume that it is your fault.

Witherweaver

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6476
  • Shuffle iT Username: Witherweaver
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #66 on: February 03, 2016, 11:26:34 am »

What hundreds of QTs are you faking?

There's the personal QT you are either given by the mod or you created yourself.  That's it.  No one, and I mean no one, is creating hundreds of QTs a game for their own use.

You are faking the VT QT, the Cop QT, the Doctor QT, the Jailkeeper QT, the 1-shot Bulletproof QT, the Roleblocker QT, the Vigilante QT, and another QT for each of the possible fake claims you might want to use at some point during the game. If you don't do that, you are playing suboptimally on purpose, and at that point, you might as well not play at all.

Really, you could make the same argument that to play optimally as scum you have to be planting possible hints in the thread for all these scenarios as you're playing.  That is, actually, more difficult and more work, I think.
Logged

ashersky

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2343
  • 2013/2014/2015 Mafia Mod of the Year
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #67 on: February 03, 2016, 11:33:04 am »

Awaclus is using hyperbole to be contrarian and to try to prove his point.  You just divide anything he says by like 2000 and you get a realistic amount of whatever it is he's shoveling.

I have also, in the past, written posts in emails to myself or notepad for the purpose of posting them later, by literal copy and paste.  There is nothing in the rules that prevents this, and I don't think there should be.

The issue I could see with the QT is it's something given by the mod that the mod can see; there is a slight gray area with "mod communication".  For example, my first post that QT was something like "I'm thinking of doing something crazy this game".  Was it directed at the mod, or to the general aether?  It could have easily been "Hey, Yuma, I'm thinking of doing something crazy this game".

You could have the rule be something like, you can't post anything from any medium of open communication (including QTs), but you can compile messages ahead of time just for yourself and copy them in (e.g., notepad, email to self).

If a players creates his own QT for notes, there's no way a mod knows it exists so there's no way a mod can police it.  A player could post a lot of text and claim it is from a QT and the mod doesn't know if it is or isn't if the mod doesn't have access.

At that point, it's a honor system rule, right?  One that's easily manipulated without breaking.
Logged
f.ds Mafia Board Moderator

2013, 2014, 2015 Mafia Mod of the Year
2015 f.ds Representative, World Forum Mafia Championships
2013, 2014 Mafia Player of the Year (Tie)

11x MVP: M30, M83, ZM16, M25, M38, M61, M76, RMM5, RMM41, RMM46, M51

Witherweaver

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6476
  • Shuffle iT Username: Witherweaver
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #68 on: February 03, 2016, 11:35:43 am »

I don't see why it's even the honor system.  As the rules stand now, there is nothing that says I cannot precompile a post and copy it in at a later time, right?  I could even write the post directly in the browser and just leave the browser window open for days, even weeks* and then post it with "I typed this up last week" or something.

*Of course, you risk power outages, etc.
Logged

ashersky

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2343
  • 2013/2014/2015 Mafia Mod of the Year
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #69 on: February 03, 2016, 11:37:37 am »

There are so many ways to exploit this QT issue, both in games where it is allowed and games where it is not.  Here's a made up example.  Everything between the lines is my example post in a game where QT quoting is NOT allowed.  Assume it is mid-way through Day 3.



Quote
Man, I wonder if that claim is for real, or if he's lying.  Compared to mine, it seems pretty tame...

Here was my immediate reaction when faust claimed his power.  I didn't put it in thread at the time because I wasn't ready to claim and I was still gauging everyone else's reactions, but I'm quoting it now so you can see how I really felt about it at the time.



Did I break your rule for making mafia games more perfect?  Do I get modkilled?
Logged
f.ds Mafia Board Moderator

2013, 2014, 2015 Mafia Mod of the Year
2015 f.ds Representative, World Forum Mafia Championships
2013, 2014 Mafia Player of the Year (Tie)

11x MVP: M30, M83, ZM16, M25, M38, M61, M76, RMM5, RMM41, RMM46, M51

faust

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3366
  • Shuffle iT Username: faust
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #70 on: February 03, 2016, 11:37:49 am »

I think many people who are against QT quoting overestimate the difficulty of making up QT quotes in the spot. Just because it has not been done yet doesn't mean it is impossible. I mean, you will have your game notes, just modify them a bit and you'll get a decent series of quotes.

The problem is not that it's difficult, the problem is that it takes time. If a townie is asked to copy paste his QT, he can do so in two minutes. You can't fabricate an entire game's worth of QT in two minutes, and then you'll get lynched because the townie's QT quotes were confirmed to be real while yours were not.

I think it is in the very nature of the game that playing scum well takes more effort than playing town well. This is just one example for that. It's not optimal, but it's nothing you could change.
Logged
You say the ocean's rising, like I give a shit
You say the whole world's ending, honey it already did

faust

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3366
  • Shuffle iT Username: faust
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #71 on: February 03, 2016, 11:43:56 am »

Did I break your rule for making mafia games more perfect?  Do I get modkilled?

I'd prefer it if people would not be hostile here. This is not a game, we do not rely on AtE, we can all just be civil. Thank you. This does not apply only to ashersky.

The way I see it is this: Some thing happened that showed people an easy way of "getting better" at the game as town - making QT posts and show them to people. As a result, in the future, the level at which we play may be higher, which means that scum has to keep up. But then scum is facing the problem inherent to mafia that playing better requires more work for them.

I agree with Teproc that this is an issue. I agree with ashersky that it is not an issue that can be solved by rules while still playing a game of mafia.
Logged
You say the ocean's rising, like I give a shit
You say the whole world's ending, honey it already did

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11800
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (。 ω 。`)
    • View Profile
    • Birds of Necama
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #72 on: February 03, 2016, 11:48:46 am »

Awaclus is using hyperbole to be contrarian and to try to prove his point.  You just divide anything he says by like 2000 and you get a realistic amount of whatever it is he's shoveling.

Maybe in an open setup you sometimes only have to do like 5 or fewer different narratives, but in a semi-open, you're usually looking at 10+ different narratives and in a closed setup, the only limit will literally be the fact that there are only 24 hours every day.

If a players creates his own QT for notes, there's no way a mod knows it exists so there's no way a mod can police it.  A player could post a lot of text and claim it is from a QT and the mod doesn't know if it is or isn't if the mod doesn't have access.

At that point, it's a honor system rule, right?  One that's easily manipulated without breaking.

The only thing that matters is that town is under the impression that it's paraphrased (i.e. the player takes enough time posting it that it seems believable that he could write all of that text in that time).

There are so many ways to exploit this QT issue, both in games where it is allowed and games where it is not.  Here's a made up example.  Everything between the lines is my example post in a game where QT quoting is NOT allowed.  Assume it is mid-way through Day 3.



Quote
Man, I wonder if that claim is for real, or if he's lying.  Compared to mine, it seems pretty tame...

Here was my immediate reaction when faust claimed his power.  I didn't put it in thread at the time because I wasn't ready to claim and I was still gauging everyone else's reactions, but I'm quoting it now so you can see how I really felt about it at the time.



Did I break your rule for making mafia games more perfect?  Do I get modkilled?

That would be allowed and it's not "exploiting" the QT issue. There is absolutely nothing problematic about a post like that.

I think it is in the very nature of the game that playing scum well takes more effort than playing town well. This is just one example for that. It's not optimal, but it's nothing you could change.

Well yeah, but if it is in the very nature of the game that I have to skip school and transcend the need to sleep in order to play scum well, it's not really a game that I want to play.
Logged
Bomb, Cannon, and many of the Gunpowder cards can strongly effect gameplay, particularly in a destructive way

The YouTube channel where I make musicDownload my band's Creative Commons albums for free

Teproc

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 765
  • Shuffle iT Username: Teproc
  • aka Le Teproc
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #73 on: February 03, 2016, 11:49:46 am »

At that point, it's a honor system rule, right?  One that's easily manipulated without breaking.

I think there's a major difference between an unstated honor system and a unenforcable rule.

If you look at it, plenty of rules are unenforcable. For example if two scum players decided to daychat via PM, nothing could stop them from doing so. It would clearly be against the rule, there'd be no way for anyone outside to know, but we trust people to follow the rules because otherwise why even play ?

An honor system that's not stated does not work, because people have different view of what's fine to do and what isn't. This is why I'm not worried about the practicality of making a rule here, even if it is technically impossible to enforce.

In my mind, your example ash would be against the rules because you're quoting. However, this would be fine :

Quote
When he claimed, I was unsure because his claim seemed pretty tame compared to mine

Just a blanket rule saying "don't quote from anywhere else than the thread" seems fine to me. I don't think it prevents people from doing what yuma's describing, because that's not quoting that's copy-pasting. It's like when people progressively catch up, and you see them posting without knowledge of some major thing that's happened. That's not a problem because it's very limited in nature. Mafiascum you can just link to. I guess you could link to the QT you created yourself...

Maybe faust is right, but I don't like it.
Logged
Mafia play advice: If you are not content with the way the game is going, always assume that it is your fault.

Teproc

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 765
  • Shuffle iT Username: Teproc
  • aka Le Teproc
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #74 on: February 03, 2016, 11:50:48 am »

I guess you were saying kind of the same thing ash, maybe we were referring to a different proposed rule.
Logged
Mafia play advice: If you are not content with the way the game is going, always assume that it is your fault.

faust

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3366
  • Shuffle iT Username: faust
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #75 on: February 03, 2016, 11:51:04 am »

Well yeah, but if it is in the very nature of the game that I have to skip school and transcend the need to sleep in order to play scum well, it's not really a game that I want to play.

???

I think it is true for almost any game that if you played it professionally (i.e. not doing anything else), you would play it better.
Logged
You say the ocean's rising, like I give a shit
You say the whole world's ending, honey it already did

Witherweaver

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6476
  • Shuffle iT Username: Witherweaver
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #76 on: February 03, 2016, 11:53:56 am »

But look, I think this is a completely avoidable issue.

If I asked Awaclus to post his QT and he said he didn't post anything in it, I would in no way think he's more likely to be scum than town.  I expect both town and scum Awaclus to not do it.

If Teproc comes out and says "it's too much work to keep doing, I didn't post extensively", that's completely believable and not an alignment indicator either.

After all, meta is everything.

The counter here is that the lack of a "super townie QT dump" prohibits giving a strong town read, but it doesn't in its own right give a higher scum read.  The problem from scum's perspective is that town players can suddenly become super townie and unlynchable, but as we've said, we only need one example of someone faking it to debunk that.  And we don't even need the example, because we've talked so much of faking it, we're going to start to get super suspicious of these things in the future.
Logged

Haddock

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 725
  • Shuffle iT Username: Haddock
  • Doc Cod
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #77 on: February 03, 2016, 11:57:02 am »

But look, I think this is a completely avoidable issue.

If I asked Awaclus to post his QT and he said he didn't post anything in it, I would in no way think he's more likely to be scum than town.  I expect both town and scum Awaclus to not do it.

If Teproc comes out and says "it's too much work to keep doing, I didn't post extensively", that's completely believable and not an alignment indicator either.

After all, meta is everything.

The counter here is that the lack of a "super townie QT dump" prohibits giving a strong town read, but it doesn't in its own right give a higher scum read.  The problem from scum's perspective is that town players can suddenly become super townie and unlynchable, but as we've said, we only need one example of someone faking it to debunk that.  And we don't even need the example, because we've talked so much of faking it, we're going to start to get super suspicious of these things in the future.
So much this.  I just don't see the meta evolving to the state where this is a common thing that people take seriously.
If it does, then yeah maybe there's a problem here.
Logged
The best reason to lynch Haddock is the meltdown we get to witness on the wagon runup. I mean, we should totally wagon him every day just for the lulz.

M Town Wins-Losses (6-2, 75%): 71, 72, 76, 81, 83, 87 - 79, 82.  M Scum Wins-Losses (2-1, 67%): 80, 101 - 70.
RMM Town Wins-Losses (3-1, 75%): 42, 47, 49 - 31.  RMM Scum Wins-Losses (3-3, 50%): 33, 37, 43 - 29, 32, 35.
Modded: M75, M84, RMM38.     Mislynched (M-RMM): None - 42.     Correctly lynched (M-RMM): 101 - 33, 33, 35.       MVPs: RMM37, M87

Teproc

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 765
  • Shuffle iT Username: Teproc
  • aka Le Teproc
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #78 on: February 03, 2016, 12:01:20 pm »

I think it absolutely will, and it will be very hard for scum to deal with it. Both people who don(t need to do it (like Awaclus) and people like me, simply because it will create ICs. I don't think it's easy to fake. People will try, of course they will, but I think they'll get caught.

If I'm wrong, then yes, this is a non-issue.
Logged
Mafia play advice: If you are not content with the way the game is going, always assume that it is your fault.

Witherweaver

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6476
  • Shuffle iT Username: Witherweaver
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #79 on: February 03, 2016, 12:04:23 pm »

I did have in the back of my head as I was posting in the personal QT that I might end up posting it (I didn't know if it was allowed or not).  I was already worrying  that people would feel it was constructed as scum to make my claim more believable.  And it kind of was constructed, since I did know that I just justify myself at least to Yuma and people reading afterwards, even if I didn't end up posting it.  I think everything I did regarding the claim could have been easily able to construct as scum.  The reads on other players and those thoughts are probably what indicated towniness. 
Logged

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11800
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (。 ω 。`)
    • View Profile
    • Birds of Necama
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #80 on: February 03, 2016, 12:04:48 pm »

Well yeah, but if it is in the very nature of the game that I have to skip school and transcend the need to sleep in order to play scum well, it's not really a game that I want to play.

???

I think it is true for almost any game that if you played it professionally (i.e. not doing anything else), you would play it better.

I can play a game of Dominion in a few minutes and then it's over. I don't have to skip anything and I can still try my best to win that game. Writing fake QTs takes so much time for weeks that it's literally impossible to do it in addition to sleeping and studying, and if I don't spend all that time writing fake QTs, it's pretty much the equivalent of pulling a reinoe.

but as we've said, we only need one example of someone faking it to debunk that.

That's not how it works, though. We've had countless of examples of scum faking things that are still universally accepted as town tells.
Logged
Bomb, Cannon, and many of the Gunpowder cards can strongly effect gameplay, particularly in a destructive way

The YouTube channel where I make musicDownload my band's Creative Commons albums for free

Witherweaver

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6476
  • Shuffle iT Username: Witherweaver
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #81 on: February 03, 2016, 12:05:15 pm »

I think it absolutely will, and it will be very hard for scum to deal with it. Both people who don(t need to do it (like Awaclus) and people like me, simply because it will create ICs. I don't think it's easy to fake. People will try, of course they will, but I think they'll get caught.

If I'm wrong, then yes, this is a non-issue.

I kind of think we'll end up mislynching a true town because we think he's trying to fake it.
Logged

XerxesPraelor

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1069
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #82 on: February 03, 2016, 12:09:53 pm »

 "and if I don't spend all that time writing fake QTs, it's pretty much the equivalent of pulling a reinoe."

 ::)

Okay, you can say "it's like pulling a reinoe in the sense that it plays against your win condition" but those are so, so, so different in both magnitude (if you don't write fake QTs, that's slightly scummy - if you pM the mafia qt, that's infinitely scumm) and intent (one is: I don't want to work at this, the other: I'm angry and want to make the mod angry).
Logged

Haddock

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 725
  • Shuffle iT Username: Haddock
  • Doc Cod
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #83 on: February 03, 2016, 12:12:15 pm »

"and if I don't spend all that time writing fake QTs, it's pretty much the equivalent of pulling a reinoe."

 ::)

Okay, you can say "it's like pulling a reinoe in the sense that it plays against your win condition" but those are so, so, so different in both magnitude (if you don't write fake QTs, that's slightly scummy - if you pM the mafia qt, that's infinitely scumm) and intent (one is: I don't want to work at this, the other: I'm angry and want to make the mod angry).
You've been around a while right XP?  So you've known Awa as long as any of us.
The fact that this kind of overblown hyperbole is Awa's bread and butter should not surprise you.
Logged
The best reason to lynch Haddock is the meltdown we get to witness on the wagon runup. I mean, we should totally wagon him every day just for the lulz.

M Town Wins-Losses (6-2, 75%): 71, 72, 76, 81, 83, 87 - 79, 82.  M Scum Wins-Losses (2-1, 67%): 80, 101 - 70.
RMM Town Wins-Losses (3-1, 75%): 42, 47, 49 - 31.  RMM Scum Wins-Losses (3-3, 50%): 33, 37, 43 - 29, 32, 35.
Modded: M75, M84, RMM38.     Mislynched (M-RMM): None - 42.     Correctly lynched (M-RMM): 101 - 33, 33, 35.       MVPs: RMM37, M87

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11800
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (。 ω 。`)
    • View Profile
    • Birds of Necama
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #84 on: February 03, 2016, 12:18:03 pm »

Okay, you can say "it's like pulling a reinoe in the sense that it plays against your win condition" but those are so, so, so different in both magnitude (if you don't write fake QTs, that's slightly scummy - if you pM the mafia qt, that's infinitely scumm) and intent (one is: I don't want to work at this, the other: I'm angry and want to make the mod angry).

Yes, it is different in both magnitude and intent, but it is the same because in both cases, you're not playing the game.
Logged
Bomb, Cannon, and many of the Gunpowder cards can strongly effect gameplay, particularly in a destructive way

The YouTube channel where I make musicDownload my band's Creative Commons albums for free

ashersky

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2343
  • 2013/2014/2015 Mafia Mod of the Year
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #85 on: February 03, 2016, 01:19:38 pm »

Did I break your rule for making mafia games more perfect?  Do I get modkilled?

I'd prefer it if people would not be hostile here. This is not a game, we do not rely on AtE, we can all just be civil. Thank you. This does not apply only to ashersky.

I honestly have no clue what you are referring to here.
Logged
f.ds Mafia Board Moderator

2013, 2014, 2015 Mafia Mod of the Year
2015 f.ds Representative, World Forum Mafia Championships
2013, 2014 Mafia Player of the Year (Tie)

11x MVP: M30, M83, ZM16, M25, M38, M61, M76, RMM5, RMM41, RMM46, M51

ashersky

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2343
  • 2013/2014/2015 Mafia Mod of the Year
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #86 on: February 03, 2016, 01:22:10 pm »

At that point, it's a honor system rule, right?  One that's easily manipulated without breaking.

I think there's a major difference between an unstated honor system and a unenforcable rule.

If you look at it, plenty of rules are unenforcable. For example if two scum players decided to daychat via PM, nothing could stop them from doing so. It would clearly be against the rule, there'd be no way for anyone outside to know, but we trust people to follow the rules because otherwise why even play ?

An honor system that's not stated does not work, because people have different view of what's fine to do and what isn't. This is why I'm not worried about the practicality of making a rule here, even if it is technically impossible to enforce.

In my mind, your example ash would be against the rules because you're quoting. However, this would be fine :

Quote
When he claimed, I was unsure because his claim seemed pretty tame compared to mine

Just a blanket rule saying "don't quote from anywhere else than the thread" seems fine to me. I don't think it prevents people from doing what yuma's describing, because that's not quoting that's copy-pasting. It's like when people progressively catch up, and you see them posting without knowledge of some major thing that's happened. That's not a problem because it's very limited in nature. Mafiascum you can just link to. I guess you could link to the QT you created yourself...

Maybe faust is right, but I don't like it.

You are saying you are completely fine with someone copying and pasting lines from their QT, just so long as we don't say it is from a QT.  Is that correct?

What if I write something and say it is from a QT but it actually isn't?  Did I break a rule?  I lied, but we know that is completely within the rules of Mafia. 

What you want banned is the QT dump, not cross posting from QTs.  That's how it sounds to me, anyway.
Logged
f.ds Mafia Board Moderator

2013, 2014, 2015 Mafia Mod of the Year
2015 f.ds Representative, World Forum Mafia Championships
2013, 2014 Mafia Player of the Year (Tie)

11x MVP: M30, M83, ZM16, M25, M38, M61, M76, RMM5, RMM41, RMM46, M51

ashersky

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2343
  • 2013/2014/2015 Mafia Mod of the Year
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #87 on: February 03, 2016, 01:23:42 pm »

But look, I think this is a completely avoidable issue.

If I asked Awaclus to post his QT and he said he didn't post anything in it, I would in no way think he's more likely to be scum than town.  I expect both town and scum Awaclus to not do it.

If Teproc comes out and says "it's too much work to keep doing, I didn't post extensively", that's completely believable and not an alignment indicator either.

After all, meta is everything.

The counter here is that the lack of a "super townie QT dump" prohibits giving a strong town read, but it doesn't in its own right give a higher scum read.  The problem from scum's perspective is that town players can suddenly become super townie and unlynchable, but as we've said, we only need one example of someone faking it to debunk that.  And we don't even need the example, because we've talked so much of faking it, we're going to start to get super suspicious of these things in the future.
So much this.  I just don't see the meta evolving to the state where this is a common thing that people take seriously.
If it does, then yeah maybe there's a problem here.

I think this is all correct.  To me, we're talking about it so much it has already permeated the meta of the game and it just won't serve the purpose people are afraid of. 

We will have mods disallow it, and mods allow it.  I for one want to see what happens when players push those boundaries.
Logged
f.ds Mafia Board Moderator

2013, 2014, 2015 Mafia Mod of the Year
2015 f.ds Representative, World Forum Mafia Championships
2013, 2014 Mafia Player of the Year (Tie)

11x MVP: M30, M83, ZM16, M25, M38, M61, M76, RMM5, RMM41, RMM46, M51

silverspawn

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5283
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #88 on: February 03, 2016, 01:43:22 pm »

I don't understand what's happening.

When I opened my RMM, I made this rule

Quote
- It is not allowed to quote from QTs, nor is it allowed to use a substitute in order to quote from (this does not include writing posts somewhere else with the intention of posting them later). Paraphrasing is acceptable. Since this rule is exploitable, I hope that no-one tries to do so.

How does this not solve everything? Why does anyone want to do anything other than puting an equivalent of this rule in the basic rule set and then move on? That's  all we need to do, and the issue is closed. The rule is exploitable, who cares, no-one is going to exploit it, everyone knows what the intent is. I don't understand why no-one sees how easy it is.

ashersky

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2343
  • 2013/2014/2015 Mafia Mod of the Year
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #89 on: February 03, 2016, 01:49:30 pm »

I don't understand what's happening.

When I opened my RMM, I made this rule

Quote
- It is not allowed to quote from QTs, nor is it allowed to use a substitute in order to quote from (this does not include writing posts somewhere else with the intention of posting them later). Paraphrasing is acceptable. Since this rule is exploitable, I hope that no-one tries to do so.

How does this not solve everything? Why does anyone want to do anything other than puting an equivalent of this rule in the basic rule set and then move on? That's  all we need to do, and the issue is closed. The rule is exploitable, who cares, no-one is going to exploit it, everyone knows what the intent is. I don't understand why no-one sees how easy it is.

No one is arguing against the "ease" of making such a rule.  We (the ones against you) are arguing against the rule itself.

I do not want to limit this in my games.  I think it hurts games to do this.
Logged
f.ds Mafia Board Moderator

2013, 2014, 2015 Mafia Mod of the Year
2015 f.ds Representative, World Forum Mafia Championships
2013, 2014 Mafia Player of the Year (Tie)

11x MVP: M30, M83, ZM16, M25, M38, M61, M76, RMM5, RMM41, RMM46, M51

silverspawn

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5283
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #90 on: February 03, 2016, 01:52:20 pm »

No one is arguing against the "ease" of making such a rule.  We (the ones against you) are arguing against the rule itself.

I do not want to limit this in my games.  I think it hurts games to do this.

Okay, now I at least understand where you're coming from.

But is that really everyone who was against forbidding it, or just you? I had the impression that faust and Haddock were not arguing against the intent.

ashersky

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2343
  • 2013/2014/2015 Mafia Mod of the Year
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #91 on: February 03, 2016, 01:54:02 pm »

No one is arguing against the "ease" of making such a rule.  We (the ones against you) are arguing against the rule itself.

I do not want to limit this in my games.  I think it hurts games to do this.

Okay, now I at least understand where you're coming from.

But is that really everyone who was against forbidding it, or just you? I had the impression that faust and Haddock were not arguing against the intent.

I think Yuma agrees with me that it would be better NOT to ban them.

The others may feel more ambivalent, or not care, or something.  I don't want to speak for anyone here.

Faust, as far as I read him, believes it is an issue, but not one to deal with via rules.
Logged
f.ds Mafia Board Moderator

2013, 2014, 2015 Mafia Mod of the Year
2015 f.ds Representative, World Forum Mafia Championships
2013, 2014 Mafia Player of the Year (Tie)

11x MVP: M30, M83, ZM16, M25, M38, M61, M76, RMM5, RMM41, RMM46, M51

Witherweaver

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6476
  • Shuffle iT Username: Witherweaver
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #92 on: February 03, 2016, 01:54:37 pm »

I don't understand what's happening.

When I opened my RMM, I made this rule

Quote
- It is not allowed to quote from QTs, nor is it allowed to use a substitute in order to quote from (this does not include writing posts somewhere else with the intention of posting them later). Paraphrasing is acceptable. Since this rule is exploitable, I hope that no-one tries to do so.

How does this not solve everything? Why does anyone want to do anything other than puting an equivalent of this rule in the basic rule set and then move on? That's  all we need to do, and the issue is closed. The rule is exploitable, who cares, no-one is going to exploit it, everyone knows what the intent is. I don't understand why no-one sees how easy it is.

I believe the main issue people have is the gratuitous hyphen use in 'no-one'.
Logged

silverspawn

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5283
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #93 on: February 03, 2016, 02:04:15 pm »

I believe the main issue people have is the gratuitous hyphen use in 'no-one'.

So your point is that you don't trust everyone to be play fair?

Witherweaver

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6476
  • Shuffle iT Username: Witherweaver
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #94 on: February 03, 2016, 02:10:51 pm »

I believe the main issue people have is the gratuitous hyphen use in 'no-one'.

So your point is that you don't trust everyone to be play fair?

Not sure if joking....
Logged

silverspawn

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5283
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #95 on: February 03, 2016, 02:12:49 pm »

I believe the main issue people have is the gratuitous hyphen use in 'no-one'.

So your point is that you don't trust everyone to be play fair?

Not sure if joking....

not joking

Witherweaver

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6476
  • Shuffle iT Username: Witherweaver
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #96 on: February 03, 2016, 02:14:50 pm »

I believe the main issue people have is the gratuitous hyphen use in 'no-one'.

So your point is that you don't trust everyone to be play fair?

Not sure if joking....

not joking

Well, I was.
Logged

silverspawn

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5283
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #97 on: February 03, 2016, 02:17:27 pm »

Well, I was.

I don't follow. So you didn't have any point initially?

Witherweaver

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6476
  • Shuffle iT Username: Witherweaver
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #98 on: February 03, 2016, 02:35:44 pm »

Just that you can say "no one" instead of "no-one".  I'd say it's preferable, but there are probably camps that disagree.
Logged

silverspawn

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5283
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #99 on: February 03, 2016, 02:40:56 pm »

oh...  I see. I didn't know the word 'hyphen', so I didn't get it.

Witherweaver

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6476
  • Shuffle iT Username: Witherweaver
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #100 on: February 03, 2016, 02:41:35 pm »

Well then this has been a productive conversation!
Logged

ashersky

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2343
  • 2013/2014/2015 Mafia Mod of the Year
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #101 on: February 03, 2016, 02:53:41 pm »

I agree that the hyphen was unneccessary.
Logged
f.ds Mafia Board Moderator

2013, 2014, 2015 Mafia Mod of the Year
2015 f.ds Representative, World Forum Mafia Championships
2013, 2014 Mafia Player of the Year (Tie)

11x MVP: M30, M83, ZM16, M25, M38, M61, M76, RMM5, RMM41, RMM46, M51

2.71828.....

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1290
  • Shuffle iT Username: irrationalE
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #102 on: February 03, 2016, 08:57:16 pm »

Everything ashersky has said on this topic I agree with.
Logged
Man. I had four strips of bacon yesterday. Was one automatically undercooked, one automatically overcooked? No, let's put a stop to that right here, all four strips were excellent.

scott_pilgrim

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1102
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #103 on: February 03, 2016, 09:19:36 pm »

Has anyone proposed allowing people to post quotes, but not allowing people to request that other people post quotes?  So someone can post their QT if they want, but I can't demand that someone post their QT.

In theory I guess it doesn't actually solve anything, because if posting your QT is a good thing, you should do it regardless of whether people ask for it.  But at least it might stop people from saying "[player] is scummy because they aren't posting their QT".  Well I guess it also becomes ambiguous what qualifies as requesting that someone post quotes.  "[player] is scummy because they aren't posting their QT" is arguably an indirect way of demanding that a player post his QT.
Logged

scott_pilgrim

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1102
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #104 on: February 03, 2016, 09:20:55 pm »

Really though I think I agree with silverspawn's rule.  We already trust people not to cheat, so if you want to ban this trick from your games, just tell people not to do it, and if people aren't sure whether it breaks the rule, they just ask the mod.
Logged

ashersky

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2343
  • 2013/2014/2015 Mafia Mod of the Year
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #105 on: February 04, 2016, 02:24:50 am »

Really though I think I agree with silverspawn's rule.  We already trust people not to cheat, so if you want to ban this trick from your games, just tell people not to do it, and if people aren't sure whether it breaks the rule, they just ask the mod.

We've always been liberally applying the "mod's game, mod's call" rule to all games at f.ds since the beginning, and there's no indication that's changing now (even with attempts to standardize stuff), so I think this is what ends up happening regardless of this discussion.

Mods who don't like this will ban it, mods who don't care will probably go with the majority opinion, and mods who like it will allow it.  The vast majority of players will play a game either way, with a few (maybe just Awaclus?) will actively avoid games that allow it.
Logged
f.ds Mafia Board Moderator

2013, 2014, 2015 Mafia Mod of the Year
2015 f.ds Representative, World Forum Mafia Championships
2013, 2014 Mafia Player of the Year (Tie)

11x MVP: M30, M83, ZM16, M25, M38, M61, M76, RMM5, RMM41, RMM46, M51

EFHW

  • Spy
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 81
  • Shuffle iT Username: EFHW
  • EFHW="ee-foo". Really, how else would you say it?
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #106 on: February 04, 2016, 10:28:51 am »

I think it's fine.  A new way to get creative as scum.
Logged

chairs

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 134
  • Why don't you have a seat over there...
    • View Profile
Re: The "QT issue"
« Reply #107 on: February 04, 2016, 10:55:25 am »

I prefer mod-supplied individual QTs, and I'm not opposed to calls to post them, but I'll probably refuse to do so regardless of alignment as my musings in my personal QTs are almost exclusively mod communication anyway.
Pages: 1 2 3 ... 5 [All]
 

Page created in 0.107 seconds with 19 queries.