Suggestions on improving atmosphere

[Songstress]

I don't think it's a bad idea to have people (privately) submit a short list of candidates they would trust to make impartial and sound decisions on such matters, with Verb taking our opinions into consideration on choosing the council.

 

I wouldn't have an issue with Verbal retaining the sole decision making power either, but if he would like to have a small group of sub-staff to bounce things off of and add perspective, that feels like the fairest way to me.

[Sooh]

I like to believe the community realizes it's not a popularity contest and rather that they need someone they trust to make the right decisions for the best of everyone as a whole in such a position. Maybe I'm naive?

[Zander?]

I don't think it's a bad idea to have people (privately) submit a short list of candidates they would trust to make impartial and sound decisions on such matters, with Verb taking our opinions into consideration on choosing the council.

 

I wouldn't have an issue with Verbal retaining the sole decision making power either, but if he would like to have a small group of sub-staff to bounce things off of and add perspective, that feels like the fairest way to me.

 

 

I like to believe the community realizes it's not a popularity contest and rather that they need someone they trust to make the right decisions for the best of everyone as a whole in such a position. Maybe I'm naive?

 

Sheeping Tress and Sooh ldo!!!!!!

[John Snow]

 

 

-snip-

I get that!!!

 

And if Verbs gonna keep doing it himself, also fine!!!!

 

What Im saying is that IF theres going to BE a committee who governs over the Mafia body, THOSE people should be picked BY the players FOR the players.

 

My point is ONLY concerning if there's going to be a committee.

 

 

I know. But members of said committee will be, effectively if not in name, staff. They will be helping to make decisions on whether or not people get tbanned. 

 

 

Thats a bit of a fine line but I think that the final choice will come down to Verb as Admin/Staff but I doubt they'll be labeled as staff.

 

But either way, if theres going to be a committee to help govern DM Mafia it should be voted on by the players thus eliminating anyone from using favoritism as an excuse imo.

 

 

Non sequitur

 

Zander runs on the campaign to ban me. 14/25 semiactive people here hate me. Zander gets elected on the promise of bias. 

 

Edit: Above is only an example, I'm not accusing anyone of anything. 

[Tiinker]

I'm in favour of a small "board" of people determining what to do if they think it gets out of hand. 2 or 3 sounds fine for us as a small group so why not just Verb, the game mod, and another? Maybe we have a volunteer. 

 

I vote Sooh cause I'd trust her to be impartial and open minded. 

[Zander?]

 

 

 

-snip-

I get that!!!

 

And if Verbs gonna keep doing it himself, also fine!!!!

 

What Im saying is that IF theres going to BE a committee who governs over the Mafia body, THOSE people should be picked BY the players FOR the players.

 

My point is ONLY concerning if there's going to be a committee.

 

 

I know. But members of said committee will be, effectively if not in name, staff. They will be helping to make decisions on whether or not people get tbanned. 

 

 

Thats a bit of a fine line but I think that the final choice will come down to Verb as Admin/Staff but I doubt they'll be labeled as staff.

 

But either way, if theres going to be a committee to help govern DM Mafia it should be voted on by the players thus eliminating anyone from using favoritism as an excuse imo.

 

 

Non sequitur

 

Zander runs on the campaign to ban me. 14/25 semiactive people here hate me. Zander gets elected on the promise of bias. 

 

 

wtf is this propaganda?!?!!?!?

 

Dude everyone gets a vote, this way favoritism is removed.the other way leads to people thinking it.

[John Snow]

 

-snip-

Non sequitur

 

Zander runs on the campaign to ban me. 14/25 semiactive people here hate me. Zander gets elected on the promise of bias. 

 

 

wtf is this propaganda?!?!!?!?

 

Dude everyone gets a vote, this way favoritism is removed.the other way leads to people thinking it.

 

 

Propaganda? FTR I'm not accusing you of running on that premise, nor am I saying 14 people here hate me. I was just using that as an example. 

 

Voting does not remove bias. It merely ensures only popular bias. 

[alannalynn]

I don't hate you or anyone

[Zander?]

Maybe it doesnt remove it completely but its still much less likely then having people chosen without a say imo.

[John Snow]

I don't hate you or anyone

 

Was an example, edited for clarification. 

[Songstress]

Again, I suggest:

 

Nobody campaigns. Private ballot. Verb is not bound to select top vote getter(s), but will get a feel for the people the community trusts as a whole without making it a public popularity contest.

[Calder]

I can deliver 100% of the Calder vote.

 

[Darthe]

Vote for Darthe?

[Lenlo]

Again, I suggest:

 

Nobody campaigns. Private ballot. Verb is not bound to select top vote getter(s), but will get a feel for the people the community trusts as a whole without making it a public popularity contest.

But how else am I going to get that minority village vote?

[randomh3r0]

Some good ideas in here. I'm relatively new back, but love DM members and mafia, so I'd love to help however I can. In the recent game I was in where two players were removed, unfortunately it seemed like one player perceived accusations as a personal attack. The nature of this game doesn't really allow for that to be easily avoided. However, there's a few lines that can be drawn:

- messages outside of the game in any way

- direct name-calling in game. (You can play and accuse without ever name calling or labeling someone in any way)

- add approved disclaimers in sign-up and game threads to remind people of any conduct rules decided

- maybe give mods the option to open mediation QTs, so if say John snow and I got into it in a game, mod could warn us and pull us into a QT to have a quick chat while forcing us to cease gameplay until it's done, clear the air, and let us resolve anything non-game related, or if that can be done then remove from the game.

 

Some of these might sound like a pain, but if it can keep people from making real enemies in this great community, it's worth a shot

[John Snow]

 

Again, I suggest:

 

Nobody campaigns. Private ballot. Verb is not bound to select top vote getter(s), but will get a feel for the people the community trusts as a whole without making it a public popularity contest.

But how else am I going to get that minority village vote?

 

 

By assuming that there's no way anyone could vote for your mafia opponent. He's clearly mafia. Who would ever want him?

[John Snow]

Some good ideas in here. I'm relatively new back, but love DM members and mafia, so I'd love to help however I can. In the recent game I was in where two players were removed, unfortunately it seemed like one player perceived accusations as a personal attack. The nature of this game doesn't really allow for that to be easily avoided. However, there's a few lines that can be drawn:

- messages outside of the game in any way

- direct name-calling in game. (You can play and accuse without ever name calling or labeling someone in any way)

- add approved disclaimers in sign-up and game threads to remind people of any conduct rules decided

- maybe give mods the option to open mediation QTs, so if say John snow and I got into it in a game, mod could warn us and pull us into a QT to have a quick chat while forcing us to cease gameplay until it's done, clear the air, and let us resolve anything non-game related, or if that can be done then remove from the game.

 

Some of these might sound like a pain, but if it can keep people from making real enemies in this great community, it's worth a shot

 

1. Messaging outside the game, except for QTs used for the game, are almost always a MK'able offense already. 

3. If any conduct rules are there above and beyond what's generally acceptable, they've been in the rules in my experience.

4. They already have that power.

 

Personally, I disagree with 2 on quite a few levels. 

[Shad_]

Alright, alright, I'm your guy and here's why.

 

First of all, I promise to build a firewall to keep all JN players off of our forums permanently.  They're filling up our sign-up slots, and you know they're all criminals.  I mean, they're Jets fans.  Come on.

 

Second off, all of our players have been going over internets to MU for years now.  I'm going to bring them back.  We have a lot of great scum hunters on this site.  Great guys, and that's great.  Why should they see all their meta get shipped over to MU?  We're going to make DM great again!

 

And what's with this "mod queue" anyway?  Did you know our administration wastes over eight billion dollars an hour maintaining it??  SHUT IT DOWN!

[John Snow]

Alright, alright, I'm your guy and here's why.

 

First of all, I promise to build a firewall to keep all JN players off of our forums permanently.  They're filling up our sign-up slots, and you know they're all criminals.  I mean, they're Jets fans.  Come on.

 

Second off, all of our players have been going over internets to MU for years now.  I'm going to bring them back.  We have a lot of great scum hunters on this site.  Great guys, and that's great.  Why should they see all their meta get shipped over to MU?  We're going to make DM great again!

 

And what's with this "mod queue" anyway?  Did you know our administration wastes over eight billion dollars an hour maintaining it??  SHUT IT DOWN!

 

lmfao Shad. 

 

MAKE DM GREAT AGAIN!

[Lenlo]

Alright, alright, I'm your guy and here's why.

 

First of all, I promise to build a firewall to keep all JN players off of our forums permanently.  They're filling up our sign-up slots, and you know they're all criminals.  I mean, they're Jets fans.  Come on.

 

Second off, all of our players have been going over internets to MU for years now.  I'm going to bring them back.  We have a lot of great scum hunters on this site.  Great guys, and that's great.  Why should they see all their meta get shipped over to MU?  We're going to make DM great again!

 

And what's with this "mod queue" anyway?  Did you know our administration wastes over eight billion dollars an hour maintaining it??  SHUT IT DOWN!

Well I have a response:

 

First, I promise FREE mafia classes! We need to raise up the mislynched, so that the winrates get spread out evenly and fairly! Did you know, that more than 50% of the victories are shared between the top 1% of 1% of DM Mafia players?! Unnacceptable!

 

Second, we need to unify this board! No more "Minority Village" crap. Here, on these boards, we are all one village! One people!

 

Finally, to pay for all this, we shall impose a tax on Mafia Game Spec threads and high post counts! We shall use the excess posts of players like Zander and AJ, and funnel them to the lower posters! 

 

Feel the Burn! Feel the SizzLen passion of the community!

[Nolder]

So we've had some issues in a few recent games where people have clearly let their emotions get the better of them and it has spilled outside of games to some pretty nasty stuff.

 

There are many ways to solve for this, but one I thought of was a "mafia usergroup" where I can remove people that need a "time out" from posting on this board.  I could potentially reinstate the mod council and have them vote on whether people need a time out - essentially becoming my assistant board mods and helping make those decisions.

 

Or I could be a tyrant and do it myself (I'm joking).

 

Thoughts?  Suggestions?  Leave it alone?  Do it!?

I think a usergroup could be an idea, although there might be better ways to handle this.

 

Let me skip a long diatribe on the whys and plainly say that I am against a Mod Council but I do think you need an assistant or two, preferably one in a US timezone and one in a Euro or Aussie time zone. IMO they could be considered Jr Mafia mods or whatever you want to call them with the authority to warn users to take a break and/or hand out temp bans from the mafia forum which will later be enforced by you if necessary. 

 

This would not only help with interpersonal issues but also with the common task of stickying/unstickying games if you want to actually give these people DM mod powers.

 

It's not a big deal of course but it's sometimes a liiiiiitle bit annoying when a game starts and it takes a few days before it gets stickied.

So it's a two for one with lightening your load somewhat but also speeding things up when you're not around.

Totally first world problems but worth mentioning since we're on the subject.

[Nolder]

IMO the mod of the game should be the first line of defense in this sort of thing and if they feel over their head they can go higher.

I disagree with this completely and utterly.

A game mod is not a "first line of defense".

A game mod is nothing.

As a game mod you have control over one thing and one thing only and that is your game.

That is to say, if someone is breaking game rules like editing a post when they are not supposed to or outing their partners you have the right and obligation to modkill them or replace them.

Any personal conflict that arises that can't be mediated within the game itself imo is already out of a game mods hands.

There is nothing that I like less than having a game mod wag their finger at me like a disappointed parent if I'm having a personal argument with someone.

You have the right to remove someone from your game not to lecture or mediate their problem.

That, fortunately or unfortunately as the case may be, resides with DM staff and specifically Verbal.

[Nolder]

Like, without calling people out, there is a certain player who clearly stepped outside the bounds of a mafia game, and attacked another player with some pretty nasty insults.

 

And there are people before who essentially forced a modkill because they were upset or whatever, and that negatively affected the game (and some future ones).

 

 

 

Point is, in BOTH of the above cases, I'd be willing to discuss with a council and decide on whether those players need a temp ban from the mafia board.  Agree or disagree? 

DISAGREE

 

When I first came to DM to play mafia you could consider me an exile from a different forum now long defunct and on that forum there was a "council" to decide certain things pertaining to that forums purpose. I have had experience with councils and let me tell you they only work in a very very very VERY small environments and only if the people specifically involved in that environment trust those people to arbitrate fairly. If even one person feels like the council is stacked against them somehow or there is the perception that decisions are more or less just popularity contests either faith will be lost in this council or people may leave and let the forum devolve into an echo chamber of specific friends.

 

I don't want anyone to feel like decisions about time outs or whether what they said was actually insulting or intended to be a personal attack comes down to whether the people on this council like you or not.

 

In short, it's arbitrary decision making based on the whims and goodwill of certain individuals and that is never good.

 

At least with a dictatorship you know what you're getting.

[Nolder]

 

 

 

@Dice - The point of having a few people weighing in on the issue rather than one helps in situations where 1 person just has an issue with the person in question. That way the group can go nah that doesnt make sense.

Imo it is also super easy to tell when someone is making decisions based on personal gripes. If they cant give a good explanation for giving a harsh decision then there you have it.

 

It's not that hard. You just take a stricter view of the rules when it's someone you don't like, and a looser view when you do like them. 

 

I mean, we are talking about a forum where we actively practice manipulation and deception.

Actively practice does not equal succeed.

 

Also the comparison is apples to oranges. The reason deception is hard to spot in mafia games is bc there is an unknown factor (target's alignment).

 

In this case every factor would be known. Someone's action that is being discussed and the mod's decided penalty. If the penalty is unnecessarily harsh then you can push the mod for more information bc they should be able to defend it. If not then a bias is present.

 

 

Bias is, imo, always going to be present. Not to a total degree, but it's not like this is a community of 100 people. We've got ~20 active players, and everyone has an opinion about someone else, and that will influence their decision. 

 

And people will be quick to blame bias for decisions, even when it's not present. If the person gets tbanned, they'll blame it on xxx have a grudge against them. If they don't, whoever is pushing for their tban will blame it on yyy liking them. 

 

Further, people will ask who voted/pushed for/against them, and that will lead to more hurt feelings.

 

I just don't think we're a big enough community to need/justify/afford a council/jury of peers. 

 

My man Snow here with the solid points long before I stepped in.

Well said, although I disagree with the big community thing.

That kind of stuff only works in very tiny communities imo like no more than 20-30 people MAX.

[Nolder]

What if it was just 2 other people?  Like 2 people weigh in with their thoughts and concerns on an issue I bring to them, and then I take their advice into consideration?

 

The decision still comes from me, so people can have me be the bad guy if they want, but I'll have a better perspective if I choose the right people to be the council.

 

None of this is concrete, btw - just fishing for ideas and thoughts.  :-)

 

I don't want people to weigh in. I want decisions to be individual and you have the authority, as head mod, to override the Jr mods.

I think people have their own thoughts and that's fine but I don't think the decision on whether or not to temp ban someone from games (or worse) should be handled by committee. 

 

I mean, who's the right people? Is it people who's judgment you already mostly agree with? What then is the point?

Or is it people who challenge your thoughts? But if that's the case what happens when you're challenged are you just going to override the council every time or are you just going to let them run things as they see fit?

Or would you aim for a mix? In which case no one will ever agree and someone will always be unhappy with decisions made.

 

I'm telling you man this council thing is a lot more stress than your life needs. It's not worth it and the forum and survive without it.