Suggestions on improving atmosphere

[John Snow]

 

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.

What he said

[Andrej]

 

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.

We'll have to agree to disagree then. I feel as a mod you're responsible for ensuring your game is ran well and that would include ensuring the environment remains ~positive for a game that involves lying and manipulation and murdering people.

 

I can agree that it's not the mod's place to "mediate" between the two, especially not during the game as that could compromise it, but they should still step in and put a stop to it or like you said remove the parties at hand in extreme cases.

 

A simple "Hey, knock off the language" or "chill out" sent in private should suffice. That's what I meant by first line of defense. Not every single hissy fit needs to go to the board's staff level.

[Sooh]

If Verb feels alone on top here I guess one solution would be to just add another full mod who knows mafia and who can assist Verb in his duties. Since it would be a full mod it would have to be someone who passes the scrutiny of the site management, and someone who is responsible for their actions the same way Verb is. That way, people will have a way of knowing how to go about it if there are complaints about decisions being made. Members shouldn't be responsible for recruiting such a person. That should be a process of research and interviews possibly from current staff. No popularity contest. No secret vote. Just straight up someone the site staff feels is responsible enough to handle such a job.

[BFG]

Withholding opinions on the idea of a 'council' at the moment, although think if that was the way it went that 3 people would be ideal - ideally would trust each other, have different opinions and be active in DM mafia. There would also have to be considerations as to whether or not the members could all play in the same game - I would argue not as they wouldn't/couldn't be impartial in that situation.

 

But before that we would need to agree on a mafia CoC, if it's going to be different to the DM one

 

Without a consensus of what's allowed and what isn't then there's no reason for players to trust(? Not sure that's the word I'm looking for, but overnight flights and no sleep ftl) the decision of the council. This thread, and the many that we've had previously all show that people play differently, so this has to be an agreement of what's 'acceptable' otherwise it's superimposing one playstyle on someone else and that's not fair.

 

TLDR - think we'd need to agree (and have players sign) a mafia CoC before a council was agreed

[Leelou]

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.

 

I know you are trying to be funny, but there is nothing wrong with the JN players. 

[BFG]

And it might be that having a CoC in place would negate the need for a council

[BFG]

Ok, I'm going to try that again

 

I would argue that for a council to be effective we need to agree on a CoC of what's acceptable and what isn't in mafia games. Otherwise it becomes the Council imposing their opinions on what's acceptable and what isn't on other people

[BFG]

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

Eh, a bit wary of the phrasing here. There are a couple of people that I play mafia with that I am genuinely good friends with outside the game. On the occasions we play together I am unlikely to stop talking to them all together, although obviously anything game related is taboo

[BFG]

 

For the most part though I would say the atmosphere is good here. I think alot of this stuff is overblown.

 

Absolutely.  Maybe me starting this thread is enough to solve the issues.  I'm back on DM full-time, and I'm going to be paying attention to when games start to have conflicts that extend past the point where they should within a mafia game (i.e. social media nasty insults, forcing modkills, in-thread nasty insults, etc.).

 

 

I would ask that ANYBODY, mod or player or spectator, to bring to my attention situations they think are getting out of hand.  If the mod handles it, then no prob.  If it needs to go beyond that, I'm happy to step in.  That said, I will not be stepping on mod's toes, though....so don't expect a mod ruling to be overthrown from me - that's not how I roll.

 

fwiw if this is what we're talking with then 'time-outs' are a good idea, and a couple of people talking about the third (in particular) so that it's judged 'fairly' seems fine

[Verbal32]

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'm ok with this.

 

 

 

 

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.

 

 

No, it is people who's judgment I trust - regardless of whether they agree with me or not.  THAT is the part you're missing.  Example:  if you forced a modkill and outed your mafia team, you'd deserve a timeout, right?  Better yet, if LEELOU did the same, do you think I'd let it slide because I'm friends with her?

 

The answer is no.  I'm comfortable enough both in my friends and in my authority on DM to act appropriately and I choose friends that won't be so narrow minded as to not want to be friends with me anymore if they made a mistake and I punished them for it.  My point is that I'd surround myself with people like me - who's judgment I trust and who would be unbiased.  I don't care if they think I'm 100% wrong all the time - I want them because they'll tell me these things and I can trust their judgment comes from a good place.

 

If I do it alone, people might think I'm the one who isn't unbiased - this was simply an idea to solve for that (a little).

 

 

 

If Verb feels alone on top here I guess one solution would be to just add another full mod who knows mafia and who can assist Verb in his duties. Since it would be a full mod it would have to be someone who passes the scrutiny of the site management, and someone who is responsible for their actions the same way Verb is. That way, people will have a way of knowing how to go about it if there are complaints about decisions being made. Members shouldn't be responsible for recruiting such a person. That should be a process of research and interviews possibly from current staff. No popularity contest. No secret vote. Just straight up someone the site staff feels is responsible enough to handle such a job.

 

I've done that before, actually.  I took over this forum from DPR, and had him as my co-mod for a few years...and then I had Wombat serve in the same role.

 

As for site staff, you're looking at him, lol.  I'm the most active Admin by a fair margin, and I oversee about 3/4 of the site as it is.  Jason and/or Jenn are not going to weigh in on staffing decisions unless I wanted to make somebody an Admin as well.  So really, it comes down to this = do you guys trust my judgment?

 

- If the answer is yes, then we don't need a council at all (but I'm still fine if you guys want one).

 

- if the answer is no, then we need one.

[Verbal32]

In short, this board used to get along really well.  Every game was a bunch of friends playing mafia and lightheartedly poking fun at each other.  When lines were crossed, and they were, we stepped back and felt really bad about it - and apologized.

 

AND MEANT IT.

 

This will be the way DM mafia functions from now on.

[Verbal32]

I don't want this to be the carebear board, btw.  You guys know I play on JN, and I'm part of the normal crew there - that place is as toxic as can be sometimes.  They're going through a rough patch right now, but I know it'll go back to normal eventually.

 

I want people to dig in and get testy.  Be feisty.  But learn the limits, and respect them.  And when they are crossed, don't ignore it.  Friggin' apologize like a normal person ffs.

 

 

AND MEANT IT.

[Songstress]

So really, it comes down to this = do you guys trust my judgment?

:unsure:

 

...

 

..

 

.

 

Absolutely.

[Verbal32]

lol

[John Snow]

 

 

 

Verbal32 for Czar.

 

 

[John Snow]

 

I don't want this to be the carebear board, btw.  You guys know I play on JN, and I'm part of the normal crew there - that place is as toxic as can be sometimes.  They're going through a rough patch right now, but I know it'll go back to normal eventually.

 

I want people to dig in and get testy.  Be feisty.  But learn the limits, and respect them.  And when they are crossed, don't ignore it.  Friggin' apologize like a normal person ffs.

 

 

AND MEANT IT.

 

 

Good.

[Andrej]

 

 

 

 

Verbal32 for Czar.

[Verbal32]

 

 

I don't want this to be the carebear board, btw.  You guys know I play on JN, and I'm part of the normal crew there - that place is as toxic as can be sometimes.  They're going through a rough patch right now, but I know it'll go back to normal eventually.

 

I want people to dig in and get testy.  Be feisty.  But learn the limits, and respect them.  And when they are crossed, don't ignore it.  Friggin' apologize like a normal person ffs.

 

 

AND MEANT IT.

 

 

Good.

 

 

Do people tell you often that they have a very visceral temptation to tell you 'you know nothing'?

 

;-)

[Leelou]

 

 

 

I don't want this to be the carebear board, btw.  You guys know I play on JN, and I'm part of the normal crew there - that place is as toxic as can be sometimes.  They're going through a rough patch right now, but I know it'll go back to normal eventually.

 

I want people to dig in and get testy.  Be feisty.  But learn the limits, and respect them.  And when they are crossed, don't ignore it.  Friggin' apologize like a normal person ffs.

 

 

AND MEANT IT.

 

 

Good.

 

 

Do people tell you often that they have a very visceral temptation to tell you 'you know nothing'?

 

;-)

 

 

I tell him all the time. :) 

[Leelou]

In short, this board used to get along really well.  Every game was a bunch of friends playing mafia and lightheartedly poking fun at each other.  When lines were crossed, and they were, we stepped back and felt really bad about it - and apologized.

 

AND MEANT IT.

 

This will be the way DM mafia functions from now on.

 

We used to take the game seriously, but could separate game from personal emotions. 

[Sooh]

Totally fine with Verb calling the shots.

[Darthe]

Darthe for committee co-chair!

 

AND MEANT IT.

[Verbal32]

Darthe for court jester.

[Leelou]

Darthe for court jester.

 

^this

[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'm ok with this.

 

 

 

 

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.

 

 

No, it is people who's judgment I trust - regardless of whether they agree with me or not.  THAT is the part you're missing.  Example:  if you forced a modkill and outed your mafia team, you'd deserve a timeout, right?  Better yet, if LEELOU did the same, do you think I'd let it slide because I'm friends with her?

 

The answer is no.  I'm comfortable enough both in my friends and in my authority on DM to act appropriately and I choose friends that won't be so narrow minded as to not want to be friends with me anymore if they made a mistake and I punished them for it.  My point is that I'd surround myself with people like me - who's judgment I trust and who would be unbiased.  I don't care if they think I'm 100% wrong all the time - I want them because they'll tell me these things and I can trust their judgment comes from a good place.

 

If I do it alone, people might think I'm the one who isn't unbiased - this was simply an idea to solve for that (a little).

 

 

 

If Verb feels alone on top here I guess one solution would be to just add another full mod who knows mafia and who can assist Verb in his duties. Since it would be a full mod it would have to be someone who passes the scrutiny of the site management, and someone who is responsible for their actions the same way Verb is. That way, people will have a way of knowing how to go about it if there are complaints about decisions being made. Members shouldn't be responsible for recruiting such a person. That should be a process of research and interviews possibly from current staff. No popularity contest. No secret vote. Just straight up someone the site staff feels is responsible enough to handle such a job.

 

I've done that before, actually.  I took over this forum from DPR, and had him as my co-mod for a few years...and then I had Wombat serve in the same role.

 

As for site staff, you're looking at him, lol.  I'm the most active Admin by a fair margin, and I oversee about 3/4 of the site as it is.  Jason and/or Jenn are not going to weigh in on staffing decisions unless I wanted to make somebody an Admin as well.  So really, it comes down to this = do you guys trust my judgment?

 

- If the answer is yes, then we don't need a council at all (but I'm still fine if you guys want one).

 

- if the answer is no, then we need one.

 

 

Wolfy AF