|
I am confirming that there are 0 death millers in my game. I think I only ran a game with a death miller exactly once, it's just not a good role.
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 19:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 21:26 |
|
|
ecco's right
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 19:40
|
|
|
EccoRaven posted:why though. Because the people who are playing the game decided that they didn't want him in the game and voted him out. He had his chance the play in the game and for whatever reason didn't use it. He's been voted out and replacing him back into the game is extremely disrespectful to the people playing the game who collectively decided to vote him out.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 19:41
|
|
|
Tbf Ecco the current climate is not great for replacements here
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 19:47
|
|
|
TMMadman posted:Because the people who are playing the game decided that they didn't want him in the game and voted him out. He had his chance the play in the game and for whatever reason didn't use it. He's been voted out and replacing him back into the game is extremely disrespectful to the people playing the game who collectively decided to vote him out. i'm pretty sure i lead that dunk and i'll allow it. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 19:50
|
|
|
Pinterest Mom posted:i'm pretty sure i lead that dunk and i'll allow it. Sorry, but it's an incredibly lovely thing to do to the rest of the people who are still in the game. He's been voted out and he shouldn't be put back into the game, regardless of his lack of posting or knowledge.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 19:51
|
|
EccoRaven posted:I am confirming that there are 0 death millers in my game. I think I only ran a game with a death miller exactly once, it's just not a good role. Talking about ongoing games itt smdh
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 19:51
|
|
|
TMMadman posted:Because the people who are playing the game decided that they didn't want him in the game and voted him out. He had his chance the play in the game and for whatever reason didn't use it. He's been voted out and replacing him back into the game is extremely disrespectful to the people playing the game who collectively decided to vote him out. this connects back to players playing to their role and alignment, though. as a mod I can't assume people voted each other out because they personally objected to that player in the game - I have to assume, unless really convincing evidence suggests otherwise, that players vote each other out because they suspected the condemned had a scum alignment/were persuaded by scum to vote for a townie/deadline crunch compromises/whatever of the multitude of vagaries that happen in a mafia game. That is, they vote each other out because of the role and alignment they have, not because they didn't want that player in the game entirely. and so this argument, to me, is not persuasive at all. again though this is all hypothetical, since I don't need another replacement and probably won't for the rest of the game. Kashuno posted:Tbf Ecco the current climate is not great for replacements here that people dislike replacements doesn't change that they're the best way to respond to absent/unavailable players. it is unfortunate that people don't agree but that's on them.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 19:52
|
|
|
also since we're rapidly veering into talking about my game outside of the game to an extent with which I am not comfortable, I suggest we either change the topic of discussion to something else, or start dealing with a truly, completely hypothetical situation where someone is double-replaced, and that someone is not merk specifically but an Anonymous Andy.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 19:55
|
|
|
Anonymous Andy should be allowed to do it or not depending on their meta threat level as these things matter a whole lot in terms of balance. Giving, hypothetically, a town merk two lives is worth a whole lot more than, say, a Kashuno.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 19:58
|
|
|
Anonymous Andy owes me five bucks
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 19:58
|
|
|
Ecco I don't like how you always have a last, long word then get on top of the horse and change the subject. You always do it that way, too. "Here is my argument. But this argument is becoming too heated or is devolving in some way, please do not respond." edit: whoops this is a bad example, you clearly didn't do that here. You just have done it many times. Sorry!
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 20:00
|
|
|
Spiros posted:Anonymous Andy should be allowed to do it or not depending on their meta threat level as these things matter a whole lot in terms of balance. Giving, hypothetically, a town merk two lives is worth a whole lot more than, say, a Kashuno. For scum, I agree.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 20:03
|
|
|
EccoRaven posted:this connects back to players playing to their role and alignment, though. as a mod I can't assume people voted each other out because they personally objected to that player in the game - I have to assume, unless really convincing evidence suggests otherwise, that players vote each other out because they suspected the condemned had a scum alignment/were persuaded by scum to vote for a townie/deadline crunch compromises/whatever of the multitude of vagaries that happen in a mafia game. That is, they vote each other out because of the role and alignment they have, not because they didn't want that player in the game entirely. Well, you can believe whatever you want, but if I'm ever in a game and the mod replaces a player with someone who was already voted out (regardless of their posting) I am going to immediately get mod killed by posting my role PM. It happened to me once in a Birdstrike Archer game and it completely screwed me (and the scum team) over, even though it was somewhat thematically justified. I stand by my opinion that it's a lovely thing to do to the players who have been playing the game. Replacements are hard enough to deal with in most cases, so replacing them back into a game where they got voted out (regardless of the reasons for the vote) is completely disrepectful to the current players imo.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 20:06
|
|
|
Kashuno posted:Tbf Ecco the current climate is not great for replacements here ?
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 20:06
|
|
|
snip
EccoRaven fucked around with this message at 23:23 on Mar 27, 2020 |
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 20:07
|
|
|
The only reason imo to not replace someone in again after death is if their private pm or role action knowledge would be carried over while unknown to the public. I trust Ecco with modding decisions, so I wouldn't be worried about it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 20:21
|
|
|
EccoRaven posted:ok My point is that if the person is exceptionally impactful you should look to find a different replacement. I don't think it's an issue outside of that fringe situation.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 20:23
|
|
|
Some said it was a mistake to replace krell back in during SA mafia I question the sanity of these people
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 20:25
|
|
|
please don't let the dead replace in a game unless if it is me, its suppose to be my gimmick
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 20:30
|
|
|
if someone joins a game as a late replacement, doesnt make a single post in the game before he gets lurker lynched on the next day, and u want to put him back in the game as a second replacement, youre a complete retard
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 20:32
|
|
|
EccoRaven posted:I was also the child of a divorce though so I'm sure that has something to do with it. But in general when people talk there's usually a point where reasonable discussion has exhausted and both parties just need to shut up already, but also in my experience dorks (especially internet dorks) rarely know when that point is. Oh hi this hits way too close to home for me and I understand the need to just walk out of a room really well.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 20:37
|
|
|
Spiros posted:My point is that if the person is exceptionally impactful you should look to find a different replacement. I don't think it's an issue outside of that fringe situation. I mean if you have a choice of replacements and there's a really clear disparity of skill (and who would choose the username Bad Player Billy anyway? they had it coming), then sure keep it in mind. fringe situations are interesting because they challenge our rules by showing us when they fail to adequately provide for every situation, which in turn reveals deeper truths about the way we run games. dongsbot 9000 posted:if someone joins a game as a late replacement, doesnt make a single post in the game before he gets lurker lynched on the next day, and u want to put him back in the game as a second replacement, youre a complete retard no u
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 20:48
|
|
|
EccoRaven posted:people can respond it's a free country, it's more me saying "I won't be responding going forward because this isn't getting us anywhere." Alternatively if I'm not a participant then it's me reading a room and realizing a discussion is dumb because people are talking past each other/aren't talking about it in good faith/getting to the point of actual hurtful words over pure opinions, which is so dumb, beyond dumb. I think this is fair, but in my experience you can post past people too, so I guess my read of it is that you just end arguments without any humility and you just sort of don't get to, in good faith, get on your high horse, in my eyes. Thank you for having this discussion with me though, despite my mistake earlier. Max posted:Oh hi this hits way too close to home for me and I understand the need to just walk out of a room really well. I guess my complaint is not that ecco walks out of the room, it's that she makes her big argument and then walks out of the room, implying that she should still get to say her thing, but you should not.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 20:52
|
|
|
Not really what I was addressing and it probably should have been a PM instead, but oh well. Years of walking out of dinner when I could smell a fight brewing and then tiptoeing around what I told my parents because I was suddenly in charge of policing their emotions because they couldn't bring themselves to complain about each other to each other but through me instead.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 20:57
|
|
|
Probably the best game I ever played in I was a scum player who replaced back into another scum role by assuming the account of the player replacing out. I think anonymous Andy replacing back in is probably ok if the game isn't too serious, but if scum kills anonymous andy for meta reasons they might be a bit upset if anonymous Andy pops back in. Whether you think that's worth entertaining is up to you, but that's one reason I can think to avoid a player replacing back into the game.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 20:57
|
|
|
BottleKnight posted:I guess my complaint is not that ecco walks out of the room, it's that she makes her big argument and then walks out of the room, implying that she should still get to say her thing, but you should not. Not about Ecco since I can't really remember anything specific here but it drives me up the wall when I see somebody post three paragraphs on something and then finish with "let's not derail this thread though so that should be the end of that" like if it's a derail just don't post it aaaaaaaaa
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 21:02
|
|
|
snip
EccoRaven fucked around with this message at 23:27 on Mar 27, 2020 |
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 21:09
|
|
|
EccoRaven posted:well no offense but "ecco is very arrogant" isn't exactly breaking news. Sure, but I only call out the people I truly respect so here is your callout!!!
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 21:13
|
|
|
You should consider calling out everyone for your own amusement
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 21:22
|
|
|
Spiros posted:You should consider calling out everyone for your own amusement Nah. It's honestly one of the reasons I like this community. Everyone's pretty smart, even if we don't act it, and while some people get on my nerves, I've never had to write someone off as 'not worth my time.' I understand why someone will put someone on ignore, I've just never done it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 21:27
|
|
|
BottleKnight posted:Sure, but I only call out the people I truly respect so here is your callout!!! I think it deserves a broader focus on the nature of discussions. In general people should try to be reasonable about things. Life has many nuances, and people can weigh different things differently, and as long as they're reasonable about what they value and how, that's okay. Reasonable people can hold diametrically opposed beliefs, but as long as those beliefs are reasonable (balancing one aspect over another using their judgment and experience, for instance), that's totally fine, and can be the basis for an interesting discussion. But in casual discussion, an argument over reasonable beliefs is silly - reasonable people can disagree, and in casual discussion it's nobody's place to convince another that they shouldn't hold their reasonable belief. When we talk about things that are matters of pure opinion, like whether Catelyn Stark is a good character or not, there are very few reasons to have the discussion turn into an argument. The range of things that are reasonable beliefs, for matters of pure opinion, is huge. When we talk about things that are matters of policy - when we decide what should be done as a group or community, for instance - then there's more of an impetus to discuss and even argue about reasonable beliefs, since something must be done (even if it's inaction) and typically things that can be done are mutually exclusive to each other. In policy discussions, arguments over reasonable beliefs aren't inherently silly, because consensus is critical. At the same time though, even if an argument is reasonable, it can become unreasonable. If people in the argument start attacking each other personally, going from "I disagree with you" to "you're a worse person because we disagree," that's a good sign the argument has become unreasonable, and people should consider backing down. = I like to view myself as someone who has a very good sense for when a discussion has turned into an argument, or when it's no longer reasonable to keep talking about a particular thing. I have experiences as a child with my parents fighting over the stupidest poo poo, and I have experiences as a youth with dorks also fighting over the stupidest poo poo. In both cases it causes rifts in the social group, and in extreme cases it can cause others to take "sides" or for the people in the argument to start disliking each other just because they disagree about their stupid poo poo. So when I am around and I see a discussion getting unreasonably heated, my kneejerk response is to step in and say "hey, this is stupid, let's talk about <x> instead." Not because I care so much more about <x>, but because I feel the discussion has gone to a stupid place and people should just drop it and the easiest way to do that is to talk about something else. It's not really my "place" to "force" people to change the subject; I'm not a moderator on a Sunday morning talk show. But at the same time it's a free country, people can keep talking about their stupid poo poo if they want. I only have as much power as people give me. If people really do stop talking about things just because I told them to, then with great power etc. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 21:49
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 21:52
|
|
|
MMM Whatchya Say posted:Probably the best game I ever played in I was a scum player who replaced back into another scum role by assuming the account of the player replacing out. Yeah, not only that, but what if they conspired to get him voted out for those same meta reasons. And now you've ruined their plans if you replace them in again. I can see the arguments for why it shouldn't matter, but I don't agree with them.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 21:52
|
|
|
Don't post about posting imho
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 21:59
|
|
|
Meinberg posted:Don't post
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 22:00
|
|
|
no everyone post about everything all the time let's do it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 22:05
|
|
|
I agree with meinberg, the idea of posting (ramming a long wooden pole deep into the ground for use as part of a fence) makes me want to hurl
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 22:13
|
|
|
If u post more then 20 words at a time and use punctuation/spellen ur a moron
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 22:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 21:26 |
|
|
if u post in this thread ur dumb as poo poo irl
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 22:29
|
|