Gameroom policy discussion thread

[GeneralHankerchief]

This thread is to be used to discuss any aspects of Gameroom policy beyond the regular in-character events that go on in the game threads.

This definition can cover a wide variety of topics: It could cover administrative policy (what the current Queue status should be, etc.), suggestions about adding features, requests to re-examine the rules, discussions about any official moderation actions I might have taken, etc. Basically, if it affects the forum as a whole, it goes here. Aside from responding to questions/comments, I personally, as moderator, will be using this thread to announce rule changes and solicit opinions on possible features/rule changes.

The only real caveat I have is that if your issue a) can be considered contentious and b) directly arises from an event that happened in an ongoing game, you wait until the game in question has finished out of respect for the host and your fellow players. In the meantime, you are of course always free to address me privately.

All posts in this thread are considered outside the scope of any games. Here you are speaking as a member of the Gameroom community and not as your particular role in a certain game. Likewise, I am speaking officially as a moderator. Any attempts to use this thread to manipulate or otherwise influence events in an ongoing game will be harshly addressed.

The original contents of this post can be found under the spoiler below.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

I intend for my second tour of duty as Gameroom moderator to be primarily focused on taking care of administrative issues for you guys: Renaming threads, moving stuff around, killing spambots, etc. In terms of policy, my goal is to determine consensus and then go from there - though I do reserve the right to act as dictator when I deem it necessary.

With this in mind, the first question I'd like to throw to the public is: What should be the restriction on the number of games allowed at a time?

The old queue system of two large games, two small games, and an unlimited amount of minis at once served us well for many years, but it also reflected activity levels that were far greater than what we're now accustomed to. The last thing I want to do is to take this mini-resurgence we're currently experiencing and squander it because the playerbase got burned out too quickly - but at the same time I want to work on nurturing and growing the number of people who want to play Mafia on this site.

My current thought is one game at a time, no matter what, under the belief that most games we host will not be too large or too long so that people lose interest. In the meantime, it will allow us to set a steady pace that we can all keep up with. I'd also be amenable to letting one mini run simultaneously with the other games to give people who die early something to do. Hosting order will be determined by consensus/who's willing to go, probably still doing so in the other thread, but in a perfect world we'd be able to segue nicely from Pirate Ship III to another game (Zack mentioned something about hosting a Futurama mafia afterwards).

Secondarily is the issue of moderation for content. I plan to enforce the ruleset that made the Gameroom's culture so great in the first place: Play fair, be nice to each other, and most importantly have fun. If everybody's fine with that very broad and general ruleset, fantastic. If you desire to get specifics nailed down, by all means, feel free to suggest specifics here.

As per the above mission statement, I now open this thread up to hear everyone's opinions on the matter.

[Zack]

I don't think a more formalized queue would hurt - not a calendar as in the past, but a simple list as is common in other sites. I agree that sticking to one game at a time is a good idea for now.

[Askthepizzaguy]

I come from the year 2017, a harbinger of doom, telling you of the future....

Your precious .Org resurgence will be short-lived! Like the death of Darth Vader, nothing can stop it now... life support systems will fail, and/or you might accidentally snap the poor lad's neck while trying to remove his helmet. It's a trap, etc.

Face it lads, the .Org is a place for total war games. Nostalgia alone is not enough, James.

That all being said, I cannot help but try to spit in the face of all of that, because I want my precious .Org to live again. I'm in.

Screw that guy from the future, he's more of a buzzkill than Buzz Killington. I want to funnel some people here from elsewhere, like I have before many times.

[BSmith]

I agree that one game at a time for now is a good pace. That can always be evaluated as we get more activity and interest.

[Zack]

I'd also like to see a GAH revival. Maybe post some Pirate Shipe themed stuff in there. I might make a thread for the Futurama game.

[Visor]

I've got a quick and easy game to run before Pirate Ship starts.


http://wiki.mafiascum.net/index.php?title=Popcorn_Mafia

24 hour days. No nights. Basically a changed lynch mechanic.

[Zack]

in a perfect world we'd be able to segue nicely from Pirate Ship III to another game (Zack mentioned something about hosting a Futurama mafia afterwards)

and it only took a year!

[El Barto]

That? It's not exactly new.

[GeneralHankerchief]

In light of recent events, I need to make one or two things perfectly clear.

First, everybody - particularly those who attack others for "struggling to read" and/or those who moderate other forums and should thus have a higher inclination to appreciate forum rules - needs to make absolutely sure they familiarize themselves with the Gameroom Rules and Reference (which you'll note is stickied and has a large "READ THIS BEFORE PLAYING" tag in the title).

The point I want to highlight is in the second post of that thread, under the "Communicating with the moderator" section:

3. If I make a post in green font, this means that I am speaking officially as Gameroom moderator and should be taken as separate from any in-character posts I make as part of whichever game the post is in. If I make a post in bold green, I am also speaking officially as Gameroom moderator, but it probably means that I am not amused about something and really need to emphasize a particular point.

When I'm reading a thread, I'm always reading it from the viewpoint of a moderator first and foremost. I'm checking to see if there's any obviously objectionable or NSFW material included that I have to delete or put under spoilers. I'm making sure that the post is in line with the guidelines laid down by the game host in the OP or clarified elsewhere in the thread. I'm debating whether the post crosses the line from a sharp comment to a personal attack. Etc.

I'm doing all of this before I take off my moderator hat and put on my player hat. With every post. If it doesn't pass muster, then I do what I have to do as mod, probably drop some green text, maybe send a PM, and look to see if there's anything else I have to deal with. If it does, then and only then do I begin to examine it from the standpoint of a player.

Basically, it comes down to a matter of trust: By playing a game in a subforum that I moderate, there is an implicit agreement on your part that the game is 100% put aside whenever I make an official action and indicate as much by writing in green text. If that trust is not there, then perhaps your forum gaming needs would be better served elsewhere.

----------

Now, for a second, somewhat related issue.

I can count on one hand the number of times this has happened in the Gameroom in its 10+ year history, but occasionally the situation will arise where the moderator's official actions become the subject of debate in a game thread. Without going into whether the mod was in the wrong or not, there is a time and place to air your grievances, and the game thread is not it. While this has never been an official rule before, many hosts have some sort of stipulation in place about this and I've always operated under this guideline in the past.

The time has come to officially codify this rule. I am placing it under the "Communicating with the moderator" section in the Rules and Reference thread:

4. If your issue is with the moderator or the moderation itself, you have three avenues of recourse:
- PM the moderator (and potentially the game host depending on the circumstance) and work it out privately
- Post in the Gameroom policy discussion thread
- If you wish to escalate the issue, post in the Watchtower
Doing so in a game thread, particularly while the game is ongoing, is not the appropriate place for this and may be met with official action regardless of and separate from the original issue.

Further discussion of this is welcome here.

[Visor]

agreed 100%

[Askthepizzaguy]

Further discussion of this is welcome here.

I think most folks here understand that since we have a limited number of people on here, we have to have moderators from within the active player base, otherwise the section will go unmoderated- just something we have to deal with being a low traffic site and a very small player base. Recent and new people may be familiar with the standards of elsewhere, and there's always culture shock going from one site to another. It's also the case that probably very few people ever take a look at the rules and regs in full before being somewhere. I know I don't.

I think, regardless of the rulebook, situation happened because adversarial accusatory guessing game plus what looked like a rulebreak- don't post after night, and don't edit posts. One was intended to fix the other, but if person isn't familiar with how we deal with rulebreak posts, or that we just have you only, pretty much... it can look strange or unfamiliar. And it may become a part of the game. It isn't supposed to, but person was trying to guess motivations for behavior, and didn't know what to make of the situation.

Very unfortunate situation. Unhappy for everyone involved. I don't think anyone is the bad guy here. We're just people and we're not perfect.

As for the moderation action, decision, and policies, all are fine with me.
As for the player in question, I would chalk it up to an honest misunderstanding, based on publicly available data. I don't know what if anything was said in private.

It's a bummer when something like that happens. I ran into something similar when moderating a clear rulebreak in another game elsewhere- sure, my action was right, but then people started to read into it for alignment. I had to adjust, because it was something I could adjust.

Here, we're not so flexible, and we have to make do with an imperfect situation- active player is also the only active moderator, tasked with enforcement of rulebreaks.

These are the random thoughts I'm having as they come at me, speaking as a fellow player in that game.

I can say that I spoke with neither party about this thing before making this post, this is just me talking and trying to approach it as honestly as possible.

It is ultimately, not a huge deal, the only problem I really can see here is there may be lingering negative feelings, or a negative impression of the site. That's all unfortunate and I don't know what to do about it other than say it's a minor misunderstanding blown up bigger than it is, due to the setting of it being a mafia game, and an instance of unintentional rulebreaking by someone else which precipitated it. No one went into it intending to harm the game, yet it happened anyway and people got bummed out.

I support both the moderator in question and the point of view that folks can make an honest mistake, or mistake honest behavior for mafia-insidiousness. That's the main thing that informs me not to get upset when Riedquat accidentally broke a rule. Hell, I've done similar things before. Keeping it in perspective it is just a parlor game, albeit one we get emotionally wrapped up in and take very seriously at times.

Blah blah blah, that was my 3 bucks and 2 cents.

[novice]

It was definitely a culture shock to me to see a player also acting as forum moderator in a game. I did a double take when it happened in the Futurama game as well. If it's the best option available it's obviously fine though, just unexpected for those who haven't seen it before.

I guess an additional factor is that the threshold for moderation is different here from what I'm used to. Foul language, personal attacks and illegal posts could be censured where I play, but would probably not be edited out or deleted. Basically, forum moderator actions in a mafia game are a bit of a culture shock in themselves. I'm used to more self-moderation and peer moderation, and less intervention and "don't talk about" rules.