Flipline Forum

Community => The Werewolf Game => Topic started by: Leia on October 19, 2017, 12:03:12 PM



Title: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Leia on October 19, 2017, 12:03:12 PM
What's going on?
TWG is in the middle of a reconstruction, and one of the things we're changing are the rules. In this topic, we'll be voting rules into play.

How the Process Works
I'll put all of the rules into a queue, and we'll vote on them (similar to the BPT). Your options will be to either Pass, Change, or Reject. If you have a suggestion for a rule, I suggest PMing it to me.

/pass means that you are completely happy with the rule.
/change means that you would like to change some aspect of the rule.
/reject means that you never, ever want to see this rule in action.

If you vote either /change or /reject without explaining yourself, I'm not going to count your vote. Each poll will be 48 hours long. If the majority is to Pass it, the rule will immediately be put into effect. If the majority is to Change it, I'll rewrite a new version and the next thing we'll do is vote on it. If the majority is to Reject it, then it's rejected and we never use it again.

I'm trying to organize the passed rules on the first page, the categories might change eventually but currently it's "Behavior" "Playing" "Spectating".

As for current gameplay, it is up to the Game Moderator to make decisions on punishment if there are no rules on it yet.

So! Let's start.

Previous Votes
Dead Player Game Thread Posting 1.0 (http://www.flipline.com/forum/index.php?topic=35632.msg1909106#msg1909106)
Editing/Deleting Posts 1.0 (http://www.flipline.com/forum/index.php?topic=35632.msg1910677#msg1910677) 1.1 (http://www.flipline.com/forum/index.php?topic=35632.msg1911649#msg1911649)
Posting Host PMs 1.0 (http://www.flipline.com/forum/index.php?topic=35632.msg1912244#msg1912244)
Gamethrowing 1.0 (http://www.flipline.com/forum/index.php?topic=35632.msg1912727#msg1912727)
Staying Dead 1.0 (http://www.flipline.com/forum/index.php?topic=35632.msg1914368#msg1914368) 1.1 (http://www.flipline.com/forum/index.php?topic=35632.msg1915620#msg1915620)
Activity in Game 1.0 (http://www.flipline.com/forum/index.php?topic=35632.msg1918132#msg1918132) 1.1 (http://www.flipline.com/forum/index.php?topic=35632.msg1920763#msg1920763)
PMing Conversations 1.0 (http://www.flipline.com/forum/index.php?topic=35632.msg1923934#msg1923934)
Automatic Self-Votes 1.0 (http://www.flipline.com/forum/index.php?topic=35632.msg1923950#msg1923950)

Official TWG Rules

Do not post in the game thread if you are dead. You may make one post after you die, but after that you are not allowed to post. Breaking this rule will result in 1 gameban.

Editing posts is never allowed, even if it's editing a typo. If you want to edit a typo or anything in your post, just post again.

Do not post any PM conversations with the Host in the thread. You may paraphrase, but directly quoting or screenshoting will result in a modkill.

Try to Win. Gamethrowing, or purposely trying to make your team lose, is never allowed. If you make your side lose on purpose, then you will be modkilled and gamebanned from the next TWG.

If you're dead, STAY dead. With the exception of having a specific gimmick in the game, dead people must stay dead. You can have one last-post to write anything you want, but after that, you can not PM any living players, post anything in the game thread, or post anything with game-related content in the lounge. Breaking this rule will result in one gameban.
Furthermore, living people can't talk to dead people in real life, so living players can't talk to dead players in the game. This means no PMing dead players once they've died. (This includes PMing the Maniac on who they should kill after they die). Doing so will result in a modkill and a gameban.

Try to be active during the game. Whenever a game starts, the host sends out a confirmation PM to all players. Anyone who doesn't respond to the PM or do anything in-game within 3 real life days will be replaced by someone on a list of overflow sign-ups. However, if there is no one on the list, the player is modkilled. Furthermore, if you have signed up for the game only to realize that you won't be able to commit to being active due to real life issues, you may replace out if you have a reason deemed valid by the host.

PM the Host all TWG related conversations. As a Host, we choose an MVP at the end. If you don't give us your thoughts, we assume you did nothing and you cannot get MVP.


Title: Re: TWG: Rules [Please read + respond]
Post by: Nickito on October 19, 2017, 01:06:20 PM
I would definitely like a set punishment, to prevent controversy.
The HQ rules page is outdated, so I don't know how to respond to the next questions. I'll just say that 'No posting host PMs' should be the most strictly enforced rule imo, and out of the major rules I think the self votes are enough punishment for 'Stay Active', and a gameban is definitely not warranted. I mean, the player obviously doesn't care about TWG, banning them should in theory do nothing.


Title: Re: TWG: Rules [Please read + respond]
Post by: Chiral of Doom on October 19, 2017, 04:34:08 PM
Wish was more strict: Stay Dead when Dead


Title: Re: TWG: Rules [Please read + respond]
Post by: hyewon on October 19, 2017, 04:51:04 PM
Wish was more strict: Stay Dead when Dead


SAME IT'S SO bleeping ANNOYING WHEN THEY DON'T STAY DEAD !!

I think no miller gaming as well should be strictly enforced as it ruins the game

Like "Alright guys I'm seer PM me your roles" is so bleeping annoying


Title: Re: TWG: Rules [Please read + respond]
Post by: dar on October 19, 2017, 05:20:48 PM
yeah.. everyone shouldn't be millers to one person. It's rather two-three claims from other people.

asking everyone to pm you means everyone is scared that their role may be claimed, and try not to be suspicious.


Title: Re: TWG: Rules [Please read + respond]
Post by: Nickito on October 19, 2017, 05:55:05 PM
Miller gaming is a strategy, and evil roles have to be ready with a claim


Title: Re: TWG: Rules [Please read + respond]
Post by: Kowhai on October 20, 2017, 06:41:30 AM
What exactly are you supposed to claim?
If you claim human, you are unable to do anything and are eventually lynched for claiming human.
If you claim a blue role, your claim will conflict with the actual person whose role you claimed, because the confirmed human is gathering the roles of literally everyone.


Title: Re: TWG: Rules [Please read + respond]
Post by: Chiral of Doom on October 20, 2017, 06:42:04 AM
miller gaming just ruins the game and makes it boring for both players and spectators


Title: Re: TWG: Rules [Please read + respond]
Post by: Shendelzare on October 20, 2017, 06:43:40 AM
I believe I introduced "Don't share PMs from the host" when Temmie broke it and got a warning, giving his infractions weighed from Stormbreaker and Nickito when their faction won at The Demon Within.


Title: Re: TWG: Rules [Please read + respond]
Post by: Chiral of Doom on October 20, 2017, 06:49:33 AM
So Lu
should certain types of...rudeness (you know what I mean on FB) warrant gamebans?


Title: Re: TWG: Rules [Please read + respond]
Post by: Abu on October 23, 2017, 12:22:06 PM
So Lu
should certain types of...rudeness (you know what I mean on FB) warrant gamebans?
Probably not. That infringes on free speech too much.


Title: Re: TWG: Rules [Please read + respond]
Post by: Chiral of Doom on October 23, 2017, 02:29:09 PM
Probably not. That infringes on free speech too much.
Uh.....


Title: Re: TWG: Rules [Please read + respond]
Post by: A Red Cube on October 23, 2017, 02:36:32 PM
Yo
Also plz ban talking on other places like fb or discord it unless the host is in the doscussion
Anybody could just delet some things they don't want thr host to see while copy pasting it


Title: Re: TWG: Rules [Please read + respond]
Post by: Abu on October 23, 2017, 03:18:25 PM
Uh.....

People should be allowed to say whatever they want without fear of repercussions


Title: Re: TWG: Rules [Please read + respond]
Post by: Chiral of Doom on October 23, 2017, 03:19:52 PM
People should be allowed to say whatever they want without fear of repercussions
I am sorry but this is just shocking to here from YOU honestly. So you are trying to say that I can just bloop talk everyone in TWG, make jokes about death, and throw a fit, and ruin the game for others without any punishment?


Title: Re: TWG: Rules [Please read + respond]
Post by: Kowhai on October 23, 2017, 03:21:38 PM
Well, excessive rudeness is already against the guidelines
Not sure it's necessary to have a separate rule for TWG


Title: Re: TWG: Rules [Please read + respond]
Post by: Abu on October 23, 2017, 03:22:08 PM
I am sorry but this is just shocking to here from YOU honestly. So you are trying to say that I can just bloop talk everyone in TWG, make jokes about death, and throw a fit, and ruin the game for others without any punishment?
It’s morally bankrupt and they should face moral repercussions, not gamebans.

Or until it crosses the legal boundary and Flipline has to delete it.

In any case, let’s not be a nanny state. Everyone here is mature enough not to do that...right?


Title: Re: TWG: Rules [Please read + respond]
Post by: Chiral of Doom on October 23, 2017, 03:23:39 PM
It’s morally bankrupt and they should face moral repercussions, not gamebans.

Or until it crosses the legal boundary and Flipline has to delete it.

In any case, let’s not be a nanny state. Everyone here is mature enough not to do that...right?
I mean, I did see one player hint at death/suicide because of another player, and it probably made the other player feel like bloop. So you never know.


Title: Re: TWG: Rules [Please read + respond]
Post by: Abu on October 23, 2017, 03:24:15 PM
I mean, I did see one player hint at death/suicide because of another player, and it probably made the other player feel like bloop. So you never know.
I said this in the SB but death threats/suicide threats aren’t free speech those are passing into the realm of murder.


Title: Re: TWG: Rules [Please read + respond]
Post by: Kowhai on October 23, 2017, 03:24:39 PM
Not everyone is mature enough, actually @Lusa


Title: Re: TWG: Rules [Please read + respond]
Post by: Chiral of Doom on October 23, 2017, 03:25:29 PM
I said this in the SB but death threats/suicide threats aren’t free speech those are passing into the realm of murder.
Which is why we need consequences (gamebans)


Title: Re: TWG: Rules [Please read + respond]
Post by: Kowhai on October 23, 2017, 03:26:03 PM
Well, excessive rudeness is already against the guidelines
Not sure it's necessary to have a separate rule for TWG


Title: Re: TWG: Rules [Please read + respond]
Post by: Chiral of Doom on October 23, 2017, 03:26:48 PM
Meh, me and Lu just did it either way *shrug*


Title: Re: TWG: Rules [Please read + respond]
Post by: Abu on October 23, 2017, 03:27:53 PM
Suicide threats should be a legal matter in any case


Title: Re: TWG: Rules [Please read + respond]
Post by: Kowhai on October 23, 2017, 03:28:27 PM
In future, I reckon reporting would be sufficient
If Joe/Matt don't deem it unsuitable for the forum, it's not unsuitable for TWG


Title: Re: TWG: Rules [Please read + respond]
Post by: Chiral of Doom on October 23, 2017, 03:29:23 PM
Except Matt and Joe does ignore a lot of stuff that A LOT of people deem unsuitable for the forum :/

I would just leave it up to the hosts


Title: Re: TWG: Rules [Please read + respond]
Post by: Kowhai on October 23, 2017, 03:31:49 PM
In that case, the solution is to atrempt to convince them to be more strict in their enforcement of the guidelines, TWG shouldn't have more strict policing of actual forum guidelines than other boards.


Title: Re: TWG: Rules [Please read + respond]
Post by: Abu on October 23, 2017, 03:34:23 PM
We should be more libertarian, not authoritarian.

The transition to direct democracy was the first big step.


Title: Re: TWG: Rules [Please read + respond]
Post by: Kowhai on October 23, 2017, 03:37:01 PM
Rules should exist for the purpose of making TWG a more enjoyable experience, as they already do
Beyond that, forum guidelines obviously apply


Title: Re: TWG: Rules [Please read + respond]
Post by: Nickito on October 23, 2017, 03:41:01 PM
yeah I personally think personal attacks should be against the rules if they involve TWG, even if they don't happen on the forum
also discussion outside of the forums should not be allowed in any way


Title: Re: TWG: Rules [Please read + respond]
Post by: Chiral of Doom on October 23, 2017, 03:41:53 PM
I am fine with people messaging me in a group chat on FB because it has happened before, but if it is the whole Discord squad messaging group messages on Discord without any notice from the host, it's unacceptable.


Title: Re: TWG: Rules [Please read + respond]
Post by: Nickito on October 24, 2017, 03:45:40 PM
Is it fair to gameban Lusamine
I told him he was breaking a rule and he continued posting when he wasn't playing, potentially affecting events in the game


Title: Re: TWG: Rules [Please read + respond]
Post by: Leia on October 24, 2017, 03:51:07 PM
If you warned him first and he continued to break the rule, then I'd imagine it'd be fine

Also should I add a strict rule about spectators? I'm not entirely sure if it's just me who gets annoyed when spectators post in the game topic or not


Title: Re: TWG: Rules [Please read + respond]
Post by: hyewon on October 24, 2017, 04:00:47 PM
Oh no it's bleeping annoying


Title: Re: TWG: Rules [Please read + respond]
Post by: Chiral of Doom on October 24, 2017, 04:01:04 PM
honestly IDK
i personally don't mind it at all


Title: Re: TWG: Rules [Please read + respond]
Post by: Nickito on October 24, 2017, 04:24:58 PM
Okay it's official
btw the rules should be more lenient for newer users
But Lusamine has been playing since like TWG XII so


Title: Re: TWG: Rules [Please read + respond]
Post by: Chiral of Doom on October 24, 2017, 04:28:41 PM
Am I the only one who literally doesn't care as long as the person doesn't reveal any game details? Because IMO, it def shouldn't warrant any harsh game-ban if nothing major is revealed.


Title: Re: TWG: Rules [Please read + respond]
Post by: dar on October 24, 2017, 04:30:39 PM
Posting in the game topic as spectator is okay as long as it's just commenting about things.

Revealing game details like chasi is wolf, that's bannable, even if in lounge.


Title: Re: TWG: Rules [Please read + respond]
Post by: Abu on October 24, 2017, 04:33:44 PM
I was the original bidder so I feel a strong need to just randomly pop in for fun.

I purposely avoided giving any tips.


Title: Re: TWG: Rules [Please read + respond]
Post by: Kowhai on October 24, 2017, 05:21:35 PM
That's why the lounge exists


Title: Re: TWG: Rules [Please read + respond]
Post by: Abu on October 24, 2017, 05:28:18 PM
That's why the lounge exists
FREE SPEECH! FREE SPEECH!


Title: Re: TWG: Rules [Please read + respond]
Post by: Chiral of Doom on October 24, 2017, 05:29:28 PM
As much as I support the fact that people should be able to post in the game topic as long as it isn't info revealing/spam and that they are actually players who keep up with TWG, the more you bring politics to this, to less I want to support this.


Title: Re: TWG: Rules [Please read + respond]
Post by: Chiral of Doom on October 26, 2017, 01:19:18 AM
BTW Lu, I feel like we should prevent people who constantly sign up and do nothing in the game except for maybe lynch once (but don't get modkilled) from signing up unless they show they can at least try to play the game

It's really annoying when some players constantly sign but do little to nothing


Title: Re: TWG: Rules [Please read + respond]
Post by: memes on October 26, 2017, 09:50:07 AM
Revealing game details like chasi is wolf, that's bannable, even if in lounge.
what if its pretty much confirmed (like when i said cosmic was arsonist after saying he was gonna go seer as amnesiac while loudly proclaiming that saburo was the arsonist)


Title: Re: TWG: Rules [Please read + respond]
Post by: Chiral of Doom on October 26, 2017, 04:50:48 PM
BTW Lu, I feel like we should prevent people who constantly sign up and do nothing in the game except for maybe lynch once (but don't get modkilled) from signing up unless they show they can at least try to play the game

It's really annoying when some players constantly sign but do little to nothing
This ? ^


Title: Re: TWG: Rules [Please read + respond]
Post by: Leia on October 26, 2017, 05:01:20 PM
This ? ^
Hash it out into a rule if you think that it's a good one and PM it to me and then we'll vote on it


Title: Re: TWG: Rules [Please read + respond]
Post by: Nickito on October 26, 2017, 05:03:07 PM
I suppose we should put up the poll that Lusamine requested


Title: Re: TWG: Rules [Please read + respond]
Post by: Leia on October 26, 2017, 05:05:24 PM
\
I suppose we should put up the poll that Lusamine requested
shh I'm making a big post right now give me a sec


Title: Re: TWG: Rules [Please read + respond]
Post by: Leia on October 26, 2017, 05:12:54 PM
I'll put all of the rules into a queue, and we'll vote on them (similar to the BPT). Your options will be to either Pass, Change, or Reject. If you have a suggestion for a rule, I suggest PMing it to me.

/pass means that you are completely happy with the rule.
/change means that you would like to change some aspect of the rule.
/reject means that you never, ever want to see this rule in action.

If you vote either /change or /reject without explaining yourself, I'm not going to count your vote. Each poll will be 48 hours long. If the majority is to Pass it, the rule will immediately be put into effect. If the majority is to Change it, I'll rewrite a new version and the next thing we'll do is vote on it. If the majority is to Reject it, then it's rejected and we never used it again.

I'm trying to organize the passed rules on the first page, the categories might change eventually but currently it's "Behavior" "Playing" "Spectating".

As for current gameplay, it is up to the Game Moderator to make decisions on punishment if there are no rules on it yet.

So! Let's start.


Title: Re: TWG: Rules [Please read + respond]
Post by: Leia on October 26, 2017, 05:15:25 PM
So. Rule #1! Vote!

Do not post in the game thread if you are dead. You may make one post after you die, but after that you are not allowed to post. Breaking this rule will result in 1 gameban.


Title: Re: TWG: Rules [Please read + respond]
Post by: Nickito on October 26, 2017, 05:17:12 PM
/pass


Title: Re: TWG: Rules [Please read + respond]
Post by: Chiral of Doom on October 26, 2017, 05:17:57 PM
/reject

Posting in the topic should not be a big deal as long as it doesn't reveal any important game info. Plus, we don't want to be too harsh on gamebans/modkills since it's usually a last resort thing like if the player is genuinely a problem, rude, gamethrowing


Title: Re: TWG: Rules [Please read + respond]
Post by: Nickito on October 26, 2017, 05:21:12 PM
this is like the worst thing I can imagine someone doing though
if this is rejected is there any point in having rules


Title: Re: TWG: Rules [Please read + respond]
Post by: Kowhai on October 26, 2017, 05:21:35 PM
Don't quite get why the lounge exists
Why does it exist?


Title: Re: TWG: Rules [Please read + respond]
Post by: Kowhai on October 26, 2017, 05:22:14 PM
There's already rules against staying dead and not revealing info
Why restrict where they can post too


Title: Re: TWG: Rules [Please read + respond]
Post by: Nickito on October 26, 2017, 05:22:44 PM
for dead players/spectators to post without breaking up the action/confusing players
remember how messy TWG I was without a lounge?


Title: Re: TWG: Rules [Please read + respond]
Post by: Leia on October 26, 2017, 05:24:24 PM
If we stick with the dead/specating chatzy (btw Nick are you ok with me adding spectators to it) then we won't need a Lounge. The only problem is that we would need to ex the necro role all together if that happened.


Title: Re: TWG: Rules [Please read + respond]
Post by: Nickito on October 26, 2017, 05:25:59 PM
idk I'd rather have a lounge
keep it all in one place, and also it's not really fun if you know everyone's roles is it ;)


Title: Re: TWG: Rules [Please read + respond]
Post by: Chiral of Doom on October 26, 2017, 05:28:07 PM
I mean, honestly, I don't really care what happens as long as players aren't punished for just posting in the game topic. Like it's a bit harsh IMO if they get gamebanned for simply going like "This game is weird!" in the game topic after they died. I mean, I get it if the player is being a nuisance and posting obnoxious things like "Why does [faction] suck?", like I think that may warrant a warning and then a gameban if it doesn't stop, but, if the player is just not doing any harm, then there's no reason for any harsh punishment.


Title: Re: TWG: Rules [Please read + respond]
Post by: Kowhai on October 26, 2017, 07:47:05 PM
idk I'd rather have a lounge
keep it all in one place, and also it's not really fun if you know everyone's roles is it ;)
Having a lounge isn't keeping things in one place, there are two topics, and I'd argue it further complicates things instead. Entering the Chatzy would be voluntary and dead people could just post in the topic, so people who don't want spoilers don't get spoilers.


Title: Re: TWG: Rules [Please read + respond]
Post by: Bandero on October 26, 2017, 07:54:39 PM
/pass

The game topic should be reserved for alive players, so it stays relevant and easy to read. I find it annoying when someone not playing or dead posts in the game topic, because it clutters it up when the post could have been put in the lounge; especially when that person keeps posting after being told not to.

The lounge exists to consolidate sign ups, MVPs/Feedback, actions, and of course discussion.

I really don't get why people think it's so unfair that they aren't allowed to post in the game topic.


Title: Re: TWG: Rules [Please read + respond]
Post by: Chiral of Doom on October 26, 2017, 07:59:50 PM
I never really said it was unfair. I just think it is unreasonable to be gamebanning people just because they posted in the game topic and it wasn't like they did anything that involved game information.

With that being said, I would wanna urge for Lusamine's unban from the following TWG but I doubt he would have played even if he wasn't banned so..


Title: Re: TWG: Rules [Please read + respond]
Post by: Kowhai on October 26, 2017, 08:00:59 PM
/pass

The game topic should be reserved for alive players, so it stays relevant and easy to read. I find it annoying when someone not playing or dead posts in the game topic, because it clutters it up when the post could have been put in the lounge; especially when that person keeps posting after being told not to.

The lounge exists to consolidate sign ups, MVPs/Feedback, actions, and of course discussion.

I really don't get why people think it's so unfair that they aren't allowed to post in the game topic.
Reject

I don't get why those functions aren't part of the main topic.
Besides, we've already got rules for staying dead, don't see why extra rules restricting where people can be dead are necessary.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Dead Player Posting]
Post by: Bandero on October 26, 2017, 08:07:37 PM
If those functions were in the game topic, then it would be more cluttered.

Having a dead player/spectator chat in a PM is more complicated than just having a lounge where anyone can discuss how the game is going, including dead players.

I suppose that Lusamine's ban was kind of harsh, but he still did post once after being told not to. Maybe if he had continued to keep posting, the ban would be more logical.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Dead Player Posting]
Post by: Kowhai on October 26, 2017, 08:15:43 PM
If those functions were in the game topic, then it would be more cluttered.

Having a dead player/spectator chat in a PM is more complicated than just having a lounge where anyone can discuss how the game is going, including dead players.

I suppose that Lusamine's ban was kind of harsh, but he still did post once after being told not to. Maybe if he had continued to keep posting, the ban would be more logical.
I don't see how it would be so cluttered. Dead people don't post that often, and even though their posts don't have any effect on gameplay, plenty of posts made by living people don't either, particularly during night time, so I don't think things would be particularly cluttered.

Having a Chatzy is kind of irrelevant, really, since we're talking about the game topic taking over the duties of the lounge. But even so, the host doesn't necessarily need to create an official Chatzy, dead people can make one if they so wish. People already discuss games via 3rd party sites (FB, for example), so I don't see how it'd be a problem, even if it was relevant.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Dead Player Posting]
Post by: Nickito on October 26, 2017, 08:46:33 PM
we should add a rule to avoid talking about the game off the forum (at the very least, while alive)


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Dead Player Posting]
Post by: Chiral of Doom on October 26, 2017, 08:48:46 PM
I feel like it would be okay as long as the hosts know about it though. I let my players add me in a FB chat to discuss the game on FB


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Dead Player Posting]
Post by: Nickito on October 26, 2017, 08:50:58 PM
...are there any rules you do want or is it just going to be anything goes


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Dead Player Posting]
Post by: Chiral of Doom on October 26, 2017, 08:52:57 PM
You are making it sound like as if we support a system of TWG that has no rules if we rejected just this one particular rule...


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Dead Player Posting]
Post by: Nickito on October 26, 2017, 08:54:28 PM
idk I'm not exactly keeping track but I don't think you've said yes yet
can we at least keep posting host PMs against the rules


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Dead Player Posting]
Post by: Kowhai on October 26, 2017, 08:56:12 PM
Do you seriously think that TWG will become a lawless free-for-all if people are allowed to talk about it on Facebook?


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Dead Player Posting]
Post by: Nickito on October 26, 2017, 08:56:47 PM
If anyone can talk about anything anywhere with no restrictions, well that could be problematic


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Dead Player Posting]
Post by: Kowhai on October 26, 2017, 09:01:45 PM
Dead people still wouldn't be able to talk about it, except to each other
TWG has functioned fine for years with 3rd party chats being used, so I don't know where you're getting your worries from


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Dead Player Posting]
Post by: Nickito on October 26, 2017, 09:03:20 PM
There should at least be a rule that the host should be able to see all conversation, I hate getting sent snippets of Facebook or discord chats

This dead people rule would get rid of the Necromancer, which is a good role :(


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Dead Player Posting]
Post by: Chiral of Doom on October 26, 2017, 09:04:03 PM
I feel like it would be okay as long as the hosts know about it though. I let my players add me in a FB chat to discuss the game on FB


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Dead Player Posting]
Post by: Kowhai on October 26, 2017, 09:05:29 PM
1. As long you know the basic gist of these conversations, it's fine.
2. Necromancer is bloop IMO, it automatically confirms living players, meaning they can basically just miller-game, as we saw in Pathological Lying.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Dead Player Posting]
Post by: Chiral of Doom on October 26, 2017, 09:11:56 PM
Speaking of miller gaming, there should be some regulations made towards miller gaming IMO. There are some limitations though, as it's kind of hard to discern a clear boundary between blatantly obnoxious miller gaming and briefly doing it to benefit the town, on like 1 or 2 players.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Dead Player Posting]
Post by: Nickito on October 26, 2017, 09:13:08 PM
nothing inherently wrong with miller gaming, it's literally just another name for asking for role claims


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Dead Player Posting]
Post by: Chiral of Doom on October 26, 2017, 09:15:04 PM
Well does I get more annoyed over miller gaming than over people posting in game topic when dead

please tell me it's not just me tho


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Dead Player Posting]
Post by: Faiz on October 26, 2017, 09:28:21 PM
/pass


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Dead Player Posting]
Post by: Chiral of Doom on October 26, 2017, 09:44:08 PM
oh come ONNN


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Dead Player Posting]
Post by: hyewon on October 26, 2017, 09:48:11 PM
/pass


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Dead Player Posting]
Post by: Chiral of Doom on October 26, 2017, 09:51:10 PM
what?


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Dead Player Posting]
Post by: Kowhai on October 26, 2017, 09:53:27 PM
You said /reject though


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Dead Player Posting]
Post by: Chiral of Doom on October 26, 2017, 09:53:50 PM
No i get that
i just don't get why you are rejecting it if you are saying that Temmie was targeted despite not playing


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Dead Player Posting]
Post by: TotesAngel on October 26, 2017, 10:02:44 PM
Speaking of miller gaming, there should be some regulations made towards miller gaming IMO. There are some limitations though, as it's kind of hard to discern a clear boundary between blatantly obnoxious miller gaming and briefly doing it to benefit the town, on like 1 or 2 players.
I know, I'm miller gaming, but I'm only asking people for their roles when other users ask me to. I'm the confirmed Seer (TWG XCIV), and TSO didn't respond to my PM. He was a wolf.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Dead Player Posting]
Post by: Faiz on October 26, 2017, 10:12:32 PM
With that being said, I would wanna urge for Lusamine's unban from the following TWG but I doubt he would have played even if he wasn't banned so..
Can the next host reverse the ban? Because a) the ban was unfair and b) I want him to be able to play revolution


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Dead Player Posting]
Post by: Abu on October 27, 2017, 02:07:58 AM
/reject

As long as nobody discusses the game it doesn’t really change anything.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Dead Player Posting]
Post by: Faiz on October 27, 2017, 02:16:25 AM
you are the next host, shouldn't it be your decision? Idk, it has happened before
Should be. If it's so, then I unban Lusamine.

Also, I think that the rule should not result into a game ban though


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Dead Player Posting]
Post by: Kirby on October 27, 2017, 02:21:43 AM
/change
Allow dead and non players post ONLY if it is to clear up about  the game's role/gimmick (like alien/oxygen in space)


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Dead Player Posting]
Post by: Faiz on October 27, 2017, 03:19:55 AM
gonna change my vote.

/change

Increase the limit of postmortem posts to, say, 5 or 7.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Dead Player Posting]
Post by: Chiral of Doom on October 27, 2017, 04:19:12 AM
gonna change my vote.

/change

Increase the limit of postmortem posts to, say, 5 or 7.
No host is willing to count and keep track that (at least i'm not)


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Dead Player Posting]
Post by: Faiz on October 27, 2017, 06:16:41 AM
Dead/Speculators can cluster up the topic, so if anyone can provide an analysis that they don't i'd change my vote


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Dead Player Posting]
Post by: Nickito on October 27, 2017, 07:41:07 AM
Yes it clutters the topic
I'm not trying to silence anyone, people can say stuff in the lounge
but the game topic is for the game


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Dead Player Posting]
Post by: Kirby on October 27, 2017, 07:42:17 AM
Im also fine with anyone inside or outside the game to help host count votes


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Dead Player Posting]
Post by: Leia on October 27, 2017, 08:07:19 AM
Can the next host reverse the ban? Because a) the ban was unfair and b) I want him to be able to play revolution
Talk to Nick, it's his decision. You could also just trade places in the queue with another host so that he can play.

/pass

Look, we have a lounge for a reason. The topic gets cluttered if it isn't. I'm not entirely sure why people are opposed to just posting in the lounge.
/change
Allow dead and non players post ONLY if it is to clear up about  the game's role/gimmick (like alien/oxygen in space)
I'm okay with this change but I don't see why this can't be posted in the Lounge


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Dead Player Posting]
Post by: Bandero on October 27, 2017, 08:57:12 AM
Dead players or spectators don't need to count votes. If they want to explain something about roles, they can do it in the lounge.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Dead Player Posting]
Post by: Kowhai on October 27, 2017, 03:23:21 PM
If Lounges exist, the board gets cluttered.
If they don't, the topics get cluttered.
People can decide which they value more, but I personally get frustrated often when navigating old TWGs and sifting through games and lounges, often randomly jumbled up. Don't think things would be that confusing in topics, really.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Dead Player Posting]
Post by: Kirby on October 27, 2017, 03:37:13 PM
except quoting is extremely hard to do if you wanna post it in a different topic of the quote and you are using a mobile ::)
plus in the game topic is more convenient


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Dead Player Posting]
Post by: Nickito on October 27, 2017, 03:40:39 PM
There are links to every game topic in the Stats topic, why would you ever search through the board
Also it wouldn't be messy if people just stopped bumping, we'd have an alternating lounge/game pattern


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Dead Player Posting]
Post by: Kowhai on October 27, 2017, 03:47:11 PM
People aren't going to stop bumping though?
Also, lounges aren't linked in Stats, as far as I know.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Dead Player Posting]
Post by: Chiral of Doom on October 27, 2017, 03:55:51 PM
I just use the Search function on the forum. As annoying as it gets, there isn't much that could be done about bumping sadly. :/

Archi could possibly implement links in the stats thing though.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Dead Player Posting]
Post by: Nickito on October 27, 2017, 05:41:12 PM
There should be a link to the lounge (if it exists) and the game topic
Then there's no reason to be upset about clutter in the board


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Dead Player Posting]
Post by: Nickito on October 27, 2017, 07:57:17 PM
So are you planning on linking games and lounges?
I think it's a good idea, although it will be time consuming


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Dead Player Posting]
Post by: Chiral of Doom on October 29, 2017, 06:07:43 AM
He clearly is


Title: Re: TWG: Rules [Please read + respond]
Post by: Leia on October 29, 2017, 07:53:00 AM
Rule #1 Voting Results

Do not post in the game thread if you are dead. You may make one post after you die, but after that you are not allowed to post. Breaking this rule will result in 1 gameban.

/pass: 5 votes
- Nickito
- greenviceroy
- Daenerys
- Archi
- Lu

/change: 2 votes
- Kassem: Allow dead and non players post ONLY if it is to clear up about  the game's role/gimmick (like alien/oxygen in space)
- Coach Huzzy: Increase the limit of postmortem posts to, say, 5 or 7.

/reject: 3 votes
- KrispyKremeExtreme: Posting in the topic should not be a big deal as long as it doesn't reveal any important game info. Plus, we don't want to be too harsh on gamebans/modkills since it's usually a last resort thing like if the player is genuinely a problem, rude, gamethrowing
- Qazikol: I don't get why those functions aren't part of the main topic. Besides, we've already got rules for staying dead, don't see why extra rules restricting where people can be dead are necessary.
- Lusamine: As long as nobody discusses the game it doesn’t really change anything.

This rule has been passed. It is now in effect and applies to all games starting now.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Dead Player Posting]
Post by: Leia on October 29, 2017, 07:59:14 AM
Next proposed rule (if anyone was curious, I'm currently just going down the list of rules in the HQ to start out with so we can edit those first before we add new ones)

Do not delete/edit posts. You can edit typos, but you should not edit otherwise. If you change your mind about something, too bad. This can interfere with other people's strategies. The first time you edit a post will result in a warning, but the second time you edit a post will result in a modkill.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Editing/Deleting Posts]
Post by: Shendelzare on October 29, 2017, 08:02:57 AM
/approve
/pass


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Editing/Deleting Posts]
Post by: Leia on October 29, 2017, 08:11:34 AM
Wait but saying I’m a green role instead of I’m a blue role is game changing


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Editing/Deleting Posts]
Post by: dar on October 29, 2017, 08:13:51 AM
yeah, it'll change wolf interest drastically.

The non-game changing posts are like


okay this person is green
ah whoops can i change the color code?

agree with archi otherwise


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Editing/Deleting Posts]
Post by: A Red Cube on October 29, 2017, 08:17:23 AM
/change we should be able to ONLY edit after somebody have posted and preferably, that it have been quoted


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Editing/Deleting Posts]
Post by: Kirby on October 29, 2017, 08:54:04 AM
/pass
if you made a mistake make a second post correcting it
if you forgot to add something, quadruple post if needed.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Editing/Deleting Posts]
Post by: hyewon on October 29, 2017, 08:54:40 AM
/pass

why do you need to edit when you can post again


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Editing/Deleting Posts]
Post by: memes on October 29, 2017, 09:20:05 AM
/pass
dae is r i g h t


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Editing/Deleting Posts]
Post by: Nickito on October 29, 2017, 09:46:44 AM
/change
editing posts should never ever be allowed, under the current rules editing typos is allowed. People can edit their posts and say they were changing typos.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Editing/Deleting Posts]
Post by: Chiral of Doom on October 29, 2017, 09:47:59 AM
/pass


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Editing/Deleting Posts]
Post by: dar on October 29, 2017, 09:49:28 AM
actually change my vote..
/change
editing posts should never ever be allowed, under the current rules editing typos is allowed. People can edit their posts and say they were changing typos.
/pass

why do you need to edit when you can post again

Those two have a point..

/change for nickitos reason


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Editing/Deleting Posts]
Post by: hyewon on October 29, 2017, 10:36:10 AM
/change for nickito's reason


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Editing/Deleting Posts]
Post by: memes on October 29, 2017, 11:20:09 AM
keep /pass


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Editing/Deleting Posts]
Post by: Chiral of Doom on October 29, 2017, 11:24:06 AM
actually
i understand what Nickito is trying to say now

/change for Nick's reason


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Editing/Deleting Posts]
Post by: dar on October 29, 2017, 11:36:16 AM
1 second "oh hi i am wolf i am spam topic
a
a
a
a
a
"

1 second later "im human
edit: i typoed human"

That's basically what nickito is saying.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Editing/Deleting Posts]
Post by: A Red Cube on October 29, 2017, 11:49:38 AM
That^ is why I said onky after somebody have quoted it lol


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Editing/Deleting Posts]
Post by: TotesAngel on October 29, 2017, 12:01:41 PM
/pass



Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Editing/Deleting Posts]
Post by: Bandero on October 29, 2017, 12:11:44 PM
/pass


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Editing/Deleting Posts]
Post by: Leia on October 29, 2017, 12:35:28 PM
/change for Nick's reason, it'd be too easy to lie about whether or not you were actually editing your typo or not


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Editing/Deleting Posts]
Post by: Bandero on October 29, 2017, 12:55:11 PM
People should be allowed to fix typos.

I don't think anyone would actually change the information in their post and then lie about it. Other players would be able to tell if they changed anything important.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Editing/Deleting Posts]
Post by: Nickito on October 29, 2017, 12:58:12 PM
If no one would change information, why even have a rule preventing it?
also the rule should probably specify that deleting counts as editing


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Editing/Deleting Posts]
Post by: Chiral of Doom on October 29, 2017, 01:01:13 PM
mistakes can always be fixed in a later post, and I believe most people will be able to tell what words they really meant by typos.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Editing/Deleting Posts]
Post by: Abu on October 29, 2017, 01:01:31 PM
If it came down to it you could always just allow editing for 5 minutes considering it is currently impossible to tell anyways, unless someone screenshotted it.

After 5 minutes or so it tells you if the post was edited or not. Before that, it doesn’t.

I think that if someone was fixing typos 5 minutes is a good time limit.

I mean, like I said you can’t really tell if someone edited it anyways before


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Editing/Deleting Posts]
Post by: Nickito on October 29, 2017, 02:11:53 PM
There's no easy way to stop people from editing before the 5 minute time limit, but that doesn't mean we can't enforce the rule if they are caught.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Editing/Deleting Posts]
Post by: A Red Cube on October 29, 2017, 02:26:26 PM
(Have I been totally ignored or'something
Lusamine said almost the same thing as me as in "screenshotting")


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Editing/Deleting Posts]
Post by: Nickito on October 29, 2017, 04:43:40 PM
You want people to screenshot every post they make?


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Editing/Deleting Posts]
Post by: dar on October 29, 2017, 04:47:00 PM
what if a person makes a rude post, is dead, and deletes it soon after?


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Editing/Deleting Posts]
Post by: TotesAngel on October 29, 2017, 05:28:48 PM
/pass

If it's considered rude, the host should allow the person to delete it.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Editing/Deleting Posts]
Post by: Nickito on October 29, 2017, 05:29:43 PM
well that's a /change then


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Editing/Deleting Posts]
Post by: TotesAngel on October 29, 2017, 05:33:43 PM
don't bleeping talk to me until the current TWG finishes.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Editing/Deleting Posts]
Post by: dar on October 29, 2017, 05:41:26 PM
but what if I make a non-guidelines post and a mod deletes it?


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Editing/Deleting Posts]
Post by: Chiral of Doom on October 29, 2017, 08:42:45 PM
wait
so
do more people wanna change this or just pass?


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Editing/Deleting Posts]
Post by: Faiz on October 30, 2017, 03:48:35 AM
/change Lusamine's idea sounds best. Allow ANY editing for 5 minutes.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Editing/Deleting Posts]
Post by: Abu on October 30, 2017, 03:54:45 AM
Oh yes /change to mine.

Unless you want everyone to take screenshots it’ll be tough to enforce anyways, if you have no editing ever.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Editing/Deleting Posts]
Post by: Nickito on October 30, 2017, 04:52:59 AM
What why can we allow editing after 5 minutes
Just because we don't have a reliable way of stopping it doesn't mean we should encourage it


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Editing/Deleting Posts]
Post by: Atomic on October 30, 2017, 05:22:47 AM
if only an ability to view the edit history was possible, then it would be more reliable, but people could exploit it if it was a thing.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Editing/Deleting Posts]
Post by: Faiz on October 30, 2017, 06:04:30 AM
What why can we allow editing after 5 minutes
Just because we don't have a reliable way of stopping it doesn't mean we should encourage it
Not AFTER 5 minutes, but for the first 5 minutes after the post is made


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Editing/Deleting Posts]
Post by: Kirby on October 30, 2017, 06:08:20 AM
/change Lusamine's idea sounds best. Allow ANY editing for 5 minutes.
going with this one


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Editing/Deleting Posts]
Post by: Nickito on October 30, 2017, 08:13:31 AM
There's no easy way to enforce it, but there's also no easy way to enforce the no PMing people host PMs
Should we remove that rule?


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Editing/Deleting Posts]
Post by: A Red Cube on October 30, 2017, 11:54:28 AM
I meant that if they want to edit it they should get someone to quote it I never said screenshot


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Editing/Deleting Posts]
Post by: Kirby on October 30, 2017, 02:10:38 PM
salt logs @temmie


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Editing/Deleting Posts]
Post by: dar on October 30, 2017, 02:31:09 PM
but what if I make a non-guidelines post and a mod deletes it?


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Editing/Deleting Posts]
Post by: A Red Cube on October 30, 2017, 03:06:59 PM
salt logs @temmie
Basically why I want to host a discord game lol
OP log plz nerf


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Editing/Deleting Posts]
Post by: Nickito on October 30, 2017, 03:11:04 PM
I meant that if they want to edit it they should get someone to quote it I never said screenshot
Or they could just post again


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Editing/Deleting Posts]
Post by: Leia on October 31, 2017, 07:58:19 PM
Voting Results

Do not delete/edit posts. You can edit typos, but you should not edit otherwise. If you change your mind about something, too bad. This can interfere with other people's strategies. The first time you edit a post will result in a warning, but the second time you edit a post will result in a modkill.

/pass:
Widow
Kassem: if you made a mistake make a second post correcting it. If you forgot to add something, quadruple post if needed.
TheStarvingOne
AuroraLights
greenviceroy

/change:
Temmie: we should be able to ONLY edit after somebody have posted and preferably, that it have been quoted
Nickito: editing posts should never ever be allowed, under the current rules editing typos is allowed. People can edit their posts and say they were changing typos.
Daenerys: Change for Nickito's reason.
KrispyKremeExtreme: Change for Nickito's reason.
Lu: Change for Nick's reason, it'd be too easy to lie about whether or not you were actually editing your typo or not
Lusamine: If it came down to it you could always just allow editing for 5 minutes considering it is currently impossible to tell anyways, unless someone screenshotted it. After 5 minutes or so it tells you if the post was edited or not. Before that, it doesn’t. I think that if someone was fixing typos 5 minutes is a good time limit. I mean, like I said you can’t really tell if someone edited it anyways before
Coach Huzzy: Change for Lusamine's reason.
Archi: Change for Lusamine's reason.
Kassem: Change for Lusamine's reason.

The majority is for change, so this rule will be changed. However, because people are pretty much split between two different reasonings, I'm going to write them both up and have a poll deciding which one will be put into play.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Editing/Deleting Posts]
Post by: Leia on October 31, 2017, 07:58:43 PM
Proposition #1: (Nick's reasoning)

Editing posts is never allowed, even if it's editing a typo. If you want to edit a typo or anything in your post, just post again.

Proposition #2: (Lusamine's reasoning)

You can edit your post up to 5 minutes after you post it. (No one will be able to tell because the forum does not keep track of edits for up to 5 minutes after the post).

Also, if no one comments on the current consequence (1st time warning, 2nd time modkill), then I'll just assume everyone is okay with it and add it on to whatever proposition makes it through.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Editing/Deleting Posts]
Post by: dar on November 01, 2017, 04:48:57 PM
>poll preposition1

And also, there probably should be a gameban if it's broken for the fourth/fifth time and up..


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Editing/Deleting Posts]
Post by: Chiral of Doom on November 01, 2017, 07:38:00 PM
voted Lusamine's


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Editing/Deleting Posts]
Post by: TotesAngel on November 01, 2017, 08:55:38 PM
Preposition one.

Lusamine's preposition could easily be abused.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Editing/Deleting Posts]
Post by: Shendelzare on November 01, 2017, 09:27:01 PM
I'm siding with nick's preposition.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Editing/Deleting Posts]
Post by: Kirby on November 01, 2017, 10:24:33 PM
Lusamine


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Editing/Deleting Posts]
Post by: TotesAngel on November 01, 2017, 10:36:00 PM
Guys, think about this before you vote Lusamine.

Say, Neprune was magically unbanned for this example, so he signs up to TWG C. He then posts a link to 18+ content, then quickly edits to something "twg related".

This is why it could easily be abused.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Editing/Deleting Posts]
Post by: Faiz on November 02, 2017, 03:13:58 AM
> far-fetched assumption


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Editing/Deleting Posts]
Post by: Abu on November 02, 2017, 03:26:24 AM
Umm that has nothing much to do with TWG

I could do that right now if you want


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Editing/Deleting Posts]
Post by: Leia on November 02, 2017, 05:00:10 AM
The thing is, Lusamine’s could still screw things up for the game- if there’s a very active discussion and people are posting every 10 seconds, having someone edit a post from a minute ago could seriously screw with perspectives and cause a lot of confusion


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Editing/Deleting Posts]
Post by: A Red Cube on November 02, 2017, 05:27:18 AM
Guys, think about this before you vote Lusamine.

Say, Neprune was magically unbanned for this example, so he signs up to TWG C. He then posts a link to 18+ content, then quickly edits to something "twg related".

This is why it could easily be abused.
1. Very unlikely to happen
2. Could happen anywhere nor just twg lmao


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Editing/Deleting Posts]
Post by: dar on November 02, 2017, 06:12:59 AM
a claim

"I'm mason"

edit

"I'm human, accidentally typed hunan."


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Editing/Deleting Posts]
Post by: A Red Cube on November 02, 2017, 06:15:54 AM
I mean uh
1. You get told that you're human when mason
2. Mason is good
3. Why would a wolf ever say I'm wolf and edit it. Wolves know that they should never say who they are, even if they'll edit it lol


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Editing/Deleting Posts]
Post by: memes on November 02, 2017, 06:21:29 AM
I mean uh
2. Mason is good
mason counts to wolf in human/wolf ratio right?
anyways if someone claims mason hes an obvious liar
you dont know if you are mason or not


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Editing/Deleting Posts]
Post by: Nickito on November 02, 2017, 09:50:43 AM
The thing is, Lusamine’s could still screw things up for the game- if there’s a very active discussion and people are posting every 10 seconds, having someone edit a post from a minute ago could seriously screw with perspectives and cause a lot of confusion
Yes
If it wasn't Lusamine I'd think this was a troll entry that accidentally gained traction
Not unlike a certain KCP contestant

Also has anyone even explained the merits of this rule, there don't seem to be any aside from the fact that there is still some sort of rule


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Editing/Deleting Posts]
Post by: A Red Cube on November 02, 2017, 10:28:57 AM
mason counts to wolf in human/wolf ratio right?
anyways if someone claims mason hes an obvious liar
you dont know if you are mason or not
It's a human that is red. Of course it'll count as a wolf to the HUMAN:wolf ratio


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Editing/Deleting Posts]
Post by: A Red Cube on November 02, 2017, 10:59:25 AM
What
*puts the joke definition link in here*


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Editing/Deleting Posts]
Post by: Leia on November 02, 2017, 12:51:26 PM
This poll is going to be closed tonight, so get your final thoughts in


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Editing/Deleting Posts]
Post by: Nickito on November 02, 2017, 01:09:19 PM
then we get the host PM
inb4 '/no, bad roles should have to fake Human PMs, and let TWG be determined by random.org'


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Editing/Deleting Posts]
Post by: Leia on November 02, 2017, 05:52:02 PM
Poll Results

Which rule should be in the game?

Proposition #1 (Nick's reasoning)   - 10 (52.6%)
Editing posts is never allowed, even if it's editing a typo. If you want to edit a typo or anything in your post, just post again.

Proposition #2 (Lusamine's reasoning)   - 9 (47.4%)
You can edit your post up to 5 minutes after you post it. (No one will be able to tell because the forum does not keep track of edits for up to 5 minutes after the post).

And so, with a 10-9 vote, Proposition #1 passes and goes into affect immediately.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Editing/Deleting Posts]
Post by: dar on November 02, 2017, 05:53:09 PM
I suggest the maniac intentional self-vote strat to be polled up, should it be allowed?


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Editing/Deleting Posts]
Post by: Nickito on November 02, 2017, 05:53:31 PM
Also has anyone even explained the merits of this rule, there don't seem to be any aside from the fact that there is still some sort of rule
none of the 9 voters ever explained it :/
oh well at least it didn't happen
I suggest the maniac intentional self-vote strat to be polled up, should it be allowed?
That should be involved in Rule 7, if Lu still goes in order of the old HQ rules.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Editing/Deleting Posts]
Post by: Leia on November 02, 2017, 05:54:01 PM
Alright! Next rule:

Do not post any PM conversations with the Host in the thread. You may paraphrase, but directly quoting or screenshoting will result in a modkill.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Editing/Deleting Posts]
Post by: Nickito on November 02, 2017, 05:54:28 PM
/pass

fairly straight forward


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Posting Host PMs]
Post by: dar on November 02, 2017, 05:55:21 PM
/pass


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Posting Host PMs]
Post by: dar on November 02, 2017, 05:55:52 PM
It is very much straightforward, and doesn't really need to be changed.



Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Posting Host PMs]
Post by: hyewon on November 02, 2017, 05:56:45 PM
/pass


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Posting Host PMs]
Post by: dar on November 02, 2017, 05:57:09 PM
/pass
It is very much straightforward, and doesn't really need to be changed.



note how i still follow the no edits rule


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Posting Host PMs]
Post by: Leia on November 02, 2017, 05:57:17 PM
/pass, I don't see anything wrong with it

And yes, I'm going in order of HQ rules. I've gotten a few PMs about rules that aren't in the HQ that people want to vote on, but those will start after we've gone through all of the HQ rules.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Posting Host PMs]
Post by: TotesAngel on November 02, 2017, 05:57:49 PM
/pass

Why would we want to change it?


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Posting Host PMs]
Post by: Bandero on November 02, 2017, 06:18:39 PM
/pass

Nothing wrong with it the way it is now.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Posting Host PMs]
Post by: Chiral of Doom on November 02, 2017, 08:33:17 PM
/Pass


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Posting Host PMs]
Post by: Shendelzare on November 02, 2017, 08:51:32 PM
Hold it.

Is it possible to change from Nick's to Lusamine's. (https://imgur.com/LjyKqFW)


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Posting Host PMs]
Post by: Chiral of Doom on November 02, 2017, 08:54:38 PM
that was sneaky

Widow [Nov 02 11:53 PM]:   here goes my tactic
Widow [Nov 02 11:53 PM]:   last minute change


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Posting Host PMs]
Post by: Shendelzare on November 02, 2017, 08:58:19 PM
Besides I was too late to analyze, sorry


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Posting Host PMs]
Post by: Kirby on November 03, 2017, 01:51:49 AM
/pass


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Posting Host PMs]
Post by: memes on November 03, 2017, 02:34:43 AM
/pass


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Posting Host PMs]
Post by: A Red Cube on November 03, 2017, 02:53:44 AM
This rule clearly states topic
*ahem widow*
/pass


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Posting Host PMs]
Post by: Shendelzare on November 03, 2017, 03:01:25 AM
rip

/pass


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Posting Host PMs]
Post by: Faiz on November 03, 2017, 06:01:40 AM
/pass


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Posting Host PMs]
Post by: Leia on November 03, 2017, 01:29:20 PM
Aight. I'm ending this one early, it's a clear yes.

Do not post any PM conversations with the Host in the thread. You may paraphrase, but directly quoting or screenshoting will result in a modkill.

/pass:
Nickito
Chasi
Daenerys
Lu
AuroraLights
greenviceroy
Archi
KrispyKremeExtreme
Kassem
TheStarvingOne
Temmie
Widow
Coach Huzzy

And so, by a clear and all encompassing majority, this rule has been passed into affect, effective immediately.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Gamethrowing]
Post by: Leia on November 03, 2017, 01:32:35 PM
Next up!

Try to Win. Gamethrowing, or purposely trying to make your team lose, is never allowed. If you make your side lose on purpose, then you will be modkilled and gamebanned from the next TWG.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Gamethrowing]
Post by: Chiral of Doom on November 03, 2017, 01:37:21 PM
/pass


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Gamethrowing]
Post by: A Red Cube on November 03, 2017, 01:39:50 PM
/passpasspassplz


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Gamethrowing]
Post by: Leia on November 03, 2017, 01:47:38 PM
/pass


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Gamethrowing]
Post by: Bandero on November 03, 2017, 01:51:15 PM
/pass


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Gamethrowing]
Post by: hyewon on November 03, 2017, 02:07:51 PM
/pass


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Gamethrowing]
Post by: Kirby on November 03, 2017, 02:12:28 PM
(https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/300368046110015488/307267040136134658/eyJ1cmwiOiJodHRwczovL2Rpc2NvcmQuc3RvcmFnZS5nb29nbGVhcGlzLmNvbS9hdHRhY2htZW50cy8yNTY2Mzc4MjQ1M.jpg)
take that as a pass


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Gamethrowing]
Post by: Nickito on November 03, 2017, 02:31:52 PM
/pass


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Gamethrowing]
Post by: TotesAngel on November 03, 2017, 02:39:06 PM
/pass

straight-foward


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Gamethrowing]
Post by: Faiz on November 03, 2017, 07:45:04 PM
/pass


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Gamethrowing]
Post by: Shendelzare on November 03, 2017, 08:23:46 PM
/oass


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Gamethrowing]
Post by: Kowhai on November 03, 2017, 08:32:31 PM
/oass


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Gamethrowing]
Post by: Chiral of Doom on November 03, 2017, 08:42:20 PM
/bleep


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Gamethrowing]
Post by: hyewon on November 03, 2017, 08:45:59 PM
/oasis


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Gamethrowing]
Post by: Chiral of Doom on November 03, 2017, 08:49:14 PM
/basis


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Gamethrowing]
Post by: Faiz on November 03, 2017, 09:17:56 PM
/basic


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Gamethrowing]
Post by: Shendelzare on November 04, 2017, 03:52:21 AM
*/pass

bah gawd


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Gamethrowing]
Post by: Kirby on November 04, 2017, 04:41:35 AM
/basic
/acidic


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Gamethrowing]
Post by: Chiral of Doom on November 04, 2017, 05:00:13 AM
/pH


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Gamethrowing]
Post by: dar on November 04, 2017, 05:04:12 AM
/passpasspasspasspass


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Gamethrowing]
Post by: Kirby on November 04, 2017, 05:08:37 AM
/pOH


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Gamethrowing]
Post by: Leia on November 04, 2017, 07:04:08 AM
Okay well this is also obviously passing

Try to Win. Gamethrowing, or purposely trying to make your team lose, is never allowed. If you make your side lose on purpose, then you will be modkilled and gamebanned from the next TWG.

/pass
KrispyKremeExtreme
Temmie
Lu
greenviceroy
Daenerys
Kassem
Nickito
AuroraLights
Archi
Coach Huzzy
Widow
Qazikol
Chasi

And so, with overwhelming and complete and total majority, this rule has been passed and goes into effect immediately.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Staying Dead]
Post by: Leia on November 04, 2017, 07:12:33 AM
I'm merging the next two rules because they're fairly similar.

If you're dead, STAY dead. With the exception of having a specific gimmick in the game, dead people must stay dead. If you're a Seer who died before they shared their results, too bad. If you know who the wolves are but you're dead, too bad. If you are dead and want to make the game over faster by helping the wolves, too bad. You just can't do anything. This means no PMing living players or posting content/information filled posts in the Lounge. If you do either of those things, it will result in one gameban.

Furthermore, living people can't talk to dead people in real life, so living players can't talk to dead players in the game. This means no PMing dead players once they've died. (This includes PMing the Maniac on who they should kill after they die). Doing so will result in a modkill and a gameban.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Staying Dead]
Post by: Kirby on November 04, 2017, 07:32:30 AM
/change
allow one last post in the topic, no pms or anything else


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Staying Dead]
Post by: dar on November 04, 2017, 07:49:40 AM
/change
allow one last post in the topic, no pms or anything else


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Staying Dead]
Post by: hyewon on November 04, 2017, 08:33:12 AM
/change
allow one last post in the topic, no pms or anything else


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Staying Dead]
Post by: memes on November 04, 2017, 08:36:16 AM
/change
allow one last post in the topic, no pms or anything else


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Staying Dead]
Post by: A Red Cube on November 04, 2017, 08:41:41 AM
/C kassem's


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Staying Dead]
Post by: Shendelzare on November 04, 2017, 08:54:20 AM
/c

Kassem's + Host's Choice


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Staying Dead]
Post by: Bandero on November 04, 2017, 09:02:11 AM
/change
allow one last post in the topic, no pms or anything else

Isn't that what is already in effect though?


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Staying Dead]
Post by: memes on November 04, 2017, 09:03:21 AM
Isn't that what is already in effect though?
yes


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Staying Dead]
Post by: Nickito on November 04, 2017, 09:21:22 AM
/change
thought the rule already allowed a last post
oh well let's make it super official


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Staying Dead]
Post by: Kirby on November 04, 2017, 10:21:19 AM
Isn't that what is already in effect though?
reading through leia's post it doesn't mention it
so let's make it official.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Staying Dead]
Post by: Leia on November 04, 2017, 11:35:08 AM
Isn't that what is already in effect though?
Hosts let people have last posts, but it's actually never stated in the rules.

/change to add a last post


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Staying Dead]
Post by: memes on November 04, 2017, 12:08:47 PM
Hosts let people have last posts, but it's actually never stated in the rules.

/change to add a last post
true
dem rules dont mention last posts though its a standard by now
so why not add it into the rules in the first place?


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Staying Dead]
Post by: Nickito on November 04, 2017, 07:48:14 PM
idk you'd have to ask Penguin, he had the HQ at that point


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Staying Dead]
Post by: Chiral of Doom on November 04, 2017, 07:54:12 PM
/change for Kass's reason


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Staying Dead]
Post by: Leia on November 06, 2017, 02:26:41 PM
Results!

If you're dead, STAY dead. With the exception of having a specific gimmick in the game, dead people must stay dead. If you're a Seer who died before they shared their results, too bad. If you know who the wolves are but you're dead, too bad. If you are dead and want to make the game over faster by helping the wolves, too bad. You just can't do anything. This means no PMing living players or posting content/information filled posts in the Lounge. If you do either of those things, it will result in one gameban.

Furthermore, living people can't talk to dead people in real life, so living players can't talk to dead players in the game. This means no PMing dead players once they've died. (This includes PMing the Maniac on who they should kill after they die). Doing so will result in a modkill and a gameban.


/change
Kassem: allow one last post in the topic, no pms or anything else
Chasi: Kassem's reasoning
Daenerys: Kassem's reasoning
TheStarvingOne: Kassem's reasoning
Temmie: Kassem's reasoning
Widow: Kassem's reasoning + host's choice
Archi: Kassem's reasoning
Nickito: Kassem's reasonig
Lu: Kassem's reasoning
KrispyKremeExtreme: Kassem's reasoning

Andd by complete agreement and consent we'll now be voting on Kassem's modification to the rule.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Staying Dead]
Post by: Leia on November 06, 2017, 02:27:30 PM
Aight this has been changed to include Kassem's proposition.

If you're dead, STAY dead. With the exception of having a specific gimmick in the game, dead people must stay dead. You can have one last-post to write anything you want, but after that, you can not PM any living players, post anything in the game thread, or post anything with game-related content in the lounge. Breaking this rule will result in one gameban.

Furthermore, living people can't talk to dead people in real life, so living players can't talk to dead players in the game. This means no PMing dead players once they've died. (This includes PMing the Maniac on who they should kill after they die). Doing so will result in a modkill and a gameban.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Staying Dead 1.1]
Post by: Nickito on November 06, 2017, 03:27:47 PM
/pass

not really sure if this vote is necessary but it can't hurt


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Staying Dead 1.1]
Post by: A Red Cube on November 06, 2017, 03:28:38 PM
/pass

not really sure if this vote is necessary but it can't hurt


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Staying Dead 1.1]
Post by: Bandero on November 06, 2017, 03:30:53 PM
/pass


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Staying Dead 1.1]
Post by: dar on November 06, 2017, 03:32:52 PM
/pass

not really sure if this vote is necessary but it can't hurt


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Staying Dead 1.1]
Post by: Leia on November 06, 2017, 03:41:31 PM
/pass


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Staying Dead 1.1]
Post by: hyewon on November 06, 2017, 05:17:46 PM
/pass


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Staying Dead 1.1]
Post by: Abu on November 06, 2017, 06:19:26 PM
Can we please discuss the sacrifice a wolf strategy after we're done all the current rules

Unless all the wolves agree on it, forcefully sacrificing a wolf that hasn't agreed to it is basically gamethrowing.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Staying Dead 1.1]
Post by: Leia on November 06, 2017, 07:23:17 PM
Can we please discuss the sacrifice a wolf strategy after we're done all the current rules

Unless all the wolves agree on it, forcefully sacrificing a wolf that hasn't agreed to it is basically gamethrowing.
yeah I'd like this. I think a lot of it has to do with hosts just being aware of what's going on and making good judgements but it would be good if there was a standard they could compare to at least


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Staying Dead 1.1]
Post by: Chiral of Doom on November 07, 2017, 08:30:22 PM
/passss


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Staying Dead 1.1]
Post by: Nickito on November 07, 2017, 08:56:12 PM
Can we please discuss the sacrifice a wolf strategy after we're done all the current rules

Unless all the wolves agree on it, forcefully sacrificing a wolf that hasn't agreed to it is basically gamethrowing.
Would a Wolf Shaman claiming to see the Wolf as red to gain trust count as gamethrowing?
Would getting the Brutal Wolf lynched to get a Guardian pet killed be gamethrowing?
Would joining a bandwagon against a fellow Wolf early to avoid seem suspicious be gamethrowing?

We need to figure out what is game throwing and what isn't. Imo there should also make a rule against fake gamethrowing (i.e being lynched as a Wolf and naming 3 random players as the other Wolves)


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Staying Dead 1.1]
Post by: Leia on November 08, 2017, 12:23:24 PM
Well it's been 48 hours and it's clearly passed, expect to see a new topic and updated format tonight


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Staying Dead 1.1]
Post by: Nickito on November 08, 2017, 08:04:30 PM
I can't imagine this next one being too controversial (don't communicate with the dead)


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Staying Dead 1.1]
Post by: Chiral of Doom on November 08, 2017, 08:11:07 PM
lmao, sharing game info with other dead people is okay tho, as long as both people are dead right


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Staying Dead 1.1]
Post by: Leia on November 09, 2017, 05:49:23 AM
Results:

If you're dead, STAY dead. With the exception of having a specific gimmick in the game, dead people must stay dead. You can have one last-post to write anything you want, but after that, you can not PM any living players, post anything in the game thread, or post anything with game-related content in the lounge. Breaking this rule will result in one gameban.

Furthermore, living people can't talk to dead people in real life, so living players can't talk to dead players in the game. This means no PMing dead players once they've died. (This includes PMing the Maniac on who they should kill after they die). Doing so will result in a modkill and a gameban.

/pass:
Nickito
greenviceroy
Chasi
Lu
Daenerys
Archi
KrispyKremeExtreme

So this passes and is now in effect


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Staying Dead 1.1]
Post by: Leia on November 09, 2017, 05:50:08 AM
Next one:

Try to be active during the game. Whenever a game starts, the host sends out a confirmation PM to all players. Anyone who doesn't respond to the PM or do anything in-game within 3 real life days will be modkilled. Warning PMs will also be sent to people who have been inactive for 3 in-game segments (nights/days) where if they don't respond or do anything in-game within 3 real life days, they, once again, get modkilled. YOU signed up for the game so it's YOUR responsibility to be active.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Activity in Game]
Post by: Bandero on November 09, 2017, 05:52:28 AM
/pass


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Activity in Game]
Post by: A Red Cube on November 09, 2017, 05:53:15 AM
Not sure if it's counted as pass or change but
/change ?
Have replacements so instead of modkilled,  have those who didn't get to sign ups replace


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Activity in Game]
Post by: Leia on November 09, 2017, 06:07:32 AM
/change
Have a list of replacements for after the sign-up list fills. Instead of modkilling these players, have them be replaced by someone on the list. However, if there were no overflow sign-ups to go into the list, then the inactive player would just be modkilled.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Activity in Game]
Post by: A Red Cube on November 09, 2017, 06:09:29 AM
Seems better^
Tho, the replacements can also sign mid game or have the "inactive" ask someone to replace them even when there's no overflow


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Activity in Game]
Post by: Kirby on November 09, 2017, 06:40:05 AM
/change for what Lu said
Results:

If you're dead, STAY dead. With the exception of having a specific gimmick in the game, dead people must stay dead. If you're a Seer who died before they shared their results, too bad. If you know who the wolves are but you're dead, too bad. If you are dead and want to make the game over faster by helping the wolves, too bad. You just can't do anything. This means no PMing living players or posting content/information filled posts in the Lounge. If you do either of those things, it will result in one gameban.

Furthermore, living people can't talk to dead people in real life, so living players can't talk to dead players in the game. This means no PMing dead players once they've died. (This includes PMing the Maniac on who they should kill after they die). Doing so will result in a modkill and a gameban.

/pass:
Nickito
greenviceroy
Chasi
Lu
Daenerys
Archi
KrispyKremeExtreme

So this passes and is now in effect
isn't this the same as the original?
I don't see the one last post change there


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Activity in Game]
Post by: Leia on November 09, 2017, 08:18:28 AM
Oh whoops I copy pasted from the wrong post, it's correct now


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Activity in Game]
Post by: TotesAngel on November 09, 2017, 10:31:10 AM
/piss

...


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Activity in Game]
Post by: Nickito on November 09, 2017, 11:09:04 AM
/pass

Replacements are messy and they removes incentive to keep playing, because there is no guilt involved


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Activity in Game]
Post by: Chiral of Doom on November 09, 2017, 12:49:47 PM
/change for Lu


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Activity in Game]
Post by: hyewon on November 09, 2017, 06:41:30 PM
/change for ludidoo


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Activity in Game]
Post by: Shendelzare on November 10, 2017, 05:59:14 AM
/change

Replacements is host's discretion/choice. One can even make replacements and replace someone who quit for valid reasons (exams, deceased someone irl, etc...), but not those who had an invalid reason or modkill by inactivity. This, however, requires an Outbox to record every single message that you sent to someone who quit.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Activity in Game]
Post by: dar on November 10, 2017, 07:00:15 PM
/change
There is literally no reason for modkill, self-votes are enough punishment.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Activity in Game]
Post by: Bandero on November 10, 2017, 07:12:41 PM
The thing is, self votes could in theory change the course of a game.

Say there are three players and one wolf left in a day. Two of the players lynch the wolf, but the inactive person has racked up three self-votes, so they are lynched. The wolf kills a player the next night, and the wolf wins because of something out of everyone's control.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Activity in Game]
Post by: Leia on November 12, 2017, 07:21:01 PM
Results of vote:

Try to be active during the game. Whenever a game starts, the host sends out a confirmation PM to all players. Anyone who doesn't respond to the PM or do anything in-game within 3 real life days will be modkilled. Warning PMs will also be sent to people who have been inactive for 3 in-game segments (nights/days) where if they don't respond or do anything in-game within 3 real life days, they, once again, get modkilled. YOU signed up for the game so it's YOUR responsibility to be active.

/pass:
greenviceroy
Nickito: Replacements are messy and they removes incentive to keep playing, because there is no guilt involved

/change:
Temmie: Have replacements so instead of modkilled,  have those who didn't get to sign ups replace
Lu: Have a list of replacements for after the sign-up list fills. Instead of modkilling these players, have them be replaced by someone on the list. However, if there were no overflow sign-ups to go into the list, then the inactive player would just be modkilled
Kassem: Lu's reasoning
KrispyKremeExtreme: Lu's reasoning
Daenerys: Lu's reasoning
Widow: Replacements is host's discretion/choice. One can even make replacements and replace someone who quit for valid reasons (exams, deceased someone irl, etc...), but not those who had an invalid reason or modkill by inactivity. This, however, requires an Outbox to record every single message that you sent to someone who quit.
Chasi: There is literally no reason for modkill, self-votes are enough punishment.

Majority is to change, so changed it will be. Incoming changes on next post-


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Activity in Game]
Post by: Leia on November 12, 2017, 07:28:46 PM
So I tried to add a bit of everything proposed?

Try to be active during the game. Whenever a game starts, the host sends out a confirmation PM to all players. Anyone who doesn't respond to the PM or do anything in-game within 3 real life days will be replaced by someone on a list of overflow sign-ups. However, if there is no one on the list, the player is modkilled. Furthermore, if you have signed up for the game only to realize that you won't be able to commit to being active due to real life issues, you may replace out if you have a reason deemed valid by the host.

vote em up


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Activity in Game]
Post by: dar on November 12, 2017, 07:30:11 PM
/pass
I actually like this version.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Activity in Game 1.1]
Post by: Nickito on November 12, 2017, 07:33:10 PM
/pass


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Activity in Game 1.1]
Post by: Bandero on November 12, 2017, 07:34:25 PM
/pass


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Activity in Game 1.1]
Post by: Abu on November 12, 2017, 07:51:48 PM
/pass


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Activity in Game 1.1]
Post by: Chiral of Doom on November 12, 2017, 08:03:53 PM
/pass


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Activity in Game 1.1]
Post by: hyewon on November 12, 2017, 09:09:14 PM
/ssap


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Activity in Game 1.1]
Post by: dar on November 12, 2017, 10:06:31 PM
/ssap for /pass's reason


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Activity in Game 1.1]
Post by: Leia on November 13, 2017, 07:53:07 AM
/pass


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Activity in Game 1.1]
Post by: Leia on November 16, 2017, 07:56:10 AM
Try to be active during the game. Whenever a game starts, the host sends out a confirmation PM to all players. Anyone who doesn't respond to the PM or do anything in-game within 3 real life days will be replaced by someone on a list of overflow sign-ups. However, if there is no one on the list, the player is modkilled. Furthermore, if you have signed up for the game only to realize that you won't be able to commit to being active due to real life issues, you may replace out if you have a reason deemed valid by the host.

/pass:
Chasi
Archi
Nickito
greenviceroy
Lusamine
KKE
Daenerys
Lu

has passed


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Currently: Activity in Game 1.1]
Post by: Leia on November 16, 2017, 08:03:03 PM
Does anyone have a problem with these rules or can we just move on to the next thing

PM the Host all TWG related conversations
As a Host, we choose an MVP at the end. If you don't give us your thoughts, we assume you did nothing and you cannot get MVP.
Vote during the Day
If you don't vote, you will get an extra vote against you. This may not be bad, but it could be a deciding vote. If you don't vote twice in a row, you get two votes. If you don't vote thrice in a row, you get three votes. The cycle continues, but you should be dead pretty soon. If you vote in the middle of the cycle, the cycle resets. Strategies will revolve around these votes.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Read new post]
Post by: Kowhai on November 16, 2017, 08:04:26 PM
Get rid of Vote during the Day, it interferes with the lynching process and the inactivity rule should be enough anyway.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Read new post]
Post by: Chiral of Doom on November 16, 2017, 08:20:06 PM
/pass


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Read new post]
Post by: dar on November 16, 2017, 08:23:39 PM
/change (The rule just mentions it being optional.. Hosts have been enforcing it. Let's make it not optional to share Game-related PMs to the host, except for bids (you'd only show other players your bid if you want to improve it before it makes the finals))
and
/pass


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Read new post]
Post by: Kowhai on November 16, 2017, 08:25:15 PM
/pass
/reject


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Read new post]
Post by: Chiral of Doom on November 16, 2017, 08:27:08 PM
OH WE ARE VOTING FOR BOTH
/pass
/pass


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Read new post]
Post by: Kowhai on November 16, 2017, 08:35:56 PM
Get rid of Vote during the Day, it interferes with the lynching process and the inactivity rule should be enough anyway.
Can someone at least acknowledge this please


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Read new post]
Post by: Chiral of Doom on November 16, 2017, 09:24:07 PM
I feel like we shouldn't get rid of the vote during Day/self lynch build-up rule just well, it's something everyone is supposed to do and there should be at least some form of a consequence for not doing it. Even if inactivity rule is still there, we can't just let people go and not vote without some form of repercussion.

Everyone on the team is supposed to be active, and if some people aren't voting (which is what they are supposed to be doing), there should be some kind of game consequence for the actions of those inactive players where the entire team might end up having the suffer, and the consequence in this case will be potential lynch interference whether people like it or not.




Title: Re: TWG Rules [Read new post]
Post by: Kowhai on November 16, 2017, 09:27:26 PM
Enhance the inactivity rule so that people have to make 1 lynch post and 1 non-lynch post every three days (in-game days for the former, don't want lazy hosts getting people modkilled). That doesn't get in the way of the lynching process and frustrate the town because because they just want to lynch one bloody wolf but they're able to lynch the one guy with 4 self votes already and get away with it.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Read new post]
Post by: hyewon on November 16, 2017, 09:30:58 PM
big words yikes


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Read new post]
Post by: Chiral of Doom on November 16, 2017, 09:48:46 PM
The thing is, yeah is is incredibly frustrating when that happens, but, just..I mean, TWG is a team effort. If there are people in the team who don't try and instead be inactive, the whole team is probably gonna have to take a blow because of that some way.

I just think the current system with the self votes is fine as it is. At least from my perspective, I think it will be a lot easier for hosts to tally self votes than to check the topic every 3 days to see who post/who didn't.

However, I certainly feel that there is no harm in having your idea with the once every 3 days thing be given a test try to see how it goes, since it clearly seems better than the previous rule we had that turned out to be a complete modkill disaster. If it works fine and we like it better than the self vote system, then we should implement it.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Read new post]
Post by: Kowhai on November 16, 2017, 10:04:57 PM
I'd say it's basically the same thing, except if you get too many self-votes, you don't replace the proper lynch target and waste valuable time, you're just killed on the side and the town is able to keep going. That's not much of a burden for the host, since they can track it in the same way that they track self-votes, currently, and your first paragraph doesn't really make sense as an argument. I reckon it's pretty much a direct upgrade.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Read new post]
Post by: Chiral of Doom on November 16, 2017, 10:15:30 PM
idek
i say we should test your idea out to see how it goes without the whole self vote thing
if it's good then yay let's do it



Title: Re: TWG Rules [Read new post]
Post by: Kirby on November 17, 2017, 02:16:56 AM
/pass /change host's choice


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Read new post]
Post by: Bandero on November 17, 2017, 05:48:25 AM
/pass

/change

Instead of having them lynched, just have them modkilled so they don't affect the game too much.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Read new post]
Post by: Nickito on November 17, 2017, 05:51:15 AM
/pass
/Pass

Nothing to say here


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Read new post]
Post by: Abu on November 17, 2017, 05:54:36 AM
/pass
/reject

Self-lynching does not exist on many forums, just have an inactivity rule.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Read new post]
Post by: Nickito on November 17, 2017, 06:04:30 AM
Just because they don't have a rule doesn't mean we can't have it


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Read new post]
Post by: Chiral of Doom on November 17, 2017, 06:06:14 AM
ya we should always keep our mind open and try new things and see how they work, if they are more convenient and likable for the players then we leave it like that. not everything has to be based off traditional rules  @Nick


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Read new post]
Post by: Leia on November 17, 2017, 06:09:17 AM
Just because they don't have a rule doesn't mean we can't have it
This ^

Part of the reason that other forums don’t have the self-lynching rule is that a) they have significantly longer day/night phases and b) they end their days with a hammer, not a timed lynch, so the moment that someone gets more than 50% of the votes the day ends and the person is lynched. Having a self-vote would screw with those mechanics.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Read new post]
Post by: Nickito on November 17, 2017, 10:00:03 AM
But don't a lot of forums have programs which post to end the day? We can't do that unless someone knows how to o program and Matt lets us


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Read new post]
Post by: Cosmic on November 19, 2017, 02:10:36 AM
The thing is, yeah is is incredibly frustrating when that happens, but, just..I mean, TWG is a team effort. If there are people in the team who don't try and instead be inactive, the whole team is probably gonna have to take a blow because of that some way.

I just think the current system with the self votes is fine as it is. At least from my perspective, I think it will be a lot easier for hosts to tally self votes than to check the topic every 3 days to see who post/who didn't.

However, I certainly feel that there is no harm in having your idea with the once every 3 days thing be given a test try to see how it goes, since it clearly seems better than the previous rule we had that turned out to be a complete modkill disaster. If it works fine and we like it better than the self vote system, then we should implement it.
but it is a strategy to not vote ok


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Read new post]
Post by: Kowhai on November 19, 2017, 02:26:51 AM
If you choose to lynch no one, you say so
If that affects your strategy, then it's a bad strategy and causes inactivity in games.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Read new post]
Post by: Cosmic on November 19, 2017, 02:39:09 AM
Not lynching doesn’t equal inactivity. Just because someone doesn’t say anything, doesn’t mean they aren’t taking part in the game, actively reading, sending pm’s etc.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Read new post]
Post by: Kowhai on November 19, 2017, 02:41:21 AM
Inactivity means not participating. If you are not posting or PMing, you are not participating.
(Also, sending PMs counts)


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Read new post]
Post by: Cosmic on November 19, 2017, 02:46:48 AM
but I said that if you aren’t posting doesn’t mean you aren’t sending pm’s, which counts as participating, so it’s fine.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Read new post]
Post by: Kowhai on November 19, 2017, 02:54:05 AM
You also need to lynch though. If you aren't lynching, you're being a liability to the game. You can choose to lynch no one, but you should at least say so. I have heard complaints about your lack of activity, so yes, you should change.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Read new post]
Post by: Cosmic on November 19, 2017, 03:07:23 AM
didn’t think everyone was actually taking this whole think so seriously, you all need to be a bit more laid back, if I don’t lynch once or twice the game isn’t going to fall in to ruin. becoming too gimmicky game wise and too serious rules wise. if I want to play that way, let me. If I’m still actively participating in the game by using Pm’s etc., i don’t see the problem. I just personally prefer to stay quiet. If you don’t like that, that’s fine, but you shouldn't make it out that I should find a different way to play. It literally doesn’t affect the entire game, and If it would, I wouldn’t do it. just my opinion.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Read new post]
Post by: Cosmic on November 19, 2017, 03:26:11 AM
sorry if that comes off in the wrong way, not trying to start a massive argument or complain at anyone specifically, just wanted to give my opinion.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Read new post]
Post by: Chiral of Doom on November 19, 2017, 06:47:30 AM
woah..

Well, you can choose to not lynch if you say so I reckon, but it’s a really easy way to have people suspicious of you IMO, and they can easily call you out and get you almost lynched where you would have to reveal your role which is bad if you are a power town role.

also, i hope when you say that you are actively PMing in game, you mean that you engage with other alliance members as any role besides independent ones and that you aren’t just PMing the host. because last game was honestly a train wreck and no one PMed me anything besides a Fool despite the fact that an alliance could have easily been made with me


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Read new post]
Post by: hyewon on November 19, 2017, 09:01:56 AM
Are you seriously still butthurt about that


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Read new post]
Post by: Cosmic on November 19, 2017, 09:39:16 AM
woah..

Well, you can choose to not lynch if you say so I reckon, but it’s a really easy way to have people suspicious of you IMO, and they can easily call you out and get you almost lynched where you would have to reveal your role which is bad if you are a power town role.

also, i hope when you say that you are actively PMing in game, you mean that you engage with other alliance members as any role besides independent ones and that you aren’t just PMing the host. because last game was honestly a train wreck and no one PMed me anything besides a Fool despite the fact that an alliance could have easily been made with me
yes that’s what I mean

and last game I stated in the lounge that I had a load to exams in the week, as the game obviously went on far longer than I expected it to (basically I signed up thinking it wouldn’t be over becafore I had to do loads of revision, but because of the combined inactivity it wasn’t)


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Read new post]
Post by: Leia on November 19, 2017, 01:21:54 PM
But don't a lot of forums have programs which post to end the day? We can't do that unless someone knows how to o program and Matt lets us
I mean yeah, but it's not needed. It's more that once someone hammers, no one can take back their votes and everyone just waits for the host to update.
also, i hope when you say that you are actively PMing in game, you mean that you engage with other alliance members as any role besides independent ones and that you aren’t just PMing the host. because last game was honestly a train wreck and no one PMed me anything besides a Fool despite the fact that an alliance could have easily been made with me
Really agree ^^

Part of what made last game such a mess was because no one was PMing or voting or engaging or doing anything really (also partially on huz cause he never updated). I think it's fine if you don't want to post or vote Illogically, but you need to be doing something in the game. PM the host thorough notes about who you think is scum, or PM other players who are proven town.

So I don't think we need the lynch during the day rule, the inactivity rule should be enough.

/pass
/reject


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Read new post]
Post by: Leia on November 19, 2017, 01:25:15 PM
So they're both currently on track to pass- this topic got really active in the last 12 hours though, so are there any last things people want to get in before I update


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Read new post]
Post by: Cosmic on November 19, 2017, 04:30:39 PM
/pass
/reject


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Read new post]
Post by: hyewon on November 19, 2017, 04:34:39 PM
/pass
/reject


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Read new post]
Post by: Leia on November 19, 2017, 06:19:04 PM
not helpful I just need to know if people want to discuss this more


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Read new post]
Post by: Chiral of Doom on November 19, 2017, 06:20:05 PM
/pass
/rekject

I think we good @Lu


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Read new post]
Post by: Leia on November 19, 2017, 07:08:29 PM
thank youuuu

PM the Host all TWG related conversations
As a Host, we choose an MVP at the end. If you don't give us your thoughts, we assume you did nothing and you cannot get MVP.

/pass:
KrispyKremeExtreme
Qazikol
Archi
Kassem
greenviceroy
Nickito
Lusamine
Lu
IllogicallyIllogical
Daenerys

/change:
Chasi: (The rule just mentions it being optional.. Hosts have been enforcing it. Let's make it not optional to share Game-related PMs to the host, except for bids (you'd only show other players your bid if you want to improve it before it makes the finals))

This passes


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Read new post]
Post by: Leia on November 19, 2017, 07:13:36 PM
You all need reasoning Illogically/Daenerys/KKE to do anything but pass, it can literally be as small as "Qazikol's reasoning" or something like that but it needs to be there for me to count it


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Read new post]
Post by: hyewon on November 19, 2017, 07:16:27 PM
fIIiine

Qazikol's reasoning

happy


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Read new post]
Post by: Chiral of Doom on November 19, 2017, 07:17:14 PM
I didn’t do reasoning for this?


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Read new post]
Post by: Leia on November 19, 2017, 07:18:00 PM
I didn’t do reasoning for this?
oh oops no it was just Daenerys, you and Illogical had a lot


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Read new post]
Post by: Leia on November 19, 2017, 07:24:14 PM
Vote during the Day
If you don't vote, you will get an extra vote against you. This may not be bad, but it could be a deciding vote. If you don't vote twice in a row, you get two votes. If you don't vote thrice in a row, you get three votes. The cycle continues, but you should be dead pretty soon. If you vote in the middle of the cycle, the cycle resets. Strategies will revolve around these votes.

/pass:
Chasi
Archi
Nickito

/change:
Kassem- host's choice
greenviceroy- Instead of having them lynched, just have them modkilled so they don't affect the game too much.

/reject:
Qazikol-  it interferes with the lynching process and the inactivity rule should be enough anyway.
Lusamine- Self-lynching does not exist on many forums, just have an inactivity rule.
Lu- I don't think we need the lynch during the day rule, the inactivity rule should be enough
IllogicallyIllogical- here (http://www.flipline.com/forum/index.php?topic=35632.msg1923215#msg1923215), here (http://www.flipline.com/forum/index.php?topic=35632.msg1923226#msg1923226), and here (http://www.flipline.com/forum/index.php?topic=35632.msg1923495#msg1923495)
Daenerys- Qazikol's reasoning
KrispyKremeExtreme- here (http://www.flipline.com/forum/index.php?topic=35632.msg1923351#msg1923351)

And this one is rejected


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Read new post]
Post by: dar on November 19, 2017, 07:25:34 PM
Welp, Self-voting will have to be a gimmick now.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Read new post]
Post by: Nickito on November 19, 2017, 07:26:24 PM
Have we voted on activity yet


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Read new post]
Post by: Leia on November 19, 2017, 07:34:02 PM
Ayy we're done with the HQ stuff (yes Nick we did)

Momentary hiatus while I update the OP and PM people about the rules that they've PMed me


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Read new post]
Post by: Abu on November 22, 2017, 08:03:19 PM
Will we vote on banning any sacrifice the wolf strategies?

People continue to try using those, usually against the will of one of the wolves, and it is more or less game throwing. But people say it’s a strategy.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Read new post]
Post by: Kowhai on November 22, 2017, 08:04:37 PM
I mean, it turned out to be a pretty good strategy in Morality


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Read new post]
Post by: Chiral of Doom on November 22, 2017, 08:06:29 PM
I feel like it should be allowed only if the other wolves agree to it.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Read new post]
Post by: Nickito on November 22, 2017, 08:09:07 PM
I think it should be allowed as long as there is no malicious intent

3 Wolves and 4 Town, a Townie is being lynched, want to sacrifice a Wolf? Go for it! Can't possibly let that Vigilante that's not on the role list win.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Read new post]
Post by: A Red Cube on November 23, 2017, 03:39:26 AM
I still hate how HyperGreen brutal wolf who was already being lynched didn't like us lynching him and started saying we're not good teammates for not protecting him and said he won't kill somebody that we are doubting is a blue role. That is not a game throwing sacrifice a wolf as green said.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Read new post]
Post by: Chiral of Doom on November 23, 2017, 04:28:09 AM
ya
should def make sure teammates are okay with it ^


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Read new post]
Post by: Nickito on November 23, 2017, 05:03:30 AM
What
Should we make sure that everyone who's lynched is okay with it


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Read new post]
Post by: Pizzaccino on November 23, 2017, 05:06:52 AM
What
Should we make sure that everyone who's lynched is okay with it
Probably. I mean people have to agree, no?


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Read new post]
Post by: Abu on November 23, 2017, 05:09:26 AM
We are talking about purposely lynching wolf teammates.

If they’re not okay with being sacrificed then it should be banned.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Read new post]
Post by: Kowhai on November 23, 2017, 05:10:09 AM
Probably. I mean people have to agree, no?
Human: You are a wolf
Wolf: I don't want to be lynched
Human: Okay nvm


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Read new post]
Post by: Pizzaccino on November 23, 2017, 05:14:24 AM
Human: You are a wolf
Wolf: I don't want to be lynched
Human: Okay nvm
XD Like I said, I don’t play TWG.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Read new post]
Post by: Kowhai on November 23, 2017, 05:15:55 AM
Then why exactly are you attempting to weigh in on a controversial topic which requires knowledge of TWG to be understood?


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Read new post]
Post by: Pizzaccino on November 23, 2017, 05:16:37 AM
Then why exactly are you attempting to weigh in on a controversial topic which requires knowledge of TWG to be understood?
Because I’m bored? But, I suppose I need to check on other things.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Read new post]
Post by: Abu on November 23, 2017, 05:16:48 AM
Then why exactly are you attempting to weigh in on a controversial topic which requires knowledge of TWG to be understood?
Because he wants to.


Title: I’m bored.
Post by: Pizzaccino on November 23, 2017, 05:21:12 AM
Because he wants to.
^^^What he said, and because of what I said.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Read new post]
Post by: Nickito on November 23, 2017, 05:44:39 AM
We are talking about purposely lynching wolf teammates.

If they’re not okay with being sacrificed then it should be banned.
There are times that sacrificing a Wolf is a good idea, but more often than not it isn't.
In some situations refusing to be sacrificed should count as gamethrowing


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Read new post]
Post by: Leia on November 23, 2017, 06:35:29 AM
Ok, but what are those situations


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Read new post]
Post by: Nickito on November 23, 2017, 08:59:48 AM
It's situational, it should be up to the host


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Read new post]
Post by: Chiral of Doom on November 23, 2017, 12:23:45 PM
I feel like if it’s obvious they are gonna be lynched the next day or they are obvious wolf because of something it wouldn’t count as gamethrowing


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Leia on November 23, 2017, 07:51:40 PM
Poll, vote 'n explain so I'll know whether or not I should make this into an actual rule and we should vote on it and stuff


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Chiral of Doom on November 23, 2017, 07:57:37 PM
I voted Kind Of.

Like, IMO, there shouldn't be a rule to completely ban it, but at the same time, there are scenarios where sacrificing a wolf would be a great strategy (esp if the wolf is obvious and most likely will be lynched the next day). It really depends on the game.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Abu on November 23, 2017, 08:03:28 PM
Perhaps we could just add on somewhere that if a wolf does not agree to it then it is not allowed.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Bandero on November 23, 2017, 08:10:03 PM
I voted kind of. It can be an okay strategy, as long as the wolf is okay with it, or he was super obvious.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Nickito on November 23, 2017, 08:31:52 PM
No, it would just be limiting strategies.
If it's clearly gamethrowing, it's covered under the gamethrowing rule. We don't need a separate rule for every kind of gamethrowing.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Leia on November 23, 2017, 08:43:00 PM
I agree with what Nickito said- we don't need a rule for every type of gamethrowing. Sacrifice the wolf strategies should be covered in gamethrowing anyways. If the host thinks that a wolf is purposely trying to make their team loose by using this strategy, then it's gamethrowing and there will be consequences. . If the host doesn't think so, then it's not gamethrowing.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Chiral of Doom on November 23, 2017, 09:26:09 PM
change vote from kind of to no for nicks rwsson


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Shendelzare on November 23, 2017, 09:29:16 PM
Nickito's reason is enough to vote No for me.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: hyewon on November 23, 2017, 09:30:39 PM
no for nick's reason


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Abu on November 24, 2017, 04:07:08 AM
I agree with what Nickito said- we don't need a rule for every type of gamethrowing. Sacrifice the wolf strategies should be covered in gamethrowing anyways. If the host thinks that a wolf is purposely trying to make their team loose by using this strategy, then it's gamethrowing and there will be consequences. . If the host doesn't think so, then it's not gamethrowing.
Should we have a TWG Guide then with examples of what constitutes it? It could help new players a lot.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Cosmic on November 24, 2017, 04:30:16 AM
Let’s not try and ban strategy please. No.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Nickito on November 24, 2017, 04:59:59 AM
Should we have a TWG Guide then with examples of what constitutes it? It could help new players a lot.
If they are trying to make their team lose on purpose it's gamethrowing.
If it's not intentional, it's just bad gameplay, and we shouldn't have a rule against that.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: dar on November 24, 2017, 06:31:01 AM
Kinda
Perhaps we could just add on somewhere that if a wolf does not agree to it then it is not allowed.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Nickito on November 24, 2017, 07:36:57 AM
What if the Wolf is gamethrowing by not agreeing


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: MariaYuki on November 24, 2017, 09:08:49 AM
If what you mean is like Nickito's strategy on N3/D3 of Choosing Faction, I think it should be allowed as long as the person who you target is okay with it.
If you mean wolves lynching wolves, it should only be if an independent role is about to win.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Kowhai on November 24, 2017, 03:02:29 PM
It should be allowed for more than that, as there are more potential strategies regarding it.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Nickito on November 24, 2017, 03:27:52 PM
Like Qazikol helped get 3 wolves killed, and everyone thought he was confirmed town


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Abu on November 24, 2017, 04:02:35 PM
Like Qazikol helped get 3 wolves killed, and everyone thought he was confirmed town
If Qazikol gets 3 wolves killed on purpose and the wolves didn't consent to it then no. It would easily backfire, and now the wolves have had their gaming experience ruined by a gamble.

If a wolf says "hey, Qazikol, make me seem evil if anyone asks" then it's a different story.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Nickito on November 24, 2017, 04:05:24 PM
By that logic HyperGreen would be banned from TWG forever


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: A Red Cube on November 24, 2017, 04:06:18 PM
By that logic HyperGreen would be banned from TWG forever
Basically^


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Atomic on November 24, 2017, 04:08:31 PM
imho no because of the strategies, like the one I agreed with qazikol to get lynched in Morality (yet I did not expect to be psychoed)


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Abu on November 24, 2017, 04:10:40 PM
By that logic HyperGreen would be banned from TWG forever
Then ban him forever?


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Nickito on November 24, 2017, 04:15:07 PM
oh you actually want him to stop playing
um it's like if we wanted to ban me because I sometimes take risks, or if we made the N1 wolfee random to be fair to Cosmic


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: hyewon on November 24, 2017, 04:32:57 PM
um you realize he can see this


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Abu on November 24, 2017, 04:42:00 PM
I don’t want him to stop playing, I’m just saying that if this rule would ban him then sure, it’s a rule.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Cosmic on November 24, 2017, 04:49:54 PM
oh you actually want him to stop playing
um it's like if we wanted to ban me because I sometimes take risks, or if we made the N1 wolfee random to be fair to Cosmic
I think this is a good rule proposal

I therefore ask we poll this brilliant idea of randomising the N1 Wolfee.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Chiral of Doom on November 24, 2017, 05:01:37 PM
I don't agree with this :/


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Cosmic on November 24, 2017, 05:16:24 PM
it’s a brilliant idea


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Bandero on November 24, 2017, 05:24:16 PM
That's not a good idea, because there are things that can influence a N1 kill like what people claim in the topic.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Nickito on November 24, 2017, 05:52:17 PM
um you realize he can see this
Yes
That's not the point, the point is if we ban risky gameplay, players like HypeeGreen would be banned as well


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: !!Vinny927 on November 24, 2017, 05:58:23 PM
wait what?
this is like banning voting based on any criterium other than night actions. i.e. You can only vote someone if they've been seered red/black.

Lusamine, I sincerely hope that you're not going to the Hydra thing with that as your mindset (idk if you signed up at all)


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Abu on November 24, 2017, 06:03:14 PM
wait what?
this is like banning voting based on any criterium other than night actions. i.e. You can only vote someone if they've been seered red/black.

Lusamine, I sincerely hope that you're not going to the Hydra thing with that as your mindset (idk if you signed up at all)
Didn’t sign up. Also, I’m suggesting that STARTING the lynching of other wolves or trying to get other wolves lynched if you are a wolf should not be allowed, unless the wolf being (attempted) to be lynch consents to it. This is called "sacrificing" a wolf. There are times when the strategy can work out and make a wolf look more like a townie by doing this but once again, it’s a huge gamble so if nobody in the wolf team wants to be lynched then this should not be allowed.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Nickito on November 24, 2017, 06:04:15 PM
But you're describing gamethrowing, which will still be against the rules


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Abu on November 24, 2017, 06:05:26 PM
Then why are people defending it?


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: !!Vinny927 on November 24, 2017, 06:21:42 PM
It's gamethrowing to discard a good strategy because it involves you getting lynched


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Cosmic on November 25, 2017, 04:55:11 AM
That's not a good idea, because there are things that can influence a N1 kill like what people claim in the topic.
it’s a joke because I always die N1


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Cosmic on November 25, 2017, 06:12:33 AM
You haven’t died N1 13 times have you though.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Leia on November 25, 2017, 06:20:03 AM
I highly doubt you’ve died N1 nearly as many times as Cosmic


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Nickito on November 25, 2017, 11:56:40 AM
Died N1 five times, died D1 4 times
Okay but the Day 1 deaths are your fault


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: JustHereForKCP on November 25, 2017, 12:37:50 PM
     I'm going to say NO.

     Sacrificing wolves (in certain situations) is not a game-throwing strategy. If eyes are already set on a fellow wolf, there's no point in going against it as it simply puts a target on your back. Potentially throwing one of your fellows wolves under the bus by pretending to be seer and seeing them as red is also a strategy to gain trust and win for the wolves (and MVP if you're a bit selfish).

     The whole "permission" idea is pointless as of course you're going to say no to being sacrificed as you want to play the game. I believe that no rule should be under place and it seems like the majority agrees.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Chiral of Doom on November 25, 2017, 01:52:46 PM
...do you even TWG?


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Abu on November 25, 2017, 01:53:25 PM
...do you even TWG?
He used to. So what if he doesn't? He can still vote.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Nickito on November 25, 2017, 03:10:44 PM
...do you even TWG?
it's .sanaki.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Chiral of Doom on November 25, 2017, 04:17:03 PM
Ah okay, gotcha
Realized shortly after Lusamine made the post


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: !!Vinny927 on November 25, 2017, 08:01:11 PM
hey that sounds like a reason we should switch to starting during the day


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Chiral of Doom on November 25, 2017, 08:01:16 PM
Wasn't Priest used like only in Choosing Factions this year?


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Nickito on November 25, 2017, 08:29:55 PM
It's not my fault priest is such an OP role
Priest is a bloop role
hey that sounds like a reason we should switch to starting during the day
bid a game where that's the gimmick


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: dar on November 25, 2017, 08:52:50 PM
Wasn't Priest used like only in Choosing Factions this year?
I could've sworn it was in earlier games this year.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Cosmic on November 26, 2017, 02:58:28 AM
Priest was first used in TWG VI (6)


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Kowhai on November 26, 2017, 04:06:02 AM
Emphasis on "this year".


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Cosmic on November 26, 2017, 01:37:49 PM
I didn’t say it was. I was stating a fact. Why is that a problem?


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Kowhai on November 26, 2017, 01:49:28 PM
Because it's irrelevant to what everyone was talking about. By the way, did you know that Pong was first released on 29 November 1972, by Atari, Inc?


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Chiral of Doom on November 26, 2017, 01:51:23 PM
45th anniversary much? In 3 days!


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Cosmic on November 26, 2017, 03:04:11 PM
Because it's irrelevant to what everyone was talking about. By the way, did you know that Pong was first released on 29 November 1972, by Atari, Inc?
It’s certainly more relevant than what you just brought up.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Chiral of Doom on November 26, 2017, 03:06:50 PM
It’s certainly more relevant than what you just brought up.
He was bringing Pong up to make a point against irrelevant statements.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Cosmic on November 26, 2017, 03:49:29 PM
He was bringing Pong up to make a point against irrelevant statements.
I’m aware, my point is my statement related to the topic of discussion in some way.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Kowhai on November 26, 2017, 04:27:28 PM
No it isn't, the subject was usage of the Priest role in the year 2017. Your post was not about that. As such, it was irrelevant to the subject. Just admit that you misread, it's not a hard thing to do.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Cosmic on November 26, 2017, 06:41:41 PM
How is talking about the role not related to It?

Anyways, I was just making a statement. Whether it is relevant or not is regardless. I don’t understand why it was a problem in the first place.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Kowhai on November 26, 2017, 09:11:40 PM
1. Emphasis on "in the year 2017"
2. We were just pointing out that what you said didn't count, and you tried to claim you made no mistake, for some reason.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Cosmic on November 27, 2017, 01:08:50 AM
You seem to be missing the point that I was just making a statement. I never said anything about it being in 2017, because I’m aware it wasn’t. Again, I don’t quite understand how me making a simple statement is such a massive deal.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Chiral of Doom on November 27, 2017, 04:12:12 AM
Just drop it
this shouldn’t be this difficult


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: A Red Cube on November 27, 2017, 05:23:38 AM
Why don't others (kke, qaz) drop it instead of him because Al he did was make a statement that the role have been first used in Twg 6, just as a fact, without stating anything abt the year.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Kowhai on November 27, 2017, 05:35:31 AM
While hats are at this point an iconic part of Team Fortress 2, they were not included when the game was first released, instead being patched into the game 2 years later, in the Sniper vs. Spy Update, with one hat for each class.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Abu on November 27, 2017, 05:46:22 AM
Why don't others (kke, qaz) drop it instead of him because Al he did was make a statement that the role have been first used in Twg 6, just as a fact, without stating anything abt the year.
Can you please try to use simple grammar rules? I’m not trying to be condescending but your posts are seriously hard to read.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Abu on November 27, 2017, 05:46:38 AM
While hats are at this point an iconic part of Team Fortress 2, they were not included when the game was first released, instead being patched into the game 2 years later, in the Sniper vs. Spy Update, with one hat for each class.
Wicke is thicc.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Leia on November 27, 2017, 06:10:01 AM
And I’m changing the topic.

So, with a clear majority voting No, we will not be voting on a rule that bans sacrifice the wolf strategies.

I’m on my phone right now but after school i’ll be able to post the next user submitted rule suggestion for us to discuss.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Cosmic on December 08, 2017, 02:11:38 PM
I assume we don’t have any new proposals?


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Leia on December 08, 2017, 02:12:48 PM
No, the ones I had been PMed had already been solved by other rules we changed


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Leia on January 13, 2018, 04:58:43 PM
So we don't have a rule for this, and I"m slightly confused because of everything that's going on right now in TWG and I think we should clarify this:

Are players allowed to ban players from playing in the next game that they host?

I always thought that the only person who could gameban a player would be the host, and they would only be allowed to ban that player in the next game. (i.e. Kassem is hosting TWG I wants to ban Lu from TWG II because of her gamethrowing)

However, in light of recent events, these two announcements have come up:
Red and Lusamine are gamebanned from my next game.
Lusamine, you will be game banned from my next game

Green is the host, but he is not hosting the next game. KKE is not host, but she is hosting the next game.

And so created my question. I gave you 4 options
Yes- Players are allowed to ban others from playing in their next game.
No- Players are not allowed to ban others from playing in their next game.
In specific cases- Players are only allowed to ban others from playing in their next game if the host does not feel safe with specific player playing in their game. (Although if this is the case that player should probably be forum banned because they probably did something seriously wrong but idk)
Other- please state why.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Cosmic on January 13, 2018, 04:59:52 PM
Number 3. There would need to be a clear reason with enough weight behind it.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Blue on January 13, 2018, 05:01:11 PM
Well idk why i am being game banned bc i never Game throwed the wolves so option 3


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Cosmic on January 13, 2018, 05:01:34 PM
you revealed your role whilst the game was going on...


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Blue on January 13, 2018, 05:02:35 PM
you revealed your role whilst the game was going on...
Kke said i was being game banned bc I told Lusamine that nickito and qazikolthen were wolves


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: hyewon on January 13, 2018, 05:02:53 PM
3 for II's reasoning


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Cosmic on January 13, 2018, 05:04:21 PM
Kke said i was being game banned bc I told Lusamine that nickito and qazikolthen were wolves
Well that’s another reason.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Bandero on January 13, 2018, 05:05:20 PM
Option 3, only if they have a reason for it


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Pizzaccino on January 13, 2018, 05:11:03 PM
Number 3. There would need to be a clear reason with enough weight behind it.
Same here. There should be a reason, like if someone is bothering the host too much in the forum that makes them unconformable, or like if they broke the rules like revealing their PMs.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Blue on January 13, 2018, 05:12:19 PM
Rn

Everyone can be game banned for breaking the rules in the HQ iirc

Its things like Lusamine being game banned that we need to vote on bc there are no rules for being rude yet


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Nickito on January 13, 2018, 08:12:19 PM
The rules are that a host can ban someone from their game as long as the reason is related to TWG, right?
Haven't actually read the topic since my last post so I'll do that


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Nickito on January 13, 2018, 09:03:44 PM
Okay I read through the game topic
Game ban literally everyone alive


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Pizzaccino on January 13, 2018, 09:20:17 PM
Okay I read through the game topic
Game ban literally everyone alive
Wait what?


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: hyewon on January 13, 2018, 09:29:42 PM
Okay I read through the game topic
Game ban literally everyone alive

Then who's gonna sign up for TWG


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Nickito on January 13, 2018, 09:33:46 PM
idk Vinnie can host a 3 person low power game with two humans and a Wolf starting on Day


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Abu on January 13, 2018, 09:34:37 PM
idk Vinnie can host a 3 person low power game with two humans and a Wolf starting on Day
No PMs or role claiming allowed!


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: hyewon on January 13, 2018, 09:35:17 PM
idk Vinnie can host a 3 person low power game with two humans and a Wolf starting on Day

Sounds lit

Let's do it *puts sunglasses on*


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Abu on January 13, 2018, 09:37:09 PM
Sounds lit

Let's do it *puts sunglasses on*
But If there are PMs and roleclaiming then it can't be a true Vinnie god tier game


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: hyewon on January 13, 2018, 09:38:20 PM
But If there are PMs and roleclaiming then it can't be a true Vinnie god tier game

True, Vinnie better fix this


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: !!Vinny927 on January 13, 2018, 09:41:06 PM
idk Vinnie can host a 3 person low power game with two humans and a Wolf starting on Day
better than what you have right now ::)


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Pizzaccino on January 13, 2018, 10:13:54 PM
better than what you have right now ::)
You guys clearly get along with each other. XD


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Nickito on January 14, 2018, 08:12:44 AM
Where is the post mentioned in the poll


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Abu on January 14, 2018, 08:16:51 AM
So we don't have a rule for this, and I"m slightly confused because of everything that's going on right now in TWG and I think we should clarify this:

Are players allowed to ban players from playing in the next game that they host?

I always thought that the only person who could gameban a player would be the host, and they would only be allowed to ban that player in the next game. (i.e. Kassem is hosting TWG I wants to ban Lu from TWG II because of her gamethrowing)

However, in light of recent events, these two announcements have come up:
Green is the host, but he is not hosting the next game. KKE is not host, but she is hosting the next game.

And so created my question. I gave you 4 options
Yes- Players are allowed to ban others from playing in their next game.
No- Players are not allowed to ban others from playing in their next game.
In specific cases- Players are only allowed to ban others from playing in their next game if the host does not feel safe with specific player playing in their game. (Although if this is the case that player should probably be forum banned because they probably did something seriously wrong but idk)
Other- please state why.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: SCP 457 on January 14, 2018, 08:26:00 AM
Along with editing, you shouldn't be able to delete posts.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Abu on January 14, 2018, 08:28:22 AM
Along with editing, you shouldn't be able to delete posts.
This is a rule already, yep. Did anyone delete posts in this game...?

You can check all of the rules in the HQ. Second post.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: SCP 457 on January 14, 2018, 08:29:36 AM
Oh, I only saw don't editing.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Blatant Wolf on January 14, 2018, 08:30:14 AM
Yes mods should be able to blacklist players


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Abu on January 14, 2018, 08:35:34 AM
Yes mods should be able to blacklist players
TWG does not have moderators. This is asking if a host can decide something like "Red Velvet, Cyrus and Lusamine will no longer be allowed to play in my games".


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Abu on January 14, 2018, 08:37:17 AM
I accept it if KitKatExtreme and Green choose to gameban me from their future games, but I hope to show improvement to be allowed back.

However, I did not have wolves given to me. Gamebanning Red for false reasons is unfair.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Nickito on January 14, 2018, 08:39:56 AM
TWG does not have moderators. This is asking if a host can decide something like "Red Velvet, Cyrus and Lusamine will no longer be allowed to play in my games".
Instead of "my games" it should be the next game. Qazikol hosts next right? He should choose whether or not to allow people to sign up.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Abu on January 14, 2018, 08:41:58 AM
Instead of "my games" it should be the next game. Qazikol hosts next right? He should choose whether or not to allow people to sign up.
I agree with this, excluding if a host feels harassed by allowing a certain player in their games. I assume that this is the "specific situation" we are voting on.

e.g if someone wanted to gameban me, KitKatExtreme, Red, IllogicallyIllogical or Qazikol, they should do it for the next game or TWG CIII in KKE/Qazikol's place. Not delay it until TWG CV.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Leia on January 14, 2018, 01:36:01 PM
Imo I feel like it should be the host that decides on the punishment, but the punishment has to be for the next game. Hosts have an overview of the game that most players don't have, so what may seem like a broken rule to a player may not actually be a broken rule.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: dar on January 14, 2018, 01:46:36 PM
Number 3. There would need to be a clear reason with enough weight behind it.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Chiral of Doom on January 14, 2018, 03:59:15 PM
I accept it if KitKatExtreme and Green choose to gameban me from their future games, but I hope to show improvement to be allowed back.

However, I did not have wolves given to me. Gamebanning Red for false reasons is unfair.
I mean, considering you are taking a break, gamebanning you will be kind of pointless.

As for the latter half of your post, I could go into details if people want (although I think most people including you and Red would prefer for me to just drop it here), but long story short, there have been a lot of strange happenings in TWG amongst you and Red playing together or you hosting + Red playing.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Abu on January 14, 2018, 04:09:07 PM
I mean, considering you are taking a break, gamebanning you will be kind of pointless.

As for the latter half of your post, I could go into details if people want (although I think most people including you and Red would prefer for me to just drop it here), but long story short, there have been a lot of strange happenings in TWG amongst you and Red playing together or you hosting + Red playing.
The strange happenings are explainable though.

1. Red knew that Len Kagamine was the Guardian in Shifting Tides because of him saying he is a "power role that protects". This was the suspicious point used against him here, but a lot of people missed Len's post which implied he was the Guardian. Or it was a PM, which would make a lot more sense actually...

2. If Red took a peek at the rolelist for Faraway City then he would have agreed to lynch IllogicallyIllogical and found Gigi Lee Lann suspicious instead of saying that both are innocent. You were suspicious because of the Investigator claim which had some holes in it, and Sodium because he was suspected by both Red and Leia because of his actions towards you and vice-versa with you to him. Seems like a lot of effort to get one wolf lynched to put up a ruse that two other evil roles are good.

3. If me being overconfident that Nickito and Qazikol are wolves is a sign that Red threw them to me, then how is me being overconfident that you were the Terrorist explainable? From my perspective all three of you seemed rather suspicious, and I provided my own evidence as to why instead of just going "I know that they are. Scumreading is making me suspicious. Lynch them/shoot them."

(note: please do not assume this is meant to be aggressive)


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Chiral of Doom on January 14, 2018, 05:04:52 PM
1.) It was a post, and I remember something like that happening, but, I don't think it was as specific as "I am a role that protects"

2.) Well you did tell me that he was suspicious of II/Lore being wolves later on as well as Gigi being BM, when the rest of town believed that Roth was BM

3.) Okay, there is literally nothing that points to Qaz and Nick as Buddying wolves from the topic yet you were still 100% confident. I've been told that the wolf chat consisted of him yelling at other wolves and telling them they are playing bad/are very obvious wolves while Red didn't do anything. Had a theory that you wanted Qaz and Nick dead so Red could at least have a stab at getting wolf MVP as he'd be caught last once Qaz an Nick are dead. Pretty sure Qazikol and Nick can also speak for themselves too, that none of their behavior strongly pointed to them being buddying wolves in game topic.. Also, as for the Terrorist thing, there was evidence so I am not going to really argue there as I did mess up a bit and freak out + II did say I was black.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Abu on January 14, 2018, 05:13:48 PM
1.) It was a post, and I remember something like that happening, but, I don't think it was as specific as "I am a role that protects"

2.) Well you did tell me that he was suspicious of II/Lore being wolves later on as well as Gigi being BM, when the rest of town believed that Roth was BM

3.) Okay, there is literally nothing that points to Qaz and Nick as Buddying wolves from the topic yet you were still 100% confident. I've been told that the wolf chat consisted of him yelling at other wolves and telling them they are playing bad/are very obvious wolves while Red didn't do anything. Had a theory that you wanted Qaz and Nick dead so Red could at least have a stab at getting wolf MVP as he'd be caught last once Qaz an Nick are dead. Pretty sure Qazikol and Nick can also speak for themselves too, that none of their behavior strongly pointed to them being buddying wolves in game topic.. Also, as for the Terrorist thing, there was evidence so I am not going to really argue there as I did mess up a bit and freak out + II did say I was black.
So 1 is dealt with I suppose.

2) He only shifted sides (no pun intended) on those after Green discussed his suspicions, not by himself. And nobody really suspected Lore until Leia just so happened to check him, so that's what happened to the other wolf anyways. My MVP post broke down how Green trusted key players like Sodium, while Red trusted others like Gigi, and they suspected the other one so the alliance worked out like opposites.

3) Nickito's very first post in the entire game had no roleclaim and said to lynch me for the purpose of me being suspected. This is suspicious in itself, but Qazikol defended his points and said that I was rolefishing. His points were over exaggerated to make it seem like I was actively searching for blue roles, which I wasn't. As my post in the topic that I unfortunately quoted far too often said, I found their behaviour mirroring and their strategies used suspicious. Also it is noticeable that I trusted Nickito much less than Qazikol, whereas Qazikol was not the one I was TOO confident in. Reflected in that Nickito was the one who actually started it. If this was an agreed upon thing to make red get wolf mvp then why would he gamethrow for a reroll anyways?


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Chiral of Doom on January 14, 2018, 05:16:44 PM
3. Yes, you were very confident in Qazikol. You were like "Qazikol and Nick 100% wolves confirmed" while quoting that quote over and over again. Also, prettyyyy sure me and Leia also called you out for rolefishing. Why weren't we suspected (well before any of the seer claiming and II stuff for me)?


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Abu on January 14, 2018, 05:20:24 PM
Don't recall you doing it.

When Leia said I was rolefishing she brought up a different post than Qazikol and as was stated multiple times, actually before she lynched me, I found her to be a practically confirmed human given the circumstances of the claim.

Qazikol quoted a post where I said "If Guardian needs a way to tell us who they guarded they should PM Cyrus, me or Leia". This...isn't really rolefishing, it's a big stretch to call it that and when I pointed that out Qazikol did not really have anything else against me if memory serves and just said I was not making things up. This is what led me to believing that he and Nickito were buddying wolves. Also I did say that they were confirmed but that was the act I was pulling off. Well first of all my evidence post had much less for Qazikol than for nickito. Second of all via PM I said "I am confident that nickito is a wolf" without mentioning Qazikol.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Chiral of Doom on January 14, 2018, 05:22:52 PM
Don't recall you doing it.

When Leia said I was rolefishing she brought up a different post than Qazikol and as was stated multiple times, actually before she lynched me, I found her to be a practically confirmed human given the circumstances of the claim.
I mean, this is quite vague, but Leia used her arguments against you by quoting things I said AFAIK.. And, I mean, with this logic, anyone can be a confirmed human or confirmed wolf.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Kowhai on January 14, 2018, 05:24:13 PM
Don't recall you doing it.

When Leia said I was rolefishing she brought up a different post than Qazikol and as was stated multiple times, actually before she lynched me, I found her to be a practically confirmed human given the circumstances of the claim.

Qazikol quoted a post where I said "If Guardian needs a way to tell us who they guarded they should PM Cyrus, me or Leia". This...isn't really rolefishing, it's a big stretch to call it that and when I pointed that out Qazikol did not really have anything else against me if memory serves and just said I was not making things up. This is what led me to believing that he and Nickito were buddying wolves. Also I did say that they were confirmed but that was the act I was pulling off. Well first of all my evidence post had much less for Qazikol than for nickito. Second of all via PM I said "I am confident that nickito is a wolf" without mentioning Qazikol.
If I was human, I would've probably said the exact same thing, as that post appeared to be rolefishing, only way you can classify it as a stretch is if you're using a completely different definition of rolefishing.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Nickito on January 14, 2018, 05:28:46 PM
I mean tbf the evidence in Lusamine's post depended on me being a skilled player, which I'm not. Therefore it was invalid


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Abu on January 14, 2018, 05:31:41 PM
I mean, this is quite vague, but Leia used her arguments against you by quoting things I said AFAIK.. And, I mean, with this logic, anyone can be a confirmed human or confirmed wolf.
It was just pretty much reading. Leia did not seem like scum to me, and because of the way that she claimed - "Humans should not reveal, Terrorist will know our roles and win" -> "Terrorist has to make it to the end?" -> "I'm a Human" - is what solidified her Human claim. It is also what made me suspicious of you, if you don't recall - claiming to have seered the Human claim with the strongest case for them is pretty scanty.

If I was human, I would've probably said the exact same thing, as that post appeared to be rolefishing, only way you can classify it as a stretch is if you're using a completely different definition of rolefishing.
What exactly would your definition be? From what I have seen offsite (since this term only made its way from other sites to here), rolefishing is much more blunt, whether it literally be "I'm a power role, give me roles" to something a bit meeker like me in Theory of Everything where I said "I'm trusted within the town, if possible could all humans with abilities PM me?".

At least by those two, saying "if you need a leeway to post results so that we can discover who is a wolf, you can PM three people with me as an option" is kind of a stretch. I suppose I can see where it can be construed rolefishing, but since I was already out on making myself to be a confident human with how I treated Cyrus' claim, I could have just said "Guardian PM me and Cyrus we are in an alliance".


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Abu on January 14, 2018, 05:32:11 PM
I mean tbf the evidence in Lusamine's post depended on me being a skilled player, which I'm not. Therefore it was invalid
You are skilled though...come on you're the founder with at least 4 MVPs to boot D:


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Chiral of Doom on January 14, 2018, 05:34:02 PM
It was just pretty much reading. Leia did not seem like scum to me, and because of the way that she claimed - "Humans should not reveal, Terrorist will know our roles and win" -> "Terrorist has to make it to the end?" -> "I'm a Human" - is what solidified her Human claim. It is also what made me suspicious of you, if you don't recall - claiming to have seered the Human claim with the strongest case for them is pretty scanty.
What exactly would your definition be? From what I have seen offsite (since this term only made its way from other sites to here), rolefishing is much more blunt, whether it literally be "I'm a power role, give me roles" to something a bit meeker like me in Theory of Everything where I said "I'm trusted within the town, if possible could all humans with abilities PM me?".
I mean, with that argument, I could have said something similar as a Disguised Wolf as well (since it can slow down Town to have humans not claim because then, Seer would have to check people one by one). Even if I was a Wolf, I could say the same thing as I wouldn't want Terrorist to win either.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Kowhai on January 14, 2018, 05:34:30 PM
What exactly would your definition be? From what I have seen offsite (since this term only made its way from other sites to here), rolefishing is much more blunt, whether it literally be "I'm a power role, give me roles" to something a bit meeker like me in Theory of Everything where I said "I'm trusted within the town, if possible could all humans with abilities PM me?".

At least by those two, saying "if you need a leeway to post results so that we can discover who is a wolf, you can PM three people with me as an option" is kind of a stretch. I suppose I can see where it can be construed rolefishing, but since I was already out on making myself to be a confident human with how I treated Cyrus' claim, I could have just said "Guardian PM me and Cyrus we are in an alliance".
It's still indicative of rolefishing, and considering that it was intended in response to your claim that you never rolefished, I reckon it counts as a valid comment


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Bandero on January 14, 2018, 05:38:57 PM
This topic is turning into a scaled down version of Foreign Affairs. XD

I'll reroll right after  I make my dish for Kief's Kitchen.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Abu on January 14, 2018, 05:41:30 PM
I mean, with that argument, I could have said something similar as a Disguised Wolf as well (since it can slow down Town to have humans not claim because then, Seer would have to check people one by one). Even if I was a Wolf, I could say the same thing as I wouldn't want Terrorist to win either.
But it was very specific, from the question she asked, to her worry that humans revealing would lose (would be odd for a wolf to jump on this), Leia could have just never got the chance for a Human claim at all then if she was a Disguised Wolf.

It's still indicative of rolefishing, and considering that it was intended in response to your claim that you never rolefished, I reckon it counts as a valid comment
From my perspective it still is not really rolefishing, and you had the same problem as Nickito which I found odd where both of you were on the lynch train in what was either your first posts (definitely for Nickito) or third-ish. Someone else mentioned this but this is out of character for you two when you play as humans


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Abu on January 14, 2018, 05:42:02 PM
This topic is turning into a scaled down version of Foreign Affairs. XD

I'll reroll right after  I make my dish for Kief's Kitchen.
Really civilised though. Minus the non-gameplay Discussion if this is the type of stuff we see in future games it would be great.


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: hyewon on January 14, 2018, 11:37:32 PM
Just saying, MVPs shouldn't be considered to be THAT important

Lenny had a lot of MVPs and I'm pretty sure it was because of his miller-gaming, and we all know that that's frowned down upon now


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Chiral of Doom on January 15, 2018, 12:05:42 AM
or just because people have him MVP for the sake of him getting MVP


Title: Re: TWG Rules [Vote + explain in poll]
Post by: Blue on January 15, 2018, 01:06:39 PM
I only made one pm where i told the wolves tips not a lot of yelling. Bc Nick started a lynch train with his v first post, on some one already suspicious, this is a bad move as anyone but esp as a wolf