The Syndicate

Mongoose wrote:Can I have another example or two of what constitutes host-based info dumps?

... no reason.

I consider any post by the host that lists all the roles or their powers, the people who are playing the game and/or their genders, or the rules of the game, as a host-based infodump.

Epignosis wrote:

bea wrote:I'm reading this thread with interest. I don't feel like I have anything to contribute to it so I'm just commenting that I'm reading it and fwiw - the champ game as well as Who is the major reason MP's game is being played though I'm long over due in the rotation. My schedule has cleared up - but in light of these two games, I feel like I want to retool a lot of things.

Also - I never did understand why meta is a bad thing? Though that's prolly a discussion for another thread.

It isn't. It's an unavoidable, beautiful thing, because it adds another layer of bluff/tell that makes Mafia interesting.

As I routinely tell people after crushing them at Parcheesi (at which I am all but invincible) "neglect the meta game at your own peril."

S~V~S wrote:Whats funny is that I am the suck at case making. I don't do it, becasue I am better at intuitive playing. But when i have info, I HAVE to make cases. So I do, and no one ever votes for the person I am pushing; they say, "Meh, that's a crappy case". If I played in my normal, "He's bad, I just KNOW it", though, I would get them lynched much easier. But I would FEEL like I was dumping, even though that is how I normally play.

Irony, eh?

But for future reference, when i am making crappy cases, I have info, wink wink nudge nudge

And when I make cases, everybody listens to me and lynches that person, even though I am always wrong!

I have become increasingly reluctant to include info roles in my games, personally. I doubt if I will include many from this point on. I do like the "get info, but it might be wrong" mechanic, and I can see using that a lot. I also really like the Mr. Boddy blackmail mechanic, where he can reveal only selected info about a player that doesn't out him entirely.

I agree that conscientious game design might be the best solution.

zeek wrote:With the beginning of this new participation rating system, it could be a good idea to turn it into a reputation rating.

Info-dumping could lose points as well as inactivity, with a standard amount of points being deducted for various crimes. It may be easier to track as well, as the mods wouldn't have to calculate overall game participation of each player, just allow a host (with their mod's backing) make a judgement on any incident. Just a thought anyway.

We discussed a score for something like this, and agreed it is too subtle and subjective to be captured by a number. We prefer to emphasize that the hosts are responsible for enforcing the rules of their games and deterring bad behavior.

I would add that one thing to keep in mind for hosts is that, if you plan to take action to punish an infodump or an outing, the action itself can contribute to the problem. If player X outs player Y and is modkilled for it, and then Player A outs Player B with no punishment, everyone can conclude that Player A was lying, because a true outing would not have gone unpunished. Player X is confirmed to be telling the truth as well.

I played one game once (I forget which one) where the host announced that fake infodumps would be punished just as severely as real ones for exactly this reason. Just one thing to keep in mind when considering whether to punish or not.