The Syndicate

thanks for making that jay! seems like it’s off to a good start

one thing i would suggest if it’s going to be up to the host what rules/guidelines/etc they’ll implement for their game is to have all the rules the host will be using for their game be announced in the signup thread (whether that be quoting the recommended rules or writing their own thing)

this way players will know when they sign up what will or won’t be allowed in that game and if they have an issue with that set of rules or lack thereof they can choose not to sign up

it also would give players time to ask the host clarification on rules before the game starts so that the host can clarify them before any problems can potentially arise and potentially make announcements at the start of the game with those clarifications

thanks sloonei, i think that’s pretty fair/a good middle ground

that ^

if the answer is just that you want hosts to have the freedom to define the rules for themselves on what they’ll allow and won’t allow, i disagree but it’s fine and i respect that host autonomy is something the syndicate values a lot

but if you’re going to leave it up to the hosts to define, they actually have to be required to define it

at the beginning of the game they need to explicitly outline what they will and won’t allow because otherwise they cannot enforce a rule that doesn’t exist or wasn’t communicated

and if hosts aren’t required to do that then we have a logistical problem on our hands where you’re leaving something up to the hosts that they are not then actually doing and therefore saying “leave it up to hosts” becomes meaningless

so if hosts are willing and able to outline such rules in the OP of every game they run, fine

if not, it doesn’t really work and you end up with games where the rules weren’t communicated clearly or at all and that’s not good

Epignosis wrote: ↑Fri Dec 04, 2020 8:09 pm I'm spending the rest of my time with my family.

thanks for discussing it

most of tutuu’s proposal has nothing to do with the word angleshooting

what about the other things?

what’s the issue with banning those things?

i don’t really understand

Epignosis wrote: ↑Fri Dec 04, 2020 7:59 pm

Hally wrote: ↑Fri Dec 04, 2020 7:54 pm

Epignosis wrote: ↑Fri Dec 04, 2020 7:38 pm I'd like to offer some long-term perspective from someone who has been here from the beginning.

The vast majority of games here do not involve broken rules, angle shooting, or hosting errors. I understand that the most recent game has perhaps contributed to the notion that a massive overhaul should be considered, but I encourage everyone to take a deep breath and a broad view of The Syndicate's evolution. I also want to remind everyone that Martin's game had a lynch mistake AND two people violate a host rule. That is not normal. Some of the games listed above are by new or newer hosts. There's a learning curve to hosting.

I have hosted on this site for seven years and I have never had a problem with angle shooting that I can recall, nor do I remember anybody else having that problem prior to recently.

There shouldn't be a rule that mentions "angle shooting" because the very definition of angle shooting is doing something that is legal but generally viewed as underhanded. There is no list for that. There never will be. As technology changes, the ability to angle shoot will change. Poker encountered crazy new angle shooting tactics when online poker was a thing. The most notorious was ripping your Internet connection out of the wall to take advantage of Internet disconnection allowances sites had, so that you could bounce out of bad hands to move on to new ones. There was no rule against that, so people did it until there was one. Against the rules? No! Shitty? Underhanded? Yes! That's what angle shooting is.

I believe hosts should make the rules for their games beyond the universal Syndicate rules. And if hosts don't make the rules themselves, then what gives you any confidence they will enforce the rules we write?

it may be that angleshooting hasn’t been that big of a problem during most of your time here but the site is growing and many new people are now playing and hosting

and the more people you have from different places the more problems you’ll run into because everyone will come from different places where the rules are different or what have you

the syndicate appears to be changing and growing a lot as a community and i think the rules should also change to account for that, no?

and i feel like you’re playing a bit with semantics by saying angleshooting can’t be outlawed because it’s by definition not against the rules

okay then lets just call what we‘ve been referring to as angleshooting something else and then say it’s not allowed

even in the example you gave with people disconnecting their internet in poker, did the people in charge go “well that’s shitty and against the spirit of the game but we can’t ban it because it’s not already banned, it’s just angleshooting”?

no, they just banned it because they realized their rules needed to change as the community changed

and regarding the last point, if hosts don’t enforce the rules the mod team puts forth as a standard for the community they shouldn’t be allowed to host games here

i mean, it seems fairly straightforward that if we actually do implement community wide rules like tutuu is proposing it would have to be a requirement to host here that hosts enforce those site rules as part of their duty as a host

and if they repeatedly shirked that responsibility, they shouldn’t be allowed to host here anymore

while that may sound harsh, if it’s as you say that instances where such a rule would even need to be enforced are so rare, it shouldn’t be so imposing on hosts to enforce it in the once in a blue moon where they need to

The very definition of angle shooting is doing something that is not against the rules to gain an unfair advantage. Once the rules change (as they eventually did in Internet poker) it isn't angle shooting anymore. It's against the rules. Online poker changed.

I think you don't get what I'm trying to tell you angle shooting is, and I think most mafia players don't understand the concept.

You can't just say "ban angle shooting." That doesn't mean anything. You can't enforce that, because angle shooting is anything that doesn't break the rules that gives someone an unfair advantage.

What rules do you specifically want to see? would be the pertinent question.

i do understand what you’re saying

so let’s say that like the online poker communities, we want to ban things that are currently considered angleshooting but we think should actually be explicitly against the rules

is that okay and why or why not?

epi let’s just refer to what tutuu has been calling “angle shooting” as “beebabooping”

should beebabooping be allowed and if it’s not allowed would it be beneficial to have site wide guidelines to address it?

Epignosis wrote: ↑Fri Dec 04, 2020 7:38 pm I'd like to offer some long-term perspective from someone who has been here from the beginning.

The vast majority of games here do not involve broken rules, angle shooting, or hosting errors. I understand that the most recent game has perhaps contributed to the notion that a massive overhaul should be considered, but I encourage everyone to take a deep breath and a broad view of The Syndicate's evolution. I also want to remind everyone that Martin's game had a lynch mistake AND two people violate a host rule. That is not normal. Some of the games listed above are by new or newer hosts. There's a learning curve to hosting.

I have hosted on this site for seven years and I have never had a problem with angle shooting that I can recall, nor do I remember anybody else having that problem prior to recently.

There shouldn't be a rule that mentions "angle shooting" because the very definition of angle shooting is doing something that is legal but generally viewed as underhanded. There is no list for that. There never will be. As technology changes, the ability to angle shoot will change. Poker encountered crazy new angle shooting tactics when online poker was a thing. The most notorious was ripping your Internet connection out of the wall to take advantage of Internet disconnection allowances sites had, so that you could bounce out of bad hands to move on to new ones. There was no rule against that, so people did it until there was one. Against the rules? No! Shitty? Underhanded? Yes! That's what angle shooting is.

I believe hosts should make the rules for their games beyond the universal Syndicate rules. And if hosts don't make the rules themselves, then what gives you any confidence they will enforce the rules we write?

it may be that angleshooting hasn’t been that big of a problem during most of your time here but the site is growing and many new people are now playing and hosting

and the more people you have from different places the more problems you’ll run into because everyone will come from different places where the rules are different or what have you

the syndicate appears to be changing and growing a lot as a community and i think the rules should also change to account for that, no?

and i feel like you’re playing a bit with semantics by saying angleshooting can’t be outlawed because it’s by definition not against the rules

okay then lets just call what we‘ve been referring to as angleshooting something else and then say it’s not allowed

even in the example you gave with people disconnecting their internet in poker, did the people in charge go “well that’s shitty and against the spirit of the game but we can’t ban it because it’s not already banned, it’s just angleshooting”?

no, they just banned it because they realized their rules needed to change as the community changed

and regarding the last point, if hosts don’t enforce the rules the mod team puts forth as a standard for the community they shouldn’t be allowed to host games here

i mean, it seems fairly straightforward that if we actually do implement community wide rules like tutuu is proposing it would have to be a requirement to host here that hosts enforce those site rules as part of their duty as a host

and if they repeatedly shirked that responsibility, they shouldn’t be allowed to host here anymore

while that may sound harsh, if it’s as you say that instances where such a rule would even need to be enforced are so rare, it shouldn’t be so imposing on hosts to enforce it in the once in a blue moon where they need to

G-Man wrote: ↑Fri Dec 04, 2020 6:43 pm How about hosts let players spend Day 0 drafting a set of rules (or call it a covenant if you like) that they will follow for the rest of the game. Whatever rules are agreed to by the end of Day 0 are set and all players must abide by them. If you don’t show up to participate in Day 0, then you’re stuck with whatever rules the rest of the group came up with. Kind of like politics.

i can’t tell if this is a serious suggestion but i think this is a very bad idea?

i do understand the other side of it though but overall i think i’m in agreement with tutuu

and i appreciate that this is being heard/discussed by staff

tutuu wrote: ↑Fri Dec 04, 2020 6:28 pm @Epignosis alright, thanks for clearing it up

I completely agree that hosts should be clear, straightforward, and unambiguous in defining their rules.

So how about, for quality of life, for the sake of convenience, have some sitewide list of rules (doesnt need to be the same ones i wrote in the OP, but something of this nature) that the majority of syndicate players agree are good rules, and have them be something as default, something to lean back on in case hosts are lazy / new to mafia.

I have played mafia here for half a year and the majority of games have barely anything written in them about the rules

So, like, i cant just PM every host and ask them "hey dude, could u please make ur rules more specific and detailed?"

Like, (from my understaning of what sloonei said), he is not opposed to some guidelines being written in a hosting thread that ppl need to look up themselves

But whats the problem with respectfully stuffing those gudelines in peoples faces, both hosts and players?

Like instead of blaming it on the host if theres a loophole in their rules, is it not strictly better to have a safety net of standard set of rules?

x-post

the thing is, i feel like if you leave it entirely up to hosts what is and is not angleshooting or against the rules, it becomes like tutuu said where you’re essentially asking each host to lay out an entire framework for what they think is crossing the line and what’s not

and asking hosts to do that i feel is a bit much

and if hosts don’t do that and spell out exactly what they consider angleshooting or against the rules and what they don’t

or if it varies each and every game because the host changes and therefore the definition of what’s angle shooting or against the rules also changes

then you’re going to constantly run into problems where people don’t know what they can and cant do or misunderstand stuff because something was allowed in a previous game that the current host doesn’t allow or something like that

and it feels like it will just end up being a mess

instead of having each host write out exactly what they would prohibit and what they wouldn’t isnt it easier to have a general set of rules that are fairly consensus and can be referred to at the start of a game?

this way since it’s consistent everyone will be on the same page and know exactly what they should and shouldn’t do

and we can have a discussion about whether tutuu’s guidelines are fair or too strict or whatever

but i feel like having ~some~ standard removes a lot of potential headaches for players and hosts alike and generally would lead to a better experience?

especially since the syndicate has grown so much as a community recently and has a lot of offsite people who play and host now

and idk, i don’t feel like having some basic guidelines about this would really limit individual hosts abilities to run games as they want

hosts would still have full autonomy over everything else so it doesn’t seem like it should be a significant hinderance?

and i would think hosts might actually appreciate not having to spell out what they’ll allow or not themselves and instead have something that’s easy to refer to because it’s less work and also will make their games run more smoothly since everyone is more likely to be on the same page

but i don’t host so i don’t really want to speak for those that do

Thunal33 wrote: ↑Fri Dec 04, 2020 3:21 pm The problem I have with a ban on mentioning the word "angleshoot" or saying I have an angleshooty read on someone is that rarely I do get angleshooty reads and as a villager I feel like I shouldn't have to lie by making up a fake reason for my pivot on a player when it's really for angleshooty reasons. The benefits to a ban might outweigh the harm though, since tunneling someone based on "I have an angleshooty read" can be extremely frustrating on both sides and it's not really fair that the tunnelee can't defend themselves.

The rest of this I completely agree with though. Host communication/clarification should be done privately in all games.

i see what you’re saying here but i do think the benefit of a ban still outweighs the negative

imo if you don’t have a non-angleshot justification for having a read or can’t come up with one it’s probably not a read you should have in the first place

like if i had a read that someone was angleshot town and i genuinely thought they were a villager i don’t think it would be difficult to find a reason why and if i couldn’t make an argument that they’re a villager based on their posts instead of angleshooting that would be a red flag to me that i should maybe reconsider if it’s a good idea to have that angleshoot read

thanks

MartinGG99 wrote: ↑Fri Dec 04, 2020 1:58 pm

Hally wrote: ↑Fri Dec 04, 2020 1:45 pm all of that stuff is pretty standard and i was under the impression it already was the rules?

It is not, apparently. A lot of TS rule stuff is under the authority of host discretion, and I just ran a Rackets game with some parts of the rules being left as "you can expect typical rules" or something like that. Which is a bad recipe because the "typical rules" are established by what could be called as cultural convention here on The Syndicate rather than anything else.

This discussion originated in regards to me modkilling a player who

1) Didn't explicitly break the rules I set up, or any other rule on the site

2) Had a different understanding of the word "Angleshooting" than I did, and used the word "Angleshot"

We've already have had plenty of discussion in the mafia channel of the Syndicate discord about it, but now we're trying to discuss rules or something we can do to prevent something like that from happening again. Maybe something standardized will come to fruition.

oh i see

well it’s definitely the standard rules on MU but idk if the syndicate has any standard rules on the matter

if not (as it appears) i think it would be a good idea to have a standard set of rules rather than leave it up to the host

this way every player knows exactly whats allowed when they play here and what’s expected of them so no such misunderstandings can occur

and if hosts want to add rules at their discretion they should be allowed to do so (like no role claiming or something)

but i think there should be a baseline set of rules that’s constant throughout every games for sure

otherwise you run into problems like you did where there will be miscommunication between hosts and players about what the rules actually are and it’s hard to enforce them when you can’t assume that every player knows what’s expected of them

generally the rule of thumb is like

players should only be read based on actions that have happened within the confines of the game thread (and any host approved btsc) because that’s what’s accessible to everyone as part of the sphere of the game

and private host communication is outside that bubble, so it shouldn’t be brought into the bubble by getting talked about itt because nobody should be able to make reads on something from outside the bubble

this is just my two cents though

Syn wrote: ↑Fri Dec 04, 2020 1:52 pm on my homesite host communication happened in basically every game, so understand that I'm working from a different cultural bias on that front

I do realize that elsewhere it's usually frowned upon. When I've hosted on MU, I didn't know what the consensus was, so I opted to be a pretty distant host.

i think having players be able to talk with the host privately is perfectly fine but i would say referring to that communication itt shouldnt be allowed

Syn wrote: ↑Fri Dec 04, 2020 1:21 pm copy-pasting and editing from the game thread:

I think these suggestions should be numbered instead of bullet-pointed.

Some of this seems like language policing which won't work IMO, like the whole referring to mod info thing at the end just doesn't parse for me. Making it a rule that someone has to say "I was told x" instead of "I was told x by the host" doesn't move the needle at all and just makes it murkier, not clearer. I think there should be a total ban on host involvement by players or no ban at all. Like your previous suggestion that players should not interact with the host ITT is solid, and is compatible with a rule that says players can't relay host info shared privately either. No conveying of private info whatsoever, and hosts should probably be recommended to not share elaborations privately either. If it's relevant to the game state, the info should only be shared as a general post by the host and not privately to an enterprising player who thought of asking.

Personally, I really like interactions between players and hosts, so my preference is towards no ban or policing on the host/player communication front, but I wouldn't be opposed to a total ban on it and would be fine with abiding with a rule like that.

it’s pretty standard imo for players to not be able to refer to communication they have with the host itt

in general players should pretend the host doesn’t exist when posting itt because host communication is outside the scope of the game

all of that stuff is pretty standard and i was under the impression it already was the rules?