Mafia 47 - The Sixth Mass Extinction, Sign Ups

[worcej]

@Jamiet, this was my correspondence with Neph. Perhaps this will address your question?

Hey,

I am writing to you as the GM of Mafia 47.

In the previous game you insinuated that you had gamed the system and found a way to subvert the rules. I believe, and my co-GM agrees with me, that this move was against the spirit of the game. I therefore am requesting that you, on the sign up thread, make a statement that you will not attempt to subvert the rules this game.

Note that this is only regarding to trying to bypass the rules that are in place to allow all players to enjoy the game.

By all means I am not trying to push you out of this game and welcome you to the game. That being said, I want it enjoyable for all.

If you have any questions or concerns then feel free to get in touch.

Nephthys

I wasn't intending to: it wouldn't work a second time.

I thought Jamiet's argument on how little information my claim provided was pretty good; could you provide a detailed argument on why Jamiet's argument is wrong and that somehow my claim gave me an unfair advantage?

That is encouraging to hear.

What you did was not overtly against the rules, as Jamie pointed out multiple times. However, the rules of the game, from my perspective at least, are only part of the code that we play by. Like morality, this secondary code is not enforced in a legal sense although the disregard for it will often lead to a negative experience of those around.

I believe that your actions directly created a negative playing experience for an overwhelming majority of the players (many of them voiced this).

GMing, I have discovered, takes a lot of effort. I have put many hours into this game with the intention that I can provide a positive experience to all playing. Therefore any situation that could negatively impact that causes me concern. That is why I have asked this of you.

So you agree it's not against the rules and is unpunishable?

I believe it breaks rule 0.

0. The GM reserves the right to adjudicate individual scenarios that arise during the course of the game at his discretion.

That's a really grey area rule...

Be that as it may, I am telling you that I consider it broken. Are you prepared to make the statement?

I already told you I don't plan on trying it again - as it wouldn't work a second time.

I was talking about a public statement on the sign up thread.

I refuse to make any more unnecessary additional statements regarding the matter. Especially not ones that I have to parrot back something that I've already stated.

I can respect your response. However I will ask you to respect mine.

We have decided to exclude you from this game due to your response to my, in our opinion, reasonable request to maximize the experience for all players. I am making a post in the sign-up thread to inform the other players of this decision.

This only applies to this game.

If this isn't filtered and is the legit posting history, I am sorry but Neph is operating under the wrong context.

"I therefore am requesting that you, on the sign up thread, make a statement that you will not attempt to subvert the rules this game." - such a request would imply he was intentionally subverting the rules. You are not privy to the fact he did have extensive communications with me about if he could post what he did and I did say he would not be breaking the rules. He did not subvert M46 deviously.

[TrPrado]

The game derailed for hours while people waited for the GM's to confirm whether or not the game was broken. It's a pretty extreme case in my personal view, whether or not the ruling was that he didn't break a rule.

[ND]

It's not up to you to make that call TrPrado. The GMs of that game already said he didn't break a rule.

I applaud Worcej's decision. It's the right decision to make and represents another loss of a player (4 now) because of your exclusion policy which should not be tolerated by any of us.

[worcej]

The game derailed for hours while people waited for the GM's to confirm whether or not the game was broken. It's a pretty extreme case in my personal view, whether or not the ruling was that he didn't break a rule.

Okay, what game hasn't had a period of derailment due to a player?

Have you not experienced a brain spam?
Have you not experienced a Jamie freak out?
Have you not experienced a Durga stirring up shit session?
Have you not experienced an ND yelling that everyone are morons?

Great, you and Neph have a personal view and apparently you guys are going forward with excluding Chippe. But I hope everyone else here who is okay with how you're doing this is okay that I am going to make sure I exclude Durga from any game I GM because I think numerous player conflicts are centered around her for how she posts. I'll also make sure to not allow MF to join because of how often he lurks, which creates a negative player experience for numerous people and sometimes requires a sub-out because of it.

You guys going to be okay with me doing that down the road? I'll be the GM, so I can do what I want right?

Are you guys beginning to see why this is a really poor precedent yet?

[worcej]

Specifically @rdr and @darg - I will not allow Durga or MF in any future game of mine because of poor player experiences that I've witnessed others experience and even express to me.

You guys okay with that? You'll still play right? I can do what I want and you'll respect that right?

My gut tells me you won't be okay with that and the only reason you're okay with it now is because it's Chippe.

[TrPrado]

The game derailed for hours while people waited for the GM's to confirm whether or not the game was broken. It's a pretty extreme case in my personal view, whether or not the ruling was that he didn't break a rule.

Okay, what game hasn't had a period of derailment due to a player?

Have you not experienced a brain spam?
Have you not experienced a Jamie freak out?
Have you not experienced a Durga stirring up shit session?
Have you not experienced an ND yelling that everyone are morons?

Great, you and Neph have a personal view and apparently you guys are going forward with excluding Chippe. But I hope everyone else here who is okay with how you're doing this is okay that I am going to make sure I exclude Durga from any game I GM because I think numerous player conflicts are centered around her for how she posts. I'll also make sure to not allow MF to join because of how often he lurks, which creates a negative player experience for numerous people and sometimes requires a sub-out because of it.

You guys going to be okay with me doing that down the road? I'll be the GM, so I can do what I want right?

Are you guys beginning to see why this is a really poor precedent yet?

I've experienced all of these other things and not a single one of them has made any player afraid that we might have to abandon the game entirely. Chippe's case was extreme no matter how it's sliced.

[worcej]

For the record - I will never exclude anyone from my games, the previous posts are an example of acceptable decisions I can make down the road. I just want to hear it as being okay from the group of people who are all saying this is okay for you to do. If it's okay now, it's okay down the road.

More 2cents - As a GM, you should be trying to ensure people play within the rules, not play how you want them to. Player experience is critical, but how people play their game is not something you have control of. Just because people don't like Chippe doesn't mean he shouldn't play. Let them D1 lynch his ass if they don't like him.

[worcej]

The game derailed for hours while people waited for the GM's to confirm whether or not the game was broken. It's a pretty extreme case in my personal view, whether or not the ruling was that he didn't break a rule.

Okay, what game hasn't had a period of derailment due to a player?

Have you not experienced a brain spam?
Have you not experienced a Jamie freak out?
Have you not experienced a Durga stirring up shit session?
Have you not experienced an ND yelling that everyone are morons?

Great, you and Neph have a personal view and apparently you guys are going forward with excluding Chippe. But I hope everyone else here who is okay with how you're doing this is okay that I am going to make sure I exclude Durga from any game I GM because I think numerous player conflicts are centered around her for how she posts. I'll also make sure to not allow MF to join because of how often he lurks, which creates a negative player experience for numerous people and sometimes requires a sub-out because of it.

You guys going to be okay with me doing that down the road? I'll be the GM, so I can do what I want right?

Are you guys beginning to see why this is a really poor precedent yet?

I've experienced all of these other things and not a single one of them has made any player afraid that we might have to abandon the game entirely. Chippe's case was extreme no matter how it's sliced.

It's extreme, but we've established it's not against the rules. So you are litigating an opinion and not an actual rule at this point. Sorry, but that's how tyranny begins.

M46 went off fine and Chippe did not effect the game in a way that it will be abandoned. Your public lynching of him is unreasonable and you should've been okay with the fact he told both of you he wouldn't do it again.

[worcej]

And, to all you fucks in here who think Chippe broke the rules, if you were the GM for M46, you would've been able to tell him that, since he would've messaged you first before he did it. He would've then not done it, and thus the issue wouldn't exist. So take your opinion on the move and be happy to know that if you chose to lead a game, it would've played out perfectly how you wanted.

If anything, your anger and need for Chippe to publicly humiliate himself should be aimed at me. I green-lighted his play after a lengthy PM conversation about how it was a borderline move, but would be ruled as not breaking the rules because the VT PM was in the opening rules post of the game.

All the people who got 'derailed' by the post should've remembered that obvious fact.

[ND]

Worcej, you are a good man. Thanks for making a stand with me and Chaqa.

[Fluminator]

Ok, just let the bloke play so we can move on. The more players the better in this gongshow of a setup.
I didn't realize it was the literal GMs of the last game defending him.

If he actually went through the GMs before doing a stunt and they okayed it, then he would do the same with these GMs.
He has also since publicly stated he wouldn't try breaking the game like it was requested.

[ND]

If they let him play then get 4 players back (who knows how many more they lose) and we put this whole thing behind us. No one should be excluded from the game.

[Durga]

Unfortunately, it means the game will likely lose 4 players anyway

[brainbomb]

I swear if one more person memtions chippee ill stay in

[damo666]

in out in out shake it all about

[TrPrado]

This truly is what the hokey pokey is all about.

[Percy Williams]

Is the sixth mass extinction an extinction of players?

[ND]

Okay I hope you understand what the exclusion of players is going to do to the community and I hope you are prepared for that. You both just opened a huge can of worms. That's all I will say on it. I'm done with this.

[brainbomb]

this community was built on exclusion.
we demand the mods release wjessop and krellin from jmos sex dungeoun

[brainbomb]

ND, I don't know the context to Chippe, but I'm a libertarian and believe business owners have the right to refuse service to people. This is pretty much the same thing. Prado and Nephy have the right to refuse service to players they don't like.

Oh would you fuck off?

You've become webDip's #1 troll and quite frankly I'm sick of you, Fluminator. I hereby declare that you're banned from any game I GM or co-GM, for evermore. Suck it.

You hear that Flum!?
he fuckin showed yer librarian ass whats up.
I dunno what you librarians believe but...
go reads some bookz and stuff