Total posts: 3,773
-->
@RationalMadman
I've wondered for the longest time how the exact 7 points were settled on, and if a couple tweaks could improve it. I would be happy to put that or any similar refinement as a question on the next MEEP (I don't want to rush it on this one). And yes, I'm fairly certain Mike would implement such minor changes if the majority of users wanted it, unlike what we faced with Juggle.
Ironically, I don't believe in change for the sake of change, but I do believe we can do better than the systems of DDO.
Created:
Anyone have any thoughts on the idea of requiring a reason to report a post, debate, and vote?
Created:
-->
@fauxlaw
How does one vote, anyway. never done this before
You'll just make a post in the upcoming thread, indicating your preferences. So long as it's easily legible, it's count as a vote.
For a sample, I'll point to #5 from last referendum.
A vote could look like this:
- Yes,
- Yes1, (the 1 signifying a preference for variant 1)
- Yes.
Like this (the missing 2, counts it as abstaining that question):
1. No, each change should be an individual question
3. Yes, we shouldn't even have voting rules.
Or even like this (a vote against 3, but abstaining from the others):
Wrong direction for voting, so no.
think adding a voting subject as you [I think] suggested to award point[s] for particularly illuminating debate argument,
I actually want to do another MEEP soonish specifically for voting refinements. While I don't want to dumb voting down, I would prefer it a little less stringent.
What would your opinion of the conduct point performing double duty? Like so long as arguments are for the other side, a voter may give conduct as Kudos if they so choose. ... And yes, I would not want to open it up to risk of abusive fluffing up the side they already favor.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@User_2006
Basically #3.
Expanding the second item: We don't have a normal deactivate option, so if someone decides to even take an extended break from the site, it's a way to let anyone curious know that they don't plan on returning in the foreseeable future.
Created:
-->
@RationalMadman
I'm not entirely sure what exactly is in the document regarding the protection of minors
Only a couple short lines about it.
- "All users must be a minimum of 13 years of age when creating an account, or older to help comply with any local laws pertaining to Internet usage."
- "You may not engage in or promote the sexual exploitation of minors."
Some form of the first one is already in the extended documents.
Why are you even being democratic about something like that?
To me it doesn't merit a standalone vote, or honestly a vote at all. However while attempting to roll out an improved CoC, allowing discussion (especially in case anyone might offer superior wording for it), I assumed would have no drawbacks.
I already focused one ban on someone sexually targeting a minor. If there had been any significant backlash, I'd probably have left the site. With us already acting to protect minors in mind, a vote against the new CoC will not be assumed to be based on that one issue (as much as I hope people justify any nay votes).
Created:
Final day for refinements.
I'll launch the proper MEEP late tomorrow night (Monday May 25th, Pacific Time, UTC−07:00), and conclude it early next Monday morning (June 1st).
Created:
Posted in:
On the top right of your screen, left click your avatar.
In the middle of the drop down, click questions.
Created:
So it's been about a week for feedback. I am of course still open to it, but I would appreciate any more constructive suggestions (especially regarding the wording of the CoC) to be offered ASAP.
- Streamlined it, cutting the length by 45%.
- Made it no longer dependent upon external extended policies and interpretations documents.
- Codified various policies (e.g., context affecting consequences, protocols for new accounts, etc.)
- Removal of the trolling and insults rules, but adding a no targeted harassment rule.
- Expanded to impersonation rule to everyone.
- Removal of the harassing the moderators is ok rule (don’t worry, we’ll still have thick skin).
- Removal of the "Contravening or Disregarding Moderation" rule.
- Added clauses to protect children.
- And more...
So preview questions:
- Ratify the new Code of Conduct?
- Allow PM sharing?
This is not to imply encouraging it... A yes to this may be divided into two subsets: - With minimal restrictions. Identifying information for example, is still protected under the general doxing rule.
- Exclusively with moderator approval.
- Change the Voting Policy to expand S&G to include other excessive legibility issues?
I assumed there would be more community generated questions. I'll say there is still room for a couple of them (without making this thing too long and confusing).
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
Good point. The estimated reason I pointed to, certainly does not apply to all (or even most) cases.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@User_2006
1. How to avoid overusing semantics in debates?
Try to think of the intended spirit of the debate.
3. What makes an argument "good"?
The most important thing is that you enjoyed writing it. However, a great one should flex some of your mental muscles to grow as a person.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fauxlaw
And I say an instigator who does not want to argue first is unsure of their confidence in their own argument. Therefore, I reject that explanation.
That precise reason (shortage of confidence), seems a fair estimate.
Another one of these sites, had an option for the first debater to post arguments to get a half round at the end (I think with related rules for minimize abuse).
Created:
-->
@Swagnarok
@PressF4Respect
What do you each think of this wording for the violence rule?
You may not threaten or promote violence against any person or persons, barring hyperbole against public figures (e.g., "all politicians should be shot"). Advocacy in favor of terrorism or violent extremism, especially as related to hate groups as generally defined by the SPLC is likewise prohibited.
The current draft is:
You may not threaten or promote violence against any individual or group of individuals, which includes terrorism or violent extremism. Advocacy in favor of any hate group or their mission is likewise prohibited.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
"exploitative intent" is meant to be open ended, to avoid needing future referendums to add to different exploits not specifically prohibited.
I believe you on how far people go, and consider it to be beyond lame. This being a small website, we've been spared the worst of it, but have still seen a bit of ugliness in this direction.
Created:
-->
@RationalMadman
That bit was expanded directly from the current CoC, ban on threats of legal action: https://info.debateart.com/statements/code-of-conduct#5-threats
People threatening to lawyer up about losing debates with strangers, or generally being made to look bad in an argument, breeds a toxic atmosphere. It's been a pretty rare problem, but trying to give people peace of mind in case it ever resumes. ... You do have a very good point about warning (too tired right now to think how to properly word the differentiation between warning and threat).
Any suggestions for how best to word it? Or alternatively, do you believe it should just be stripped from the CoC?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
How about basically inverting them? If not, then any suggestions for better wording?
Users are free to transition a new account or back to a former, so long as they demonstrate no exploitative intent, and inform moderators to ensure only one is active.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Crocodile
Thanks for your input. Settled on not specifically referencing such outlier cases in the new CoC. What do you think of this drafted line?
Users are free to create a new account or switch to an old one, so long as they both inform moderators to ban the prior, and demonstrate no exploitative intent.
Created:
I don't know the power balance role it plays. I assume it's good, due to the possibility of luck giving someone an otherwise unfair lead (they get ahead of an early scuffle, and can stay safe and ahead without further danger).
Created:
I personally prefer categorical voting, but also see the benefit of Winner Select. Especially for less serious debates.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Danielle
How many times now have you asked whomever the other power role is to out themselves? Doing so would tell the mafia exactly who to kill.
Again, you've chosen looking clever, over actually playing smart. Sure, I could have stayed silent and allowed a mislynch on me by not outing myself. Apparently I am a complete idiot for not doing that... Instead I shared useful information town would have otherwise not received until the mislynch.
Looking at your behavior from the outside, anyone can see that me flipping town indicates the people obsessed with this wagon are the most likely scums. If I flip town, do you agree to VTL yourself tomorrow? I doubt it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Crocodile
I agree with you on that.
What about cases of clear credential matches, where they deny any connection? Specifically when a different user is worried about a feud with the old, so they don't want to be tricked into conversing with the new if they are the same.
And yes, we've dealt with that exact scenario. Before that one came up, it was pretty easy to just tell people there's no evidence.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
@oromagi
@Speedrace
@PressF4Respect
@skittlez09
I'm probably going to regret this later, but with nothing else to go on: Lynch All Liars.
Supa snuck into the dessert bin last night, and had a cookie.
Unvote,
VTL Supadudz
Created:
Posted in:
With Danielle actively trying to help mafia with deduction (could be obsessed with looking clever instead of playing smart, but highly suspect), I'm also leaning less Coal/Sui and more Coal/Danielle. Obvious common denominator.
Coal is the most anti-town person in the game, which again could be due to his longstanding documented obsession with me. Honestly, I would not have joined had I known ahead of time my old stalker was going to be here; but when the day started and we were both on the list, I thought I would give his ability to grow the benefit of the doubt. That he's calling, my infinite rejections of him "juvenile," rather than just accepting that No Means No, indicates I was wrong to give him a sliver of faith as a human being.
Unvote,
VTL Coal
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@skittlez09
Did it make you happy? Because: Happiness is Mandatory.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Crocodile
As someone who switched accounts, what do you think the privacy rules should be about such things?
We've had cases where user X assumes user Y is secretly user Z, and there are no signs of them being connected. We've had it were they are obviously connected but deny it to us. And of course cases were they admit to us that they're the same, but ask us to keep it secret to make it a proper fresh start.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@David
Links got broken, but everything should be otherwise intact.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@skittlez09
I've got to VTL you for not liking The Flesh. It is required viewing in our worker lead utopia.
Also, what you had for dinner last night?
Unvote,
VTL LittleCookie
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Danielle
If you're town, mafia should thank you for ensuring they did not miss anything.
Get this: I'm not going to encourage the other person to out themselves. I can't imagine town so obsessed with wanting to throw away all advantage of anonymity, but I also can't imagine Mafia being so open about it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Danielle
You haven't suggested how to try to use it. You haven't even suggested keeping you alive so the mafia is forced to kill you
There's no way to use it when I'm dead. If town honestly wants to kill a power role for the scum, by all means... But I did say "I'll be dead by morning. I suggest voting for someone who has actually made scum slips."
And now multiple people (you and Coal) asking digging questions which could expose any other power roles...
Why do you think Sui is scum but Oro isn't? I'm not familiar with Oro's style.
This is not Oro's style in any game I remember. Based on general behavior in many other games, I assume he'll be back and contribute. ... Not to mention, my vote for Sui was not based on inactivity (as much as that began to play into it).
I caught a couple slips from Sui earlier. I've maintained my vote since then, to keep some attention on him.
Why do you think having a power role necessitates a mafia role blocker as opposed to role cop?
There's a list in: #1. Obviously I lined up my role to their potential matching roles. You trying to dig this much, is suspect as hell.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@oromagi
Wherever you are, I hope you're ok.
Also you should know that the mod confirmed you to be a commie bastard.
TOWN Role SPECIES SHIP Notes
6) iLikePie5 Jailkeeper Ur-Quan Kzer-Za Dreadnaught
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
We've been prompted for activity... So tell me what you had for dinner last night?
VTL SupaDudz
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@sui_generis
Pretty sure we have a day remaining. It's the next day phases that we have a little less time.
...
Biggest thing that happened was Objectivity was modkilled.
I outed myself for a power role, revealing that if the mafia has one it's roleblocker.
I'm stubbornly holding to my theory that you and Coal are a scum team.
Danielle and Coal are convinced is convinced my claim was a bluff.
Zaradi and Lunatic are at odds with each other.
Oro, Sui, and Airmax have basically been AFK.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lucky
Added:05.18.20 04:08PM
Day 1 will have a deadline of 4 days. Day 2+ will have a deadline of 3 days. Extensions may be granted if players request and I see it fit.
Would you mind confirming that we have until Friday evening US time? AKA 23 hours 33 minutes from now.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Danielle
@Ragnar, is Oro posting in your other game?
He's MIA from that one too at the moment.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Danielle
That was @Sui
My bad. Sorry for the confusion.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lunatic
You have coal listed as your top scum read on your list, but you are voting sui?
I considered changing it, but my hypothesis is that Coal and Sui are a scum team. When I put a little pressure on Sui, Coal freaked out and tried to mislynch me... Had Sui made those same posts, people would be faster to spot OMGUS red herring retaliation. Since then Sui has been virtually silent.
So I'm maintaining my vote, so to keep his name highlighted on the vote counts, thus try to sabotage his tactic of lurking while his scum buddy redirects the heat.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Danielle
You asked not to end the DP until you posted but then you had nothing to say.
Would you mind linking the post where I asked that?
Created:
Posted in:
I should have posted this much earlier... (no useful insight for the game, just on presentation)
Formatting Best Practices:
For actual debates, I highly suggest referencing the guide. However, for general forum use, just obey a few simple rules:
- Space between things is useful if you wish to be legible,
- Don’t bold and/or CAPITALIZE all of your text, and
- Don’t misquote other users.
Regarding the quote tool (just right of the underline button when making a post), bare in mind it adds an extra space after its paragraphs; so if replying just after it, use a couple line breaks around each section.
Correct Way
What’s being replied to...
Reply to the above, followed by two line breaks to separate it from the next point of discussion.
What’s being replied to next...
Reply to the above..
Wrong Way
What’s being replied to...
Reply to the above, disguised to look like it’s replying to what’s below; adding needless confusion.
What’s being replied to next
Reply to the above..
The problem with this is there are no extra line breaks, which clusters the wrong bits together. That the formatting does this is known, so use the extra line breaks.
Created:
-->
@Tejretics
Tej, has made a proposal worth considering. Changing the default voting method to Choose Winner (it is currently categorical).
He started a thread for it, in which he lays out the merits in his words, which can be found at: https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/4232-proposal-make-choose-winner-the-default-voting-system-in-debates
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Danielle
"the fact that you think it’s scummy I’m not tagging you or whatever is dumb"
You can reread your own post. "If Ragnar has anything insightful to add, now's the time..." You chose to make a deal out of how fast I should respond to it. Consider that you've admitted previously that when you were in some danger of being lynched for inactivity, it was my tagging you that got you to check in. That I presume you are intelligent enough to know how to tag people when it's important ("now's the time..."), makes it read a little suspicious to me. Granted, too many people VTLed others to pressure for activity, while making the choice to refuse to tag said targets to actually pressure them, for it to be a scum exclusive behavior.
My conclusion on you is still more likely town. I don't get why people insist on all or nothing. Noting behavior to possibly look back at later, seems much better than tunneling based on deciding things ahead of time (e.g., how many people have said I should die for being the least active player, in spite of the evidence of others who are even less active?).
Created:
Posted in:
Wow. Caught up.
Okay for anyone that missed it, I claimed in #517. I'm amazed at the stupidity of anyone being surprised people with power roles don't wave a flag all day to tell mafia to kill them. I am further not going to be baited into saying more, as Coal is trying to get any other power roles to reveal themselves (or me to tell scum precisely which I am for their risk analysis).
With Objectivity dead, and me scheduled to die, people should treat right now as DP2 with me already dead.
Created:
Posted in:
I really wish I was scum, as then someone would have pointed me to important posts...
Coal - Either scum, or intentionally acting anti-town for other reasons.
#393, trying to force the Ragnar/Objectivity scum team (hunting Masons?). He continues this in a bunch of others I won't list. #498 suggests he always thought I might be on a scum team with Sui, when earlier he made a declarative statement about the need to ignore any evidence on Sui today no matter what.
#411 and elsewhere, breadcrumbs that scum will reliably appear at the end of wagons; which if town is poor reasoning due to scum not wanting to look like scum.
Lunatic -
#392, a fine defense post, but with some words of wisdom we should occasionally check our actions against: "His intentions don't seem like he's open minded to hunting scum, and his vision is narrow." #480, I'm biased in favor of people reevaluating situations based on mod confirmed evidence (very much going to look forward to their take on the bomb I dropped later).
Zaradi - Neutral
#399, occasionally killing someone for this reason is valid, and I take no offense at the comment: "Also pretty sure Ragnar is just bad/clueless townie. I dont say that to flame." #464, yeah why was Oro not pressured the same or worse than me (incidentally, there was a completely BS defense of this made by Coal #470)? And yes, sorry for not being a better DP1 player in these games.
Objectivity - Town confirmed, RIP
#409, not afraid to be lynched, questioning the tunneling which doesn't lead to him.
Lunatic - Neutral
#437, points to one of my previous games as evidence; I really did not want to spent my time looking over my own actions in previous games... In the final 5 pages of that other game's day 1, how many posts did I make? How many conclusive reads did I give on players (people have made a BIG issue of me not jumping to enough conclusions here)?
Airmax - Strong town read.
#443, this bit of common sense needs to be repeated: "This is also DP1 in a theme-less game, the very definition of low activity type scenario. In fact almost everything I've read in this DP is a bit fluffy and otherwise forced." #457, willing to be lynched for activity if it becomes harmful to town. The game is a bit more fun as mafia, so yes, I would assume he would squeeze in a few more posts if scum.
#489, I feel his pain, *hugs*.
FYI, your tell is that when you lie, the Axolotl winks.
Danielle - Bit of a lurker vibe, but also leaning town.
#471 is a bit suspect to me, as she knows full well the power of being tagged, yet is refusing to return the courtesy even while being suggestive of implications to someone not responding right away. #493 suggests town, as Mafia wants to blend in, and pretending to not know where the scum chat is raises eyebrows (note: I am technically assuming, based on every other game on here using it).
With that, I've fully read the first 500 posts, and links within... I have to take care of some things this morning in my real life.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Zaradi
If you're around, you definitely need to be contributing more.
Amazingly, this was the only message anyone thought was important enough to tag me.
Anyway, I've got a little bit of time this morning, so I'll try to get caught up.
Created:
Posted in:
Not caught up, but Objectivity getting mod-killed stands out to me. Could have sworn there were votes on me based on he and I being a scum team...
Created:
Posted in:
Normally low activity is a bad thing, but being unexpectedly extra busy right now, I'm quite thankful.
Created:
Posted in:
Too much to get caught up on right now. I left at page 16, and we're on page 21.
Mafia is working to keep me at L-1, and I don't foresee that going away by pointing out the flawed logic on why this wagon was formed.
When I left, people were focusing on the question of whether or not Lucky assigned roles at random. It was random, I can say that with absolute certain.
Further, if mafia have a power role, it's blocker. Of course by saying this, I'll be dead by morning. I suggest voting for someone who has actually made scum slips.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lunatic
I assume Zaradi and Coal are not a team, due to their behavior toward each other. ... FYI, expect me to minimize mentions of Coal.Does this mean they are both town reads?
Neither are town reads, but they as a scum team strikes me as a not in line with their behavior. That said, since then Coal is acting particularly scummy, but it might be his longstanding obsession with me renewing itself, such that he's willing to harm town to get my attention.
Bare in mind, Coal's outright insisted anyone who catches people contradicting themselves and other scummy behavior and even commits with VTL is doing "less than nothing that moves the ball forward."
Zaradi did a good post in #273.What specifically was good about it?
The level of depth. You've since explained why you feel it was misrepresenting your understanding of pressure and such.
Seeing the lack of anyone following up
A misstatement from me. I should have said "lack of anyone joining the wagon." I did not mean to imply that you ignored it.
Objectivity insisting we do a lynch, I instinctively find to be scummy, but then the math is shown on why lynching is better... This becomes neutral to me, as I do understand town should make themselves useful to town with such things, and scum should do it to seem like town. Assuming this isn't their first or second game, again, neutral. However, not in my ok to lynch pile.This feels like a non-statement, and an easy way to pass off Objectivity as if you actually just placed a read on him when in actuality you didn't. I am suspecting a ragnar/objectivity scum team.
WIFOM leading to no conclusion. While his actions don't make me lean either way, his input to game theory looks useful. Without I would probably be VTLNing.
Created:
Posted in:
Coal and Sui_G could be a scum team, based on the way Coal is reacting to a negative read on Sui.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
@oromagi
@Speedrace
@PressF4Respect
@skittlez09
With Mafia getting lucky on killing our Hider, we really can't afford a mislynch today. Anyone have anything useful to contribute?
Created: