I‘ve been told that several people are planning to host games, so to avoid any problems like people cutting into each other‘s game signups and other things we may need a schedule of games.
For anyone who plans to host a game, you can either write in this thread for what month/day you‘re planning a game or edit it in the schedule yourself if you can.
Note that there‘s no limit to how many games can be had per month, but try not to have 2 games running at the same time.
Sign-ups!
To everyone who usually plays MG or those that don‘t want to miss signups, we‘re testing a new way to alert everyone to a new game instead of mass tags before each game.
All you have to do is go to>>this thread<<and press Watch on the top corner of the thread. I or a host will post there and notify everyone like this whenever a new game starts.
While hosting overall isn't necessarily hard, it's very easy to mess things up as we have seen plenty of times already. This naturally happens more often with newer hosts.
In order to get these new hosts familiar with how the game works behind the scenes and make it a smoother experience for everyone (no one wants a cancelled game!), we are establishing these sets of rules that follow the methods that have been used in the last 50 games:
-If it's your first time hosting, it's MANDATORY to have the help of someone that has hosted before. As long as they aren't banned, it doesn't matter if this person hosted twenty times or just once. This experienced host will be the "Main Host", while the new one assumes the role of "co-host".
-Tasks will be split in a rather equal manner so that the Main Host can keep things in check while the Co-host gets hands-on experience to learn properly.
-The Main Host has the final say when it comes to decisions (ideally, this won't need to be enforced heavily, it's mostly to avoid possible issues).
Once the game is over, the co-host can host on their own and even take the role of "experienced host" for a new host in need!
Huh? What does the second quote have to do with whether that sort of activity should be going on or not in the first place? If the host wants to set up a conversation for dead players, they can do it, that's all I said. If a dead player wishes to do so themselves and include the hosts, by all means. I'm not holding any host to any different standard here. I've never been in favor of anyone bum-rushing this thread to talk about the game when it isn't supposed to be going on.
Wow lol. I just followed quiet the game and gotta say kinda hilarious tho. But really people just relax. I mean, really. Mistakes can happen. It is not like other hosts made such 'small' mistakes. Nothing can be flawless, it happens. We are human beings anyway, we are made to make mistakes. MISTAKES I TELL YOU!
Huh? What does the second quote have to do with whether that sort of activity should be going on or not in the first place? If the host wants to set up a conversation for dead players, they can do it, that's all I said. If a dead player wishes to do so themselves and include the hosts, by all means. I'm not holding any host to any different standard here.
There is a noticeable different standard when you see that, in this present game, you've been constantly complaining about players writting in here, whereas back in the day your whole contribution to the topic was that we, as hosts, could had easily(can't remark it enough) avoided it all thanks to how awesome our lord Xenforum is.
There is a noticeable different standard when you see that, in this present game, you've been constantly complaining about players writting in here, whereas back in the day your whole contribution to the topic was that we, as hosts, could had easily(can't remark it enough) avoided it all thanks to how awesome our lord Xenforum is.
I don't really understand the problem with what you've quoted? I said Xenforo is more convenient in regards to organizing a "death club" convo. That has very little to do with my complaints about players posting here, since almost of none of these players would even be a part of it, since they're still alive, posting while the game is locked. This would only give dead players an avenue to discuss the game, nothing else.
And you're just wrong, I've complained about people posting after the thread was locked for YEARS, regardless of host or forum software. I'm not even sure what my complaints have to do with the hosts in the first place. I wasn't calling for penalties here and now, I was calling for revisiting the the topic of penalty/punishment in general. You're barking up the wrong tree.
I think we do have rules that are preventing the conversations going on in night phases in here. Lack of implementation is why it's still happening. I don't recall giving out penalties for discussion thread convos, only host kills in severe cases.
Maybe if that'd become a regular thing, players getting extra votes on them for lack of constraint, it will get better?
But that's a question of the human nature. Is it really possible to fight it? Or perhaps giving it room instead.
Yeah, that's sort of what I was alluding to. I don't think it needs to be as severe as hostkill or ban (if they're dead), but this is a rule that people sort of ignore, and as to up until these two back-to-back games, I haven't played in a game since you've last hosted (The Gantz game, which was actually interrupted by the Xenforo switch, coincidentally) and hadn't followed the others, I had no input to give in regards to it going on there.
Well, that's what the private thread or PM conversation topic after the Xenforo switch was brought up (vBulletin PMs between multiple members were a visual nightmare, on Xenforo they look no different from threads). It'd be easy for a Host to setup one for dead players, but penalty votes or something would be the only way to address alive players doing it IMO.
I don't really understand the problem with what you've quoted? I said Xenforo is more convenient in regards to organizing a "death club" convo. That has very little to do with my complaints about players posting here, since most of none of these players would even be a part of it, since they're still alive, posting while the game is locked. This would only give dead players an avenue to discuss the game, nothing else.
And you're just wrong, I've complained about people posting after the thread was locked for YEARS, regardless of host or forum software. I'm not even sure what my complaints have to do with the hosts in the first place. I wasn't calling for penalties here and now, I was calling for revisiting the the topic of penalty/punishment in general. You're barking up the wrong tree.
It has a lot to do. I'm not ¨just wrong¨, I was aware that you were always against players posting in this thread, which is why I'm remarking your only post when the topic was brought into disussion in the game I had with Lala.
Back then, to most players the fault seemed to be only ours, the hosts, no one commented on the players themselves. Your only contribution -instead of taking the role you are having nowadays- was that we could had easily avoided it, adding more to that fire against us -and, well, to the wound. The focus on the point of view of your post was adding on how ¨easily¨ we could had avoided it.
So what you're saying is: Active players who post in places like this regarding the game can be given penalties, while dead players can be banned from the next game?
We could try out giving penalities, it would be hard to find the right measurement of what is casual comment and what is game content though. Not completely impossible but hard. In the past I have moved posts to the actual game thread although it was closed, because deleting like mentioned on several occations already does not solve the visibility issue. In that regard it can also be considered leaving the game thread open, so everyone can say how they knew that Holt and Evil were Mafias and shit like that, and hopefully it would die out right after.