-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Could someone (@Wagonlitz , @Canadian_95_RTS ?, or someone else of course) compile data on who was subbed out or autolynched due to inactivity only? I can do some analysis on it then and post it here.
I'm not adding to this witch hunt which I find detestable.
Why do you want to drive people away so much?
Why do you want to drive people away so much?
It's not; but it should be up to the GM who he wants in his game and not be dictated by a wall of shame.
I know I am breaking my own rule of not destroying the atmosphere here, but can you read? How often do I have to say that it will be up to the GM, of course?? (since I am not a moderator and can't enforce anything). It will be a list for GMs to consult. IT WILL BE UP TO INDIVIDUAL GMS!!!! REPEAT: IT WILL BE UP TO INDIVIDUAL GMS!!! They can consult this list, and since we can't expect GMs to remember every single fucking game ever, it will be a useful repertoire of info.
Do you expect all potential GMs to keep private lists of zombies just to protect some feelings?
It's still a wall of shame which risks driving away he people on it.
You want to actively drive away people? And most active players, i.e. who would be assumed to be GMs, have an idea about who are chronic zombies.
So unless you want to put people who just have a single transgression on your wall of shame, which would be even more horrible, then GMs would know who were zombies.
We want to drive zombies away - they break games. We want people to be shamed for being zombies. It's like saying that we shouldn't ban ghost rule breaking because it might drive people away. Or that people shouldn't be publically listed as being banned (by mods) because it might hurt some feelings. You're being delibaretly confrontational now - you will deny it, you might not even realise it, but you are. I've seen it before with you, and I feel like you get off on it.
Once the data will be collected, I will make it so "single" zombies (i.e. missing one game) won't be an issue - only chronic zombies will be. It's a work in progress, be patient. It would go quicker if someone would help me with the data collection, otherwise it will take longer. I would ask you to refrain from further comment until the list is done, ok?
Why don't you want to try and have the zombies improve? Because that has happened in the past. And some zombieism can be due to unexpected circumstances, so putting people up on your wall of shame just because they missed one vote can then drive away normally active players.
If they care about it that much then sure. But the hypocrisy here is egregious that you've even admitted yourself.
There's a difference between breaking the rules of the forum and someone not having enough time to play in one game. This statement is absurd.
Perhaps some people who feel shamed should not participate?
Ironhead, back in a day, posted a big post on this.....
You are driving quantity but the quality of players is plummeting.....
You are hosting a game with 40 people, 20 of which are zombies. Is that a good game? I would say no.
We cannot integrate people from other forums, why do you think that is happening?
Suggestion. If GM wishes he/she can impose a reasonable minimum number of posts a day (definitely less than 10b think 3 or 5).
Please read what I wrote. I understand that people can miss a single vote, and the finished list will take that into account and only "shame" chronic zombies. If you keep ignoring that fact, and my other posts, then I will have to assume you are trolling.
I stand with Tornadoli on this. I think a list would encourage more people to be more active in werewolf as inactive players ruin games.
If you want the data, compile it yourself. I see no use in such a pursuit, and thus see no reason to gather it for you.
I will, I just thought I'd do you a favour since you like collecting data.