Okay, while waiting for Tass to get around to making Manti the local mod. I think that we should start up a thread to allow the community to voice their concerns with the game as it stands.

So, in this thread post any ideas you think could make the game better, rules that should be enforced, or policies that should be instated.

Also, this is a good place to nominate people for bans. (Whether they result from inactivity or whatever else) [A majority vote will result in a ban.]

TWC members:
Makilaz (BenderChan) Inactive
BDN (MegamnGTX) Inactive
Manti (Darkmanticorex2)
Pnt (merlonifan28) Inactive
Travman (RBennie362) Inactive
Thunder (thunderstrike687) Inactive
Roundbox (tehroundbox) Inactive

Currently Banned Members
None!


Manti Edit

I would like to ask everyone else to abstain from posting in this thread If it isn't necessary. If you are going to post here, make sure the post has a point. I will be deleting postwhoring posts in this thread.
We will attempt to clear up any sutuations that arise.

Re: TWC Rules, Policies, Etc.
 

Let's start this party off.

I think that mattc should definitely receive a 2 game ban.

He has signed up for the past couple games, and continues to be inactive in every single one of them. In our last game, he didn't make a single post.

Re: TWC Rules, Policies, Etc.
 

Trav's right, there should be a level of activity that you must complete to not recieve a ban. Like a minimum of 5 posts or 10 posts or someting.

Re: TWC Rules, Policies, Etc.
 

matt Actually had two posts, but both were apologies for inactivity.

mattc

As a general rule of thumb, If you can't be active enough to give the game a good shot don't join up. What generally ends up happening is someone signs up for the game, gets human and then goes "well i'm worthless, good luck blues". Inactivity from one person always leads to other people being inactive. That on top of the fact that inactives take away spots from people who would otherwise be active (mamimi this game), I see this as deserved.

Re: TWC Rules, Policies, Etc.
 

I'm hereby nominating myself to the WGP, or werewolfgame panel

also mattc, rzrgirl, lito, timo for inactivity

rzr for stupidity?

Re: TWC Rules, Policies, Etc.
 

rzr's fine he just played stupid that game

Lito got killed night 2. I'd like to see more real activity out of him (other than willliam hung voiceover)

Rzrgirl I don't think we have to worry about, It doesn't look like she'll play TWG again.

Timo played fine. He doesn't post much, but he's always on AIM ready to talk. You just never messaged him pnt =P

Re: TWC Rules, Policies, Etc.
 

i talked to him every time I saw him online without an away message, and that was only three convos

and one of them was after I was dead =\

Re: TWC Rules, Policies, Etc.
 

She says she wants to, maybe she (and some others) should switch to jTWG?

Re: TWC Rules, Policies, Etc.
 

If she wants to play again, make sure she knows she needs to be more active.

I'd say she should go in jtwg, but the main problem at this point is we don't have enough players for one, unless both games are really small

Re: TWC Rules, Policies, Etc.
 

I am voting for mattc and rzrgirl for a ban. Maybe not rzr girl so much that she didn't get the game. But inactivity was huge factor in the outcome of this game, which is really not fair to the wolves at all.

Re: TWC Rules, Policies, Etc.
 

Inactivity usually benifits wolves. Just not this game.

Re: TWC Rules, Policies, Etc.
 

There isn't a jTWG right now because there aren't enough players for one.

Re: TWC Rules, Policies, Etc.
 

I support this. I think you should be recommended for a game ban for everytime this happens.

Re: TWC Rules, Policies, Etc.
 

There needs to be some type of basis for that idea. You can't just ban people for not reaching a certain amount of posts because its all realative. Say someone gets killed night 1 and hasn't posted anything yet. Thats not ban worthy, or someone dies night 2, but has 3 very game oriented posts. This also isn't banworthy, just because they haven't met a quota.

I would say though If it's day 3, and someone has no worthwhile game influencing posts (even if they have 20 posts) thats worth a ban, because all that person is doing is postwhoring.

Each situation is different, so I think we need to talk a look at each one and assess it from there.

Re: TWC Rules, Policies, Etc.
 

Good pointo manti, would you like me to come up with this basis for you and post it?

Also, I have a LOT o f friednds who will be interested in playing. I'm setting them up accounts as we speak and will host a jTWG for them. rzrgirl and a few others should probably start there. It would be basic like manhunt or something.

Re: TWC Rules, Policies, Etc.
 

I'll make a jTWG host signup then, to see if anyone wants to oppose you.

Re: TWC Rules, Policies, Etc.
 

How's that?

30+ players

MUST POST AT LEAST 10 TIMES THROGUHOUT THE GAME. UNLESS YOU DIE FIRST DAY.

20-30 players
1 day/night- minimum of 3 posts, 1 relevant
2 day/night- minimum of 5 posts, 3 relevant
and so on

15-20 players
1 day/night- minimum of 2 posts, 1 relevant. Like you could make a joke out of one and a vote on the other.
2 day/night- minimum of 4 posts, 2 relevant.
3 day/night- minimum of 6 posts, 3 relevant.
And so on.

10-15 players
1 day/night- 1 posts, relevant
2 day/night- 3 posts, 2 relevant
And so on.

10 players or less
at least 5 posts throughout the ENTIRE GAME
If you die then don't post obviously.

Re: TWC Rules, Policies, Etc.
 

The thing about that is posts don't always equal activity. I could be very active via AIM and not post very often, or I could be a conservative poster and post all my important information via one huge post. The problem with setting up a set of rules is there will always be exceptions or special circumstances.

My suggestion would be to make everything regarding activity a matter of public opinion. For example, here's a situation that comes to mind:

XXX is inactive the whole game. He is either replaced/killed.
At the end of the game, the host, who is preferably very involved with the going ons of his TWG recommends which players (if any) should be banned. After this, each person who was elected for a ban should have a base time period to post (preferably 2 or 3 days) in their defense. When this time passes, the "TWC" reads the posts and decides which users should be banned, and for how long via votes. (as an example, 2-3 votes would garnish a ban)

This system seems pretty damn bureaucratic, but in the ends it's barely 5 minutes of 5 people's time.

Anyways, that's my proposition with inactivity.

Re: TWC Rules, Policies, Etc.
 

What if a person is defended by **** players. Like (no offence) mattc16 defends litodude (no offence). Then the **** defenderes defend an inactive player, and the good one's convict?

Re: TWC Rules, Policies, Etc.
 

Er, that's the reason not everyone is involved. The host would have to elect the players as inactive, and then the person (and only him) would present evidence that he was not, or concede that he was. Based on the information provided by the 2 parties, then the "jTWC" or "TWC" or whatever would vote between themselves on whether or not the ban should go into effect, and if so, for how long.