Info Mafia Game Hall Of Shame

[Evil3ye]

HALL OF SHAME:

Host Kill Log.

• Hystzen was disqualified for revealing game sensitive information in Game 4.
• kakashi919 was hostkilled for inactivity in Game 6.
• Channy was hostkilled for in activity in Game 6.
• yukilove21 was hostkilled for inactivity in Game 7.
• xAznSinnage was hostkilled for inactivity in Game 7.
• BBB Banana was hostkilled for breaking rules in Game 7.
• digitaldude was disqualified for revealing game sensitive information in Game 8.
• jorped was hostkilled for inactivity in Game 10.
• Xadyu was hostkilled for inactivity in Game 10.
• Hystzen was disqualified for revealing game sensitive information in Game 10.
• Imperium was hostkilled for inactivity in Game 15.
• Baka Taichou was hostkilled for inactivity in Game 16.
• kdowns was hostkilled for inactivity in Game 17.
• Adorien was hostkilled for inactivity in Game 17.
• googlez_kun was hostkilled for inactivity in Game 18.
• wizzard was hostkilled for breaking rules in Game 18.
• Tatasugoi was hostkilled for revealing game sensitive information in Game 19.
• xi0 was hostkilled for receiving game sensivitve information in Game 19.
• kdowns is not allowed to participate in Game 21, because of inactivity in Game 20.
• Charlie is not allowed to participate in Game 21, because of inactivity in Game 20.
• kkck is not allowed to participate in Game 22, because of inactivity in Game 21.
• Baka Taichou is not allowed to participate in Game 22, for revealing game sensitive information in Game 21, while being dead.
• Macaco is not allowed to participate in Game 23, because of inactivity in Game 22.
• Xadyu is not allowed to participate in Game 23, because of inactivity in Game 22.
• Kazu-Sama is not allowed to participate in Game 23, because of inactivity in Game 22.
• BBB Banana is not allowed to participate in Game 23, because of inactivity in Game 22.
• Baka Taichou is not allowed to participate in Game 24 & 25, because of inactivity in Game 23.
• thornofcarrion is not allowed to participate in Game 25, because of inactivity in Game 24.
• FaustXIII is not allowed to participate in Game 26, because of inactivity in Game 25.
• Hakuteiken is not allowed to participate in Game 26, because he told everyone about the remaining mafia in Game 25.
• kdowns is not allowed to participate in Games 27, 28, 29 & 30, because of inactivity in Game 26.
• Kat is not allowed to participate in Game 27, because of inactivity in Game 26.
• lawlett-kun is not allowed to participte in Game 28 because he posted the PM from the host about his role in Game 27 and kept posting in the game thread when he's already disqualified.
• FaustXIII is not allowed to participate in Game 29, 30 & 31, because of inactivity in Game 28.
• Ustegius is not allowed to participate in Game 29, because of inactivity in Game 28.
• BBB Banana is not allowed to participate in Game 29, 30 & 31, because of inactivity in Game 28.
• shinsengumi is not allowed to participate in Game 29 because of inactivity in Game 28.
• Xerous is not allowed to participate in Game 29 because of inactivity in Game 28.
• digitaldude is not allowed to participate in Game 30, because of inactivity in Game 29.
• Adorien is not allowed to participate in Game 32, because of her retirement in Game 31.
• matzik1212 is not allowed to participate in Game 33, because of inactivity in Game 32.
• Imperium is not allowed to participate in Game 33, because of his retirement in Game 32.
• nanaDmari is not allowed to participate in Games 35, because of inactivity in Game 34.
• BBB Banana is banned until further notice, because of inactivity in Game 35.
• TheBoss is not allowed to participate in Game 39, because of inactivity in Game 38.
• Xadyu is not allowed to participate in Game 40, 41 & 42, because of inactivity in Game 39.
• Ustegius is not allowed to participate in Game 40, 41 & 42, because of his cutting short in Game 39.
• Zeltrax is not allowed to participate in Game 41, because of inactivity in Game 40.
• Nico Brown is not allowed to participate in Game 41, because of inactivity in Game 40.
• Nico Brown is not allowed to participate in Game 43, 44 & 45 because of inactivity in Game 42.
• Zasz is not allowed to participate in Game 44 because of inactivity in Game 43.
• lawlett-kun is not allowed to participte in Game 48, 49 & 50, for posting fake host PMs in Game 47.
• GrySun is not allowed to participte in Game 48 for posting host PMs in Game 47.
• Naomi is not allowed to participate in Games 48, because of inactivity in Game 47.
• YumaKuga is not allowed to participate in Game 49, because of Inactivity in Game 48.
• Philia is not allowed to participate in Game 50, because of Inactivity in Game 49.
• Xadyu is banned until further notice, because of inactivity in Game 49.
• SheepyTurtle is not allowed to participate in Game 52, because of inactivity in Game 51.
• SugarKitty is not allowed to participate in Game 52, because of inactivity in Game 51.
• Utsune is not allowed to participate in Game 52, because of inactivity in Game 51.
• xnut is not allowed to participate in Game 57, because of inactivity in Game 56.
• Mazino is not allowed to participate in Game 58, because of inactivity in Game 57.
• Qixus is not allowed to participate in Game 58, because of inactivity in Game 57.
• xnut is not allowed to participate in Game 59 & 60 because of inactivity in Game 58.
• Kiki is not allowed to participate in Game 59, because of inactivity in Game 58.
• Kiki is not allowed to participate in Game 60 & 61 because of inactivity in Game 59.
• Kato756 is not allowed to participate in Game 60, because of inactivity in Game 59.
• Demonspeed is not allowed to participate in Game 61 for posting host PMs in Game 60.
• Erinyes is not allowed to participate in Game 61 for posting host PMs in Game 60.
• Xadyu is unbanned as of Game 61.
• BluePegasus is not allowed to participate in Game 62, because of inactivity in Game 61.
• Mononoke is not allowed to participate in Game 62, because of inactivity in Game 61.
• kira is not allowed to participate in Game 62, because of inactivity in Game 61.
• Elusia is not allowed to participate in Game 65, because of inactivity in Game 64.
• Commanderaxe is not allowed to participate in Game 68, because of inactivity in Game 67.
• kkck is not allowed to participate in Game 68, 69 & 70, because of inactivity in Game 67.
• Kato756 is not allowed to participate in Game 71, 72 & 73, because of inactivity in Game 70.
• Lambu is not allowed to participate in Game 74, because of inactivity in Game 73.
• Kiki is not allowed to participate in Game 76, 77 & 78, because of inactivity in Game 75.
• Arjuna is not allowed to participate in Game 77, because of inactivity in Game 76.
• Brandish is not allowed to participte in Game 79 for posting host PMs in Game 78.
• Buffynut is not allowed to participate in Game 80, because of inactivity in Game 79.
• Kato756 is banned until further notice, because of inactivity in Game 80.
• Kato756 is banned until game 91, because of inactivity in Game 80.
• Spirit is not allowed to participate in Game 82, because of inactivity in Game 81.
• gnut is not allowed to participate in Game 82, because of inactivity in Game 81.
• revo retired from Game 81.
• Copy Panda is not allowed to participate in Game 86 for deleting a post in Game 85.
• Raven is not allowed to participate in Game 86 for revealing game sensitive information in Game 85, while dead.
• Crescent Jinx is not allowed to participate in Game 88 for posting host PMs in Game 87.
• Baka Taichou is not allowed to participate in Game 88, 89 and 90 for posting host PMs in Game 87.
• BBB Banana is unbanned as of Game 88.
• gnut is not allowed to participate in Game 92, 93 and 94, because of inactivity in Game 91.
• Asako retired from Game 93.
• Demonspeed retired from Game 93.
• Crescent Jinx is not allowed to participate in Games 103, 104 and 105, due to playing against her win-con in Game 102.
• AwkwardMisha retired from Game 102.
• Erinyes is not allowed to participate in Game 103, due to playing against her win-con in Game 102.
• Demonspeed is not allowed to participate in Game 105, due to sharing sensitive PM content in Game 104.
• Sky retired from Game 106.
• gnut retired from Game 106.
• Baka Taichou retired from Game 108.
• Kato756 is not allowed to participate in Game 109, because of inactivity in Game 108.
• Kat retired from Game 110.
• Shad is not allowed to participate in Game 114, for faking the use of a day ability in game 113.
• boolbool is not allowed to participate in Game 115, because of inactivity in Game 114.
• desin24 is not allowed to participate in Game 116 for inactivity in Game 115.
• Shad is not allowed to participate in Games 120, 121 & 122, for being Host Killed in game 119.

Spoiler: General Information

General Infraction Treatment

-All infractions (meaning, a hostkill for being inactive, a player hostkilled for revealing sensitive PM information, etc) will have the same punishment.

-Players that are banned CANNOT host, co-host nor consult.

-If a player has been listed in the Hall of Shame before, the host of a game is allowed to NOT let the player join regardless if the player is currently banned or not (only to be used in extreme cases).

Players are still allowed to appeal their bans in the Hall of Shame.

Ban and forgiveness system

All players start at Stage 0.

Stage 0: you are unbanned.
Stage 1: you are banned one game.
Stage 2: you are banned three games.
Stage 3: you are banned ten games.
Stage 4: you are banned permanently.

If you're punished, you are moved up one (1) stage. To move back a stage, you have to PLAY ten (10) games without moving up a stage.

 

[Hardy]

I believe the bans are just for playing not for hosting.

We are discussing all these in THE COUNCIL

 

[Baka Taichou]

well discuss fast cuz I already found my sacrifice partner host and we're debating themes and shit already xD

 

[Hardy]

HALL OF SHAME 2.0: PREPARE TO BE BANNED​

New infraction

Following the basic forum rules and the Fun Forum guideline:

-Players are not allowed to insult nor bash each other, this will not be tolerated and will be punished.

The infraction will follow the standard for minor violations, favouring the host's discretion.

We won't ban players retroactively, this new violation will apply from Game 88 onwards.

General Infraction Treatment

-All infractions (meaning, a hostkill for being inactive, a player hostkilled for revealing sensitive PM information, etc) will have the same punishment.

-Players that are banned CANNOT host, co-host nor consult.

-If a player has been listed in the Hall of Shame before, the host of a game is allowed to NOT let the player join regardless if the player is currently banned or not (only to be used in extreme cases).

Players are still allowed to appeal their bans in the Hall of Shame.

New ban and forgiveness system

All players start at Stage 0.

Stage 0: you are unbanned.
Stage 1: you are banned one game.
Stage 2: you are banned three games.
Stage 3: you are banned ten games.
Stage 4: you are banned permanently.

If you're punished, you are moved up one (1) stage. To move back a stage, you have to PLAY ten (10) games without moving up a stage.

The Stage every player is on will be added to the first post once I calculate it for every single player.

Aftermath of Game 87

- @Crescent Jinx is banned for one game and will be listed in Stage 1. She won't be allowed to play nor host game 88.

- @sakura-aneki is banned for three games and will be listed in Stage 2. She won't be allowed to play nor host games 88, 89 and 90. Despite her being banned before twice, we are being lenient here given that the ban format is new.

--- Double Post Merged, Dec 26, 2020, Original Post Date: Dec 26, 2020 ---

The penalties of @Kato756 and @BBB Banana have been changed accordingly.

 

[Baka Taichou]

No need to be lenient. I was also banned 3 times not 2. This is the 4th.

--- Double Post Merged, Dec 26, 2020, Original Post Date: Dec 26, 2020 ---

So, fix that and put up 10 game bans.

 

[digitaldude]

Criminal doesn't decide his fate. Only the high council does.

 

[Hardy]

No need to be lenient. I was also banned 3 times not 2. This is the 4th.

--- Double Post Merged, Dec 26, 2020, Original Post Date: Dec 26, 2020 ---

So, fix that and put up 10 game bans.

Any hostkill before game 20 was made before the Hall of Shame and its punishments were a thing. They have always been listed merely anecdotally.

--- Double Post Merged, Dec 26, 2020 ---

Apparently anecdotally isn't the word but hopefully the message was understood '-'

 

[Baka Taichou]

Any hostkill before game 20 was made before the Hall of Shame and its punishments were a thing. They have always been listed merely anecdotally.

--- Double Post Merged, Dec 26, 2020 ---

Apparently anecdotally isn't the word but hopefully the message was understood '-'

ah, so, in thit case, an infringement that happened in past tense is not taken into account. But In the hosting rule addition it is? How about when Copan hosted while being banned from playing?

 

[Hardy]

ah, so, in thit case, an infringement that happened in past tense is not taken into account. But In the hosting rule addition it is? How about when Copan hosted while being banned from playing?

We talked about it in the deadpad. Panda was a last second addition where someone asked him to join, so it really didn't cross my mind, whereas this whole situation was presented as "ok I can't play but I can host!".

There's no sort of favoritism here though. If people agree that it's the best approach then panda will sit out the next game as well.

--- Double Post Merged, Dec 27, 2020, Original Post Date: Dec 27, 2020 ---

Writing the panda ban down in some minutes.

 

[Baka Taichou]

I left the deadpad so I wouldn't know what was discussed.

I heard from copan that he was a last addition to the hosting, still rules are rules aren't they?

Did in no way insinuate favoritism, as copan's situation happened in the past i don't even know when. and no way in hell would I desire or agree with copan sitting out on the next game. It was just an example of how it was overlooked in the past.

I would be more interested in your answers to the first part of the msg not the copan one.

 

[Hardy]

I would be more interested in your answers to the first part of the msg not the copan one.

Punishments weren't specified in the past. People were just asked to behave and there was a very loose three strike system. We decided on what's the best for everyone moving forward.

You knew what you were doing, you saw someone getting hostkilled in front of you in the same game. Yet you went ahead and did it anyway. People aren't being mean for the sake of it, but a punishment has to be one.

Let's use Jinx's case, for example. Would she had behaved differently had she known she wouldn't be able to host the next game? I would like to think not, as then she did it intentionally knowing she could abuse a loophole and the only people affected would be the hosts and fellow players. So then, how is it unfair?

--- Double Post Merged, Dec 27, 2020, Original Post Date: Dec 27, 2020 ---

And again, this whole scenario that is happening isn't making you guys unable to ever host again (which has happened before and would probably be seen as the norm for someone that would had been permanently banned), but just delaying it a couple of months at worst.

 

[Baka Taichou]

Somehow i never got notified of that last message. Funny I came to check after exactly 1 year )).

I think my point was, if bans from a decade ago weren't taken into consideration because the banning system from 0 to 10 was just started recently, why did i get 3 months instead of 1. Not to mention adding that you were being "lenient" lmao.

Adding an infraction ban system 10 years after an infraction was made and taking said infraction into account when deciding on the level of punishment for a recent infraction is morally wrong. That's my point here, and I think that was where I was getting at last year before MH decided to stop notifying me about replies and I forgot.

And the point you made about the hosting part fits what I said above, it was a new rule added and it shouldn't have been taken into account for an infraction that had just happened, but be considered for future infractions. even if you say Jinx wouldn't have broken the rules if she knew she'd get banned from hosting an upcoming game, while that may be true, the rule did not exist, it's not a matter of not knowing about the rule, but a matter of adding new punishments that weren't there when the infraction took place.

"Ok she broke the rules, she's banned from games, but since she already is supposed to host, let's also add a rule to ban from hosting too" that's wrong. "ok she broke the rules, she's banned from games, but since she's already supposed to host, let's let her host, pay close attention to her while she's at it, and let's introduce this hosting rule too for future infractions, effective from the moment the rule is approved, for infractions happening AFTER the rule is approved" that would have been the correct moral/ethic approach that I meant should have been taken.

Plus, considering the same infractions never repeated, I'd say it's an improvement, it's also an improvement to the way the roles are written and clarified after an infraction is made, so these infractions were actually benefic (exception the inactivity happened twice because the second time I actually left MH because i was kicked out of the ap i rented and almost ended up on the street, and had no internet access for 3 months or so and the rest is irrelevant, but yea was a result of rl problems that prevented me from being active ~if I remember right), as nothing is perfect from the start and as anything else in life it gets improved over time and through experiences from mistakes.

 

[Copy Panda]

Somehow i never got notified of that last message. Funny I came to check after exactly 1 year )).

I think my point was, if bans from a decade ago weren't taken into consideration because the banning system from 0 to 10 was just started recently, why did i get 3 months instead of 1. Not to mention adding that you were being "lenient" lmao.

I think you were close to perma earlier? The leniency comes from not just perma'ing you immediately since you did something bannable. 3 games vs perma I think is considerably lenient.

Adding an infraction ban system 10 years after an infraction was made and taking said infraction into account when deciding on the level of punishment for a recent infraction is morally wrong. That's my point here, and I think that was where I was getting at last year before MH decided to stop notifying me about replies and I forgot.

Why is it morally wrong to consider where one was at when introducing/enforcing a new system?

The fact of the matter is that repeat offenders are prone to rule breaking and misbehaving; a new system does not make it so the players are suddenly 'new' as well. A new rule is not a 'reset' of the game, players or history.

And the point you made about the hosting part fits what I said above, it was a new rule added and it shouldn't have been taken into account for an infraction that had just happened, but be considered for future infractions. even if you say Jinx wouldn't have broken the rules if she knew she'd get banned from hosting an upcoming game, while that may be true, the rule did not exist, it's not a matter of not knowing about the rule, but a matter of adding new punishments that weren't there when the infraction took place.

At the heart of it, MG is a game about rules and arrangements; how well hosts and players stick to these arrangements determines the quality of the experience.

For instance, intentionally posting PM's in a game (to end an argument) proves that the player at that moment fails to respect these arrangements and boundaries (it's a clear and blatant disregard of an embedded rule). Why allow such a player to host and make up rules they others should keep immediately after? It's not like one or two offences make you a persona non grata for eternity, but I do think it sensible to want to deter certain behaviours.

"Ok she broke the rules, she's banned from games, but since she already is supposed to host, let's also add a rule to ban from hosting too" that's wrong. "ok she broke the rules, she's banned from games, but since she's already supposed to host, let's let her host, pay close attention to her while she's at it, and let's introduce this hosting rule too for future infractions, effective from the moment the rule is approved, for infractions happening AFTER the rule is approved" that would have been the correct moral/ethic approach that I meant should have been taken.

That's way too much oversight to provide. So because a player broke the rules, someone else now has to volunteer their time to closely monitor the situation? So not a co-host but a babysitter? That brings much of its own complexities as well.

For instance, if someone broke a rule in game, but they are babysat the game after, it'd be unclear if they reflected and/or reformed or were being watched too much.

Why not just have someone who is allowed to play/host set-up the next game? Safer and less intensive on our community.

Plus, considering the same infractions never repeated

Not to make it personal but merely for the sake of illustration, haven't you multiple times revealed PM's, or dropped in a public space who the remaining mafia are? Repeat offenders will generally repeat offend, for one reason or another.

I'd say it's an improvement, it's also an improvement to the way the roles are written and clarified after an infraction is made, so these infractions were actually benefic (...) as nothing is perfect from the start and as anything else in life it gets improved over time and through experiences from mistakes.

Are you suggesting the player base should be grateful to people who are toxic, abusive, sabotaging etc. to others every (other) game they play? To people who (deliberately and/or consistently) ruin experiences of other people?

Toxic players are not a 'necessary evil'. It's just that every now and then a new player shows up (or an old one returns) that forces the base to come up with new rules to enforce behavioural guidelines that to an important degree were already established or accepted.

Nothing is perfect but thanking people who ruin things (for personal gain) seems twisted. It's not 'innovation', just problematic enough to be addressed.

--- Double Post Merged, Dec 19, 2021, Original Post Date: Dec 19, 2021 ---

edit: made some edits

 

[Baka Taichou]

I didn.t mean "thank toxic ppl", I meant there.s also a bright side to it.
I dropped in a public space mafia once, i private convo screenshot once.

The rest I won.t address rn because you.re interpretting it all wrongly and I don.t have energy to continue an arguement on the matter. I simply left my opinion, not looking to convince anyone to cha ge anything, just felt I left the doscussion hanging, you replied based off of what you understood so will leave it at that.

 

[GrySun]

@Demonspeed after consulting with others, decision is you get to Stage 1 and banned for 1 game. The PM rules are clear to majority of players, and must be enforced.

 

[Copy Panda]

aigo what happened

--- Double Post Merged, Aug 26, 2022, Original Post Date: Aug 26, 2022 ---

demon

 

[Hardy]

Aftermath of Game 113

- @Shad is banned for one game and will be listed in Stage 1 because he faked a day ability in game 113. He won't be allowed to play nor host game 114.

 

[Raven]

I thought lying about your role is okay.

 

[Hardy]

I thought lying about your role is okay.

You can but you cannot fake day abilities.

 

[Copy Panda]

Aftermath of Game 114

- @boolbool is banned for one game and will be listed in Stage 1 because they were largely AFK and eventually subbed out without notice in game 114. He won't be allowed to play nor host game 115.

Additionally, we ask Hosts and Players to remain vigilant in guarding the rulesets. There was some ambivalence in this game concerning what amount of PM information is allowed to be shared. The answer is 'none', bar serious paraphrasing, so just changing a few words (or even just one word) shouldn't cut it. There were no real consequences to the information being revealed (also according to Host perspectives) so there will be warnings and reminders this time. But we ask all to please not take this PM-rule lightly.

 

[Copy Panda]

Aftermath of Game 119

- @Shad is banned for three games and will be listed in Stage 2 because he got Host Killed during Game 119. Because it has been less than 10 games ago he received a HoS penalty last time (Game 113), he has moved up one stage and he won't be allowed to play nor host games 120, 121 and 122.

Due to circumstances, both IRL and behavioural, Shad requested Host Kill and substitution in Game 119. The hosts decided, for the continuation of the game, that the player should be taken out and replaced by another, but we would like to make it clear this is exceptional: substitution is not a tactic to be used and abused at a player's convenience.

In the future, we request Hosts to not list substitute players (if they recruit any) publicly. This is to ensure that players who sign up for the game are committed and do not think they can drop out at a moment's notice because a substitute is ready. To be clear, Substitution and Host Killing are two different things: a player that is being substituted is not being Host Killed and therefore does not receive a penalty. Should a host decide to sub out a player they Host Kill, like in this case, that player should receive appropriate penalties post-game.

We urge hosts to use Host Kills and substitution sparingly and ask players not to abuse the good faith grace systems put in place to facilitate those who have no choice but to drop out.