Some setups with GS cc's call for a "GS Test" where one person is told to gun x and their cc told to gun y. In this case, the real GS gunned the person his cc was told to gun. If the test had been followed properly, then the cc would've been confirmed as mafia based on the agreement from the previous day.
The report was for GT, but I think that not following the GS test constitutes as trolling since it's being disruptive - you can read my comments on the report for further reasoning. If not trolling, I'd be tempted to say No Vio, just poor play (like a cop checking his cc, for example)
Are there any precedents for this sort of thing and how has it been ruled on previously? I'd ask the mods, but no one is awake right now it looks like and I thought that if this report established new ground on "GS Testing" that it's better we let the community give their opinions.
I had a different view than most of everyone in this thread on it and wasn't certain, so I asked before passing judgment. Now I know for the future what this would constitute as.
not following a gs test =gt -- because it confirms you as mafia. if you follow the gs test if confirms your cc as mafia. and it is quite evident he knew about the gs test, so he did it intentionally. so it is gt.
@bronto-- what could you possibly gain out of not following gs test? especially in this scenario? he certainly did it so that i lose the game. he knows idiots like you wont refund the game even though it took me from autowin to autoloss.
This proves TheEye not only KNEW what a GS test was but he even advocated for this test to be given to him and his cc which he sequentially failed intentionally the next night. He GAME-THREW case closed
Here, I'll come and poop on this thread with logic - let's ignore theye's trolling the whole game or possible ISP; not knowing who his cc and voting the clear leader for 3/4 of the day and let's just look at the puush in my next post.
Most "bad play" non-violations are complete bulls*it.
Icarus threw a game I was in earlier by claiming sheriff day 1 and refusing to retract..somehow this was justified as "bad play"
You should be able to justify bad play. You did something with an intention to win or get an advantage and failed or did not correctly have the foresight to see where you could go wrong.
When you play game, then you probably want to win. and when you have gs cc, you should try your best to confirm yourself as real. And when you are gunsmith,, you should obviously follow the GS test. there is nothing wrong with following GS test, if you want to win. Not following GS test and intentionally gunning someone else you were told to, or you said so, is obviously gamethrowing, because you know if you don't follow GS test, you might get lynched. So its obviously major improper play, and GT.
Ergo, both players in the game that survived the lynch were clear.
There's basically no way to go through that process without mechanically confirmed which is the fake GS.
If Giga had no gun the mafia would not have been able to WIFOM that because the way the test is set up. It completely and utterly relies on town GTing to mess that up.
He doesn't have to gun someone for his win condition, but in that case he confirmed his self as mafia when he gunned giga. I see this like a situation where a blue claims cop with inno on the real cop, but doesn't retract.
This community tends to be too lenient to blatant, intentional gamethrowing because it allows people to subvert the premise of mafia(which is playing with a team to achieve a common goal) and basically run a clown show based on their own arrogance.
People who constantly do things solely to be disruptive to team members, while being fully aware of the consequences should just be banned.
Mafia would be a much better place to be on without the egotists and the apathetic.
The difference is not checking someone in that case is a throw because you could mechanically confirm someone. This case he's just being told to gun X even though he really doesn't have to in order to play to his win condition. It doesn't mechanically confirm someone, town just chooses to believe that it does. (if you gun me you're mafia, etc)
Arguably 100% of ISP cases are GT but most mods are too scared to give GT vios for things like chronic lurking. The vio ought to be pretty superfluous.
Refusing to do the test is identical to not investigating someone as cop with blue, nilla, and an outed doc left in the game. If you're not prepared to call that GT then damn.
And yes, there's definitely some overlap here. The only reason I bring up ISP is because you could argue that it really didn't look like he knew what he was doing or that he gunned Giga because he wasn't paying attention.
It's not like he gunned mafia, he gunned a clear. It's just the clear that the town said not to gun. If it was a mechanical thing I'd be all for GT, but he gunned someone (who was clear), even though he was told to gun someone else. It's like saying someone threw for checking someone as cop outside what the town told him to check.
The non-mechanical aspect of the play makes me think Trolling is more fitting than GT.
Game throwing and trolling often overlap and they do in this case but if you don't follow a GS test then you're playing against your win condition unless for some reason it's a better not to comply (which is never). It's GT and probably trolling. Unless it's exceedingly plausible that the player wasn't paying attention, in which case it's ISP in addition to GT. In this situation ISP would be a conduit for GT.
if they did it on purpose they are directly confirming their cc, if they did it by accident it's no vio if they participated. if they did it because they weren't reading the game it's ISP. this is like basic intent reading 101 bronto
Not following a "GS Test"
