Eh, anyone who reads the rules will know that this clearly isn't the case
Ok, then just make the infringements for Meta Abuse (12 month expiry):
1. Warning 2. 24 hour suspension (& 6 month ban from trophying in Main Lobby) 3. Lobby Ban
(12 month expiry)
A user being reported for a batch of games would count towards one violation (one violation per batch of games reported essentially, then if they continue AFTER the first violation, then the batch of games that occurred AFTER the first violation was given would be the games that constitute handing out the second violation).
I don't like the idea of putting meta abuse inside cheating as it may give the impression that using meta is cheating.
The nature of cheating suggests that the user is using off-site material to gain an unfair advantage and is something that can be evaluated in an absolute sense (i.e "either he role-shared or he didn't"). Whereas meta abuse is subject to gradation and the line is hazy for what would hit the violation mark.
The difference is similar to the difference between GT and ISP. Where GT holds an intent to destroy the game, whereas ISP is more the lack of an effort spent to win.
I'm also not sure if making a note the mandatory verdict for a first offence is reasonable because notes only exist to protect new players, meaning if experienced players meta abused then they should face consequences accordingly.
But in retrospect I agree that a 4-violation lobby ban is probably too lenient for such an offence, and I plan to tweak how consequences are handed out to better fit the crime.
i played a game for the first time in awhile on an alt (with Gerry in there) and it was so strange, the reasoning going back and forth was all meta-based and i didnt know wtf was going on. it wasnt rule breaking, it just felt like not being able to play a proper game
In comp it becomes very obvious what it. Giga is right after a warning they should know that can't pull that kind of crap. "I'm clear because I don't kill my friends" Or playing with a friends over and over that knows you don't do certain sh*t as mafia eg claim cop.
Now everyone, I know, I know. I just wrote some mighty big paragraphs, but... they are about rules of the game of Mafia (what the site is about) so I'd appreciate feedback on my revision idea if you would be so kind, please and thanks
Shoutouts to: Devante, Solace for reading and replying and offering feedback
Right. Which is why the first infringement (the first time they are caught meta abusing like this) would simply be a Note with a verdict such as: "Note for Meta Abuse--Don't do this again or it will result in a Cheating violation" (one might call it a slap on the e-wrist). You could revise the rule right now for it to just be
1. Note 2. See: Cheating infringements (infringements will apply in order after Note for Meta Abuse is given)
or something like that
Basically, after the Note, it would become Cheating ("via Meta Abuse" in the verdict) - 24h susp. and Cheating ("via Meta Abuse" in the verdict) - Lobby Ban for infringements 2 and 3 respectively.
These would count as cheating vios, but you would get it for a different reason which can be followed and tracked through observing verdicts. Like how you can get ISP or ISP via negligence, but they both count towards your accumulation of ISP violations and your 8 maximum total violations
That's an interesting point. But cheating and meta abuse differ in the sense that...cheating is frequently done with the user knowing that they're breaking rules (such as role-sharing on Skype), whereas meta abuse can occur unintentionally, especially among newer players - which calls for a distinction and a more lenient consequence.
