The Spammers' Spree debate

[Sutherlands]

Ok, I'm under fire here because people say that I'm a "criminal" in the Spammers' Spree. I want to know what everyone else thinks. What happened is that they allowed outside communication. Then the inspector found out that someone was mafia so he told one of my friends. Then that friend told me. I did not break any of the rules pertaining to this, although some people say I had an unfair advantage. I want to know who you think is at fault.

You can view the part where I posted if it interests you here:
http://forums.mtgnews.com/showthread.php?threadid=129863&perpage=15&display=&pagenumber=33

And you can view the "debate" that was on the thread here:
http://forums.mtgnews.com/showthread.php?threadid=129863&perpage=15&display=&pagenumber=35

[fÉLiX]

Zombie sharpshooter is most defnitely at fault. after reviewing the rules of this exact game with a certain "Sutherlan....player" we shall say, I totally find zombie at fault. From what i understand he tried to change the rules in the middle of the game slightly. Thats terribly wrong, and he shouldnt moderate anymore mafia games...~shakes finger~

[Sutherlands]

He's referring to the rule that we could communicate outside the thread, then said that we couldn't talk to people that weren't in the game and said that it was implied or something like that.

[Ryo0oki]

If there was one person at fault, that was CRiX, for going against his better judgement and telling you something he shouldn't have. You are not a "criminal" and people honestly need to learn to take Mafia games less seriously. ZS did what was best for the game, and did what made it most fair. Poll closed, moved to TGC.

-Ryo0oki:bunny:

[Jon]

I totally agree that CRiX is the one at fault, and that ZS did the right thing. CRiX really shouldn't have told Sutherlands anything (not that I'm complaining, but...).

[Hatredboy77]

ha, you actually made a debate about this?? hmm.. since i am playing in the game and i have heard both sides of the story, i think that CRIX shouldn't have told you. Also if massive knew that you and CRIX were close, he shouldnt have told him. Also i think you shouldnt have used it. and lastly i think that ZS did the right thing. sorry sutherlands.

[massive]

I of course had no idea that Sutherlands and CRiX were close. I remember CRiX telling me at one point during our chats in the chat room that giving him info was dangerous since someone was lurking over his shoulder ... but to my recollection he goes to school with about five or six of the Mafia players here, so which specific one he was referring to escapes me at this time.

I brought it up in the DACA thread to discuss; I don't think we all need to debate it again.

[CRiX]

umm, if I had told him anything maybe I would've been at fault,

btw.. this is the convo that happened between me and Sutherlands..
(he asked me if Radjin had been in the channel, I said yes, he asked if any discussion about Spammers accurred, I said yes, but no roles were revealed, so I gave him my logs to find the convo between Radjin and Massive, I didn't know that massive had said that in my logs (I don't keep track of what is my logs.)


--MSN names changed to MTGNews user names--
Sutherlands.. a whole bunch of different ones....
CRiX: yes
CRiX: I don't know when he was one
CRiX: on**
Sutherlands: lol
Sutherlands: i'll guess...
Sutherlands: what was radjan on as?
Sutherlands: just radjanspiritmonger?
CRiX: yes
CRiX: dude!! I don't think you can do that..
CRiX: -_-
CRiX: I was not a part of this!!
Sutherlands: so? we can talk outside the thread!
Sutherlands: heehee
Sutherlands: we already got into a bout about it
CRiX: aha

so "we can talk outside the thread" meant to me that it didn't matter who they talked to, if something is said and someone hears it, it can be used against the other, correct??

Outside discussion is *NOT* a good thing for mafia games, just so you know. It doesn't add anything but confusion and/or cheating. Not really my kind of thing to get into. I'm going to say that people who're blamnig me need to look at the facts.

1. I was unaware of what he was going to use the logs for
2. He asked me for the logs to find something against RADJIN, not Longview (I don't even remember that conversation.)
3. There are seven people on these boards that live within several feet of me.

Sure, Sutherlands could've used the info in a different way, but he didn't have to because outside discussion is allowed!!! What if someone y'all didn't even know was in the channel instead of me, and *that's* who massive told, and *that's* who game the logs to Sutherlands.. sheesh, it's just a game. Get over it. -_-

[Arg[y]veDawnshooter]

:visor:--Well, not all of us are in Daca, eh? :p

Originally posted by fÉLiX
Zombie sharpshooter is most defnitely at fault. after reviewing the rules of this exact game with a certain "Sutherlan....player" we shall say, I totally find zombie at fault. From what i understand he tried to change the rules in the middle of the game slightly. Thats terribly wrong, and he shouldnt moderate anymore mafia games...~shakes finger~
How much mafia experience do you have, that gives you enough right to decide what was right and what was wrong? Think of this first: How would you feel if you were mafia and someone posted that? Does it seem fair to you? How about you play a few games, then come back and share your opinion.

Sutherland, if you were not sure about it (which I think you said so at some point), you should have asked me or D_G_C. You desided to go right a head and post it, so this is the consencuence. (Yeah, bad spelling, I know).

Incase anyone doesn't know:

Outside Communication- Players may communicate with EACH OTHER outside of the main thread.--:visor:

[Sutherlands]

That's not what outside communication means. I'm gonna give you a few definitions:

Outside - Acting, occurring, originating, or being at a place beyond certain limits.

Communication - something communicated, a message.

I'm going to assume that the "limit" that we are talking about and may pass is the limit of talking in the thread.

So then:
We are allowed to give messages to people beyond the limits of the thread.
How does this say anything about not giving messages to people outside the game. You assumed something that you shouldn't have, and that's what screwed up the game.

[carpo]

My opinions:
CRiX cannot be blamed for what occurred. He cannot be expected to know the rules of a game he is not partaking in. Sutherlands was, and should be blamed for the incident.

From what I understand, the concept of outside communication is from one person to another person, or 3 or more. People not involved in that conversation have no right to read it without someone in the conversation giving it to them. So, Sutherlands should not have been looking for a conversation involving RSM, because RSM was talking to massive under what should be the correct impression that the information would be kept private. So in fact, asking for the chat logs IMO should be enough to get Sutherlands removed.

Furthermore, Sutherlands posted a private conversation between massive and CRiX. massive should be able to talk to players outside the game, as long as the information is kept secret. In fact, massive even asked CRiX if anyone was watching him as he was chatting. It is obvious that massive did not want anyone else to know about what he was saying. Sutherlands should not have even read that, but did, and then proceeded to post it, knowing it was secret information, without asking a moderator of the game.

Sorry Sutherlands, but in IMO, you are majorly at fault here.

Regarding the bannings:
zs had no choice. Sutherlands deserved to be banned. Longview did not, but had to be. After the game being tainted by the illegally obtained information, zs was left with no choice but to ban all members involved.

[Sutherlands]

I was not looking through someone's conversations without the right. CRiX gave me the logs himself knowing that I was in the game and was looking for the mafia.

It was not a private conversation between the two, it was in a chat room.

And the "secret information" is exactly what we're in the game to obtain.

Also, I still do not see any rules that were broken or any way that the game was tainted. I did not talk to anyone who was dead, nor did i get information from someone who had talked to someone who was dead at the time. We were allowed to communicate outside the thread, so I did. Massive telling CRiX that is no different than telling one of the people in the game that he thought would not say anything and then that person telling me.

[carpo]

CRiX giving you the logs doesn't give you the right to look through them. CRiX is not the moderator of the game. So yes, you were looking through the chat logs without the right (in terms of the game).

And yes, it was a private conversation. True, it was in a chat room, but massive made sure that noone was watching when he typed that information. He meant for the information to be kept between himself and CRiX. Something that is exclusive to a small amount of people is a secret.

If I were you, I would stop trying to make what you did look correct. You should admit you made a mistake, apologize, and move on.

EDIT:
And yes, it is different than massive telling somebody in the game. He did not intend for anyone in the game to receive that information. Can I make that more clear?

True, there is no specific rule stating what you did is illegal, but sometimes you have to use common sense. massive never intended for you to get that information. He wanted to keep it a secret. This is obvious. You should have realized this, and not looked through the chat logs. Even though you did, you further should not have posted that information. Under the rulings given, you should not be able to obtain information not specifically said in your presence, and you did. That deserved a banning.

[Sutherlands]

I already did apologize, but I will not admit I made a mistake, because I don't believe that I did. It's like in those movies when they deal with the army and stuff and they want them to plea bargain, but they won't because then they would have to say they were guilty. Still no one has provided me with a rule that I have broken, and I still believe that the game was fine and able to continue with what I did.

[carpo]

Regarding the rule: see above. You were never intended to get that information under the rulings given. It is irrelevent that no specific ruling was given. The intent of the rulings was for somebody not to get information that was not specifically told to them, so you should have followed the intention of the rules.

And no, the game could not have continued after what you did. Longview would have been lynched unfairly. This would have proven you innocent. For these two reasons, the game could not continue as normal.

EDIT:

If you want the specific ruling, here you go. The rules said outside communication is allowed. What you did by looking through the chat logs was not communication. It was 'eavesdropping'.

[Sutherlands]

There's lots of times that people get information that people didn't intend for them to get, that doesn't make them cheaters. How would longview have been lynched unfairly? If you looked at the threads, people were trying to kill ME after I said this. You can never determine if someone is lying or not, even when posting this stuff.

And I had moved on, what drove me to create this thread was that people in the game are still referring to it as cheating.

Another definition:
Cheat - To violate rules deliberately, as in a game.

When someone can show me how I did this (except for the accidental edit during the game), then I will concede my point.

[carpo]

You did intend to get that information, or similar information regarding the mafia game.

This will be my last attempt at trying to explain this to you:

massive never intended for you to see what he typed. He was not communicating that information to you, or anyone else except CRiX. For you to read, and post that information, is illegal. Regardless of whether you 'accidentally' came across this information, it was meant for noone other than CRiX, and should have stayed that way. I cannot point out a specific rule to you. You should only follow the intention of the rules.

[Sutherlands]

I said "people get information that people didn't intend for them to get"... that's what you said... anyway. Tell me an intended rule even that I broke. The rule that we should only communicate with people in the game? That's not a rule, remember, zs threw that one out. And if it is a rule, massive and RSM broke it first, not me, so that can't be it.

[massive]

Well, there's two things: One, the dis-connection between Sutherlands and carpo; two, the manner in which the information was used or mis-used.

About the rules: Think of it in terms of Magic. You're playing a match, let's say it's a PTQ just so that there's some weight on the argument, and you're 4-1 going into the sixth round. You and your opponent begin the first game, and after a couple of turns back-and-forth, he's in the process of countering one of your spells. He plays out his counterspell, taps some land, and then thinks about it and untaps his Adarkar Wastes and taps an Island instead. You think "eh, it's no big deal, I mis-tap mana sometimes too" and continue on. In the second game, you're tapping mana for a creature and you do the exact same thing ... only your opponent makes a big stink about the rules and how you tapped certain lands and can't go back and change that without taking mana burn.

Letter of the law? Spirit of the game? Which one is more important here to you? Are you the guy who lets his opponent rethink his land tapping, or are you the guy who forces his opponent to commit to his mistake?

Maybe the 'spirit' of the Mafia game is to take every advantage that's presented to you. I wasn't taking it that seriously. But suffice to say that this debate will (hopefully) cause all future games here to be of the 'no outside communication' type.

About the use of the info: The info itself didn't matter. You could have fabricated a chat between you and me directly and it still wouldn't have impacted the game. Why? Because you were already acting way too suspiciously and most of the players had you pegged as a Spammer. It took an act of Mod to get Longview kicked out, otherwise I don't believe he would have been lynched.

The sad thing is, whatever skill you have in the game or whatever desire you have to play again, it'll probably be overshadowed by this. It's unfortunate. May your next game go smoothly.

I'll finish with one final message, this one to everyone: Remember that we're all new to playing this game online, and that we're still working out all the kinks of playing it on this board. We are ALL going to make mistakes from time to time, causing games to rupture and funny things to happen. We need to remember that it's just a game and that we all still want to be friends afterwards. We want to keep playing and get more people to play, not run them off in fear of making mistakes. So maybe we ALL need to take a step back and remember that we all mis-tap lands sometimes.

[Sutherlands]

That is very true, and I think that was an excellent post.
The 'spirit' of the game is to have fun. I was having fun and I thought everyone else was too. The thing that I don't like right now is that I'm being called a cheater, that's the only part I hate. Yes, my future games will probably be shadowed over by this, but if the mod says no outside communication, i won't. I play by the rules (unless there's a different house rule) and I think that cheating takes away everyone's fun. This is why I insist that I wasn't. If we would have stayed in, I may have been lynched first, that is perfectly plausible, which is another reason I don't believe the game was disrupted. But like I said, the only reason for this thread is that I take being called a cheater personally.

[clunk]

Originally posted by carpo
You should only follow the intention of the rules.

Ya know what, this is what judges are around for. To follow the intention of the law.

Oh well, Sutherlands has fallen down a hole, Spammer's Spree seems poised to fall into the abyss, and more than likely OCD is gonna get us all killed if jmd isn't mafia. Rats.

Really, though, I can't foresee this ever happening again (at least by "accident.") But If i had gotten wind of this info, I would have known it wasn't ethical to use it. jeez. some people just need to play the GAME. It is just a game... it's not like... the Pro Tour or something.

[ToBeContinued000]

One point I'd like to make:

Why does everyone think that no outisde communication leads to less cheating? If anything, I would say that it leads to more cheating because you can communicate without anyone knowing and it would be against the rules. With outside communication, it's harder to cheat because communicating is legal, so it's not cheating. I'm not saying it's better or worse, I just don't think no outside communication prevents cheating.

[RadjanSpiritMonger]

What I don't understand is why you would intentionally go after the logs about my conversation with Massive. You explained that you were doing that yourself, which is in my opinion, illegal.

[Sutherlands]

ToBeContinued... outside communication is difficult, because then people don't exactly know what to do. If you don't allow it, you can monitor everything that is said, which is supposed to happen. If you allow it than things like what happened... happen. Everyone has a different interpretation of what is "illegal." This was the problem for everything.