I originally filed an appeal against Mist, mistakenly believing that hip-firing being GT was the precedent ruling. I had this mistaken assumption because the last time I was active on this site, that was the case.
It is now clear that my actual appeal is against the current precedent. Mist was merely basing the verdict on current precedent, and has made no mistake in handling the original report
To me this seems like a very black/white scenario. Shooting a gun for the sake of shooting a gun is a clear indication that you do not care about the outcome of the game. If you cared about the outcome of the game, you would try to shoot in such a way that benefits town.
The current precedent treats hip-firing as trolling. Is there any merit in this? Is someone who randomly fires a gun trying to antagonize anyone, or is it that they do not care about winning?
Helsinki has taken the bold stand against the current precedent, and I imagine that moderators are discussing this among themselves before the next vote is cast.
Lets help them make the right decision. >>>>>>>>>
Poll
Should hip-firing (shooting with no reads) be considered Game-throwing?
there's a clause in the gamethrowing rule that actually implies desire to lose is not a direct requirement. "Intentionally playing against your win condition or not playing to win". it's there to cover stuff like grudge lynching (since it's not playing to lose, just not playing to win either)
however i've been thinking about it ever since zovea started making threads. yes, gamethrowing can be applied to people who just selfvote without scumhunting, or ISP the whole game and wait for the clear. because none of their actions have the direct purpose of aiding their win condition. and when they do nothing, there are no actions to have that purpose. technically, it all fits the violation.
and for the longest time, i considered hipfiring just one of those things. it's just a roll of the dice that can benefit you, but you have no way of knowing, so it can't be attributed to "playing to win". then again, that only makes sense when it's unlikely. at what point do objective gambles stop being okay? when the risk:reward ratio hits a certain level? it's not different to the reverse mafia situation i just described. you can't really draw that line.
If there is no reason to use town resources, it is wasting a resource. It is essentially the same as a Doctor wasting a night action when they're safe to use it.
Anyways getting back on topic, shooting someone after you know their claim and you fos them no matter how fast it is isn't gamethrowing OR trolling. Shooting someone based on intuition or one bad post that they made is at most trolling. Shooting someone based on grudge is gamethrowing.
deleteddeletedover 11 years ago
where's your proof? Where's the proof *shoves your head into a toilet bowl* where's the proof
the vig is allowed to shoot n1, so no it's not reportable. the sheriff is reportable if they shoot day 1 without any reads.
I don't care what the violation is for red hearts, I've already stated that. My argument is in competitive games if you hipfire you're game throwing peroid.
deleteddeletedover 11 years ago
1 friggin vio for hipfiring my 2 foses when i knew their claims and 1 friggin vio for acting like a complete noob in one game as scum and some butthurt loser reporting me because they lost. epicmafia irl
deleteddeletedover 11 years ago
I have 2 trolling vios.
deleteddeletedover 11 years agoedited
both sheriff and vig are allowed in ranked games, they're both reportable for gt violations, which is what is being discussed.
deleteddeletedover 11 years ago
Also if I get gunned in hollywood illusions as non-bleeder, I hipfire to avoid getting sacked with gun.
deleteddeletedover 11 years ago
u prob have 3 trolling vios. 4= ban
deleteddeletedover 11 years ago
everyone in this thread is now a virgin
deleteddeletedover 11 years ago
also you guys are really trying to argue vig ( a role that is not in competitive mafia) and a pointfarm setup in this argmuent... holy crap this is amazing lol
