and you blatently gt, but that goes unpunished which is fine by me, but if mittens or tier wolf claomed like that they’d be repremanded or warnded
I disagree.
Placing responsibility on the players to actively have to reach out and kick someone out of a game is insane and that’s exactly the undesirable result that DS alluded to earlier.
its not responsibility, its conversation, 'hey mod this guy flakes a lot js" is more productive than a mark that accomplishes the same if not worse thing because mods can say no check marks allowed.
it needs to be personal and case by case not just some blanket semi ban. That’s what this site was supposed to acoid, or at least I thought so.
claiming ignorance to what ds said btw, idr or didn’t read it.
I don’t think we’ll ever warn someone for something gameplay related that has any reasoning behind it, regardless of the result. I wanted to make sure I got lynched instead of Geyde. If you think I hold greater responsibility than any other member of the town for losing this then. 
There’s no ban? It’s already personal and case by case up to acceptable reasons for replacing out. Like the mark has to be manually applied - it being there is in itself already a case specific evaluation.
sure dude, lynching geyde would have been a bad play even though we still lost because someone wolfclaimed when josh was about to be lynched.
and my main beef with the checkmarks is that it’s admin intervention.
sure you can ignore it, but then what’s the point? Why not make a game thrower tag too?
Popping in to agree with Elli that mods are more than welcome to do replacements and I didn’t want to in particular because in Upicks and IPicks roles are tailored and I’m my opinion dampens the fun.
That is in no means a mandate for all mods
you stated it in your ruleset so its fine xhess, its not like its standard, but still good luck growing the site when most noobies are flakey.
"lif I get lynched lynch josh after me " is playing to your wincon. "I give up Im wolf’ is not, and leaves wiggle room for josh and the whole scumteam the next day. classic gt
Im done ranting because now this is me being salty at elli amd less complaining about the site policies.
butnfeel free to respond I wont disappear yet, but wont check in for the rest of the day.
Honestly, Erika is right about a couple points imo:
Game throwing is more acceptable for an established member than new players to the site - look at how much some of the players got flamed in this graveyard and in the thread.
I do believe that the site is looking for a niche in the type of player. And that’s fine, but also difficult to build on.
yeah shit on the noobies and give em scarlet letters thays smart for site growth
Well, I’m not in agreement with your flaming, I think all non-game play arguments are kind of silly, like… I really don’t care about the policy on replacement, you’ll always have a decent ratio of strict to lenient mods regardless of where you go.
Just to be clear
I can’t help but 
but appreciate the sentiment so I don’t fet dogpilled.
I’m fine with being flamed. At the time I thought Josh was never getting lynched and it was between me and Geyde and I made a bad call.
I don’t think players should be flamed in general and if you think I did that somewhere out of game I apologize.
The line for “game-throwing” that may result in some sort of warning we’ll apply is NOT “did a bad action that caused a game to be lost”. Someone will have to be maliciously done something to knowingly make their alignment lose. Especially with my recent experience with video mafia I’ve realized that line is very high - people can come up with (incorrect) reasons to make “bad” plays up to and including self voting in lylo and we think that’s fine. As long as we think there’s some reasoning (correct or incorrect) we’re never issuing a warning.