Mini 408 - EXiLE Mafia, MOD ABANDONED

[Maz Medias]

I nominated cheesfan for being first and Jdodge for starting with a J.

I nominated Raging Rabbit for being alliterative...

As a side note, Hi Maz! I promise I won't be a

total moron

this game!

That's good. We won't win if you give us away on the first page!

... Oh shi-

[Maz Medias]

Oh, and, I nominated Skruffs and Fircoal thanks to good ol' random.org. I am happy about the first.

Vote: Skruffs

[Maz Medias]

Jack: Someone else suggested it, I added my thoughts to it, which were that mafia may not want to be seen voting en masse if there's some sort of public display of votes.

This is the basis of my (quite temporary) vote. It seems like you're saying "hey guys, don't fall for it or we'll get caught ;_;".

[Maz Medias]

I want to ask again what we gain from full revelation of nominations? All I see happening is the scum jumping on to any overlaps in voting and using that to maneuver us towards a mislynch.

[Maz Medias]

I want to ask again what we gain from full revelation of nominations? All I see happening is the scum jumping on to any overlaps in voting and using that to maneuver us towards a mislynch.

I dunno, but why the fuck do you care? We've got absolutely nothing to lose...

IGMEOY: MM

.

Did you even read the second sentence of my post? Revealing nominations seems to me like a tool which scum could use to orchestrate a mislynch based on nominatory overlap. I'm pretty sure I made that really, really obvious. Besides, losing a townie is always something to lose, as is playing into scumgambits.

Unvote, Vote: Raging Rabbit

@Jack: I meant it in the sense that he was cueing his scumbuddies to distance so they could then implement what I mentioned above.

[Maz Medias]

Seriously, people. Look at RR's posts closely; he's just not RIGHT.

[Maz Medias]

Thanks for misrepresenting me again. I already told my nominations. Any other "oversights"?

[Maz Medias]

I revealed my nominations before I really started railing against revelation of nominations. I'll be the first to admit that I sort of play by the seat of my pants; I didn't realize that it was a bad idea until after I'd already played in to it. By the way, I'm okay with the last two or three people revealing, since we've already had these discussions, but I do not and

will

not support it on future days unless there's a very good reason.

[Maz Medias]

Blantantly misrepresenting somebody just because they've changed their minds on a topic is by no means permissable.

[Maz Medias]

Blantantly misrepresenting somebody just because they've changed their minds on a topic is by no means permissable.

he

forgot

. Jaysus.

He didn't

bother to check

, and then tried to excuse his laziness by attacking me further.

[Maz Medias]

My sincere apologies for not being bothered to check back right now. A not necessarily comprehensive list:

First of all, the "let's make this game Limited Lynch Mafia, we can't possibly risk mislynching" argument he's been pushing pretty hard sucks bad and hurts the town.

When have I made this the specific argument? The game's setup allows for the initial narrowing of the lynch candidates to made at night and with greater flexibility. It is, in practice, going to work out the same as putting everybody up on the block and then discussing the top two or three bandwagons, which is what almost always happens in a normal Day anyway.

Second, I strongly dislike his ad homini-cious "There's just obviously something

WRONG

about Raging Rabbit, can't you people see it?!" post.

Which was made immediately after I pointing out a pretty glaring bullshit post ("Why the fuck do you care?") that I wanted response to.

Third, I dislike the contradiciton between his earlier sharing his nominations to his current "no misleading info" BS - while it's certainly possible for people the change their minds, I just don't get why he never bothered to say he's changed his mind IIRC, and his earlier attack on me for missing his contradicition makes no sense.

Next time I'll just state all my positions on every issue at the start of every day, place my vote, and not check in again until night. Will that be more consistent?

I think out of the four poeple we can vote for it should not be skruffs or RagingRabbit.

How can you possibly suspect the infallible RagingRabbit?! (Seriously though, why?)

You realize he said it should NOT be you, right? Why are you getting so upset - or, to use your own words, why the fuck do you care?

[Maz Medias]

Hmmm RR I say you have a knak of getting into long and winding convos that dont lead anywhere.

You have a knack of not contributing.

[Maz Medias]

Instances of RR OMGUSing today: 2.

Confirm Vote: RagingRabbit

, if it wasn't obvious already.

[Maz Medias]

Instances of RR OMGUSing today: 2.

Confirm Vote: RagingRabbit

, if it wasn't obvious already.

Depite this really stupid post, I still regret not being able to lynch Romanus more.

Instances of unsubstantiated post dismissal: X+1, where X is a number I've lost track of

[Maz Medias]

Votecount

Cheesefan (0)
Skruffs (0)
JDodge (0)
Raging Rabbit (3)- Maz Medias, TCS, Romanus

fixed

[Maz Medias]

No it's okay, you can put Ghyrt up there :P

I thought you were ready to take one for the team? :eyebrowraise:

[Maz Medias]

Excuse me, I haven't 'done much'? What do you expect me to do except contribute to the thread like I have been doing?

Seriously, what the fuck else do you want?

[Maz Medias]

Let me add an additional facet to my anti-nomination argument, which is certainly manifesting itself right now.

Focusing on nominations, rather than actual game play, will lead us into irrelevant, time-wasting, obscuring arguments out of which scum will pull rationales for mislynches.

[Maz Medias]

RR, your latest suggestion is once more blasted by the presence of power roles, or even simple mafia cunning. I'm standing by my position that revealing nominations is akin to planning night actions, which is always a bad plan in a normal game...

[Maz Medias]

RR, your latest suggestion is once more blasted by the presence of power roles, or even simple mafia cunning. I'm standing by my position that revealing nominations is akin to planning night actions, which is always a bad plan in a normal game...

Please re-read this post.

[Maz Medias]

I vote against telling the scum what we are going to do before we do it.

Same here.

[Maz Medias]

I want to note that an increase in randomness always helps the larger force.

[Maz Medias]

I want to note that an increase in randomness always helps the larger force.

Wrong. Just look at the odds for a town win in "back 2 basic" mafia. They're in the wiki. Town basically has like a 38% chance of winning in a 3 mafia/17 townies setting.

Also, the best Chess player in the world would beat the worst one more consitently then the best and worst Poker players (though I'm now talking about

quality

, not quantity).

That's full randomness, and in lynches. I was citing a rule that states that an increase in randomness favors the larger force because the larger force gains more chances at a good result.

By this I mean that allowing the townies to simply nominate who they want to vote for, we're making it much more difficult for mafia meddlings to occur.

[Maz Medias]

I'll encapsulate the argument:

First, we'll consider, for purpose of argument, everybody to have a power role: the nominator.

Now, let's look to normal mafia...

Why do we not reveal night action targets the day before unless it's absolutely necessary?

Because any premeditation of night actions that mafia can know about

can and will be tampered with

. Don't underestimate the creativity of the scum. Also, considering the flavor of the game, don't count out the presence of scum power roles that deal with nominations. Romanus' claim already shows us that there are nominatory power roles, and I would be surprised if none of these came up scum.

So, because of the unknowns, and because of the myriad of ways the mafia could tamper with the nomation process, I feel that it's better to pursue this on an individual basis. Allowing mafia to know who to kill to narrow down the lynch board is very much a bad plan; allowing them to know it at all, in fact, is bad, because if one of their own is on the platform, they can intentionally BROADEN selections through their sabotage.

The plan of revealing nominations before they're made is disasterous. Info is info, yes, but showing the mafia our hands so that they can surgically strike the weak points is in no way a good play.

[Maz Medias]

Here's a bump above the locked games.

[Maz Medias]

Raging Rabbit still needs to die. :teach:

[Maz Medias]

RR, please stop misrepping me. My case is not "lol he's wrong!". I've outlined my reasons before.

[Maz Medias]

Am I correct in hearing an inversion of the "ability =/= alignment" fallacy here? Because Romanus has an ability that 'may be' scummish, he should be on the table for a lynch? That's ridiculous, Dean.

[Maz Medias]

I seem to recall you saying that your case on me is something more than "something's ROTTEN in the kingdom of RR". Well?

I'm fairly sure you're literate. It's my policy not to indulge laziness; reread the fucking thread.

[Maz Medias]

I will not agree to reveal nominations unless I am the only individual to refuse. That is, I am not so stubborn that I will withold my nominations once everyone else has revealed theirs, but barring that extreme situation, I will maintain my privacy.

[Maz Medias]

Not talking about your nominations is the equivalent of random nominations.

This is some of the most flagrant bullshit ever spoke in a mafia game.

Vote: Skruffs

[Maz Medias]

As far as Jack goes, if Cheesefan is lynched, his alignment is going to help make up my mind about Jack. As of now, I do not think Jack is scum.

I want to point out that, upon a second reading, this statement strikes me strangely. It seems a little too open-ended, perhaps; tomorrow, it could be cited as "Since cheesefan was [town/scum], Jack's interactions with him are scummy!".

[Maz Medias]

Am I correct in my understanding that Skruffs's case against me is based primarily on the fact that I strongly oppose premeditation of nominations? The numbers have already been laid out, and I've given my arguments; I believe it is anti-town behavior to try to coerce the town into conforming to a premeditated pattern of nomination, because this opens the door wide open for scum to tamper with it however they may please.

[Maz Medias]

When have I belittled anyone for disagreeing with me? I feel my position is the only logically sound argument and I have provided the basis for them. My arguments are not appeals from emotion but appeals in theory and corollary. In a normal game, it's incredibly scummy to ask town power roles to coordinate their decisions the day before. I feel that the same applies here.

Furthermore, I

have

suggested the other solution: do it the way it's meant to be done. If each individual nominates the people he or she feels is scummiest, we will have a board that encompasses the general mean consensus of scumminess, rather than a premeditated and limited spread. Careful calculation will allow scum to change a premeditated plan into something different in a definite sense, whereas nominating on an individual basis will require scum to guess at how to interfere. More later, I have to go to Florida.

[Maz Medias]

Excuse me, Dean, but what have

you

contributed? What have

you

done but snipe at people like me with minimal basis? Who are you - and who are you, Skruffs? - to tell me that my substantiated opinion on this issue makes me scummy? Are you so deluded as to believe that anyone disagreeing with you must be anti-town?

Let me challenge you this way, then. Offer me any hypothetical nomination plan involving 11 people: 8 townies and 3 scum (for argument's sake, we're assuming these nice even numbers). I will show you some way that the scum could manipulate that premeditated plan to lessen the power of the lynch - which, being the town's primary weapon, needs NOT be lessened.

Stop misrepresenting me and making unsubstantiated attacks, just for a moment, and humor me, please.

[Maz Medias]

Let me make this very, very clear, one last time, before I give up on you.

The reason that unpremeditated nominations are good for town is because the scum DO NOT KNOW

HOW

TO FUCK THEM UP. If the town is let by a mean concensus of nominations, the scum have to successfully guess at the results of the night's nominations to effectively interfere with the process. If all the numbers are laid out before them, it becomes much easier to contrive at least a marginally successful interference.

Furthermore, for one who complains constantly about straw men, you certainly seem to enjoy portraying my argument as one of randomness and chaos. If you've ever played Mafia before, you know damn well that NOTHING is random in the minds of town OR scum from the moment the game actually starts. Unrevealed nomination will not cause a random block, but rather a block the scum cannot predict that is made up of the most popular nominees and - thus - the individuals who would be lynched in a normal game, anyway.

Do you understand, Skruffs?

[Maz Medias]

A two-person nomination plan - that is, the entire town nominating the same two people - gives scum almost executive power over the nomination process. Let's say we have ten people, three scum, and the town decides to nominate A and B. That's 10A and 10B by town's count. The townies all stick to their word, and scum switch to (A or B)+C, where C is someone they'd like on the block, and shoot the other of A or B in the face. Then we have whichever the scum want lynched out of A and B, plus a C selected executively by the scum.

You have also misrepped me again by saying that I know who the town will nominate before. You obviously don't understand the difference between 'unpredictable' and 'random' any more than you understand between 'popular' and 'public'. The block will, indeed, consist of the most popular nominees, but the scum have to guess who those will be based on clues in-thread, which is much much harder than handing them our numbers on a silver fucking platter.

[Maz Medias]

The scum have to guess who town's nominating. The town doesn't have to guess who town's nominating; the town nominates whoever its members do. Each individual townie does not need to coordinate their actions with other townies during the nomination stage.

Also, I'd like to call in logistics: how often is the entire town going to agree on two people? How often is this two-person plan going to force us into guaranteed mislynches? What happens when we can't agree on two people - do we put up three, four, five evenly?

[Maz Medias]

I decline to comment - obviously.

[Maz Medias]

I'm voting Skruffs for the way he said he was going to try and get rid of the people who disagree with his position.

And voting for someone for any reason other than their scumminess, is extremely scummy.

Are you saying that fascism is pro-town?

[Maz Medias]

I'm not arguing to prove I'm pro-town. :P And I'm not saying JDodge is not pro-town.

I am fighting with everyone who thinks, right now, that we should quietly lynch and go to sleep and in the morning, what, quietly lynch again and go to sleep, etc
Not talking about your nominations is the equivalent of random nominations.
I am not going to nominate lurkers, myself, though that theory would generally be a good one -

I'm going to go all fascist

and say we should nominate people who are refusing to cooperate with everyone else. Not only does it put a bigger target on all fo the cooperators backs - because mafia know that if they keep uncooperative townies around they'll have more control over the game - btu it also makes it less possible to get people to slip up in why they want to nominate people, etc.

Quoted for reference.

Lynch all liars.

[Maz Medias]

I think Skruffs is bluffing, to be honest. In a sort of WIFOM taunt, he's saying, "Look, I'm so townie I'll lynch myself!", expecting us to get spooked and hit somebody else. I don't really buy it.

[Maz Medias]

Um... wasn't that hammer?

He was at L-1, JDodge unvoted, Mariyta voted, Romanus voted...

If so, nice fucking job, and I'll be rather suspicious of Romanus/Mariyta for it.

[Maz Medias]

Snarky comment here.

Vote: Raging Rabbit

[Maz Medias]

Checking in. Can't say I am surprised by my nomination. I want to hear some stuff from our Ghyrt replacement, so

Vote: Rangerofthenorth

I can't say I'm surprised by

any

of the nominations.

See? This is what freedom brought us; a cornucopia of opportunity.

I didn't want to be the one to say it. :hifive:

[Maz Medias]

Actually, I nominated RR and Romanus, because I think they're scum. It's not your place to speak for me or anyone else in this town, and I wish in retrospect that I hadn't let Skruffs dying words dissuade me from nominating you, Dean.

[Maz Medias]

We need to know who everyone nominated. Scum voted together.

How do you know this? Isn't this pretty WIFOM?

We need to figure out who they nominated so we know who not to lynch.

Again, WIFOM.

I'm thinking they would have put up Romanus and rr.

This isn't WIFOM, it's just speculation.

[Maz Medias]

I want to ask - for the record - why I'm such "suspected scum". If it's because of my nomination position, why isn't JDodge just as suspicious? I haven't really seen any case against me besides "he scum 'cause he not fascist".

[Maz Medias]

Easy. I voted RR and Dean, two scumbuddies.

Respond plx, Jack? If that's your only reason, I'd think Mariyta would be equally guilty.

[Maz Medias]

She voted him after 20 pages or so and after he'd disappeared; you voted him page 2 I wouldn't say it's the same at all.

She's also a replacement, so she couldn't have voted him on page 2. I am, however, fairly sure that she was on him almost immediately after replacing in.

[Maz Medias]

She voted him after 20 pages or so and after he'd disappeared; you voted him page 2 I wouldn't say it's the same at all.

She's also a replacement, so she couldn't have voted him on page 2. I am, however, fairly sure that she was on him almost immediately after replacing in.

I did indeed, and I suspected Dean almost immediately due to his absolute and utter insistance that RR was town. And I'm still amazed that no one else thought it awfully off.

That you suspected them, or that Dean defended him?

I thought you were a little quick, sure, but replacements sort of have to get a position up immediately. They don't have the advantage of, well, having played in the game. (It also helps for you that I agree.)

I'm just making a point that Jack's being very inconsistent.

[Maz Medias]

'Sup

[Maz Medias]

I'm here. People need to post.

[Maz Medias]

Dean becomes more scummy with every word that comes out of his mouth. This is an achievment of the highest caliber.

(For those who can't read implication: Yes, Dean's scum.)

[Maz Medias]

JDodge -- I think you are right about one, very possible on another, and completely off on the third.

I have this inkling that you're a bit biased.

[Maz Medias]

Only concerning one of the people in his list

Which is why you're a bit biased, not completely. :P

[Maz Medias]

Romanus: up there because of abillity. He claimed it, with no presure, he is obviously town.

what

[Maz Medias]

I say we lynch Maz today and Dean tomorrow. I don't buy there suspicion of each other.

Your baseless and arbitrary opinion is noted.

Vote: Raging Rabbit

if I didn't before.

[Maz Medias]

Well? Just who

were

the scum, anyways?

Hey. 8)

I think this game is my best Day One performance of all time. :D

[Maz Medias]

btw guys, Skruffs was

totally

right about the nomination system.

Good game while it lasted.

Frankly, I think that debate was what this game would've come down to.