Mini 681 - Mish Mash Mafia - THE END!

[letsbefriends]

Hullo friends!

Does the game we play rotate from the list in the beginning or is it going to be Elect the Executioner the entire game?

[letsbefriends]

I'm not sure that I agree with trying to defeat the "theme" part of the game...

What do you suggest, then?

Group hug!

[letsbefriends]

Don't elect me because I don't want to kill. ;_;

[letsbefriends]

Huh? That still makes no sense. o_o

The person who you vote for will be the one who becomes the executioner. If you think Caboose is scummy, then you

wouldn't

vote him.

[letsbefriends]

Yes. I'd rather see 1 scum and 1 town die, than 2 town and then the NK.

I wasn't aware that the executioner commits suicide...

How are you so sure that Caboose is scum? I also thought you didn't want to say who you would kill, but I think it's pretty obvious now though.

[letsbefriends]

Humhum, I understood it to be like what RF said. But then there isn't any lynching. We vote for the executioner, executioner gets to kill, and the person killed gets a one-shot.

If my understanding is correct, we should still be wanting to

vote

town players to be the executioner (except me, I don't want to kill v_v). If we vote for scum, which means they become the executioner, then they will just get a free kill.

[letsbefriends]

Eep, I understand what sekinj was saying now. The executioner's kill is the lynch. It's pretty much like what Caboose suggested except more detailed. I also agree with sekinj.

[letsbefriends]

In a normal game, scum would press a lynch on anyone town, just because it's Day 1, and short of an immense fail, it's fairly hard to find scum.
In this game, if people do what sekinj and caboose have been suggesting, the scum could theoretically make someone an executioner who wants to kill a pro-town player who had said they would revenge-kill another pro-town player.
If people follow sekinj and Caboose' advice to announce who they would kill if given the chance, scum could theoretically engineeer a double town kill. That's why I don't like it. I'm only repeating myself because you idiots aren't listening.

I think someone needs a hug.

If you want to talk theoretically, scum could just majority vote a scum buddy to be executioner and be able to double kill as well. But either way, they would be leaving evidence behind.

[letsbefriends]

I don't trust letsbefriends as executioner... she could be trying to draw that vote by repeatedly saying she doesn't want it aka reverse psychology.

Yes, that sounds extremely plausible, so don't vote me!

[letsbefriends]

How was I not prodded.

Vote; Mana Ku

Any reason for your vote?

[letsbefriends]

Why do you oppose binding?

I don't oppose stating suspicions, but I don't think we shoudl tie the hands of the executioner either.

Umm, doesn't this contradict your plan that you suggested earlier? What you're saying here is that you only want to vote/elect the executioner, but not say who to lynch or shoot, am I correct? Doesn't that mean you agree more with KoC than Caboose, strategy-wise?

I just don't agree with trying to defeat the theme part of any theme game. For me it falls into the category of trying to outguess the mod.

I disagree with you disagreeing. To me, the mod's most important role in a mafia game is choosing the game, and the rules that come with it. Once the game starts, the game is in the players' hands. Players should only be concerned with maximizing their chances to win, even if it means breaking the game. Being able to break a game either means the game isn't fair, or that it needs improvement. If a game has flaws, why not exploit them? It's about using your head.

Don't hate the player, hate the game.

[letsbefriends]

Well, I play mafia for fun as well, but I play to win everytime too. I'd rather play a game that is fair than play a game that can be broken, even if it means I can win.

Breaking the game was just an example. I don't think that what we're talking about even constitutes anything close to breaking the game.

[letsbefriends]

@letsbefriends: I already explained this. I'm all for input.

I don't like the idea of openly stating who we would kill, and as such, I refuse to do anything but vote. Scum will aready be steering the lynch, so why give them even more information to base their decision on?

Actually, I don't think it shoudl be REQUIRED to state who we would kill. I was just suggesting those tags to make it clear what we are talking about. The person elected still has free rgith to choose anyone, and the person lynched has free right to choose anyone to shoot. However, it looked like people were going to make suggestion on lynches and shootings anyway, so I just proposed that way of stating it. I don't agree that everyone should HAVE to do anything except vote.

What I don't understand is why you would suggest a plan that you disagree with. If you think it will hurt the town by saying who to lynch and who to shoot, shouldn't you be more focused on trying to convince people to NOT do so, rather than suggesting a better way to go about it? It seems really counter-productive to what your goal is, assuming that your goal is to not openly state who to lynch/shoot.

[letsbefriends]

You're still reeeeeeally confusing me. Do

YOU

, only you, want to list who you want to vote/lynch/shoot?

... if they decide to go on their own and town gets killed... well they are looking pretty scummy and will probably be on the chopping block next.

But you're saying everyone should be given the option of using the vote/lynch/shoot system or not. Going with majority vote would only be best if

everyone

participates rather than say, only half of everyone. For example, 5 people participate in saying who to vote/lynch/shoot, and the executioner ignores majority vote and kills someone, who flips town. Does that mean the executioner should be killed because he killed a townie? What if scum used their power in numbers to sway the lynch/shoot candidates? If not everyone is participating, it makes no sense to go with majority decision.

I'm not too keen on the logic you're using at this point.

I don't want to BIND myself to someone or make others BIND themselves into a death embrace.

What do you mean by bind? By saying who you want to vote/lynch/shoot, would that be considered binding? If not, what would? You keep saying you don't want to bind yourself as if you don't want to take responsibility for it if town is on the receiving end of something bad happening.

[letsbefriends]

... if they decide to go on their own and town gets killed... well they are looking pretty scummy and will probably be on the chopping block next.

But you're saying everyone should be given the option of using the vote/lynch/shoot system or not. Going with majority vote would only be best if

everyone

participates rather than say, only half of everyone. For example, 5 people participate in saying who to vote/lynch/shoot, and the executioner ignores majority vote and kills someone, who flips town. Does that mean the executioner should be killed because he killed a townie? What if scum used their power in numbers to sway the lynch/shoot candidates? If not everyone is participating, it makes no sense to go with majority decision.

I agree, the more poeple that participate the better.

Why say that people should have an option of giving their input or not then? Instead, you should be like, "Hey, you! Tell me who you want to vote/lynch/shoot, or I'll...umm...gnaw on your legs!", and then everyone will be scared and participate.

I don't oppose stating suspicions, but I don't think we shoudl tie the hands of the executioner either.

if they decide to go on their own and town gets killed... well they are looking pretty scummy and will probably be on the chopping block next.

In the first post, you're saying the executioner should be able to make his own decision, to choose if he wants to follow majority or not, but in the second, you seem to be trying to urge them to go with majority or lest be faced with the wrath of the townies. I agree that you should be responsible for your actions, but your opinions seems to fluctuate a bit.

I'm talking about someone's suggestion of each person chosing one other person they would lynch until everyone has a proposed lynch and proposed executioner. I dont' like that idea. I think we shoudl all take responsibility of who we want to lynch. but I don't like the idea of each player binding to one and only one other player until it is a big death circle.

I've reread the thread but I don't see who mentions an idea like this. Can you point it out for me?

It also wouldn't work as we're only playing "Elect the Executioner" for one day.

[letsbefriends]

For example, 5 people participate in saying who to vote/lynch/shoot, and the executioner ignores majority vote and kills someone, who flips town. Does that mean the executioner should be killed because he killed a townie?

Did said give a logical, well thought explanation for straying for the majority? Then maybe then shouldn't be noosed, even if they are wrong.

I'm just saying it's not a true majority if only a handful of people participate, so it wouldn't be exactly fair to lynch the executioner for not following it.

[letsbefriends]

Scummy scumdar?

[letsbefriends]

You're voting Caboose for being the scummiest or for having a good scumdar? I don't understand how both can apply.

[letsbefriends]

If you vote him for being scum, and he becomes executioner, I don't really see him killing his scum partners.

[letsbefriends]

I'm thinking if even the slightest doubt exist whether a person is scum or not, you'd not vote them instead. There are plenty of other people to choose from.

[letsbefriends]

1. You're saying you think Caboose is the

scummiest

. Why even vote for the person who you think is scummiest?
2. It means you believe everyone else to be less scummy, in comparison to Caboose.

[letsbefriends]

Vote != Lynch

[letsbefriends]

Having majority vote means becoming the executioner. That's it. The executioner will not be lynched. The executioner stays alive, unless the person killed by the executioner one-shots him.

[letsbefriends]

Having majority vote means becoming the executioner. That's it. The executioner will not be lynched. The executioner stays alive, unless the person killed by the executioner one-shots him.

Have you read the first page?

This has already been discussed. Have you read the game at all?

vote for the person who you wish to

determine

the dead person,

Person with majority choose who to kill.

upon the person being chosen to die another will be shot.

Person killed by execution is given a one-shot vig kill.

[letsbefriends]

EBWOP:

vote for the person who you wish to

determine

the dead person,

Person with majority

vote chooses

who to kill.

upon the person being chosen to die another will be shot.

Person killed by execution

er

is given a one-shot vig kill.

[letsbefriends]

Vote: Mana_Ku

, as she seems to be the only person here with two working eyes and some brain cells left dedicated to reading comprehension.

Can you explain why you are voting Mana?

At this point, I will not vote Caboose, KoC or Letsbefriends.
Caboose his idea can be seen as WIFOM to vote him.
KoC has really strange posts.
Letsbefriends is again WIFOM. Does he say he doesn't want to kill to appear pro-town or does he really mean it.

At this point from what I've seen, I'm having doubts between Sekinj and RestFermata. Therefor I'll Vote Sekinj as I can agree with her thoughts most of the time.

Mana is just labeling things as WIFOM, using that as a "reason" for not voting that person. She isn't voting Caboose for suggesting that we say who we want the executioner to kill because it COULD be WIFOM. If you're going to look at it that way, everything can be intrepreted as WIFOM. In fact, sekinj did something extremely similar by suggesting that not only do we say who we want to elect and lynch, but also shoot, and yet Mana doesn't label it as WIFOM and instead places a vote on her for executioner. What is different from what sekinj and Caboose's idea?

[letsbefriends]

I comment on your post because of KoC's vote on you. I didn't pay as much attention the first time around. If someone votes for you, I'd like to see why.

You haven't explained why you labeled Caboose's idea as WIFOM and not sekinj's, as well as going a step further and also voting her. Can you tell me what is different from their ideas?

[letsbefriends]

Err, missed the last sentence. You do realize that sekinj has agreed with Caboose on his orginal idea, as well as

improved

it?

[letsbefriends]

Why do you consider proposing an idea WIFOM while agreeing with one is not? Do you think that no one should share any ideas?

[letsbefriends]

Because killing is bad.

And since you have a higher chance of not living till Day 2. If you hit scum, you probably become the most confirmed town (go ahead, I know what you want to say) and thus more likely to be killed by the one-shot.

Do you agree with the vote/lynch/shoot system? You're saying Caboose's idea makes it seem like he's pro-town which sounds like you think the idea would benefit town, yet you haven't given your opinion on it yet.

[letsbefriends]

I saw a game at the marathon day, where someone who also suggested an idea was the bad guy.

Can you also show me which game it is you're referring to here?

[letsbefriends]

If we go by majority vote to decide who will be lynched, will the outcome be any different whoever becomes the executioner?

[letsbefriends]

If we go by majority vote to decide who will be lynched, will the outcome be any different whoever becomes the executioner?

Well, technically no [if it's a true majority] but people are funny in the way that they don't always due what you expect them to.

How about we just pick who we want to be lynched, a la regular mafia. If we can decide who we want to become executioner by majority vote, why not just cut the middle man and decide who to lynch as a whole, instead of granting one single person unlimited power?

[letsbefriends]

I don't see why we can't if everyone agrees to it. We decide who we want to lynch, elect anyone as executioner and they follow through.

Counter arguments are welcomed.

[letsbefriends]

Automatically lynched the next day or whatever.

I assume if we even get to that point, it means that everyone would've already agreed to following the plan, so I see no reason they would stray at the last minute.

[letsbefriends]

Automatic lynch = bad.

I assume if we even get to that point, it means that everyone would've already agreed to following the plan, so I see no reason they would stray at the last minute.

[letsbefriends]

I'm gunna trust sekinj as he's the one coming up with the glorius plans.

Unvote, vote sekinj

What plans are these?

Sekinj is the person I'd most likely have lynched at the moment.

[letsbefriends]

You might agree with the plan, until you think the town got it wrong.

That's what we're doing now. Discussing to see if anyone has objections.

Also what if all but one person diagrees, what do you do then.

Regardless of the person they killed is scum or town?

These questions are only of concern if we are going through with this. So until we decide whether we're going to even do it or not, I don't quite see the point in asking this now.

Tell me whether or not you agree with cutting out the executioner and going straight to lynching. I'd like to hear feedback such as you don't like it because it's mathmatically unsound, you see flaws, etc.

[letsbefriends]

How to decide our lynches and how to decide our executioner of course.

As Mana has already pointed out, it wasn't her idea. It was Caboose's.

[letsbefriends]

I meant the whole Lynch for who want to lynch the Vote for who we want to be executioner and so on and so forth.

But almost no one is following that format now, including you.

[letsbefriends]

Oh yes, I guess you are.

But explain to me why you're voting for the person who basically clarified an idea that was already on the table rather than the person who suggested the idea? I agree that it's a better idea, but I don't see why making something more clear=more town.

[letsbefriends]

What posts of his makes him seem scummy?

[letsbefriends]

Quick it was.

What do you think of skipping the vote for executioner and vote for who to lynch like in a regular mafia game? That way, majority would be deciding who is lynched, instead of one person.

[letsbefriends]

Oh yes, I guess you are.

But explain to me why you're voting for the person who basically clarified an idea that was already on the table rather than the person who suggested the idea? I agree that it's a better idea, but I don't see why making something more clear=more town.

Because the intial suggestion of the idea seems to be WIFOM as to the person's allignment. And why doesn't making it more clear make them more town? Well, at least seem more town, anyway.

I find it to be in the same vein as fixing spelling errors to make things more understandable. I would think that the person who actually suggested the idea would be considered more town in the first place.

[letsbefriends]

Quick it was.

What do you think of skipping the vote for executioner and vote for who to lynch like in a regular mafia game? That way, majority would be deciding who is lynched, instead of one person.

I wholeheartedly agree with the idea which is why I've used the format suggested by sekinj.

I'm not talking about that though. I'm asking what you think of playing this like a regular mafia game rather than electing an executioner. We lynch who is most scummy. It removes the possibility of electing scum as the executioner.

[letsbefriends]

*frustration*

FIRST OF ALL - I did not expand on Caboose's idea. Caboose wanted to do basically what LBF is wanting to do now. which is play like a regular game of mafia, and try to skip out on playing Elect the Executioner. I had a huge discussion with LBF about this, and I'm not sure why STILL no one understands (expecially LBF).

You're right, but the entire discussion we had wasn't focused on that. It was briefly discussed at the end and I guess it didn't completely register.

This opens all the previous questions I have directed to Mana then. Sekinj is providing an idea, just like Caboose had. Once again, why is her idea not WIFOM and his is? Same question to Shadowgirl since she seemed to agree with Mana on this.

I do not like that idea, becuase it is defeating the "theme" part of this game (which to me falls into the category of outguesing the mod) I don't like that. INSTEAD I suggested that everyone Vote/Elect the executioner, and then GIVE INPUT on Lynch and Shoot. IF the executioner and/or Lynchee decided to do things differently than the town already decided, then we would judge that player for their actions and the merits of any arguements they make.

That woudl still keep the spirit of the game, and would give us lots of info. We have just as much chance at hitting scum as if we tried to play regular.

I signed up for MISH MASH mafia for a reason. That is what I want to play...

Look, you're willing to have everyone state who they want to vote/lynch/shoot. If everyone participates, that means we are left with an executioner, a person who is to be lynched, and a person who is to be shot, all chosen by majority vote. If everything goes as planned, WE have already chosen who the executioner should lynch. The only difference from what I am suggesting now is that the executioner is given the OPTION of not following said majority and lynch whoever he wants. That is the only minor difference. To me, this minor difference tips the game in favor of scum, if we do elect a scum for an executioner. I cannot see why you are so opposed to playing a regular game of mafia when that is exactly what you suggested in the first place.

Besides the game is not going to be EXACTLY like regular mafia. One person gets lynched, one person gets vigged, no nights. It is still ETE no matter how you play it. The only thing that changes is strategy and tactic.

[letsbefriends]

I cannot see why you are so opposed to playing a regular game of mafia when that is exactly what you suggested in the first place.

and where was that? I NEVER suggested this, and you KEEP saying that I did. Please stop. I suggested that people give INPUT about who to lynch and shoot. Then the executioner would choose, and we would judge from there.

I've answered this in my last post.

The only difference from what I am suggesting now is that the executioner is given the OPTION of not following said majority and lynch whoever he wants. That is the only minor difference. To me, this minor difference tips the game in favor of scum, if we do elect a scum for an executioner.

You have said before that you prefer everyone to give input. What is the point of going through all that trouble if you want the executioner to have free reign to do whatever they want?

Really, as soon as we elect the executioner, they have all the power anyway about who to lynch. there is nothing holding them back from lynching whoever they want, no matter what little plan you put together.

Yes, and what I am saying is that we decide as a whole that it's better for town to not do that. If everyone decides to follow it, I don't see why anyone would deviate.

Why are you so intent on punishing others for not agreeing with you by implimenting an auto-lynch if they don't do what you want??

What do you mean I'm so intent on punishing others? What happens AFTER is not the issue. I was giving any answer to appease them so they would focus on the actual topic at hand. What I am asking is whether or not everyone agrees with skipping the elect an executioner stage and go straight to lynching. Skip executioner, skip chance to elect scum. That's the only thing I'm after here.

How about you set aside your personal reason for not wanting to follow this and tell me if you think cutting out the executioner would help town, or hurt it.

I don't know about anybody else, but I'm getting some anti-town vibes from Mana Ku as stated in my FoS.

Unvote
Vote: sekinj

Hasn't done anything all game that jumps out as scummy, but my vote is subject to change.

*facepalm*

THIS QUESTION IS ADDRESSED TO EVERYBODY:

Do you think skipping the 'elect an executioner' stage would be good or bad for town?

I do not want personal reasons. I just want you to discuss whether or not it would help or hurt town. I'm not asking if you want to go through with the plan or not.

[letsbefriends]

@LBF: you seem to not realize the fact that we can't just skip the 'elect executioner' because you want too. it's the mod's game. when we vote, we are voting for an executioner, no matter what you'd rather do. If you'd rather not play a mish-mash theme game... then replace out.

*sigh* Think of it as a hypothetical. In this imaginary fairyland, everyone agrees to it, everyone follows the plan. Tell me if you think the plan would help or hurt town.

Like I've said before, we ARE playing mish-mash. It NEVER become regular mafia. It's strategy that changes.

[letsbefriends]

I don't think it is any better or worse for the town on D1.

Mmmm, what a nice neutral statement. Yay, more questions,

1) Do you think removing the possibility of scum being elected executioner would not help town?

2) Do you think allowing one person to decide who to lynch would be better than allowing town to decide who gets lynched by majority vote?

p.s. Remember this is hypothetical. I am not referring to what we are discussing in game directly.

[letsbefriends]

1) Do you think removing the possibility of scum being elected executioner would not help town?

Theoretically, yes. however, in practice that is impossible. If we knew who the scum were, we wouldn't even be playing this game.

Refer to RF's last post. The executioner does not stray from majority vote. Whoever becomes executioner WILL kill the person with majority vote. Electing scum would not make a difference in that case. What it becomes is majority will decide who is to be lynched. It's not impossible, or even theoretically impossible. It's possible.

2) Do you think allowing one person to decide who to lynch would be better than allowing town to decide who gets lynched by majority vote?

theoretically, no. but again we don't have a choice. Yes, I think all the town SHOULD give input, and the executioner would probably be smart to go with that decision. However, if cercumstances present and the executioner decides on their own, they will face the analysis and judgement of the town for it. How is that Bad?? I feel we have just as much chance of hitting scum as we normally would on Day1.

The fact is, we can turn this into a majority vote lynch if we want. So what I want answered is if you think majority vote would be better than letting one person decide. If it's better, why you don't agree with it if it can be done.

Personally, i don't think we are getting anywhere debating this.

I disagree. You're answering the questions I'm asking instead of beating around the bush, sort of.

[letsbefriends]

and it is getting us no where. we are just creating white noise instead of actually discussing who might be scum. I'm going to shut up for a while and let others talk so i can get more of a read on people.

How does it get us nowhere? If it will benefit the town, why should we not do it? Still, no one has provided substantive reasoning for why we should not follow it.

[letsbefriends]

The only additional information you gain from electing the executioner is if they decide to not follow majority decision and lynches someone on their own. If they follow majority decision, it yields no information. And little bit of information you do get is WIFOM. If the executioner kills scum, they could be town with good scumdar, or they could be scum bussing. I don't see how that is more useful than completely eliminating that step to remove it.

[letsbefriends]

- following majority is a decision, and gives info

I'm saying it gives no ADDITIONAL information. If we skip electing executioner, we will still be majority voting on a lynch, thus getting the same information.

- it's no more WIFOMy than a standard vote

You're comparing one person to the entire population. It's a lot easier to catch scum and scumbuddies alike when having everyone participate than when narrowing it down to one person.

[letsbefriends]

If you say so .
Then lets call it not trust worthy. The game is called 'Vote the electioner'. The players vote for the player who they see as best option. This player decides who the lynch will be. Only if we're gonna do it your way, the scum will have some influence on the lynch. Or the scum will be elected with this game.

But Sekinj is right. I was wrong. Sekinj has a whole other idea then Caboose. Caboose suggests we should vote the player who wants to kill the player you want to have lynched. Sekinj suggests that we should still vote the player who we see as most pro-town, but at the same time also show who we want to see lynched and who we want to see shot.

The difference is that Caboose wants us to discuss the lynch, while Sekinj wants us to discuss the executioner, the lynch and the person shot.
Am i correct here or still not?

I have to say no. The original reason why you did not want to vote Caboose was because he suggested an idea, and that by doing so, it is WIFOM. Sekinj suggests a different idea, but you don't consider it WIFOM.

I won't vote Caboose, that's a given. By suggesting that idea, it seems as if he's pro-town. I saw a game at the marathon day, where someone who also suggested an idea was the bad guy. This is a clear case of WIFOM.

You aren't saying why it's WIFOM because you agree or disagree with the idea itself, but it's because he SUGGESTED it. Sekinj suggests an idea, you don't consider it WIFOM, you vote her.

Instead for ease of communication I just suggested that everyone use ELECT, LYNCH AND SHOOT. So everyone Elect/Votes the person they believe is most town. AND everyone gives input on the lynches and shooting by pointing out people they would LYNCH and SHOOT.

Ok, you keep saying I misrepresent you when I say this. Tell me if this incorrect.

Your idea: You want everyone to elect an executioner via

Vote

, who is to be lynched by the executioner via

Lynch

, and who is to be shot via

Shoot

.
My idea: We decide who we want to lynch via

Lynch

. Once everyone has given their input, we choose anyone to be an executioner and they lynch person with the majority. The executioner will not lynch anyone else.

Tell me what is different from your plan and mine. I have said many times that the only major difference would be in the executioner having the decision to change their mind and choose whoever they want to lynch, majority or not. BUT, you've said quite a couple times that you would prefer that the executioner follows majority. So ideally, following your idea, the executioner will lynch the person who we have chosen by majority, correct? So is that not a redudant step?

What also differs is having a say in who to

shoot

. I find that quite useless but I don't see why we can't implement it either way so I consider it a minor difference not even worth mentioning. We can still do it if everyone wants.

So tell me, why do you want to follow your idea rather than mine. So that the executioner will always have the option to ignore majority decision and kill anyone they want? You kept saying you want to play ETE and not a "regular mafia game". Are you arguing that you don't want to play a "regular mafia game" over a small bit of freedom that the executioner loses?

I'd still like everyone to answer this question; Is it more beneficial to town or to scum to give the executioner the choice to make the final decision on who to kill?

[letsbefriends]

So, yes, i believe we should proceed. the differences between our ideas will basically be born out by natural play. If people want to input who to shoot, they will, which is fine. If the executioner wants to do whatever and go against the town, he/she will.

Proceed as in stop talking about this? I'm not willing to. I'm asking everyone whether they find cutting out the executioner step would be a good idea or not. I find it to be much more helpful to town than not, and I find that this will be useful in determining where people stand and possibly help find scum. We would be able to cut out all the WIFOM logic, remove the possibility of a scum executioner who will undoubtedly kill town, as well as gauge other people's reaction.

Anyone can disagree with the idea, but I'm expecting to hear why also. If you disagree with no valid reason for doing so, I'm moving you up on my scum list.

[letsbefriends]

@LBF: i meant proceed as in play the game. I think it's fine for you to ask that. I, for one, already answered.

But you answered when you thought I was suggesting a completely different idea. Do you still stand by your answer now? And just to be sure we're on the same level here, this what you're referring to, right?

THIS QUESTION IS ADDRESSED TO EVERYBODY:

Do you think skipping the 'elect an executioner' stage would be good or bad for town?

I do not want personal reasons. I just want you to discuss whether or not it would help or hurt town. I'm not asking if you want to go through with the plan or not.

I don't think it is any better or worse for the town on D1.

If it is, it still seems to be quite vague. Can you tell me what would or wouldn't be better for town? For example, by cutting the executioner step, we remove the chance of electing a scum executioner who would be able to kill anyone they want, since we decide who to kill by majority, would that be better worse for town?

LBF, this is Mish Mash Mafia. Day one is elect the executioner. If I wanted a mini normal, I would've gone to Little Italy, thanks.

This is Mish Mash Mafia. If you joined, I assume you want to play. Two post in 10 pages is not really playing.

You voted for sekinj to be executioner, so do you agree with her idea to have everyone give their opinion on who they want to

Vote/Lynch/Shoot

? I have a feeling you're not even reading most of what was said in this game, so I'll repeat it. This game will never be a regular mafia game, no matter how you look at it. What we're discussing is strategy on how to play

ELECT THE EXECUTIONER

for the maximum benefit of town.

Lynch/Shoot: orangepenguin

[letsbefriends]

LBF, this is Mish Mash Mafia. Day one is elect the executioner. If I wanted a mini normal, I would've gone to Little Italy, thanks.

I've looked at past Elect the Executioner games and the mechanics are completely different from Mish-Mish ETE. In "traditional" ETE, there are no scum; we have scum here. In traditional ETE, executioners are chosen by a point system. Each person has 3 points, the person who has the most amount of points in the allotted time becomes the exectioner. Traditional ETE game mechanics are completely different. I also noticed you were in one of the past ETE games. You should know that the mechanics are completely different.

[letsbefriends]

@LBF: I get tired of your questions. I think they are goign around in circles.
I don't beleive we can truely "cut the executioner step". Anyone who is elected executioner KNOWS that they have to answer to the town anyway, and that's IF they don't just get shot by the lynchee right off.

Look, I'm not asking if you think if it will or will not be possible. I'm asking if you think it will benefit town

if it is done

. If everyone agrees that it will benefit town, that means we can decide together that that is how we should play. I'm getting tired of you trying to avoid the actual questions.

[letsbefriends]

In fact,

Lynch: orangepenguin

Shoot: sekinj

Or vice versa, i.e. if sekinj is lynched, shoot orangepenguin.

[letsbefriends]

Wow, are all of you that want to shoot me actually think I am scummy or are you only voting me because you don't disagree with me?

[letsbefriends]

ebwop:

Wow, are all of you that want to shoot me actually think I am scummy or are you only voting me because you don't

agree

with me?

[letsbefriends]

Wow, are all of you that want to shoot me actually think I am scummy or are you only voting me because you don't disagree with me?

Both.

Right, and can you answer my question as well then? Why don't you think my idea is good? Or what is sekinj's better?

[letsbefriends]

@LBF: I get tired of your questions. I think they are goign around in circles.
I don't beleive we can truely "cut the executioner step". Anyone who is elected executioner KNOWS that they have to answer to the town anyway, and that's IF they don't just get shot by the lynchee right off.

Look, I'm not asking if you think if it will or will not be possible. I'm asking if you think it will benefit town

if it is done

. If everyone agrees that it will benefit town, that means we can decide together that that is how we should play. I'm getting tired of you trying to avoid the actual questions.

I've answered your questions a million times. I DO NOT THINK THE TOWN WILL HAVE ANY ADVANTAGE IF WE DO IT YOUR WAY. End of Story.

Still going in circles. THIS IS NOT A REASON. WHEN YOU ANSWER

WHY

OR

HOW

IT ISN'T ADVANTAGEOUS, THEN IT IS A REASON. You are so dense, it's making me crazy.

In fact you claim you are trying to cut out the influence of scum, yet you are trying so hard to get everyone to play it your way. Your previous misrep of me plus your refusal to take an answer now...you are starting to look scummy to me. not to mention your WIFOM earlier about not wanting to be executioner...

Previous misrep? You mean when it was your fault for not reading and misunderstanding my idea? Yeah, must be completely my fault.

It's WIFOM because you want to consider it WIFOM. I said what I meant. You voted Shadowgirl. It COULD be WIFOM as you could be scum trying to buddy up, so I'm going to go ahead and say that's WIFOM as well.

Wow, are all of you that want to shoot me actually think I am scummy or are you only voting me because you don't disagree with me?

The first.

Oh, ok. I'm sure you have your reasons, but yeah, let's just keep everything to ourselves. Don't need to share them at all.

Vote: sekinj

for executioner. I hope she will lynch herself.

[letsbefriends]

Because that possibility is there. And as long as it's there, she just might. I have hope.

[letsbefriends]

I love how people want me gone and are voting me for not being here. I've explained it already, but I got my role pm, and I expected to get a thread link too, and I looked in the wrong forum, so I never saw/found the thread, until a few days and and many pages into the game.

Your first post was at page 7. In that same post, you also vote sekinj. Are you placing your vote without reading the entire game? If you read the entire game, you didn't see anything else you worth discussion?

Your second post, in page 10, also seems to imply you haven't read anything. We discussed what you posted somewhere in between page 7 and 10. If you haven't bothered reading those pages either, how do you come up with the decision that you don't like my idea? Could it be that you're just following other people?

Sekinj, I think you should shoot LBF, for obvious reasons.

Shoot: LBF

Yay, OMGUS and trying to get people to bandwagon me? Apparently the reasons are so obvious it does not need to be stated. The way the rest of the town completely ignores when people cast their vote, I think there's a bright future ahead for everyone.

For all the people voting to shoot me,

orangepenguin, Empking, MafiaSSK

, am I the most scummy person to you at the moment?

[letsbefriends]

No, I have been reading. sekinj has by far the best strategy. Plus, I've played with her before, so I trust her more than anyone else (as much as you can trust anyone in these games).

How does her playstyle in other games affect her alignment in this game?

Your idea is not a good one, and is scummy. And that answers your question, yes.

Please enlighten me to how it is scummy.

Just because I haven't posted 10 posts per page doesn't mean I haven't been reading. I just "joined" the game a week after everyone else, which puts me at a big disadvantage, post count wise.

Post count has nothing to do with it. It's the lack of content. You've read 7 pages and all you have to say is that you agree with sekinj? Also, when you talk about something that has already been discussed, it shows you haven't been reading.

[letsbefriends]

Lynch: orangepenguin

[letsbefriends]

Yes, don't really care anymore.

[letsbefriends]

I'm not being a poor sport. I probably was being a tad too forceful, but a number of others still find me suspicious, so if I get shot, it still works out.

[letsbefriends]

But if OP is lynched, he will die. Why not vote for lynching OP? He also makes it pretty clear he's going to shoot me.

[letsbefriends]

I find it ridiculous that I am everybody's best choice for a lynch. I think KoC's plan to lynch himself is pretty stupid and kill me - no, I wouldn't lynch you anyways. I am going with LBF. I think if I die, I will do you all a favor, and get rid of real scum.

Why do you keep trying to appeal to emotion? If you believe I am scum, this is the only way possible to kill scum. One scum dies, one town dies.

Since, unlike some people, I wanted to play a Mish Mash version, I am saddened to see that I am going to be killed.

We're also playing the way you wanted to play. We're following sekinj's plan, are we not? Why are you complaining?

Eh, whatever. sek should just go with her own opinion, since scum likely will be influencing his choice.

And you're saying scum couldn't influence who becomes executioner? Don't even bring this up now. This has been the point I've been making since.

[letsbefriends]

Agreed with this.

And I agree with this.

Not that I'm agreeing with SG as well, or even disagreeing with her. Just that I agree with SSK's agreement in general.

[letsbefriends]

Either sekinj or SG is such obvscum.

[letsbefriends]

Either sekinj or SG is such obvscum.

How so?

Going for the easy lynches.

[letsbefriends]

Easy lynch =/= bad lynch.

And easy lynch =/= good lynch.

LBF, why do you suspect them, while others are doing the same?

What do you mean others are doing the same? Who else is suspecting them? Are you implying I'm scum because I said who I think are scum? I'm going to be shot, will it make any difference when you see my role?

[letsbefriends]

I see what you mean now. Sorry, I misunderstood the first time.

sekinj did seem to be annoyed by my constant questions, but does she say she thinks I'm scum because of it? She says she doesn't like my questions or she thinks my questions are going in circles, but she doesn't actually say it's scummy until after everyone else starts saying so. Is being forceful the reason why she thinks I'm scummy? If I'm being forceful while suggesting a bad idea, sure, then I could agree. But I still have not seen any actual reason as to why it was a bad idea.

SG's posts seem very passive. She seems to try and keep a low profile and stay out of the spotlight. She agrees with a lot of people or the topic that is on discussion. Perhaps it's all just coincidental.

But then again, I'm also suspicious of a lot of other people. KoC for wanting to lynch himself so he will be able to shoot OP. That seems very much like a gambit by trying to show a lack of self regard, as there are other, more reasonable, alternatives to killing OP, if that really is his goal, such as voting himself to be executioner or voting for OP as the lynch candidate instead.

I'm also suspicious of you (Mana) for considering early on that Caboose's idea was WIFOM while sekinj's was not. Perhaps you misunderstood as I did and didn't realize she was suggesting a completely different idea then. I don't know. My suspicion of you so far mainly depends on what sekinj flips.

Two other players I'm mildly suspicious of, (yes, more people) who seem to want me dead all of a sudden because they don't agree with my idea, or when I said I would shoot sekinj, are Empking and SSK. The reason they gave when voting me was that sekinj's idea was better. I didn't see any reason given for

why

it was better. Their quick decision to shoot me after I decided to shoot sekinj is what struck me as odd.

Most of my suspicions might seem quite weak, and probably baseless, but granted it's still only Day 1 and I'm only going off what little there is.

[letsbefriends]

She did though.

[letsbefriends]

If you're saying you fulfilled my idea, why would I be sore about it? I'm not lashing out either. Those are my suspicions. There's no reason for me to be making up things for no reason as town.

[letsbefriends]

OP, you say it as if you already know sekinj is confirmed town. How are you so sure? Because you liked her idea? Because she was town in the other games you've played with her?