I think this illustrates my position pretty clearly. Below I include a response that I wrote up earlier today but was interrupted mid post and did not finish. Feel free to read and respond to that, but my main point is contained directly below.
Your analogy oversimplifies and does not include critical issues:He says that if a person does something to protect himself from a certain action, you should suspect that person of wanting to commit that exact same action to you.
--Action L harms the target.
--When a player, P_i, does Action M to another player, P_j, P_i allows P_j to do Action L.
--When a player, P_k, does Action N, P_k is protected against Action L and allows Action M to be done to P_k.
-Player A suspects that some unknown Player B is trying to do Action L.
-Player C asks Player A to do Action M, and claims he has reason to believe some unknown Player B is trying to do Action L.
-Player D also asks Player A to do Action M, and claims he has reason to believe some unknown Player B is trying to do Action L.
The existence of multiple players warning that someone is trying to do Action L makes it more likely that someone is trying to do Action L.
The fact that Player C (or D) provided a warning has no bearing on the likelihood that Player C (or D) is Player B (neither a reason to suspect nor a reason to not suspect). HOWEVER, the increase in likelihood that there is a Player B makes doing Action M less desirable (when done with any player who is not confirmed as NOT Player B).
Also, the point under discussion is not the sole factor to consider when deciding to rescue someone. It is a factor which disinclines townies in general from rescuing another player. Other factors include but are not limited to:
-Likelihood that the player is a townie
-Other night actions that can be taken
-Private information (and it's repercussions)
-Sigma's claimed cop ability
@LL-
In general, I don't see why any townie has any reason to expect 5 red ships (or really any number of red ships beyond 3). The existence of 3 confirmed red ships plus two plausibly claimed red ships makes it reasonable to believe there are at least 5 red ships.If people think there are going to be 5 red ships, as seems to be the case,
The existence of a ship-affiliation-cop (or equivalent) argues either a small number of townie ship-millers, or some powerful pro-town game mechanic to balance out mod-provided disinformation. Barring public revelation of such a mechanic, I am inclined to believe that there are probably a small number (ie 2) ship-millers.
@Rising/Excedrin/Porkens-
Please chime in thoughts on Dry-Fit and refresh why you are voting for RC. If the object is to lynch RC, why choose to lynch RC instead of let him be modkilled?
If RC waits until deadline then posts something like "I am here", does he still get mod-killed? Or to be more specific, is the mod-kill for lurking enforced to the letter or to the spirit?
It would be unfortunate if RC waited until deadline then posted content-less fluff to avoid both defending himself and getting modkilled. Also unfortunately, such behavior would be entirely in line with what everyone was willing to excuse on D1.
@Dry-Fit-
Please post something. The lurking isn't helping town.
----------------------------
@Rising's first post-
Good post overall. First point is valid, second point is nonsense.
Agreed that if a townie knows that Sigma is town they should rescue Sigma. If they know that Porkens is town, then they should rescue Porkens. In that sense, then agreed that:
IF A AND B, THEN NOT D.
I stated this in my explanations of the arguments. However, technically you are correct that the conditional itself should include the clarifications that I added as explanations. I should have been more rigorous in my definitions.
As a correction, substitute A and B with E and F, which are actually relevant and incorporate my explanations. D should not need to be expanded upon, but for sake of completeness, you can change D to G.
E = Porkens claims to be town with a scum ship
F = Sigma claims to be town with a scum ship
G = Town should be less inclined to rescue jettisoned players whose affiliation is unknown
The existence of a player claiming he has a ship scum would want to get on increases the likelihood of (C). The existence of multiple players claiming the same makes (C) even more probable. E and F are not required for C to be true.
Your second point is nonsense. IF it is probable that scum want to get aboard town ships, THEN Town should not rescue. This is true regardless of your addendum. Also, your hypothetical situation is more likely than a similar hypothetical where the scum player begins on a non-scum ship. Beginning on a scum ship provides the scum player with an excuse for jettisoning.
I agree that scum only being able to rely on jettisoning and being rescued by the correct town player is an unlikely game mechanism. If scum have a pro-scum game mechanic that requires getting aboard another player's ship, I think it is more likely to be something that works regardless of who picks them up. If they have to give up a red ship in order to achieve this mechanism, it would have to be very powerful to balance the information that town gains from seeing the mod confirmed red ship.
Given the existence of a player who knew the color of another player's ship, the existence of claimed townies on scum ships seems more likely a miller mechanic than a hidden power-up (although it could certainly be both).
@Rising's second post-
False analogy. Your "claimed circumstances" are wrong and you also make a couple flawed assumptions.
-Two players want to get on other players ships.
-Both of those players had confirmed scum ships.
-One of those players explicitly feared scum getting aboard his ship.
-The other player implied a similar reason, but soon after claimed a game mechanic that requires getting on another player's ship (and one that would disincline scum).
You assume that A and B are required in order for C to be true. As Excedrin mentioned, the existence of both jettison and rescue game mechanics suggests interactions between players on the same ship. This alone is reason to consider C.