Stoofer's 2nd Law

[EnderX]

@Delvar:

Your description on how Stoofer's 2nd law becomes a tautology (I'm assuming that's what you're implying, at least) has a flaw to it. Please reread the law itself:

As a discussion in the Mafia Discussion Forum grows longer, the probability of someone voting for someone else in the thread approaches 1.

The key word here, I believe, is the word

discussion

. What you are implying is a thread of infinite length, but randomly chosen or arbitrarily chosen combinations of letters/numbers/symbols in each post. Such a thread would not consist of true discussion, which is generally fairly ordered and focused, even if the discussion topic itself isn't. As a result, your hypothetical thread no longer qualifies as a valid example of Stoofer's 2nd Law. In order for the symbol set [,b,], ,V,o,t,e,:, ,«Name», ,[,/,b,] to occur in a discussion format, those involved in the discussion must at least know of, and feel it legitimate discussion, to include that particular set of symbols in the thread. And based on the evidence,

that

only happens when at least one of them is a Mafia player, with the chances of the symbol set occuring increasing relative to the number of Mafia players within the discussion. I'm not sure if the increase is linear, non-linear geometric, or exponential, however.

[EnderX]

But that undermines your earlier argument as well, since in that case, you still require Mafia players to create the discussion posts. You cannot get away from having them involved.