Mini 408 - EXiLE Mafia, MOD ABANDONED

[Skruffs]

Hey all.

Vote : Ghyrt

I'm guessing Fircoal's nominations went in, even though he died.. what with his finger being in the ballot box and all. The finger is suspicious. Hopefully it means one of the killers is nominated.

[Skruffs]

D:
D:
D:

Unvote ME

D:

I think if the mafia really wanted to avoid being nominated, they would have *All* voted for the same two people, in order to put three votes against them. Everyone else (save maybe for a mason group) would be voting randomly, so, assuming each of the people 'randomly' votes for two other people, the people who already had three would get 1 or 2 more each. It wouldn't have been a four way tie like it is today. With that in mind, I think the mafia voted randomly; maybe they didn't know if who everyone nominated would be made public the next day and didn't want to be seen voting en masse.

With that in mind, I think it's *possible* that a scum has been nominated today, so maybe we shouldn't just speedlynch. >.>

Would there be any point in talking about who nominated who and why?

[Skruffs]

Why would Maz care? <.<
I nommed Cheese and Maz. Mostly because I'm scared of them.

[Skruffs]

Interesting, Ghyrt. I suggest that maybe a scum has been nominated, and that today's lynch could matter, and you put a vote on me? ^.^ Well, fair's fair. I'm up here, and you ain't. You get to decide what's town and what's not.

If there is scum up, and I think more than likely there is, than worse comes to worse we have a 1/4 chance of getting lucky. If we work together, maybe we can narrow it down to 50% or more.

[Skruffs]

Cheez was nominated at least 4 times, and the other nominees were chosen at least 3 times. I say this because MM has two votes on them, and isn't nominated, so ergo there is either one person with the most votes and the other three are tied for second, or it is a four way tie for first.
So 13 out of 24 votes (or possibly 16 if a four way tie) were used to get the four nominees up here. We have 8 accounted for, out of 14 total votes.

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.

Ghyrt: in all your accusing me of being 'phony helpful', you forgot to reveal your nominations. Stop waiting to see what everyone else nominated and post

Ghyrt, Maz Medias, yellowbounder, we wait for you to reveal your results.

Sidenote: Considering we have a skunk, a dog, a bunny, and harry potter nominated, I'm wondering if this island is a refuge or an insane asylum. >.>

[Skruffs]

Oops, forgot to add Romanus in there, too. Claim!
Who you voted for isn't going to incriminate you, automatically. We'll work it out.
(oh no I'm trying to incite cooperation!!)

[Skruffs]

My bad Cheezfan.. I realized that in the other game we were in but I see the damage has been done already in this one. Lennon rules more than Potter any day.

Maz, izzatta random vote?

If we don't find some kind of direct evidence worth going on today, or come to the conclusion that we are all townies, I'll take one for the team. I'd prefer to be civilized about it though..

Bunny, it helps in lots of ways. Let's wait until after everyone has revealed their nominations or explained why they aren't going to.

[Skruffs]

I dunno if this is applicable but what happens if someone doesn't nominate? Is it randomly done?

[Skruffs]

I think it is a really bad idea to be telling everyone who we are nominating.

You're going to have to help me on this one... I see a number of ways in which this could help the town and no ways in which it could hurt us.

.. who's 'us'?

[Skruffs]

Maz - Well, with a four nomination spread, votes are more easily confirmed because there's only a few setups that could have happened, effectively.
It's all about numbers. We won't get a complete set of nominations, of course, with fircoal being dead and all, but we should be able to use logic to figure out something.
Plus it makes scum nervous.
I already have a suspicion or two.

[Skruffs]

It's an interesting speculation JDoidge, one I am going to chew o ver for a while.
Personally, I don't think anyone is 'at fault' for us being nominated how we were. Even if we are all townies, I don't think other townies should feel personally responsible. However...
This is kind of like a day one 'test'. I think we have the oppurtunity and ability to collaborate, wether it leads to anything, number wise, or not, isn't as important as the reactions people have to this group investigation.

[Skruffs]

It's okay, Jack, I did it too.
Thing is, tommorrow, there may be only 2 people nominated. No way to prove or disprove who nominated who, and then, it won't even matter much. Today we can possibly take advantage of an oversight of the scum. The only people who are town who have reason be worried would be... maybe a mason group who voted together.

Anyways, come on. yellowbounder hasn't posted yet, ghyrt's posted twice and in one he acknowledged he nominated but didn't say who. And romanus stalled in his last post.

[Skruffs]

Seriously, Maz, give the town some credit. Even if scum jumps on an overlap, that doesn't mean anything. The town has to do it, too, for it to be worth anything.

As far as I can see, and for my own reasons that will remain suspiciously clandestine until I get roman and yellow's nominateoins, so far, everyone who's nominated today looks pretty clear. So I'll probably be offering myself up to be lynched But that can wait.


Thanks, Ghyrt. Sorry for random voting you/me.

[Skruffs]

*shrugs* I'm not coming to any conclusions until everyone decides to cooperate.

[Skruffs]

I kind of agree with Maz Medias, on future dayas it will more likely than not be too easily manipulatable... ANd who knows... like I said abefore, if worse comes to worst, at least we have something to play with before someone gets lynched. I can understand the worry about possibly using the results to misdirect the town into nominating the wrong people, but, whateva. THe same thing can happen if we just look at scum tells or random lynch.

[Skruffs]

I'm not claiming to know how, at all. I"m not infallible. I'm going to present what I think and then we can talk about it, and someone else can counterpresent what they think.

[Skruffs]

Jdodge, it's possible, which is why I don't mind being lynched today, after we talk, unless we find a good reason to lynch someone else. My 100%-pure towniness can be like a seal of approval.

[Skruffs]

No, you didn't. And lying about it is going to screw you over.
Who did you really nominate?

[Skruffs]

Erm guys..
*points to romanus*
suspicious much?

[Skruffs]

The really long rules that outline everything are below. Here's a quick summaray: everyone sends in two different players each night as nominations. These are added to a tally. The two players with the most votes will be eligible to be lynched the following day. Ties will change this, so if there's for example a three way tie for first, then all three will be on the block for the following day. You may be interested in reading the rules below to learn the 'special cases.'

And then later...

NOMINATION RULES

1- In addition to standard night actions, each player MUST select two different people to be voted for nomination the next day.
2- The two players with the most nominations votes will be eligible lynch candidates the next day. If there is a two-way tie for most votes, both tied will be on the block. If there’s a three or more way tie, all tied players are on the block, with an exception which I’ll add later. If there’s a leader, but then players tied for second, the leader and all tied for second players are added to the block.
3- The exception: no more than half of the town can be nominated. If 6 are alive, at max three can be nominated. Ditto for seven. If there’s more than the max people nominated in a tie scenario, nominees out of the tied players will be randomly selected. Only catch: with three alive, two is the maximum.

But then again...

10- And of course, the exceptions rule. There’s an exception to every rule, and these rules are included. Based on certain game mechanics and whatnot, there is a chance that there may be exceptions, additions, or exemptions to these rules. If something I say in thread or by PM conflicts with these rules, whatever I said will most likely be correct. These rules were designed to be uniform to most games I run and as such may not accurately represent all role mechanics, so read what I have to say in thread and in your role PM carefully. Your diligence will be rewarded.

[Skruffs]

Point is... maybe not suspicious. Yellow Bounder, who did you vote for? This is important.

[Skruffs]

Yellow bounder holds the power. TeEELLLLL UUUUS..
Side note, we must have a 4-way tie between the four nominees.

Could be a nomination restriction, a nomination *ability*, or he could be young, dumb, and full of scum.

If you think I'm scummy for being martyry, than lynch me, problem solved but wait until we go through the numbers first. I'm good with numbers.

Technical Rule 1 : "In order for a lynch to occur, a majority vote, rounding up, must be made against a particular lynch candidate. The second that majority is reached, that person is considered dead and may say nothing more game related. Only players that are nominated (see later) for the day may receive votes.

The town cannot vote for No Lynch in this game, so don’t try.

"

So yeah, no lynches aren't possible.

[Skruffs]

JDodge, There has to be a four way tie; you and Cheezfan already have four votes eash. That would be first and second place. The fact that me and RR also are nominated means that we therefore have the same number as votes.

Thanks bunny!

I'm going to take a gander and say that yellow bounder voted for me once, adn fircoal voted for me once.n I'm in another game with fircoal, so that might be a reason he put a vote on me (that's why I put a vote on cheezfan after all)
That makes everything even. I'm still curious who yellow bounder's other vote was on.

Sorry for being suspicious of you romanus, but to be honest, you should have outright said it rather than phrasing things in such a way to sound like that... I thought you were scum who wasn't paying attentino to the rules and was lying.

Anyways gone for a while.
I will post my calculations as soon as possible!

[Skruffs]

hmm. I would like to post a link to an image of a chart I mad. Is that feasible? I think charts are more efefctive than lists.

*note* I have heard in scumchat that RR is an ass and most people who play with him get very aggravated with him. That's why I've been taking him with a grain of salt. However, being an ass doesn't not clear you frlom being scum as well, so don't use that a defense. ^.^

[Skruffs]

Actually no, I don't think of you as an ass at all.. it's late, I had a big weekend, and I am feeling deliciously blunt.
I think you are doing pretty well. I just don't know if it's okay to post images that are off site or whatnot.
modmod?
I <3 you

captain jerry

, can I post an image in thread?

[Skruffs]

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

[Skruffs]

I said I will take one for the team, unless we find an obvious scum nominated amongst us, and I *will*. The obvious implication is that Ghyrt is not on our team, because he's scum, OBVOBV. (Get with it people!!)

The one thing that *Does* irk me about RR is that he tends to 'side up' with people in favor with town but is just as quick to chastize and be suspicious of them. The way he's been regarding me this entire game is interesting, for example, saying he knows I am good with numbers one post and then saying that I'm scummy for offering martyrism the next. He does it with other people too, and there's nothing wrong with it, except it makes me wary to take him at face value: Is he being genuine or is he just setting me up for something? It doesn't mean he's scummy, it meanas I have to take extra care in reading his posts because I don't know what he's really saying, sometimes.

Actually I have no idea.

Let's assume that fircoal nominated me and someone who isn't eligible for lynching today. That puts me at four, tied with Bunny and Clown. (I do have a graph but it has to wait until tonight, I"m at work right now, sorry)

In thte meanwhile, here's a 'votes for' tally as supplied by all of us...
------------------------------------
Nominated:
*Dodge 5
*CheezFan 4
*RR 4
*skruffs 3 (+1)

Dead:
!FirCoal 2

Neither:
Maz 2
jack 1
CenScru 1
dean: 0
romanus: 0
yellowbounder 0
ghyrt 0

(One of the 'neithers' has an additional vote from Fircoal)

I have to go back and figure out why each person purportedly voted for who they did.. my graph displays who everyone voted for, too, which is fairly interesting.
If I were to nominate someone entirely on nominational data, I would suggest Dean and Ghyrt for tomorrow. But why can wait until later!
Discuss amongst yourselves. (I'm phklemphed)

[Skruffs]

Side note : POwer roles relevant to nominations
It's possible there are other power roles out there, too - everyone saying who they nominated clears most possibilities, though, like a nomination blocker, a nomination 'switcher'. There could be a nomination cop. Well hold on, there could be a blocker or switcher; if there is, they targetted someone who didn't nominate one of the current nominees.

[Skruffs]

I personally think Romanus could have lied about his nominations and gotten away with it, if he was scum. Is that wifomy? Maybe.

JDodge, it's better to discuss the information and decide something, than to not and go based purely on play style. We're lowering the chances of a mislynch by comparing notes, I thinkI had no idea you would have five votes on you until I tallied them up... and if everyone randomly distributed ( which of course isn't the case ) than everyone would roughly have two votes on them. It's not the case. If there was a a'nomination cop' they would know now if who they followed last night was telling the truth or not; who would be lying? Everything tallies up. A nomination switcher honestly doesn't make much sense, flavor rise - a nomination blocker does. This information is there to be examined by anyone; why does bringing it into the open more likely harm us?

Bunny, I always try to read everyone evenly - if someone is 'running distraction' I spend more time hopping after them and less time following more substantial clues that could possibly lead to more information.

[Skruffs]

as for the martyrism, meh, i'll discuss that when we are closer to lynching.

[Skruffs]

* listens to dean and aneurisms*


"I think now that we're all finished tallying the nominations and have a few non-nominees targets it may be time to start discussing the lynch, and the longer you avoid explaining that the more suspicious it looks."
Let's discuss what's likely vs not, discuss nominations, and if it turns out one nominated person is probably more likely scum than another (it right now doesn't look like it, to me) than we'll lynch them. Otherwise, why give mafia the chance to get role claims out of four people? You have no idea what I am, Bunny - and why does it even really matter at this point? Shouldn't you be happy that someone's offering to take 'the fall' so that you (And the other two) have more of a chance to make it to the morning? Instead of trying to paint me as scummy and get me lynched 'against my will', we can do what I suggested earlier and play civilized-like.

[Skruffs]

Aight so here's the graph (number 2) which I just got done making. As you can see all normal nominations are in blue, except for ROmanus, who is special, and is red. IT hink he'll like that, it goes with his avatar. Similarly, because we can't be 100% sure everyone is telling the truth, fircoal's nominations are in grey.

I'm going to talk about Fircoal, first. Fircoal had two people voting against him, RR, and MM. (coincidentally enough, those are the people who Dodge voted against, but that's pointless to really go into). This is WIFOM, of course, but I will raise the point: Would scum nominate people that they were already going to kill? I don't think so. You might say they could because they wanted to seem innocent, but in effect they are cancelling out their own participation in who gets nominated, which means there's a higher chance of being nominated themselves.

Ghyrt, Romanus, Dean, and yellow bounder didn't receive any votes. that doesn't necessarily mean anything. JDodge received 5 votes.
I think it's pretty unlikely that five out of 11 possible people would randomly pick JDodge. So we look at Dodge and see that Ghyrt, Cheez, Dean, Jack, and Yellow have all voted for him.

What's even crazier is that every single person who voted Dodge, also voted for someone else who is nominated today. Three out of those five (Ghyrt, Dean, Yellow) have no votes against them. And Dean and Jack nominated the exact same people.

So here's my basic sumamry. I have more but I'm effectively done, now, and I'll post my recoup:
Fircoal is dead; he is not scum.
Maz and RR are probably

not scum

because at this point I don't think they would want to risk forfeiting their nominations on a soon-to-be-dead player and risk being nominated themselves.
Romanus, I think, is

not scum

. If it's an optional ability (like I said before) and he's scum he would have no reason to reveal that, he could just as easily lie and not be caught. (It would be almost impossible for an unknowing town to deduce that someone had double votes.)
8 left; five of them voted for JDodge.
Dodge is probably not scum because it's highly unlikely that out of the eight people remaining, six of them most likely being town (though it may only be two, since the mafia has a bigger advantage this game), that five townies decided to gang up (randomly) on the other one.
---------------(sidenote)---------
Even if you don't want to clear bunny and Maz and Romanus, it's unlikely that five out of 9/10 pro town players would randomly pick the same person. Bunny's nomination is due to ROmanus stacking the deck. Me and cheesefan are probably because we picked each other, because we are in another game together, and I think Dodge is nominated because he got ganged up on by scum. It is I guess possible to consider that Dodge is also scum and was nominated today to be 'cleared' in our eyes by the same reason.
---------(end sidenote)------------
Jack and Dean both had the same nominations, were not voted for themselves (except by CS), and in Jack's last post, he put Dean way at the bottom with a kinda impartial side comment. I think that out of what we know about night one that these two would be a good nomination team for the morrow. It's possible I'm missing something, or that theere is more information that I didn't consider, but that's what the facts are telling me.
(I'm not a math whiz, by the way. I'm just trying to help. I'm more than willing to have people interpret the logistics themselves... this is all just me saying how *I* see it and I am sure I don't see the whole picture)

Note : I was up way too late tonight, hope this doesn't ramble too much

[Skruffs]

Okay, Jack -

What I am suggesting is that, based on what I see in the numbers. As I said multiple times, it's rambling, and I use the word 'probably' a bunch of times.

I assume everyone is truthful, yes, I have no reason at this time to think otherwise. WHO do you think was being untruthful? Tell me which data should be invalidated before criticizing hypothesises based on that data.

I also said why I am assuming that mafia were not nominating each other, for the same reason that they would not pick the person they knew was dying, and for the same reason they would team up to help make sure that one person (or two) was nominated.

IT IS ENTIRELY POSSIBLE THAT YOU AND DEAN ONLY COINCIDENTALLY PICKED THE SAME TWO PEOPLE.

But adding in all the other things, that i just went over, it's MORE likely that if anything can be gleaned from the numbers, that you and him would be looking most guilty.


"You take not getting nominated as a scumtell."
Where?

[quote="Ghyrt, Romanus, Dean, and yellow bounder didn't receive any votes. that doesn't necessarily mean anything. JDodge received 5 votes."

Is this what you mean? Because it is not saying that not being nominated is a scumtell.

Was Cheesefan's nominations random?
"Jack : "I nominated cheesfan for being first and Jdodge for starting with a J."
Ddean : "I nominated Cheesefan because I like cheese and Jdodge because i like his picture of a dog. Even if there is one scum up I don't think we are going to hit them.
Skruffs: "Me and cheesefan are probably because we picked each other, because we are in another game together"
Central: "I nominated Cheesefan and Jack. "

I personally don't know anything about statistical variation. Please explain more.

JDodge is special because he has one more vote than anyone else, and four of the five people nominating him, aren't nominated themselves. I personally traded nominations with Maz and Cheese, who got pegged bvy you, jack, and CS. Bunny is another special case because he got targetted by Romanus.

"This kind of analysis is not going to help us at all. It would be easy for scum to say they nominated fircoal. They could say they nominated whoever they liked, it if doesn't add up in the end we have no way of knowing who lied about it. Your assuming maz is innocent and dean and I are scum off of this?"

I'm saying what I think based on the numbers, and putting it out there so that everyone else can add their opinion. For all I know, cum *might* be lying about who they nominated, however, the numbers add up. I'm kinda suspicious of yellowbounder for being the last one to claim when he could have claimed earlier; he could b e cleaning up the messes of someone else. With fircoal not here it's entirely possible someone else voted me and fircoal nominated other people.

I will note that you didn't seem very inclined to add any information yourself, you instead used your post mostly to discredit what I did post. My text is not as important as the graph - the graph is what the text is based on. Patterns I see. After today, the way some people are suggesting that we all decide before hand who to nominate, the mafia will know who to vote for, to be able to blend seamlessly in with town. At that point the game will become mostly just keeping suspicion on other people of the town. Today we have the raw information; as has been said before, I personally think scum are more likely to cooperate today to avoid being caught up in a bluff as to who they nominated.

[Skruffs]

I'm not talking about 'every day' Dodge. this is just for today. I think claiming won't be important from now on, especially if we are going to be 'pre-deciding' who to nominate the night before. Why? Because if everyone votes for two people, and they are all townies, it is likely the cop will investigate one of them, and it's likely that scum can kill one of them and nominate someone else. On the other hand, if everyone votes for the same two people, why would scum have any reason to *not* vote for them? there's no way to know who voted who excepet in situations like today , where 4 people are nominted with 4/5 votes each.

Just look it over, chew on it a while, come to some conclusions and share them with everyone else.

[Skruffs]

JDodge : if we all vote for two people, and one of them is pro-town, teh mafia can kill that person, vote someone else, and that person (with two or three votes) will have a majority and will be nominated, because every other vote will be on thte other person. Obviously the two people who are 'being nominated', town or not, will not necessarily want to vote for themselves or each other, so that's a third element you have to deal with.

Jack: After everyone else posted their nominations, jodge had 5, rr and chz has 4, and i have 3. Fircoal nominated two people, as well. We found his finger in the ballot box, so OBVIOUSLY he did put in his nominations (tho why his finger was in there is beyound me). I am nominated with everyone else; so it stands to reason that he more likely than not nominated me.

Maz could have easily done that; maz nominated AND voted for me as the day started, i could probably try to find a way to suggest that maz lied and is trying to cover, but that is PURELY speculation.

Again, you are saying I'm assuming all kind of stuff, namely that the information is correct and that people aren't lying. I am saying that based on what people are saying, this is what I have concluded. You can't 'wifom' evidence away just because it's possible someone lied. Romanus 'came clean' about who he nominated, and you are suspicious of him for that.


cheesefan : I posted what people said, if you doubt the validity of that, talk to them, don't criticize me for reposting.

If you want me to post a basis on who I think is scummy, I think that ghyrt, yellow bounder, bunny, and dean are

acting

the most scummy. I don't know why I think CS isn't scummy considering he's kinda lurking (no offense meant).

I'm not really trying to throw suspicion on them, though, that's my opinion. IF you want I will post a longer person-by-person review tonight.

[Skruffs]

You are asking me to provide a double negative on Maz; I can't really explain why he's

not

scummy, just like I can't really explain why Dodge is

not

scummy. I could conceivably say that Dodge was nominated by scum buddies so that he would not be a target later on. <.< Or I can say " wow he has a crap load of votes on him, what are the chances those are all coincidental?"

I don't see how it's circular reasoning. You are saying we can't prove he nominated me, and I agree. We can't prove it, but we also can't disprove it, and it's just basically a temporary band-aid until we find something better.

[Skruffs]

Couldn't it also be said that the lists could be manipulated by mafia into getting the wrong people nominated?

[Skruffs]

12 players with 3 scum means after each mislynch scum has more of an ability to force misnominations. I'm not so liking the 'scum lists'.. posts 316, and 318, together, seem to be setting things up to screw town in the morrow.

If scum knows who everyone is likely to be voting, and even knowing who is getting second place and third place, they can manipulate things in their own favor by adding votes and killing off least suspicious people, etc. This is basically why I discredited 'pre-nominating' people earlier in the game, but to be honest, it's all SO FRIGGING wifomy what the mafia will/won't do that it will be hard to figure things out.

On the other hand, maybe we should just do it and stop discrediting everything. Everything is a piece of info. But if we say who we want to nominate tonight, we won't be able to look at who everyone nominated tomorrow, or be able to validate what everyone says they did, because, once again, people could be lying.

Anyways because mafia has the quasi-ability to collectively eliminate and nominate things, I'm much more reluctant to think that Romanus is a pro-town role.
JDodge, I Think, is more likely than not pro town.
Cheesefan is more likely than not town, in my eyes.

I'm reluctant to say I think Jack or Ghyrt is protown.I'm reluctant to say I think dean or bunny is pro-town. I don't think yellowbounder is much of anything. But that doesn't mean they aren't, it's just where my opinions lie.

I don't like Ghyrt's stalling technique. He did it before with his nominations, going through the motions without saying who it was, and then again with his lists, agreeing we should but then conveninenetly leaving. I'm not saying he's not leaving or anything, but I'm looking at how long he had to post it, i see his agreement post and then his 'i'll be away post'.. it's not hard to put a huge list of people if you're honestly thinking it's a good idea.

I'd like T.C.S's opinion on things... he seems pretty not involved in this fiasco.

[Skruffs]

But how will you be able to 'force' them to vote based on who they think is suspicious? You can't. You already discredited last nights nominations as 'evidence', so how the hell are you going to do it tommorrow?

[Skruffs]

They can't just up and say nominated someone that was at the bottom of their list. Therefore they would have to lie. Forcing scum to lie is good.

Why would they have to? And if they did, how would anyone know? Scum are more than willing to lie, especially in situations where there's

no way

to catch them.

[Skruffs]

I'm not trying to discourage sharing of information, but you can't have your cake and eat it too. You can't say we can't look at one thing because scum is lying, and then say we can do another thing because we would be able to catch scum lying. How will we catch scum lying tomorrow that we can't do today? That's what I am asking.

[Skruffs]

Is that what you think I am suggesting, Jack?

[Skruffs]

Mafia has soooooo much more power than town it's not funny.

The only way nominations will work is if we literally steamroller over mafia; they don't have enough power to finaglge nominations at this point if we work togehter. However, - and JDodge emphasized this point - how are you going to convince the proverbiail ABC to also vote for each other? If Romanus were A, he could annouce that he was going to target D, and the mafia (And B and C) could follow suit. Bamf, D is nominated. (2 + 1 + 1 + (2 or 3 of mafia depending on A - C's alignment) compared to ABC now getting 12 votes split between them, and average of four.

So the only way this works is if Townies also agree to be nominated. THis is getting so wacked out and twisted!! I love it even though I hate it too. It is helping me think tho

[Skruffs]

You're not getting me here. Right now you and our Scottish friend here are basically saying "lets play it random because it's the simplest, probably also the most intuitive approach".

I don't think it would be random, persay. N1 was random because nobody had anything to go on. Tonight, if done secretly, will be based on people's suspicions / wanting to get rid of townies.

Sidenote : How will we decide who to nominate? Should we have some sort of voting to deicde who we are going to vote for tonight to decide who we are going to lynch tommorrow?

Let's take a vote.

[Skruffs]

As of right now, the scum are IN our town, killin our dudez. So they're going to work to make sure they don't get nominated in the morning.

The concept behind not sharing your nominations is because it then comes down to each person to nominate who they actually feel is the most scummy. The idea being is if mafia don't know who's going to nominate who, they'll have to nominate people themselves. This kind of forces every townie to make calculated guesses, thinking for themselves who is scum and who isn't. Which can be good.

In the end, we will have to agree before we lynch who we are going to collectively, as a group, nominate. If one of them get nightkilled, it is as bunny said: one less suspicious person. There's not going to be a way to foolproofedly determine who nominated who. We're going to have to hope. And if scum are really good at not looking suspicious, then... we're going to have to rely on any doctor and cop roles to help us out.

[Skruffs]

This whole post is interesting, I'll refer to my specific part later, but basically.. I notice you go through two phases... a helpful phase and a distracting phase. This whole pose was from your 'distracting' phase. I'm going to go back and see what people are talking abuot before you start doing this silly stuff, as compared to when you are talking helpfully. This whole post.. not helpful. Taking smidgens of poeple's posts and commenting on them, with ten or more, does nothing. It's interesting that you posted it right after ROmanus said that it's a red herring that scum will use to cause town to fight each other. Hmm. Anyways...

The idea being is if mafia don't know who's going to nominate who, they'll have to nominate people themselves.

Huh? They

want

to nominate people themselves. My system just makes it that much harder for them to fuck up our lynch options, and leaves a whole lot less to pure chance.

In the end, we will have to agree before we lynch who we are going to collectively, as a group, nominate.

So you do agree? Good.

First quote : You took that out of context. "

The concept behind not sharing your nominations is because it then comes down to each person to nominate who they actually feel is the most scummy. The idea being is if mafia don't know who's going to nominate who, they'll have to nominate people themselves. This kind of forces every townie to make calculated guesses, thinking for themselves who is scum and who isn't. Which can be good.

What I am saying is that mafia will have to 'choose themselves' who they want to nominate vs knowing what the town is doing and following along with them, and then hope that a few other people are also voting them.

Second quote : My sentence said that Town was going to have to agree on who they were going to nominate the next day. You asked/inferred that I agreed. With what? If you were to assume I was agreeing with something based on the sentence you quoted, it would be that I thought that tommorrow's nominations were a good choice. Since that hasn't been discussed at all, there is absolutely nothing to agree with. If you were asking "Do you agree that town will have to agree on them" then you should have asked that. This is where your quotes fail, because you take only a bit out, which misinterprets what they are saying, and then when you reply, it looks like you are twisting wrods around, misconstruing what is said, or putting words in other people's mouths. You are more than welcome to do things your own way but if people get ruffled by it, you can't then tell them to stop, because that's them reacting to you. This is meant as helpful criticism.

My method, however, pretty much guarantees that

we get at least 2 out of our 3 most suspicious people up for lynching tomorrow.

Except it doesn't, because those suspects and the mafia can coup it.


Anyways, I think we should nominate Dean. Jack defended him, and then he bussed Jack.

[Skruffs]

Law of Entropy, mebbe? Causality? Ennui? I don't know myself.
I think MAz is sayign what Romanus was sayign and I aws echoing as well;

if mafia doesn't know what plans to mess up, they'll have to devise their own.

[Skruffs]

Damn, lost my post while constructing that neat little thing at hte bottom of this one. Let's try again.

How about instead of splitting into camps, we compromise?
Compromise. We all have two votes. Let's use one together, and one randomly. That's right. We nominate one person with half our votes, and we all quietly, privately decide what to do with our other vote. Not everyone would have to do this; 5 people will most likely be a majority. With our other vote, we nominate who else we want to see up there. THAt way we have one pre planned nominee, and a second placer down by secret, popular vote. If mafia want to kill the person we have decided to nominate, than it's all the more possible one of them will be nominated.

Maybe this is a flawed Idea, but I Think it's a step forward from either of the other ideas.

Second note, I akinda side with Romanus about revealing votes in the morning. I have been changing opinions a lot as more and more thoughts are added to the mix; kudos to everyone who is participating.

Whatever happens, this game is going to have a truckload of WIFOM.



Hmmmmmmmmmm.

A'ight, please show me what makes "anarchy" less easily corrupted than my plan.

Guys, please try to think this through here. By "random" I didn't mean meaningless, I meant "anarchy". We have no idea how easy we make life for the mafia, or how much they'll be able to fuck us up. It leaves too much to pure luck, basically.

My method, however, pretty much guarantees that

we get at least 2 out of our 3 most suspicious people up for lynching tomorrow.

And by choosing which of our 3 suspects to remove as an option, the mafia's basically giving us more free information. That's better than anarchy in my book. Yay institutions!

1. Paranoid, much? Let the town judge what's good and what's not for ourselves rather than shout "SABOTAGE!"
2. "Anarchy" is just as much a chosen system as mine is, only more intuitive. Can't it also be set into place by evil anti town culprits?

Nope, just not too pro town-ish. Look, we need to think this thing over and decide on the town's best course of action. Forcing us into anarchy just because you "won't have it any other way", since you won't give up your "freedom" or somethin', is not particularly helpful.

"Anarchy" isn't purely random, true. It's (way)

more

random than what I'm trying to propose, though, and randomness is a big no no.

Lastly Mr. Big Bunny, you put those words in my mouth. All I said was that town would have to agree on WHO they were nominating. That's the third time you are inferring that I Agree with your plan - for the record, your plan is not a bad one. But everyone has to be involved or it will be chaos.

[Skruffs]

You're forgetting what "Consensual' means.

Okay. Well, I'm willing to give this a go, ie nominating. Nobody can be held to it, and of course the mafia has two/three people backing each other up whereas we are all fending for each other.

I don't care who gets nominated, but I'd prefer to see Dawg, Romanus, and cheesefan off the lynching block tommorrow.

I wasn't really suspicious of jack until he went off after I posted the chart, b dean/jack/ghyrt works for me

[Skruffs]

Both sides have drawbacks. Both sides have oppurtunities. Doing it one way tonight doesn't mean we have to do it another way tommorrow night.

[Skruffs]

Hmm? Oh I'm not really annoyed by them, I just see what other people are saying. I like you, bunny! (Disclaimer: Liking RR is not a scumtell)

[Skruffs]

I don't think that is really a correct metaphor, does libertarianism take into account that political 'nominees' are being killed off and that there is a knowledgable group of subversives trying to destroy the political state entirely?maybe it does, i have no clue.

Okay so let's just leave it out in the open - if peole want to state cases on why some people should be nominated they are free to do so, but nobody is required to disclose who they are nominating, but in the morning we're going to try and figure out what's going on?

[Skruffs]

Okay.

Vote Skruffs

[Skruffs]

Naw. ANd you should stop pressing it! I originally offered to give myself up if none of the people nominated seemed really suspicoius. I think Dodge is pretty town, and while I've had doubts about you, I don't feel comfortable trying to get you lynched to save mytself. Cheesefan, not so sure about, but I understand his nomination of me (and mine of his) so i'd also feel weird lynching him atm. So. With everyone else rather cleared, I'll vote myself. There's nothing more to it than that, I promise.

[Skruffs]

Welcome back, Ghyrt. We missed you.

[Skruffs]

I will be nominating two of Jack, Dean, Ghyrt, and Bunny.
ASSUMING I live to night.. muahahaha

[Skruffs]

I'm voting myself, aren't I? Form your own conclusions.

jack - he says you are scummy next to cheezfan, who he thinks is noninnocent.

[Skruffs]

I think TCS got replaced in another game I'm in by his own request. It's possible he forgot about this one.
yellowbouner, well, he's jsut scum.
Who do I think is scum? The people I"m nominating. (see above)

[Skruffs]

I think I Already explained; that's why you are voting me currently, yes/no?
HOwever I have no trouble explaining again.

Bunny : I think being on the pedestal of being nominated is good for his gameplay.
Ghyrt : Suspicious to me in every sense of the word.
Dean : He's trying to bus you and Ghyrt to save his own skin, which is understandable.
You : Because you consistently make suggestions that would only benefit scum in the long run.

None of it is personal, really, and I had to really consider if I wanted to nominate Maz or TCS or yellow bounder. I see dodge as cleared, and romanus as helpful, so I'm not going to nominate them.

Who are you going to nominate?

[Skruffs]

Jack asked me who I thought was suspicious. I told him, he asked why, I told him. I'm not in turn allowd to ask his suspicions?

This is why I am not going to vote someone else who is nominated, it will be far too tempting for the four of us to attack each other for our own self preservation at the cost of giving scum info they can use. If jack is scum, he can fake it, and if he's not comfortable, he can fake it - the mafia might lie about who they want to nominate, but so can we. Discussing things have to be done or it WILL be like what rabbit is afraid of - anarchy. I think we can all talk about who we find susipcious without revealing any info - that's why I listed four people.

[Skruffs]

Not everyone is comfortable doing tha, and it can't be forced. So those of us who want to, lets, and if others don't, lets respect that.

[Skruffs]

I'm curious why cheesefan is considered suspicios? I know it's been said before but, for the sake of argument, can you say again why you are voting for him and not me or rabbit?

[Skruffs]

Already explained, maybe a page back. Basically I don't think any of you are scummy, and I don't like the idea of townies voting against each other to save their own skin. It can just lead to distress/conflict in later days. You could say I'm being 'chivalrous".

[Skruffs]

Why are you answering Dean's question for him?

[Skruffs]

Aight... so I'm still curious about cheez's suspiciability.

[Skruffs]

Already explained, maybe a page back. Basically I don't think any of you are scummy, and I don't like the idea of townies voting against each other to save their own skin. It can just lead to distress/conflict in later days. You could say I'm being 'chivalrous".

Doesn't sit well with me at all.

1. Why didn't you say so the first 900 times I asked that?
2. You "know" you're innocent, but not any of the others. Why vote yourself? What gain does it possibly give you that simply not selfishly attacking the other nominees doesn't?

Jdodge, it's possible, which is why I don't mind being lynched today, after we talk, unless we find a good reason to lynch someone else. My 100%-pure towniness can be like a seal of approval.

You are hte one qho coined 'martyr' and have been bringing it up nonstop since I mentioned it. I was offering an tou for the nominees so that we could focus on determing a way to catch scum rather than attacking each other. I don't care if you guys know or don't know that I am innocent - you say I am very pro-town and then suggest i'm being uber scummy (in more than one post), so I think you n eed to figure that out for yourself. Selfishly attacking the other nominess gives mafia more of a stranglehold. If the four of us go springer-style on each other, resentments from a mislynch today can be exploited in nominations tonight.

I'm trying to figure out if you maybe use the 'dislike' as a defense... the 'just because you don't like me doesn't make me scum' only works if you are really town, because it sends a 'you are voting me because you dislike me, not because you think i am scum' kinda thing. You don't know that people are voting you just because they dislike you, they might actually think you are scum. In any case, if someone likes or dislikes you, they should not be basing a vote on you, just on that - so instead of sayign not to be lynched for being disliked, ask them why they aer voting you, and coutner their arguments head on.

GOOD POINT about cheese and jack, will have to look at that. Jack voted for cheezfan, tho - or at least says he did. Does that matter?

[Skruffs]

I'm sorry I brought up that jack said he nominated cheesefan. ?? Is that better??

Jack - I was being sarcastic - if anything, my post was in defense of YOU.

[Skruffs]

I don't see how the chart coudl at all eb used to say that jack and you are scum together. That's why I brought it up, I'm asking for more than just a 'he defended cheezfan'. His attack was a quasi attack, so I bring up a quasi defense.

[Skruffs]

I didn't consider his "jack and cheese are scum' as a real attack - esp considering it was based on my original suggestion that he and jack voted together. Jack got angry at me for suggesting it, dean got scared and started sayign jack was scummy. Me bringing that back up has jack getting angry at me again.
angry of course means 'hostileish'.

[Skruffs]

Just kinda skimming back, looking through things..
Most of this game has been about discussing how it should be played, and I think that's great. THere is absolutely no way to say which way is the best or worse, and no way to really say that one person who was advocating one way or another is better than another. In the end, we are going to be mostly split on what way to play the game. There is nothing wrong with expressing that interest.

I'm going to be more curious, later on, if I'm around, of the people who didn't contribute to 'what is right or wrong' discussion at all - people who can just aviod revealing what they think and then cast blame on other people who may earnestly believe that one way or another is best or worst.

Anyways, jsut a little commentary to help spark more discussion.
Ghyrt, Yellow, TCS (or replacements)?

[Skruffs]

I'm guessing that was meant to Dean - I referred to your replacement in mine.


Recap : We are on an island. We (at least most of us ) are here because we Know The Secret. This reminds me too too much of a show I used to watch... I guess we'll see what happens if a giant bubble comes and kills the person we lynch.

Again, there are people where who want to kill us all. All of us. Because we know the secret. One of the way s that will make it easy for them to kill us is to keep us in conflict with each other, and unorganized. So. just for today, let's *all* agree on one plan or another. I think the more organized we are, the better. While I know some of you value your liberties and your privacy, and everything else, this is a matter of your survival, so I am going to ask - would you please voluntarily consider giving up your nominations privacy before we lynch whoever get lynched today? While it is possible that mafia can subvert the nomination process, it is also possible that by all of us talking about it before hand, the mafia will be exposed. So let's give it a go.
I've changed my nomination list, I know exactly who I want to nominate tonight - and it's not based on traditional scummy behavior. It's based on scummy behavior pertaining to this particular setup.

[Skruffs]

MAz - now that you hae said that - the mafia have absolutely no reason to agree.
Jdodge : I'm not saying we should *force* each other to nominate people, I'm simply saying, will you agree to talk about it first? Nobody can force anyoen else (as far as I am aware) to nominate one person or another - however, talking about who you are intending to nominate and why can give us an edge.

[Skruffs]

It gives town the edge.
Even if it results in a townie lynch tommorrow, there will be a pattern, a pattern we can break.

[Skruffs]

JDodge - NOT talking about it is going to give the game to scum. Why did you misconstrue my words/ WHen I said "even if we lynch a townie tommorrow', I meant, in reference to you saying it gives scsum the edge, that even if they manipulate a situation for tommorrow that puts two townies up - we'll have their words and thoughts down on paper. You seem to be sayign there is no reason to talk about it because mafia can use it for their purposes, but that also gives mafia a smoke screen to hide behind because they will change their nominations to fit, tommorrow, just like several people have accused of happening today. At least if we talk about it today we will have something to put presure on tommorrow if things go differently.

[Skruffs]

You are avoiding the meat of what I'm saying and picking on the seasoning.
PEople can change their nominations if they won't - that's fine. Just rememeber that three people ARE going to be workign together to get me, you, and everyone else in this gamge killed. If you want to play the lone wolf that's fine but don't be surprised if you are back UP here tommorrow for being anti-town today.

[Skruffs]

I'm not arguing to prove I'm pro-town. 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.

[Skruffs]

Every single post I've made, you've misinterpreted, misconstrued, and ignored.
I'm trying to get everyone to AGREE to help each other and you think that means I'm

splitting us up

??? How???

Lemme tell you what it looks like, to me, will happen -
out of everyone in this game, a few people will vote for maz, a few people will vote for dean, a few will vote for RR, a few will vote for jack, and the romanus will probably get killed, which a few people will also be voting for. Mafia will be free to peg three votes each on whoever they want - iof they are smart, they will nominate a scummy-acting townie and a very pro-town acting townie, and tommorrow it won't matter who we lynch, they'll still win.

Do you really think that the town is going to

unanimously

decide to nominate scum withOUT talking about it?

DO YOU, REALLY???

[Skruffs]

Romanus - Did I vote for JDodge? Did I say he should be lynched? Did I say he was stupid? Go on and vote me if you want, or nominate me tonight, or whatever. I've realized there's only one way for the town to do this with any amount of control and that's by workign TOGETHER.

JDodge - saying that scum won't be able to screw with nominations because "they won't know who's going for who." Is

flawed

, because scum don't have to KNOW who's going for who. And

neither will we

, because we will all be randomly nominating whoever we want. So their three votes (added on to any of the townies) will get anyone they want nominated. Basically advocating a secret nomination insures that scum doesn't HAVE to everyone else is nominating, because they can nominate anyone they want, enmasse, and then lie about it the next day.

*Maz* understands this, that's why he's calling it *bullshit*.

Everyone -

If it's bullshit to work together to get a minority nominated when that's the ONLY WAY we can get that minority nominated, than workign as a ateam -

even at the risk of screwing up

- is the only real choice we have.

JDodge - if you are not going to reveal your nominations tonight, than you can't talk about who you think is suspicious, either, can you? Because then the mafia might deduct who you are nominating. And so on from there, etc. Which is ALSO a very easily claim for scum to hide behind, too, to keep from being exposed.

[Skruffs]

Cheesefan is probably going to nominate:

Romanus for having an ability.
RR for acting scummy.

Dean is going to nominate two of :

Ghryt, Jack, Maz, Romanus (assuming Cheezefan is killed)

Ghyrt

In his many illustrious posts, has ALSO only commented/fossed/looked at
Raging Rabbits
Skruffs

Jack

In a list Jack posted previously, he said he was going to nominate
Maz
Jack

Maz is probably going to nominate two of

Raging Rabbit
Skruffs
Dean

Raging Rabbit

Seems to be enemies with everyone, but focuses a lot onn
Romanus
MM

Romanus

Cheesefan dead today - biggest lurkers tommorrow
(biggest lurkers are : )
TCS
Ghyrt
YellowBounder

Skruffs

Maz
T.C.S

The Central Scrutinizer

Does not refer to non-nominees, so, presumably

Yellow bounder

Said he would nominate :
Romanus
(presumably) Jdodge
and

JDodge

Nobody Knows..

So presumably, two of Maz, Romanus, and Raging Rabbit will be nominated tommorrow.

Who I think is scummy :
Maz, Ghyrt, and TCS have basically ignored everyone else in the town and focused only on the people who are nominated today.
Maz, especially, has no trouble voting between them, ridiculing them, etc.I don't like his 'boogeyman' post where he says:

]
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.

*THIS* is ridiculous. He's not only been belittling Every attempt for people to talk with each other, he's also sayign that Trying it will END IN FAILURE... to the point of trying to lynch people who Do advocate it.

I don't think scum has that much power, Yet, in this game.
Scum want to kill people who will not be nominated. Killing townies who are going to be nominated isn't going to help them. Killing people who is under the radar and not likely to get any votes, THAT is who they want to kill.
There. This is kinda about nominations, but this is mostly because I think Maz is behaving scummily.

[Skruffs]

This is *not* A traditional mafia game. In a traditional mafia game ANyone can be lynched on any day. In this game, we *HAVE* to plan ahead, or others will plan ahead *for* us.

Maz was voting RR for advocating teamwork, he directed attention at Dead for advocating teamwork, and now he's happily voting me for advocating teamwork. Why?

Even if there is mafia, there is a LOT more town than there is mafia. This is why...

Scum don't want town to work together

- They want us to be distracted little sheep. LOOK at the flavor for the intro; they are subversives here to kill all of us. IF we work together, They may try to lead us, yes, but at the least they will have to Step in line and lay low and cooperational.

Look at Maz's other quotes :

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

What is the bigger force in a game with an informed minority and 8-9 uninformed individuals?

I will not agree to reveal nominations unless I am the only individual to refuse.

It's a known that JDodge will not reveal his, so Maz is completely safe in making this statement, but look at it just a little closer. The only individual? That means if Maz is actually a town, then every other townie and EVERY scum, will have to agree to cooperate, BEFORE Maz will. This is an impossibility.

It looks (to me) like Maz is going to be nominated tommorrow, and by his own decree we shouldn't change the way people are wanting to nominate.

[Skruffs]

Is that all you have to say about that, JDodge? Saying "You are misconstrueing" is not sayign

anything

unless you back it up. You don't seem to have any intentions of doing so... you are posting vague rebuttals saying 'Uh-uh" as a defense. You are the one advocating true democracy, and I respect that, but this game is MORE than just voting between who's been nominated.

Just think about it for a while.. take a break, re-read or get away from the computer and really *consider* what's going to wind up helping the town and what's not.

Basically, we choose who we're going to lynch tommorrow, *today* - that's what the nomination process EQUATES too. I am all for Maz going up tommorrow, and not just because of his impossible demands and "fear da scum" posts. IF you think someone is scummy tommorrow, you have to nominate them tommorrow night. If you think someone is scummy today, you have to nominate them tonight.

I posted Maz's quotes and how they are flawed - show how my arguments are flawed. THAT is what is standard about this game - we can debate. Let's do so. Just voting to silence a voice you don't agree with... is that really what democratism is about?

[Skruffs]

JDodge, you keep getting my references to you and Maz mixed up.

[Skruffs]

romanus - my last post was commenting on maz's game play.
Unfortunately nominations and the way people feel like them are part of a game play.
What exactly am i supposed to talk about that isn't going to 'upset' people?

[Skruffs]

I am asking you how they may please to tamper with it.
You're speaking as if there is nothing we can do to st op scum, I think, we can. I've provided scenarios - you only offer warnings.

You say scum will tamper with any attempts to collaborate in nominating people. You say scum more likely than not have power roles to interfere with that, but you don't elucidate on any specifics.

Let's say that A and B are not scum but it looks like the they will be nominated. Scum would want to interfere with that? No. It means that they get three townies killed. (nomination night, mislynch, next night)

Let's say A is scum and B is not. How will scum tamper with that? THey will kill off someone who was anti-A and put their combined votes on C to try and get B and C nominated. But that makes A look guilty - in a wifomish way - and then a hunt goes on for who voted C. AT least then we have people who originally seemed suspicious of A who would then have to explain why they changed their vote.

The same situation applies to if A and B are both scum and going to be nominated.

The funny thing is, I know that instead of attacking my logic, (simply sayign it's flawed without having any actual rebuttal of their own) and my arguments, they are sayign that i myself am ridiculous and should be voted/ignored/lynched/full of bullshit etc. That's how Maz treated RR when he was pushing it, and it's how he's treating me when I am pushing it.

I can only assume that they will continue this with everyone else who follows along with this mindset; that working together is bad and that not voting together is thte only way to stop scum from having an advantage.

Yes I will keep railling on it, until someone actually says something with meat in it instead of "no scum will win if we do that"

[Skruffs]

JDodge - your position seems to come from an idealized, even political concept of how the game shuld be play. Even if I don't agree with it, you are still putting your neck out there in advocating it.
Maz is not - he's just belittling the people who say things he doesn't agree with, sayign this won't work and that won't work but not suggesting anything that will work. Gyrt, similarly, started immediately trying to find scumtells in the nominees, hasn't had much interest in anyone else in the game, really.

Romanus - I doubt we are tearing ourselves apart. It's a passionate discussion that is getting results. Look at your own sig.

[Skruffs]

I"m past advocating we all work together, however, apart from maz not agreeing to nominate, i think he's playign a very under-the-radar game in only criticizing people who are on the chopping block. His arguments are appeals to emotion with no apparent solid basis behind it. I'm not going to just let him say whatever he wants and not try to hold him to it.

[Skruffs]

Intellectual talk instead of just calling me flagrantly bullshit. Marked improvement.

In a normal game, asking power roles to coordinate games allow scum to know who's not going to be protected, who's going to be vigged, etc. Yes- scummy.

This is Not the same situation. In this situation, we effectively have to lynch someone twice - the night before in a privat erandom stage, and then, based on that, a definitive stage.

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.

Exactly. A wide range of people will receive nomination votes -

but only two will be up for lynching the next day.

Giving scum a wider range of choices to play with means that town will be hard-pressed to get enough of a collaborative effort to nominate actual scum without receiving paranoid-defensive votes from other people,

which scum can exploit

.

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.

How? How, dangit?? Give me an example of how scum can stop a group of townies nominating enmasse rather than a sloppy wide variety of nominations?

The worse that I can come up with is that scum would kill a townie who's acting scummy (who is being nominated because a majority of people think they are acting scummy in the first place) and get someone unexpected nominated.

[Skruffs]

JDodge, the funny thing is, your example just proves MY point; that we need to agree colelctively to ONLY nominate two people. The more of a field - as Maz wants - of nominees we have, the more that scum can dick with it. Thank you for your agreement.

Here, I'll explain it for you.

First of all : What letter representation are the three scum?

I am assumign that scum would have no reason to protect/prevent from being nominated B and C, if B and C are actutally townies. In that case, they don't do anything, at all, kill townie E, and one of A, B or C is lynched.

Let's say that the town has a good reason to believe that two of A, B, and C are scum, and B and C actually are scum. A, B, and C are agreed on to be nominated.
JDodge's situation occurs as he states it, (this includes B and C publicly agreeing to vote with each other).
The next day, D and E are mysteriously nominated, A is dead, and B and C are *curiously* scott free. One of D and E will be lynched. The other one is almost *cleared*... B and C would claim they had no idea that the other was ALSO going to nominate D and E, as well as a third, unknown person (hmm) or something along those lines. It wouldn't be very pretty watching them squirm. IS town going to let B and C do the same thing with a third townie? No.

In that regards, I believe that, the next night, there would be only two nominees: B, and C. Even if one scum kills the other to nominate towne F or whatnot, B is still looking suspicious. Bammo.

With four nominations, or five, or six (as would happen if everyone chose independantly), scum have even MORE choices.

Nominations should be based on gameplay.
Being anti-town = bad game play.
Discussing what constitutes bad game play = playing mafia.
Giving scum advantages = Bad gameplay
Forcing scum to be public about decisions they will make = Information that can be used later on.

How about this

: We have a regular vote lynch for who gets lynched today - and then we have a "tommorrow lynch" vote count, too. The top two people on the 'tommorrow lynch' are agreed by everyone to be voted on.
With 8 votes (assuming scum defect) each, scum can not nominate someone that's not on the top two. THEN the game isn't played in secret - then it's all about scum having to persuade the town on WHO to nominate based

entirely

on public posts.

With two people:
If neither are scum : Why would scum lie? A scummy-acting townie is lynched the next day, and hopefully the town picks better nominations the following night.
Scum could kill off one of the nominees that night and nominate someone else (Even one of their own) to damn the remaining nominee.

If one is scum:
Scum could : put extra votes on another townie, and kill the first one, however, this will not prevent the nominated scum from being nominated, and in fact, will make him look guilty.
They could NOT screw with the nominations, and just push for a mislynch the next day. While killing a townie that is being nominated might be tempting, they could instead focus their kill on a very pro-town player, instead.

If both scum are nominated, with eight other votes behind the nominations - what can they do to stop it? Killing a townie won't keep the townie from nominating them, and though they can put 3 votes on any townie, it won't matter because they'll have an unmaneuvarable block of votes (7) coming at them.

The reason I want to nominate people who aren't going to cooperate is because; if they are not going to cooperate, they are going to be Helping the scum by Not helping the town in nominating who is the guiltiest. Scum will keep scummy players alive if possible, killing off those that put up the most resistance to them doing what thtey want.


Maz - you countered my request with a request of your own, and I fulfilled it. I am still waiting to see your own scenario.

[Skruffs]

Guys - it's a huge post - but I Really think it is worth reading all of it.
(Just incase you think it's bickering and should be ignored)

[Skruffs]

JDodge, seriously, why are you *constantly* trying to strawman me?

[Skruffs]

JDodge - who's voting who for opposing their view?

[Skruffs]

I want to get rid of scum. People who are anti-town are much more likely to be scum than people who are pro-town. People who want to let scum choose who gets lynched, consequently, are scum, because scum generally are not going to lynch themselves.

You were doing so good when you had Maz to guide you, too.

[Skruffs]

Bonus points to Raging Rabbit who is not voting one of the other nominees...

[Skruffs]

Are you attempting to put words in my mouth, again, instead of dfealing with the facts and requests and challenges I provided you already?
You're really reaching...

[Skruffs]

Here, I'll explain it for you.

First of all : What letter representation are the three scum?

I am assumign that scum would have no reason to protect/prevent from being nominated B and C, if B and C are actutally townies. In that case, they don't do anything, at all, kill townie E, and one of A, B or C is lynched.

Let's say that the town has a good reason to believe that two of A, B, and C are scum, and B and C actually are scum. A, B, and C are agreed on to be nominated.
JDodge's situation occurs as he states it, (this includes B and C publicly agreeing to vote with each other).
The next day, D and E are mysteriously nominated, A is dead, and B and C are *curiously* scott free. One of D and E will be lynched. The other one is almost *cleared*... B and C would claim they had no idea that the other was ALSO going to nominate D and E, as well as a third, unknown person (hmm) or something along those lines. It wouldn't be very pretty watching them squirm. IS town going to let B and C do the same thing with a third townie? No.

In that regards, I believe that, the next night, there would be only two nominees: B, and C. Even if one scum kills the other to nominate towne F or whatnot, B is still looking suspicious. Bammo.

With four nominations, or five, or six (as would happen if everyone chose independantly), scum have even MORE choices.

With two people:
If neither are scum : Why would scum lie? A scummy-acting townie is lynched the next day, and hopefully the town picks better nominations the following night.
Scum could kill off one of the nominees that night and nominate someone else (Even one of their own) to damn the remaining nominee.

If one is scum:
Scum could : put extra votes on another townie, and kill the first one, however, this will not prevent the nominated scum from being nominated, and in fact, will make him look guilty.
They could NOT screw with the nominations, and just push for a mislynch the next day. While killing a townie that is being nominated might be tempting, they could instead focus their kill on a very pro-town player, instead.

If both scum are nominated, with eight other votes behind the nominations - what can they do to stop it? Killing a townie won't keep the townie from nominating them, and though they can put 3 votes on any townie, it won't matter because they'll have an unmaneuvarable block of votes (7) coming at them.

The reason I want to nominate people who aren't going to cooperate is because; if they are not going to cooperate, they are going to be Helping the scum by Not helping the town in nominating who is the guiltiest. Scum will keep scummy players alive if possible, killing off those that put up the most resistance to them doing what thtey want.

I trimmed off stuff that was opinion and left only the meat of my argument. If you can, With Reason, (not just saying "scum will tamper with it), say that nominating 2 people as a town is worse for the town than randomly privately nominating, than I will drop the case. If you can, I have overlooked something.

MOD: I VOTE NO DEADLINE, BICKERING OR NOT WE ARE BEING ACTIVE.

[Skruffs]

Romanus - I want town to have control.
TOWN needs to decide who is scummy, and work to get those scummy people nominated.
You saying that scum act pro-town is wifomy and without basis. Scum want to act protown, and town want to find scum. If you don't think there's any way to logically build cases against people, than how are people going to nominate the right people to be lynched? There's no evidence of a vigilante - so lynching scum is the Only way to get rid of them.

Personally, I really don't care - if you guys want to NOT lynch me, and nominate me tommorrow, than do so - if nothing else it will prove that the town *can*. If you want to lynch me today - than fine - I'm half way there already. But before you do, at least discuss who should be nonminated tommorrow.

My argument is not that people will vote RANDOMLY, it is that people will not vote ORGANIZEDLY and thus, all those weaknesses that Maz and Jdodge have been complaining about, will be better able to be exploited by scum.

Scum can Not fuck with a 2-person nomination plan without screwing themselves over MORE than the people they are trying to screw over.

That nobody has offered

evidence

coutnering that, even in theory, should say something.

[Skruffs]

Jack - you do not need 'jsut' three nominations, you need more nominations than the scum can contrive. You are refuting Maz's theory that scum can/will destroy *any* attempts of town-cooperation, by saying town only needs to partially cooperate - the same argument JDodge is using - which has already been addressed and is ineffective.

Another example - 14/16 votes,

evenly

(not realistic) divided amongst:
2 people = 7/8 votes per nominee - mafia

can not

outnumber.
3 people = 4/5 votes per nominee - mafia could outnumber if there are one or two obvious strays (people refusing to cooperate and/or fosing other people)
4 people = 3/4 votes each if everyone cooperates, mafia can pick up on suspected strays and get ties or get someone nominated.
5 people = basically giving the nomination to scum. 2/3 votes per nominee.

I've done the number tests, and people doing it individually - not randomly, but individually - does not equal the strength of a voting block.
Why is this so hard to accept? Sayign I am scummy and voting for me is not explaining why this is a false statement, it is simply sayign you are suspicious of the statement.

What do you thinking I am smokescreening? What do you think I was pretending to be sarcastic about? Or are you falling back on JDodge's fascist comment?

Every mislynch will get scum one step closer to beign able to control both lynches and nightkills. A day one mislynch is inevitable, but tommorrow's is not.

People who are just trying to get people lynched and not planning aghead for tommorrow are acting

stupid

. I'm sorry to be insulting, but tommorrow's lynched will be

entirely based

on tonight's nominations. This is how the game works. tHe nominations are the most important tool at town's dispoasl. You *must not* disregard what can be done with it. If people do

not work together

, you will only have each other to blame when scum takes advantage of the chaos and puts who they want up instead.

Welcome, Mariyta.

Lastly, all I've really been asking that we agree on who to nominate Before the lynch. So people pushing for a lynch first, are ignoring that nominations are important. Just remember that, okay?

[Skruffs]

Maz - you are not really looking at the situation, or are intentionally ignoring aspects of it.

If all the numbers are laid out before them, it becomes much easier to contrive at least a marginally successful interference.

This is what you keep repeating. And repeatedly I keep asking you to explain how. But you don't. You jsut say it will happen. When you provide evidence as to how scum will screw with a two person nomination plan - much like how I have provided theories saying the oposite - I will cede victory to you. But you are not, and you will not, because you Can not.

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

HOW

TO FUCK THEM UP.

If we can not talk about who we are going to nominate, because we will be afraid that scum will interfere with it, than you can give NO CLUES about who you are going to nominate. Thusly, you can give no clues as to who you think is scummy - because if you are saying a town is scummy, it is a fairly sure thing that scum will pick up on it - and hope that a fwe other townies will too. Since you will be the one publicly discussing it, it is a sure fire bet that people who disagree with you are going to nominate you as well, so scum can distribute their votes between you adn the person you say is scummy. Even not knowing who people are going to nominate, they can guess based on public discussion.

So not talking abuot nominees (because we don't want to give scum that 'advantage' means not talking about scummy behavior, which means that votes will not be based on any real block, which means scum will be able to put their three votes wherever they want - and more likely than not they will have success.

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.

Oh. So in your own words you are saying that town will know who to nominate that night. Which means scum will too. So you are

defeating your own point

.
IF we agree to work together, we can make this as similar to a normal mafia game as possible. The difference will be that the next day's lynch has to be 'planned ahead' by a willing and vocal town.

Romanus - apparently you held true to your statement about ignoring me, I've already gone over who I think should be nominated and the scummy behavior as to why I think so.


I know, it's a huge post. But points are made in it.

[Skruffs]

This setup is misleading; it's not about deducing information from nominations, it's about the town working as a collective towards a favorable outcome.

Guess who said this, way back when.

[Skruffs]

Jdodge - so, borrowing from your own style of debating, does this mean you think town should not work together towards a favorable outcome? Or jsut nto work together at all?

Maz - yes, it's possible for scum to do that. Yup! But why would they want to? What would be the point? Assuming that A and B are not scum - why would scum want to shoot them at all? They wouldn't. They would want to keep the scummy people alive, because those people provide a nice big distraction that the scum can hide behind. THey would prefer to kill, for example, the pro town player who isn't acting suspicious - or the claimed cop.

If the two of them are on the nomination block - and they will know, since it will be obvious - than they will not shoot each other.

If only one of them is scum, than what benefit will it give B to shoot A and be nominated alongside C? There is none, esp if C is not as scummy or A and B. B (As scum) will want to be nominated alongside town so that they can argue to get the otehr lynched, seem 'cleared', and thus be not nominated the next night.

This is basically a repeat of an earlier post, however, I do not mind reciting it, because I know my posts are long and boring.

[quote "Maz"] 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. [/quote]
First, Considering the numbers won't matter if they are SOLID (7 strong for example), let's look at the base root of what YOU want. You think we need to somehow 'outsmart scum' by nto letting them know who is giong to be nominated. They have to 'guess' that way. But if the scum has to guess who's being nominated, so will town, won't they?

How will we express suspicion of each other with out indicating people we are suspicious of and THEREFORE likely to nominate? Scum come in a block of, by your own pretty numbers, three. How can four townies scucessfully agree to nominate the same two people without "Giving the numbers to the scum on a silver fucking platter"? I'm saying your silver fucking platter doesn't matter, and the numbers on it, don't really matter if we make the scum Choke on them.

Lastly. (yay, you all sing)
This is not about unpredictable vs random at all. You are intelligent, and I think you are aware of this. Which is why I don't like your sweeping generalizations about my ability to copmrehend your 'masterful plan', because the more you talk about it the more it looks full of Shit.

Based on our talk - assuming you are town - I think there will be one or two townies nominating you tonight. If you are not scum, I can be pretty sure that scum will gleefully add another three onto you, and if romanus is townie, probably him as well. That's 4 or five votes. Do you think anyone else in the game (Excluding myself) will be getting more than five 'popular' votes? Dean, a few, maybe. JDodge, maybe a few. Anyone else? Hmm. Doubt it.

Romanus - all you seem to be doing is saying I'm not talking about who I think is suspicious. I do not like the way JDodge is sitting in Maz's lap regarding his opinion of this stuff. HE originally debated with me, but when MAz 'took the handle', and started deferring to him almost immediately. I know how relieving it can be to get an ally when you are in a losing battle, but the immediate trust makes me suspicious of the both of them. Maz's peculiar shifting talking pattern also bothers me. He basically treats everyone like an ass until called on it, then posts a very informed-sounding post with very little meat in it - as seems to be the case in almost all of his posts when he posts something. Regardless of hte content of his post, the fact that he *can* be informed sounding but *chooses* to sound like an ass is also suspicious. IF you have class, why not use it? Him FOSing RR for 'just not beign right' back in the beginning and their vulgar interchanges since then reeks of hypocrasy. Ghyrt similarly seemed pretty arrogant for someone who is in no danger. I do not think dean and jack are working together, honestly.

Now it's your turn - I'll ask you to contribute something yourself, rather than just asking of others.
Which of the lurkers you said you will probably nominate do you think are the most suspicious?

[Skruffs]

Everyone

If you have not realized it, tommorrow's nominated people are going to be a result of today's talks.. Having a 'fake vote' today will allow us to nominate the group-decided two scummiest-seeming people tommorrow. Tommorrow we talk about who should be nominated the next day, while deciding which of the two people that alerady are nominated, should be lynched that day. So there needs to be foreplanning.

Jack

- I am not worried about anything. Saying something is simple math is a lot different than exlpaining in numerical terms how it is simple math. I am pointing out the only system that town has to be able to decisively lynch who they want to instead of being forced to lynch who scum (because we must never underestimate their ability to fuck with the nomination process - Just ask Maz, he knows) want them to. However, I will consider your point - see Maz's argument below.

Romanus

- Will you be able to do scum hunting tommorrow that you can't do today? Allt his talk of scum hunting you are advocating is not equal to the amount of scum hunting you are doing.

JDodge

- thank you for calling me out on schoolyard teasing, I have also noticed you do not call people who agree with you out for being snide or condescending.

Maz

- Scum will not have to guess. IF town has any kind of communication it will be obvious who some people will be voting. Scum only need to know who a few people are voting to be able to get what they want done. You have said this yourself.
Not everyone agrees on every lynch, do they? All it takes is a majority. If people choose not to do the nomination system, they can simply not state in any terms who they are likely to nominate, and scum will have to guess- like you say - but for those of us who want to actually work together and be effective, why not put it RIGHT out there loud and clear to see if scum can do anything about it, at least night one?


So...

Who does everyone want to lynch tommorrow

?
Let's just say each person has two 'votes' each. Say who, and why.
I'll go first. I would like to see

Nominate :Maz

to be up here tommorrow. I would like for him to experience the nomination/lynching process from the other side.
I would also like to

Nominate : Mariyta

to be up here. Nothign against Mariyta, but yellowbounder was the last person to reveal his nominations, and thus the most likely to have been covering up for scum buddies. Plus it will help Mariyta get into the groove of things.

If you don't want to reveal who you think should be lynched tommorrow - than simply say "I decline to comment" and I will not bug you abuot it anymore.. This should satisfy the independants who don't want their choices screwed with.
If at least 7 people do this, than a majority of them have to be town, and we can test-drive with this. That should satisfy Jack.

This is the absolute best I can do. I encourage you to lynch me after we have discussed who should be nominated tommorrow, to at least prove that I really have the town's best interests at heart. This is hte *only* reason why I am not voting JDodge right now. It's been very tempting to change my vote.

As it stands I will respect Romanus's and other's wishes, and I will not push my thoughts on what we should do today, except for discussing who I think is scummy, and thus am likely to nominate. If someone thinks my choices are wrong, I think they should be free to argue with me about this.

Okay? /end tirade.

Bunny, get to hopping.

[Skruffs]

Ghyrt - I see what your reasoning is from but I believe your viewpoint is from a few pagse back, when one of the biggest issues was one RR made fo me beign a martyr. If you didn't notice, I'm not being 'let go'. Thank you for sticking with it tho

I'm now at -1 (danke TCS). Someone could place the final vote on me now, and town will have to decide who to nominate. For my part, I kinda hope Maz is up here in the morning. Scum will have no reason to nightkill Maz, JDodge, or TCS, so, it's not like those nomination votes would be wasted.

Romanus - thanks at least for the vote of support.
Dean understands the basis of what I am trying to say; we have to narrow down tommorrow today, collectively. Anyways you will probably figure it out, but doing it sooner rather than later will give town the biggest advantage.

Mariyta - yes I remember that from PR3. Do you think I am pointing fingers at you? I'm not. My suggestion of your nomination was based entirely on the stallingness of your predecessor.

[Skruffs]

Uhh... guys... why are you voting Cheesefan?

[Skruffs]

It's dying!! We need help!!!
Or maybe a VOTE COUNT!!

[Skruffs]

It really has nothing to do with me disagreeing with your position?

[Skruffs]

Ha Ha HA, JDodge and MAz, using the same attacks (agaaaain)
IF you really think I want to kill off people who disagree with me, than you never really read my posts to understand them, you read through them skimming for something you could arbitrarily vote for.

I had reasoning for saying that I would push to get uncooperative townies nominate, it was because uncooperative townies are, in my opinion, five times more likely to be scum,a dn those that aren't scum, are Helping scum by resisting efforts to catch scum.

TCS : This isn't exactly all Day One - this is also a sort of panel discussion on hwo the game should be played.
I'm absolutely positive later days will take longer.

[Skruffs]

Yes.
I did say that. And I knew when I did that people who wanted to discredit me would use that instead of actually discrediting my theories.
You're grasping at straws.

[Skruffs]

Of course! You didn't actually mean that, you meant to make it so that it drew attention away from your theories so we wouldn't realize how scummy you were.

Exactly!!! I threw in red herrings to distract from my OWN THEORIES that I was simultaneously posting, because I knew that they were scummy somehow, and didn't actually want anyone to read them.
BY JOVE YOU'VE GOT IT!!
However, wouldn't it be easier just not to post those theories in the first place if I didn't want people to read them? And why would I insist in later posts that you actually read the theories instead of just skimming through them for things you think might help push a wagon on me? Hmm.

In any case, you've disproved yourself (again). I am

trying to get myself lynched

. How will I 'kill off people that don't disagree with me' if I am trying to die first? That is a bit of a glitch in your theory. Of course you could say that I don't really want to be lynched, but I'm still voting myself at lynch -2, and have no reason to remove that vote at -1, either. Go ahead and lynch me. I'm happy to die for what I think is right - and there's still a possibility that cheez is a power role. Why expose him, if he is?

Mariyta, the biggest key to remember is that after nominations are over, one of the nominees is going to be lynched, each day.

LAstly - I meant to say later days will not be as long. I think we've worked out a lot of bugs today.

[Skruffs]

I'm not offering, I'm requesting it. I have been requesting it.
I don't think cheezfan should have to claim.
I don't think RRabbit should have to claim,
I don't think JDodge should have to claim.
I don't agree with Jack in this game but I think lynching cheez fan because jack defended him is sketchy at best.

I like your tone.. like you think I'm some squirmy fish that you've finally got hooked or something. None of your arguments hold water, though, and you've referred to the fascist quote how many times now?

[Skruffs]

JDodge, I've answered every question, openly. I'de rebutted every argument, openly. If you are saying I'm ignoring yoru meat, it's because your meat is so small, I can not see it.

[Skruffs]

As compared to your "If we don't *really* discuss it maybe town will just get lucky!" plan. Right.
Anyways.. someone hammer me and then you should all nominated JDodge and Maz tonight.

[Skruffs]

Why are you so scared of the big, bad, townie?

[Skruffs]

JDodge is sure I'm scum, but now he doesn't want to lynch me because that's

exactly

what scum would want. Ha!!

You've been building a case

against

yourself and your scum buddy Maz this whole time. Nobody's going to reread day one, but if they did, they'll see it as clearly as I do.

I've just been pointing out the various ways you are avoiding contributing, the flaws in your theories, and teasing you for putting the bulk of your effort into trying make a townie who's

willing to be lynched to avoid giving scum an advantage

look scummy. All you ever had to say was "I agree that not all nominees should claim today, let's lynch Skruffs since he's offering to take one for the team", but you didn't - you're suspicious, you're wish-washing, you're trying to figure out what my deal is.

Maybe

you're afraid I'm a super saint. If you got killed for putting the hammer on me, and turned up scum, your buddy Maz wouldn't really have a chance in the morning, would he?


My ride on this exile train is about over, but I've had a great time and I wish town the best of luck.

[Skruffs]

So while we wait for the last vote... it looks like there's been sufficient fraying of focus to make sure that five or six people will get a divvying of votes between them.

Maz.. Mas I think is scum.
I

would go for a maz and cheesefan nomination, personally

. If maz is scum, might be worth re looking at Dodge, and if cheese is scum, might be worth looking into Jack. That's just what I would suggest, though - things are going to change in the morning. For all the townies out there, nominating those two will at least help make sure that you yourselves do not get nominated, and that should be as good a reason as any.

It's easy to FOS active players though because they give you something to FOS about, whereas other players don't. It would be easy to FOS RR for stirring things up so hard in the beginning and then hiding at the middle end of hte day when the deadline appeared, but he's appeared twice and said that it is based on real life - best to just take his word on it. The other two idlers aren't really saying much of anything.

Personally

I don't think JDodge is scum

, or I would have changed my vote to him. I do think he was manipulated by Maz, though. JDodge kept at the bickering with me long after the rest of the town said to stop, though, long after a reasonable scum

would

have stopped - I don't honestly think he was trying to misdirect the town. Even if I was calling him scum, I don't think he was. If I really thought he was, I would have changed my vote.


There was more, but, it'll have to wait, and I doubt I'll get antoher chance to post before the last vote.

[Skruffs]

Dean's not scum.
Hope you guys are ready for more awkward townie squirming in the morning.

Death FOS : Maz, TCS.

[Skruffs]

bahgotown

[Skruffs]

Yeah, well, I guess I was right, then, huh.

[Skruffs]

It *was* a fun debate.

[Skruffs]

i learned a LOT about how mafia try to influence town playing this game.