Mini 408 - EXiLE Mafia, MOD ABANDONED

[Romanus]

Scum act pro-town

[GreenLiquid]

Vote Count

Cheesefan (3)- DeanWinchester, TCS, Romanus
Skruffs (3)- Skruffs, JDodge, Maz Medias
JDodge (2)- yellowbounder, Cheesefan
Raging Rabbit (0)

11 alive, 6 to lynch.

[Skruffs]

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

[JDodge]

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.

So you think that people who are doing what I'm doing are scum?

[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...

[Romanus]

MOD

I request a deadline so I don't have to listen to this bickering any more.

[JDodge]

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...

Then give me actual facts as opposed to meaningless conjecture.

[GreenLiquid]

MOD I request a deadline so I don't have to listen to this bickering any more.

If I recieve 2 more votes for a deadline then I will set one.

Edit: We're getting a lot of votes for no deadline, so I don't think I will be setting one.

[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.

[JDodge]

It would require that everyone work together evenly. That's the problem; I refuse to work like that. I'm sure there are others here who will also refuse. The small list of people who will do this are scum.

Give me one good reason why scum would not want to be a part of this plan. It's easier to screw up a plan from the inside than it is from the outside.

[Romanus]

Skruffs, stop using the word "RANDOM." There is nothing that is random in this game anymore. Last night, that could be said to have been random, but it also wasn't. First, the scum got to talk and pick, which wasn't random, and obviously people nominated others for reasons, be they good or bad.

You may wish to call it somewhat choatic, or better yet, and more accurately, SECRET. I am getting more and more of a feeling that you want control because, well, scum want control.

I repeat, there is nothing RANDOM going on. So, therefore, your entire argument is crap.

[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.

[GreenLiquid]

Please welcome Mariyta, who is replacing yellowbounder.

[Jack]

Look Skruffs. All we need to get someone nominated is 3 nominations. The town will have 14-16 total. Now, even if we nominate randomly it's probable that the town will get one or two people nominated. Since we won't be nominated randomly I'd say it's almost certain. Try some random number tests and see for yourself. I said this several pages ago so I don't know why you keep saying nobody has offered arguments against you plan. Or maybe I do.

You are spending far too much time on this, I think you're using it on a smokescreen. I'm also not convinced you were being sarcastic back a couple of pages ago.

Vote:Skruffs

fake edit:

Here, I ran some number tests for you. Assuming worst case, here are some results:

6 1 7 4 4 6 4
2 6 3 10 7 2 4

4 and 6 get chosen by town.

10 5 10 6 6 6 6
2 9 8 6 9 10 1

6 and 10 get chosen by town.

2 7 2 2 3 2 9
4 5 10 8 9 4 3

2 gets chosen by town.

3 10 3 2 4 2 9
2 1 4 6 3 9 9

2, 3 and 9 get chosen by town

you see?

[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?

[Romanus]

Hey Skruffs, why don't you shut up already and talk about who should be nominated for tomorrow.

[JDodge]

Skruffs, you are forgetting one extremely important factor in your calculations; nightkills.

[Maz Medias]

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

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

HOW

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

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

Do you understand, Skruffs?

[DeanWinchester]

First off

Mod:

I vote for Deadline. 24 pages is enough for the first day, and I am done talking about nomination strategies, there to many players against working together.

If skruffs gets lynched and comes up town, I am so glad that the poeple that wanted him lynch are the poeple that I wanted to go after anyway.

[JDodge]

Mod:

No deadline, please.

Anyone who wants a deadline wants to end conversation. Ending conversation generally doesn't help the town.

[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.

[Romanus]

And yet skruffs, we are not discussing scumminess, and haven't in a very long time.

[JDodge]

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.

This is going to be a real shocker - opinions change!

[Maz Medias]

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

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