Mini 425 Generic Western Mafia- Game over!

[Occult]

unvote, Vote: Guardian

I was mostly voting Avinyl because I didn't think he was comming back.
(just a reminder)

Any Reasons?

[Thesp]

No one's anywhere near close to lynch yet.

Peter, what's your take on all this?

Good job avoiding the question. I've re-printed the question for your convenience.

If you really want to know, the argument you presented is a variant of too townie/scummy argument. It's a branch of WIFOM, and you laid it out in plain daylight.

I'm really, really not seeing this. Can you show me how? Feel free to be patronizing in your explanation.

So, um, let's wagon Peterscum?

So, um, let's lynch Peterscum?

So, um, that's really not helpful at all.

I disagree.

...and for the love of god,

WHY

have they been doing this? Everything that happens on day one is a WIFOM argument. No single town player has any reason to pat another on the back, or say things like "So and So makes a good point." Until we have some voting records and confirmations no town player has good reason to trust anyone else.

I see you said something, but all I hear is, "Boo! Boo! Be afraid!" without actual contribution to the discussion.

[Raffles]

Sorry, missed it. But speak for yourself. You never said why you disagree with this
[quote="Raffles]Anti-town = Good lynch

The last statement is true because at later stage of the game, it is detrimental to have an anti-town townie. If it is to get to lylo situation, a anti-town townie could throw a town side completely off. The bottom line is this. Lynching anti-towns should be up there with lynching all liars.[/quote]

statement.

(2)

Show that scum are more likely to fail to give reasoning. Some of what I've seen shows the opposite. (Also, often townies do anti-town things as well, do they not?

Showing (1) may be irrelevant, if it is also the case that townies are more likely to do action X, even if X is unintentionally harmful.)

What you are telling me there in red is this.

-Scums can be more logical than a town. Therefore if you see a illogical town, don't automatically assume he is a scum. He could be town.

This is unacceptable as the argument here is one of "Too scummy" argument. This argument gives scums free reign to spout out logic that is about as watertight as a net, which case you would have no idea how to hunt out a scum. Speaking of which, I have a question. If this is still your theory, how do you propose to hunt out a scum?

[Paradoxombie]

Any Reasons?

For voting guardian? Same as I posted before. Plus I think it's important to always keep your vote on someone(normally the person you suspect the most[obviously]).

[Peter Venkman]

I see you said something, but all I hear is, "Boo! Boo! Be afraid!" without actual contribution to the discussion.

I

have

contributed. A lot.

Why are

you

trying to control the pace of this game?

-Peter

[Occult]

I'm starting to see a very clear split in Strongly Anti and Strongly Pro thesp players. It's an interesting contrast.

Strongly For:
Guardian
Thesp (obviously)

Strongly Against:
Peter
Raffles
john

I don't really know if this means much, but these are the two distinct groups at the current moment. Everyone else is closer to the center and leans one way or the other.

[Occult]

As a note Guardian has said he isn't that supportive of thesp, but I'm seeing a big thesp influence on him. (This was added for the sake of guardian)

[Guardian]

As a note Guardian has said he isn't that supportive of thesp, but I'm seeing a big thesp influence on him. (This was added for the sake of guardian)

I loved your diction there .

I think the difference between me and the three you mentioned is that for me, Thesp finally brought some bold accusations into the game that I think it had been lacking, and I took them with an open mind. Upon a re-read, I do not agree with all of them, but I can see where they all would have been coming from if he is pro-town.

It seems to me that

John - reacted in an OMGUS way to being accused of SKness.
Raffles - is trying, at least, to understand/work with Thesp but has several reservations
Peter - doesn't like that he's being attacked right now but does not actually directly say he doesn't like thesp's reasoning, just that he doesn't like players leading in general. If no townies lead, then who shall we follow?


Also @paradoxombie, your reasons for voting me were like "oh, i agree with other people's reasons" Then you explained this a bit in your longest post of the game, and I understood why your initial reasoning was what it was. Do you have anything new to contribute, on me, or anyone in the game? Ditto with mustafa15 .

Interesting how thesp finds my one line posts helpful...

Anyways... can we lynch Peter yet?[/troll]

[Thesp]

I have contributed. A lot.

Why are you trying to control the pace of this game?

Goof for you. Keep it up, rather than resting on your laurels. I'm trying to control the pace of the game (to use your words) because I get the best results that way, and find out a heck of a lot more than sitting back and doing nothing. And being aggressive is waaaaaaaaay more fun.

Sorry, missed it. But speak for yourself. You never said why you disagree with this
[quote="Raffles]Anti-town = Good lynch

The last statement is true because at later stage of the game, it is detrimental to have an anti-town townie. If it is to get to lylo situation, a anti-town townie could throw a town side completely off. The bottom line is this. Lynching anti-towns should be up there with lynching all liars.

statement.

(2)

Show that scum are more likely to fail to give reasoning. Some of what I've seen shows the opposite. (Also, often townies do anti-town things as well, do they not?

Showing (1) may be irrelevant, if it is also the case that townies are more likely to do action X, even if X is unintentionally harmful.)

What you are telling me there in red is this.

-Scums can be more logical than a town. Therefore if you see a illogical town, don't automatically assume he is a scum. He could be town.

This is unacceptable as the argument here is one of "Too scummy" argument. This argument gives scums free reign to spout out logic that is about as watertight as a net, which case you would have no idea how to hunt out a scum. Speaking of which, I have a question. If this is still your theory, how do you propose to hunt out a scum?

[/quote]
Anti-town doesn't always equal good lynch because, in some real sense, you don't have evidence they will continue to be anti-town. Suppose you have someone who has claimed cop, and is, by some game-state, significantly more likely to be town than scum. N1 they investigate Bob, and get an innocent. N2, they investigate Bob again, because they're certain it's a one-shot investigation immunity Bob has. Now, selecting Bob as a N2 nightchoice is demonstrably anti-town, as it seems we're using it here. Would you then argue that the claimed cop should be lynched, even if he's significantly more likely to be town?

Also, I don't have any problem with your quoted argument, "Scums can be more logical than a town. Therefore if you see a illogical town, don't automatically assume he is a scum. He could be town." I suspect if you took the inverse of this approach, you'd have lynched far more townies than you ought to have. However, note that supplying reasoning and being logical are not equivalent, and my argument was largely based on the

supplying

of reasoning.

In some real sense, it does seem absurd to me to make arguments on who is scum based who is perceived to be more helpful to the town (and converseley who is more harmful),

especially

when there are demonstrable indicators (scumtells, if you will) which are far better indicators. Remember, scumtells are based on the premise that scum are more likely to exhibit certain characteristics than townie do. If you can reliably discover what traits scum are more likely to exhibit (and conversely, what town are more likely to exhibit), you can more reliably predict what players are scum and which ones are not. Along this lines, if scum are significantly more likely to exhibit

X

,

even if

X

can be conceived as being helpful to the town

, then players who exhibit

X

ought to be treated with suspicion. Your argument would deny this useful tool.

I placed it upon you to show that your method was more indicative of discovering scum players. To this post, you have utterly and miserably failed to do so. Accordingly, I am not giving any credence to your argument, and I don't think anyone else should either.

[Peter Venkman]

If no townies lead, then who shall we follow?

I assume the town players are smart enough to make up their own mind. That and

at this point

a good town player is suspicious of everyone.

-Peter

[Paradoxombie]

Do you have anything new to contribute, on me, or anyone in the game?

no, nothing sigificant.

[Guardian]

*Guardian facepalms*

[Peter Venkman]

@Thesp>

Does your feeling about John remain the same? Still voting on him because you think he is the SK?

-Peter

[gorckat]

...

at this point

a good town player is suspicious of everyone.

-Peter

I am ze greatest town evar!

I'm feeling a little 'Ick' on:

Guardian- his rushing, while understandable, is just putting me off
John- the leaps he's made to vote Thesp and his reaction in general
Peter- strikes me as using a lot of words but not saying anything...that might be harsh and maybe even unfair, but a lot of theory has been debated and gone over between him and others
Thesp- I'm still at the point where I am learning the various playstyles, and his aggression is both intriguing and intimidating (in a suspicious sense)

Those are my strongest inclinations. Thesp is most likely to fall off the big ick list as I get further used to him. I also agree with Guardian's response to zombie's last post, as well.

[John]

Here goes another playstyle post against thesp. sorry.

your aware that you are trying to conrtol the game and you admit it as well. unforutuantly, i wont allow someone to control a game. that is about the most dangerous thing you can do in a mafia game in my opinion.

[Guardian]

I kind of tried to control the game and you supported me, John, even when it seemed everyone posting thought I was scum.

What's the difference between me and Thesp that makes you not want to support him?

[Raffles]

Thesp, in case you are getting worried, I did a whole big rebuttal than the damn thing logged me out. I'm going to bed now, I'll do it tommorrow.

[Thesp]

Here goes another playstyle post against thesp. sorry.

your aware that you are trying to conrtol the game and you admit it as well. unforutuantly, i wont allow someone to control a game. that is about the most dangerous thing you can do in a mafia game in my opinion.

I don't mind people taking an interest in the game. I encourage it. Of course, I haven't heard anything much from you besides "Thesp bad!". Perhaps you'll pardon me if I respectfully disagree.

Thesp, in case you are getting worried, I did a whole big rebuttal than the damn thing logged me out. I'm going to bed now, I'll do it tommorrow.

I've had that happen many a time. You may want to try on or two things:

1) before posting, hit Ctrl-A (selects all text), then Ctrl-C (copies it), and/or
2) use Notepad when making large posts.

I've saved much time averting danger in such a way. Hope it helps! And I'll be happy to patiently wait your self-discovery of how wrong you are. (I'm really having trouble conceptualizing how you are going to argue against the usefulness of scum tells, which is how I perceive the argument.)

[Peter Venkman]

So... Thesp... still voting on John because you think he is the SK?

-Peter

[mustafa15]

So... Thesp... still voting on John because you think he is the SK?

-Peter

QFE

I'd still like at least a little bit of reasoning for your first post claims.

[Thesp]

So... Thesp... still voting on John because you think he is the SK?

-Peter

I think he's scum. SK is a distinct possibility.

[Peter Venkman]

I distrust John, and was curious about your reasoning. I wanted to get it out of you before I added my own vote.

I don't agree with your SK accusation, but I think John certainly isn't pro-town.

Vote John

-Peter

[Guardian]

@John, see my question above.

@John, are you just going to take that, from Thesp and Peterscum?

[Peter Venkman]

Gee Guardian, why you are trying to lead a bandwagon? It is day one mate, and while you might be so incredibly convinced of your own reasoning, it is still a WIFOM argument. The players can make up their own mind, yet you insist on pushing us.

Also, are you going to call me "Peterscum" the whole game? It isn't an argument, rather, a piece of propaganda. I have a name, please use it when refering to me.

-Peter

[Raffles]

@Thesp - Sorry this is late. I'm panicking because of dawning realiation that I don't know shit for exams. But I'm going to keep this blief so I can get back to working.

Scum-tells don't exist. Wiki testifies to this. Wiki tells you that tells should be taken as a guideline at best. And no one has updated mafia-tells until 2004. In my view, scum tells are so unreliable at catching a scum you might as well not use it. It's like a car that is almst guaranteed to break down on every journey it makes.

Then the best the town can do is to cooperate with each other until there comes a point the scums has to do something anti-town because it conflicts their interests too much. This is where rules of thumb like "LynchAllLiars" come from.

I'd like to have gone into a little more detail but I don't have time. That's a very condensed argument of what I wrote couple of days ago.