Mini 441 - Flavourless Mafia. Game Over!

[Bob700]

No I'm not. I'm just saying that undo claimed a townie, and you should assume he is now either a townie or scum, not a power role.

Fine, in that case... I remain neutral on the subject.

[xyzzy]

What matters is not whether Primate did hurt the town; it's whether it was possible. That was an extremely dangerous move, and before it occured he had no idea what the results would be.

[Raffles]

You see, I don't see that as particularly risky move. It was blatantly obvious what he was doing and I've done things that are far riskier.

[Aimee]

Primate's move definitely benefited the town. Absolutely no question about it. I do, however, want to know what Primate thinks about this new found suspicion against what he did.

[The Fonz]

I faked having a guilty result on you to see what you'd do.

An admitted lie. Lynch all liars should apply here. However, it seems people are reluctant to apply it. Why?

Lynch all liars is not always an good strategy; and this is one of the cases where it isn't.

Nope, Lynch all liars always applies: that's what that pesky all bit in the middle means. If someone is caught in or admits to a lie, they should be lynched. It is in the town's interests to know that everyone is either telling the truth, or is scum. The moment you start letting people get away with lies, you hand the scum an advantage.

There ARE some lies (not many) that are good for the town. And yet those people who made those lies should be lynched just because they lied? No matter the alignment that person is you are lynching someone for protown behavior; which I don't believe in at all. Lynching lies that do not help the town IS however a good idea, but this is one of the cases that DOES help the town.

Undo, do you think it a likely thing for scum to do, to come out with a fake cop guilty result result day 1?

What do you consider the pros and the cons of this, for the scum?

Off the top of my head, it has the chance to expose the real doc. More to the point- what good reason is there for town to do it? I can't think of any. The risk of getting yourself lynched and/or outing a powerrole outweigh any good which might be done by analysing undo's reactions.

There is some risk of a cop counterclaim, but it seems unlikely as a cop can't know for sure whether a person who claimed cop on day 1 is telling the truth or not. However, I am surprised that Primate wasn't put off enough by the threat of getting lynched, as unless he's played with several of the people here (I haven't); he can't know how they would react, but I suspect you underestimate how much good Primate's play has done us; as it has given us an excellent jump start into disscussion, which is usually hard to start on day 1.

You can jump start discussion by randomly dayvigging someone if you have that ability, but that doesn't mean you should. Of course you can't know if someone's telling the truth, but that's the whole point: the possibilities should be binary: telling the truth, or scum. In the theoretical case that undo were the cop, what motive would he have for not counterclaiming?Also, Primate's question here

is

hugely WIFOMy- trying to suggest that it wouldn't make sense for scum to do what he did. As I explained above, it makes more sense for scum than town.

The difference between randomly dayvigging and faking a cop investigation is that if you are careful, which Primate at least somewhat was; you can explain the situation so that the person doesn't get lynched immeaditly

I'm not saying random dayvigging and faking an investigation are

exactly the same

- rather, pointing out that 'generating discussion' is not the kind of end which justifies just about any means.

Hmm... After re-reading the beginning of the commotion, I can see that Primate probably was actually just trying to start up the game... That caused undo to go on a paranoid rampage of some sort. Like Someone2 said, it could easily be a back and forth OMGUS kind of thing.

Just trying to start up the game...

by lying,

which is an anti-town action.

Lying is normally an anti-town action, but not always; there are some rare cases where it is pro-town, and since his action has benifited us, it makes this case an exception to lying being anti-town.

It is almost never optimal to lie as town, and this is certainly not one of these cases. How can you be so sure it's benefitted us?

It has clearly benifited us because it has caused a lot of disscussion, has shown some possible pairings to take note of, and will allow us to make what will probably be a more informed lynch then normal for day 1 and since day 1 tends to be the most useful for info in the later game; the info we get here will continue to be of serious use.

This applies to everyone who blithely thinks we have benefitted immensely from Primate's actions: what information have we actually gained here, that couldn't have been gained otherwise? That undo's a little jumpy? Ooooh, lynch him already![/sarcasm] Just because as a result of Primate's action, a wagon built up on undo, which subsequently led into the discussion we're having now, doesn't mean we couldn't have gotten into a debate which generates as much or more info by less risky means. You're being overly deterministic.

I've already defended myself, I can't help it more. If you really want it, go on, lynch me. I can only say that you might be being too hasty.

Too hasty? How so? We are simply voting who we believe is scum. But, at the -2 point, I can only suggest one thing. Roleclaim.

I find this rather suspicious. Imho, claims should be made at L-1 and no sooner.

Why not? Though while you don't see more than one scum hammering, sometimes you will see one hammering to deny info; so claiming at L-2 eliminates that risk. However, claiming before that because of pressure isn't needed, and defending your actions is a better choice of defense.

Defending your actions is a better course of action right up to L-1. One town for one scum is a fine tradeoff for the town.

True, but if the person is a powerrole, we lose the info we get from their choices, so there is a tradeoff. Before L-2; you are definitly correct that defending your actions is the better move.

True, but there's also a fair chance the individual in question is not a powerrole, that has to be factored into the equation- even if the player in question is, say, the doc, that's one of 3-4 scum down, with the cop and any other potential power roles still hidden. Those are odds I like, personally.

How were Primate's arguments bad?

I'm a strict believer in lynch all liars; he lied to get evidence, which only creates more confusion.

How many times does it have to be said, he was fishing for reactions, not lying. It's not uncommon in the first day.

No, he was lying. He said he had a guilty result on undo. He didn't. Lie. He may well have been fishing for reactions

by

lying, but he lied. End of.

Xyzzy is entirely right here- what if Undo himself had been the doc? He immediately counterclaims, and we have an outed powerrole right at the beginning of the game. Primate's actions hurt the town.

He was lying, and in doing so took a risk that could have hurt the town; but he didn't.

And you think risking hurting the town is a pro-town action?

Not really, but its not much of a scum tell as there are some people who when protwon are willing to take uneccisary risks to try to help town.

There might be- but pray tell, surely in the definition of 'unnecessary risk' we have the suggestion that it's probably not a good idea? That things can be done by town doesn't make them not scumtells. It makes them not enough on their own.

Whilst we're at it:

Streeflo is hugely scummy.

For example xyzzy blindly saying lynch all liars when many people do lie on the first day to get reactions

No town player SHOULD lie day one to get reactions, it sows confusion and discord which is the scum's best friend. Competent town players do not lie day one. It's that simple.

Considering that other people (including me) agree with Streeflo, how suspicious was this compared to the other points against him in this post?

That wasn't my only point against Streeflo. You're quite right that I am at least a little suspicious of everyone on the undo wagon. The phrasing of this point, however 'people lie all the time' seems to stand out as a strange argument to make. The 'I want undo lynched for info on Xyzzy, then Xyzzy lynched anyway' was more scummy.

Add in the fact that he appears to be completely discounting the possibility that Xyzzy is defending undo because he finds him town and his attackers scummy.

Also, take into account this:

My thoughts on Primate: It seems as if someone as experienced as him would do something like fake claim a cop guilty investigation on day one to see if how someone would respond

It seems to me like the more experienced someone is, the less likely they are to try something like this as town. Trying to suggest Primate's experience is a reason for this being a town action is an appeal to authority.

However, we likely wouldn't have gotten the wealth of information that we did get if Primate had not lied.

Humbly disagree. The only thing that definitely happened as a result of Primate's lie was that the first wagon built on undo on the grounds of 'being emotional' (not really in a scumtell in this situation imo, if I were him I'd likely be thinking 'What the hell!' too) rather than someone else for another reason.

[The Fonz]

EBWODP: Oh, Streeflo also said that what Primate said 'wasn't lying' which even Primate doesn't think.

[undo]

If Bob hadn't the townie PM, I don't see how he could check if the paraphrased answer fit with the true PM...

Take a look at the initial post of this game - you may get some answers.

[Cum Grano Salis]

I don't think Primate's actions weren't scummy

because

of the information we got.
I do think that his actions weren't scummy because of the reasons I already stated.

A short summary of my thoughts:

The Fonz doesn't appear really scummy to me, but I do disagree with him about the Primate issue.

Streeflo's "people always lie" is somewhat alerting, as well as his suggestion to kill undo so we can check Xyzzy, though he said Xyzzy should be lynched anyway.

Bob700 asking for Townie background - slightly suspicious. His answers to accusers are confusing, too:

No I'm not. I'm just saying that undo claimed a townie, and you should assume he is now either a townie or scum, not a power role.

Fine, in that case... I remain neutral on the subject.

Neutral on what subject,

Bob700

?

Undo and Xyzzy are the scummiest for me. Now, I don't have much experience, but I have the feeling that Xyzzy's inconsistency is more scummy then undo's nervousness. There was no pressure on Xyzzy at the time, attention was on Undo and Primate, and it seems to me that he tried to blend in the conversation, but when he was asked for explanation - "What do you mean - Primate seems safe?" he panicked.

Also what Raffles pointed out:

I'm a strict believer in lynch all liars; he lied to get evidence, which only creates more confusion.

Which point it struck me, if you were a strict believer, then why didn't you vote Primate in the first place? It was this inconsistency that stuck out to me.

And what I pointed out:

I don't think Primate's trying to accuse anyone as an innocent

; that's too dangerous this early on.

and then

Why would Primate accuse someone like he did if he was scum then? He's drawing attention to himself uneccesairly; but it makes sense if he is innocent as he would be fishing for reactions, which can help find scum.

Perhaps it's a gamble, hoping that we'll think

he meant to look townie by doing something scum would never do

. It's a working strategy.

Xyzzy

, I asked you for an explanation directly at my last post. I would like to hear (read) your answer.

[Bob700]

Bob700 asking for Townie background - slightly suspicious. His answers to accusers are confusing, too:

No I'm not. I'm just saying that undo claimed a townie, and you should assume he is now either a townie or scum, not a power role.

Fine, in that case... I remain neutral on the subject.

Neutral on what subject,

Bob700

?

Neutral on Undo's role. I have no current opinion.

[xyzzy]

Also what Raffles pointed out:

I'm a strict believer in lynch all liars; he lied to get evidence, which only creates more confusion.

Which point it struck me, if you were a strict believer, then why didn't you vote Primate in the first place? It was this inconsistency that stuck out to me.

And what I pointed out:

I don't think Primate's trying to accuse anyone as an innocent

; that's too dangerous this early on.

and then

Why would Primate accuse someone like he did if he was scum then? He's drawing attention to himself uneccesairly; but it makes sense if he is innocent as he would be fishing for reactions, which can help find scum.

Perhaps it's a gamble, hoping that we'll think

he meant to look townie by doing something scum would never do

. It's a working strategy.

Xyzzy

, I asked you for an explanation directly at my last post. I would like to hear (read) your answer.

If I'm scum and I do something so incredibly stupid that it's a 99% scumtell, I can argue that, as an intelligent player, I would never do that as scum.

Basically, I've been saying Primate could be bluffing 100%. It's a dangerous move thaat no one would be able to predict.

[undo]

Undo and Xyzzy are the scummiest for me

Why am I one of the scummiest? What accusations do you have against me? That I was over-reacted in the beginning of the game? That could be a good lead at that stage of the game, but now is a rather poor accusation.

[StallingChamp]

I'm leaving for the weekend, back Sunday evening. If you lynch someone, either Pie will write the lynch-scene, or you can wait until I'm back. Either way, send me your nightchoices.

[The Fonz]

I find CGS's post slightly troubling, just because undo and Xyzzy seem the towniest to me at this stage. I find Xyzzy's explanation in 184 satisfactory- it's an opinion I share, that Primate might well be audacious scum. I think that his trying to claim that he wouldn't possibly risk doing what he did if he were scum is WIFOMy.

I also think that he made an excellent point about Bob, which makes me pretty sure the latter is scum.

[Bob700]

I find CGS's post slightly troubling, just because undo and Xyzzy seem the towniest to me at this stage. I find Xyzzy's explanation in 184 satisfactory- it's an opinion I share, that Primate might well be audacious scum. I think that his trying to claim that he wouldn't possibly risk doing what he did if he were scum is WIFOMy.

I also think that he made an excellent point about Bob, which makes me pretty sure the latter is scum.

May I ask, what point?

[Streeflo]

If I'm scum and I do something so incredibly stupid that it's a 99% scumtell, I can argue that, as an intelligent player, I would never do that as scum.

You realize how immensely WIFOM this is right.

[xyzzy]

If I'm scum and I do something so incredibly stupid that it's a 99% scumtell, I can argue that, as an intelligent player, I would never do that as scum.

You realize how immensely WIFOM this is right.

To which scum replies, "Ah! Yes! Of course. Since it's so stupidly WIFOMy, no scum would ever do it; therefore, I'm not scum."

[Cum Grano Salis]

Also what Raffles pointed out:

I'm a strict believer in lynch all liars; he lied to get evidence, which only creates more confusion.

Which point it struck me, if you were a strict believer, then why didn't you vote Primate in the first place? It was this inconsistency that stuck out to me.

And what I pointed out:

I don't think Primate's trying to accuse anyone as an innocent

; that's too dangerous this early on.

and then

Why would Primate accuse someone like he did if he was scum then? He's drawing attention to himself uneccesairly; but it makes sense if he is innocent as he would be fishing for reactions, which can help find scum.

Perhaps it's a gamble, hoping that we'll think

he meant to look townie by doing something scum would never do

. It's a working strategy.

Xyzzy

, I asked you for an explanation directly at my last post. I would like to hear (read) your answer.

If I'm scum and I do something so incredibly stupid that it's a 99% scumtell, I can argue that, as an intelligent player, I would never do that as scum.

Basically, I've been saying Primate could be bluffing 100%. It's a dangerous move thaat no one would be able to predict.

Ok, one by one:
"I don't think Primate's trying to accuse anyone as an innocent" - Here you say that accusing someone the way Primate did is something that an

innocent

person

would not do

.
"he meant to look townie by doing something scum would never do" - Here you say that

scum would never do

what he did.

So, which one? Did he do something that scum wouldn't do (=something that is seemingly townish) or something that an innocent wouldn't do (=something that is seemingly scummy)?
What Xyzzy does here is to accuse Primate in doing both: "Ok, he is scum - his actions are scummy. He is also misleading us by his actions - which are extremely townish." You contradict yourself really badly.

Besides, if you say that "he meant to look townie by doing something scum would never do", then why did you think he was scummy at the first place? Example:
"That person is mentally ill."
"How do you know?"
"Because he really acts like a sane one, so that we think he is normal."

[undo]

"That person is mentally ill."
"How do you know?"
"Because he really acts like a sane one, so that we think he is normal."

What a nonsensical analogy. What does this have to do with a mafia game?

[The Fonz]

I find CGS's post slightly troubling, just because undo and Xyzzy seem the towniest to me at this stage. I find Xyzzy's explanation in 184 satisfactory- it's an opinion I share, that Primate might well be audacious scum. I think that his trying to claim that he wouldn't possibly risk doing what he did if he were scum is WIFOMy.

I also think that he made an excellent point about Bob, which makes me pretty sure the latter is scum.

May I ask, what point?

The point that your asking undo for 'backstory' on his townie PM means that you can't possibly be townie.

[Aimee]

I find CGS's post slightly troubling, just because undo and Xyzzy seem the towniest to me at this stage. I find Xyzzy's explanation in 184 satisfactory- it's an opinion I share, that Primate might well be audacious scum. I think that his trying to claim that he wouldn't possibly risk doing what he did if he were scum is WIFOMy.

I also think that he made an excellent point about Bob, which makes me pretty sure the latter is scum.

May I ask, what point?

The point that your asking undo for 'backstory' on his townie PM means that you can't possibly be townie.

Errr... what if Bob700 was just being a complete moron by asking that? He could be stupid, not scum?

[The Fonz]

I disagree. Why would anyone be stupid enough to ask for flavour when their own role PM was supposedly of the same type, and contained none? That's off the charts stupid.

Besides, that's not what Bob claimed- he claimed by backstory, he didn't actually mean flavour, but things like win condition. I don't believe for a second that's plausible, and hence I'm pretty convinced he's scum. If I weren't, I'd still be voting Primate- the only thing can make me not push for the application of LAL is the even more useful metagame policy of 'lynch blatant scum.'

[Bob700]

I disagree. Why would anyone be stupid enough to ask for flavour when their own role PM was supposedly of the same type, and contained none? That's off the charts stupid.

Besides, that's not what Bob claimed- he claimed by backstory, he didn't actually mean flavour, but things like win condition. I don't believe for a second that's plausible, and hence I'm pretty convinced he's scum. If I weren't, I'd still be voting Primate- the only thing can make me not push for the application of LAL is the even more useful metagame policy of 'lynch blatant scum.'

Ok, didn't you read anything I have posted before? I'm not going to explain it again...

[The Fonz]

I've read everything you've posted- but I'm confident you're lying, as it just doesn't make sense.

[Cum Grano Salis]

[Underlined text in quote was added by me, to make the example clearer.]

John:

"That person is mentally ill."

Jane:

"How do you know?"

John:

"Because he really acts like a sane one, so that we think he is normal."

What a nonsensical analogy. What does this have to do with a mafia game?

You are right, it has nothing to do with Mafia game. That's the point of it. It's an illustration - I am trying to explain why what Xyzzy said makes no sense (and is scummy), by giving a simple example from a different area. The argument that Xyzzy presented is of the kind of logic that 'John' uses - doesn't make any sense.
If the person acts like a sane, why did John think he is ill? Why does Xyzzy think Primate is scum, if what he did "scum would never do"?

[undo]

Maybe Xyzzy is trying to say that Primate did something scum would PROBABLY never do, but they do it so they don't look scum.

Got it?