Mini 486: GAME OVER!

[Elias_the_thief]

"The simple fact is that you think I'm more scummy than the hermit because he "backtracked" which I believe you attacked him for while I remained consistent"
What simple fact? I said it *might*. Please stop speaking in absolutes.

"Again you have no counter argument, you just dismiss my thoughts as ridiculous. How closed minded is that? "
What do you mean, "counterargument"? Maybe, had you posted a reason that lynching a noncontributor was 100% necessary, I would have an argument to counter.

"exactly, we have no idea if he's town or not. So mafia can just act like this and never give up clues or hints. If they never act, they never act scummy we never find the last mafia and we lose by letting him automatically live"
we can see how true this is by the way that nelly has since been playing. Also, only about 3- 4 players in a mini game are anti town. The chances of a random lynch hitting a townie as opposed to a scum is STAGGERING. This is why random lynches are idiotic. They almost always hit town, and there is a chance of hitting a power role on top of that (in this case the only power roles are masons, but im making a case against random lynches in general).

"Sure, vollkan was in the game as well:
http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... highlight=
Just check out the first lynch. "
I notice that the player you lynched was a townie. Yet you learned nothing from this.

[curiouskarmadog]

Wait a minute...that is your whole response to Para post?

Any comment on the slip up?

[Elias_the_thief]

I dont think its too strong a tell.

[curiouskarmadog]

(mouth drops open)

[Paradoxombie]

Whoa what?

That means a day with no discussion, which is very anti town.

that's too bad, if we're gonna have to lynch some random guy inevitably, why not make it sooner so you can get on with hunting?

This was biggest slip up so far. “so

you

can get on with hunting”? ummm, aren’t

we

suppose to be hunting scum? Why are you not hunting scum? Not only do you state you want the day to end sooner, your justification to Elias is so “you can get on with hunting:”

HUGE SCUM SLIP UP HERE!

No Para, if I have anything to do with it, we are not going to lynch some random guy. We are going to lynch the scummiest guy in this thread…you.

Believe what you want, none of you seem to want to see things any other way than what you originally expected.

You say its acceptable in certain cirmumstances, yet you dont even try to find out the circumstances in this scenario.

WTF do you mean? I read the whole thread

Really you read the whole thread? Is that why you pulled something out of context for your case, then said I was just skimming through. So are you reading or skimming?

I read the entire thread when I decided that Nelly was my taget for a lynch. I have no idea what Elias is suggesting really.

I saw that post of yours, CKD when I was looking back for somthing. Idr what now, I can figure it out later when I look back at the timing.

[vollkan]

My points:
With regards to the "Should Para have backtracked matter:

haha that's pretty ****ed up, man. I get a get out of jail free card if I just change my mind under preassure? It's like the goddamn inquisition the liars who have no real conviction are the ones who live . And you think I've been unreasonable. I also really don't see why you'd think it's worse than what hermit said, so I'd like an answer to why that is.

In my eyes, it is the fact that you sought a lynch with the "forced our hand" thing in the first place that does it. I honestly don't care about whether or not you backtracked, it bears no contingency upon the scumminess of what you said.

If you really thought it was so bad for me to think this why don't you try to change my mind? I think you guys gave up pretty quickly when we got to actually using logic. This makes me think you people either don't know what you're talking about and are just acting on instinct or alternatively are scum who don't have any authentic beliefs.

Right. I will try and explain why I think it is scummy; may not be other people's reason.

A lynch based on reason of non-contribution/oddity/lurking/almost any reason other than suspicion has the following problems:
1) Easily exploited by scum (Case in point: Mini 436. The scum, including myself, rode the anti-lurker sentiment to get the first lynch)
2) Lack of generated information. Without arguments to analyse, the lynch reveals nothing other than the lynchee's role. With a "proper" lynch, you can usually look back at the arguments to learn something.
3) More often than not, the lynchee will be a pro-town player. Query whether this is due to vanillas getting bored or if it just a result of there being MORE townies in a game. The fact remains that the lynch will very likely have a town victim.

The only upside is the lynching of a non-contributor. Is that worth losing a townie, denying one lynch's worth of information AND granting the scum virtually a free NK? I very strongly answer in the negative.

[curiouskarmadog]

Whoa what?

That means a day with no discussion, which is very anti town.

that's too bad, if we're gonna have to lynch some random guy inevitably, why not make it sooner so you can get on with hunting?

This was biggest slip up so far. “so

you

can get on with hunting”? ummm, aren’t

we

suppose to be hunting scum? Why are you not hunting scum? Not only do you state you want the day to end sooner, your justification to Elias is so “you can get on with hunting:”

HUGE SCUM SLIP UP HERE!

No Para, if I have anything to do with it, we are not going to lynch some random guy. We are going to lynch the scummiest guy in this thread…you.

Believe what you want, none of you seem to want to see things any other way than what you originally expected.

My god...you just slipped up and told us your alignment..not to mention you are arguing for a short Day 1...this is a huge red light..flashing...with sirens...and a small fireworks show..

[Paradoxombie]

If you really thought it was so bad for me to think this why don't you try to change my mind? I think you guys gave up pretty quickly when we got to actually using logic. This makes me think you people either don't know what you're talking about and are just acting on instinct or alternatively are scum who don't have any authentic beliefs.

Right. I will try and explain why I think it is scummy; may not be other people's reason.

A lynch based on reason of non-contribution/oddity/lurking/almost any reason other than suspicion has the following problems:
1) Easily exploited by scum (Case in point: Mini 436. The scum, including myself, rode the anti-lurker sentiment to get the first lynch)
2) Lack of generated information. Without arguments to analyse, the lynch reveals nothing other than the lynchee's role. With a "proper" lynch, you can usually look back at the arguments to learn something.
3) More often than not, the lynchee will be a pro-town player. Query whether this is due to vanillas getting bored or if it just a result of there being MORE townies in a game. The fact remains that the lynch will very likely have a town victim.

The only upside is the lynching of a non-contributor. Is that worth losing a townie, denying one lynch's worth of information AND granting the scum virtually a free NK? I very strongly answer in the negative.

But you ignore my primary argument that if players are always allowed to live simply because they do nothing is pretty stupid. I still pose the question: What keeps scum from acting that way and getting a free ride? I f you want to argue circumstances, then whatever, but just letting people get away with it is inevitably game breaking once scum see the potential.

I realize there are obvious and harsh consequences, but it's better than just ignoring the possibility of it being a scumtactic. By completely allowing it freely you guarantee that one day you will lose to someone who does utilize it against you. So overall you are giving them a much greater tool than the handicap caused by killing a noncontributor.
Additionally by getting it done sooner rather than later you still reduce the pool of possible scum suspects, so it's not all bad news. And don't forget, while it is a semi-random lynch overall, you also force the mafia to make a semi-random NK. They can't pick off more advanced players or pick up power role clues.

"Sure, vollkan was in the game as well:
http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... highlight=
Just check out the first lynch. "
I notice that the player you lynched was a townie. Yet you learned nothing from this.

You being very thick. I've already said that in the end you will lynch more town than mafia. But hey, it's little difference, the odds of lynching scum even with a full day are quite bad.

Whoa what?

That means a day with no discussion, which is very anti town.

that's too bad, if we're gonna have to lynch some random guy inevitably, why not make it sooner so you can get on with hunting?

This was biggest slip up so far. “so

you

can get on with hunting”? ummm, aren’t

we

suppose to be hunting scum? Why are you not hunting scum? Not only do you state you want the day to end sooner, your justification to Elias is so “you can get on with hunting:”

HUGE SCUM SLIP UP HERE!

No Para, if I have anything to do with it, we are not going to lynch some random guy. We are going to lynch the scummiest guy in this thread…you.

Believe what you want, none of you seem to want to see things any other way than what you originally expected.

My god...you just slipped up and told us your alignment..not to mention you are arguing for a short Day 1...this is a huge red light..flashing...with sirens...and a small fireworks show..

You only entertain me.

[Paradoxombie]

"The simple fact is that you think I'm more scummy than the hermit because he "backtracked" which I believe you attacked him for while I remained consistent"
What simple fact? I said it *might*. Please stop speaking in absolutes.

You definitely expressed your feeling that it was basically better for someone to change their opinion when you confront them versus maintaining an opinion despite opposition. This means you think I'm probably more likely to be lying than someone who does the exact same thing but backtracks immediatly at the first sign of conflict. It's just really stupid, man, and you don't want to admit it.

[Elias_the_thief]

I still never said that. I said that it was stupid for you to call replacement unethical.

[vollkan]

But you ignore my primary argument that if players are always allowed to live simply because they do nothing is pretty stupid. I still pose the question: What keeps scum from acting that way and getting a free ride? I f you want to argue circumstances, then whatever, but just letting people get away with it is inevitably game breaking once scum see the potential.

Simple, actually.

Let's imagine two hypothetical lurky non-contributors named A and B.
A = Vanilla townie who is lurking and non-contributing due to inexperience and/or boredom and/or juvenile humour attempt.
B = Scum who is lurking and acting as a non-contrubutor as a conscious tactic of avoiding a lynch.

I would be prepared to bet that Person A tires of the stupidity (or learns how to play in the case of a newbie) A LOT faster than person B. Anybody who fits A's profile (any of the possibilities) is clearly not going to have the committment this game requires and, thus, will eventually tire of the stupidity and become a plain lurker and then get replaced out.

Anybody who maintains such a persona for an extended time is, in all likelihood, scum.

Thus, as a scum strategy, it would have no point. It might let a scum live one day or so, but in the end it will come crashing down upon them.

Hence, I unequivocally disagree with Para that it is good to lynch such people early on. If they are a lurking scum, they will eventually and rightly come under suspicion for maintaining it for a long time.

Don't give me an argument about such a person posing a risk in LYLO, because in all likelihood I think that a genuine stupid player would, in this game, have given up already. If, even by this stage, someone had maintained such an attitude you might be well advised to suspect them, but at the point of time when Para did so, it is utterly anti-town.

[gorckat]

vote: Sir Tornado

A little out of left field, I admit, but he promised us a post 5 days ago at the same time he apologized for lurking for 5 days. He has numerous posts in other games since then.

Comments on the actual events of the last two days shortly. I've read up and want to mull it over for a short bit.

[curiouskarmadog]

vote: Sir Tornado

A little out of left field, I admit, but he promised us a post 5 days ago at the same time he apologized for lurking for 5 days. He has numerous posts in other games since then.

Comments on the actual events of the last two days shortly. I've read up and want to mull it over for a short bit.

you do understand if we dont get the votes needed for a lynch, we have a no lynch right?

at least that is my understanding

[gorckat]

Yes. A lot of my re-re-reading of the last few days and of individual posters has been of Hermit and xombie.

I'm looking for anything in their posts, as well as other's I've looked at, to guide me under deadline. I want to be as certain as I can before deadline lynching.

My vote on Sir is somewhat 'proddy', but I feel its important to note when people say they'll post and then don't, especially when they're very active elsewhere (as I said above).

One thing that has me leaning towards Hemrit is the 'Lynch All Vanillas' rule of thumb. I've seen it argued over (and have probably been on both sides), but basically, we are likely to hit a townie anyway, and people who claim under pressure don't exactly claim scum.

Beyond that, I want to try to pin down what I expect to learn from anyone's lynch.

[JordanA24]

Well I've never lynched a mafia on day one. =(

Vote:Nelly632

Unfortunately(unless he's mafia), he's forced our hand. It's 100% necessary to lynch someone who doesn't play.

that puts him at -3 I believe

This seems rather too sure that Nelly is scum to me, I agree that Nelly's play is very scummy, but outright stating that he's scum doesn't seem right to me, it could easily be a null tell on it's own (It's a common newbie mistake, I fell foul of it once as well)

I didn't say he was scum, in fact I later said it was probably more likely he was town. I guess it's not too important but I might as well set the record straight.

You seemed to instigate he was scum, and you said it was 100% neccessary to lynch him, so I'm hoping you thought he was scum, and wasn't just voting him because he was refusing to play, because a town could just as easily do this, and you would just be helping the scum to an easy quickmis-lynch.

Yes. I didn't realize he was near a lynch so I made casual and incomplete count. My fault entirely. But take notice that I said, "I believe." It's important to account for human error.

How could you have not realised that he was near a lynch when votes for him were flying in left, right & centre? And the way you try and dismiss it with crap reasoning doesn't help it either, you made a "casual and incomplete count", if you're taking the trouble to count the votes in the first place, I really doubt it'd be casual. And how does saying "I believe" rather than "He is" make any difference?

Well Vollkan later pointed out that it's 6 to lynch instead of 7 and someone voted 1 minute before I posted and that might've been the cause. And saying "I believe" instead of "He is" may not change the scumminess of my mistake, but there's still a pretty big ****ing difference in the meaning between them.

I accept your explaination for the incorrect vote count. But when I'm typing up a post, "I believe" is just another way of saying "He is" to me, regardless of the fact that they have a slightly different meaning if you're going to be pedantic about it. But since the vote count now seems like a genuine mistake, it's a bit of a moot point now.[/quote]

Whoa what?

That means a day with no discussion, which is very anti town.

that's too bad, if we're gonna have to lynch some random guy inevitably, why not make it sooner so you can get on with hunting?

This was biggest slip up so far. “so

you

can get on with hunting”? ummm, aren’t

we

suppose to be hunting scum? Why are you not hunting scum? Not only do you state you want the day to end sooner, your justification to Elias is so “you can get on with hunting:”

HUGE SCUM SLIP UP HERE!

This is a pretty bad slip, but I still think the town-tell that Oman said he'd prefer a Paradox vig over anyone else outweighs the scumtell you've pointed out there.

But you ignore my primary argument that if players are always allowed to live simply because they do nothing is pretty stupid. I still pose the question: What keeps scum from acting that way and getting a free ride? I f you want to argue circumstances, then whatever, but just letting people get away with it is inevitably game breaking once scum see the potential.

Simple, actually.

Let's imagine two hypothetical lurky non-contributors named A and B.
A = Vanilla townie who is lurking and non-contributing due to inexperience and/or boredom and/or juvenile humour attempt.
B = Scum who is lurking and acting as a non-contrubutor as a conscious tactic of avoiding a lynch.

I would be prepared to bet that Person A tires of the stupidity (or learns how to play in the case of a newbie) A LOT faster than person B. Anybody who fits A's profile (any of the possibilities) is clearly not going to have the committment this game requires and, thus, will eventually tire of the stupidity and become a plain lurker and then get replaced out.

Anybody who maintains such a persona for an extended time is, in all likelihood, scum.

Thus, as a scum strategy, it would have no point. It might let a scum live one day or so, but in the end it will come crashing down upon them.

Hence, I unequivocally disagree with Para that it is good to lynch such people early on. If they are a lurking scum, they will eventually and rightly come under suspicion for maintaining it for a long time.

Don't give me an argument about such a person posing a risk in LYLO, because in all likelihood I think that a genuine stupid player would, in this game, have given up already. If, even by this stage, someone had maintained such an attitude you might be well advised to suspect them, but at the point of time when Para did so, it is utterly anti-town.

Good post, I agree 100% with this.

[Elias_the_thief]

The one thing I can say about para is this theory

is

consistent with that other game. However, the fact that he wanted to lynch them quickly and didnt care about lost conversation is too big of a tell for me. In that other game, he waited a LONG time before he voted to lynch the noncontributor, while in this, the vote came by page 4 or 5, i think.

[Elias_the_thief]

Also, MOD, can we get a votecount?

[gorckat]

ckd seems to be pushing xombie pretty hard. Makes a big show of leading the town, too.

FOS: ckd

[curiouskarmadog]

ckd seems to be pushing xombie pretty hard. Makes a big show of leading the town, too.

FOS: ckd

there is no "seems" to it..I am pushing hard..I think he is scum...wouldnt you push hard if you thought someone is scum?..Why are you FOSing me...we do not officially know Para's alignment yet..will you still FoS me if he turns out scum?

[curiouskarmadog]

This is a pretty bad slip, but I still think the town-tell that Oman said he'd prefer a Paradox vig over anyone else outweighs the scumtell you've pointed out there.

why is that? If I was Oman and I was trying to find a quick fix to get some town cred I would have fingered someone I knew was scum. Lets say Vollkan vigged Para (on Oman's insistance) instead and he turned out scum..wouldnt that have bought some Oman some cred?

[JordanA24]

This is a pretty bad slip, but I still think the town-tell that Oman said he'd prefer a Paradox vig over anyone else outweighs the scumtell you've pointed out there.

why is that? If I was Oman and I was trying to find a quick fix to get some town cred I would have fingered someone I knew was scum. Lets say Vollkan vigged Para (on Oman's insistance) instead and he turned out scum..wouldnt that have bought some Oman some cred?

Oman might have thought that we would think that he might have simply sacrificed one of his own to gain town cred. I'd imagine he would have gained some town cred, but not nearly enough to make him consider decreasing his chances of winning by that much.

[curiouskarmadog]

This is a pretty bad slip, but I still think the town-tell that Oman said he'd prefer a Paradox vig over anyone else outweighs the scumtell you've pointed out there.

why is that? If I was Oman and I was trying to find a quick fix to get some town cred I would have fingered someone I knew was scum. Lets say Vollkan vigged Para (on Oman's insistance) instead and he turned out scum..wouldnt that have bought some Oman some cred?

Oman might have thought that we would think that he might have simply sacrificed one of his own to gain town cred. I'd imagine he would have gained some town cred, but not nearly enough to make him consider decreasing his chances of winning by that much.

So we dont really know why Oman picked who he did...that (in my mind) does not out weigh Para's scummy play.

[gorckat]

These are a few of your statements that get my attention as being leading:

TOWN: please go back and read the actual quote placing…you will see para is trying anything to deflect suspicion on himself!

TOWN this is our scum....

By themselves, they are very "appealy" to something (authority, perhaps- I forget all the various sorts of appeals).

Early on, many of your posts were non-commital- calling out lurkers, asking others opinions before giving your own, vote counts. "Helpful" things. Plus your reaction to xombie's slip (I'm not sure of whether it is as big a deal as you make it).

They feel like noob scum to me. Re-reading xombie, Hermit, ckd, Nelly, Oman, Sir Tornado...I'm not convinced that xombie is the lynch for today. Certainly not the way you are.

I'm still poking at Sir Tornado with my vote, atm. I'll be checking in later to see what's what.

[curiouskarmadog]

These are a few of your statements that get my attention as being leading:

TOWN: please go back and read the actual quote placing…you will see para is trying anything to deflect suspicion on himself!

TOWN this is our scum....

By themselves, they are very "appealy" to something (authority, perhaps- I forget all the various sorts of appeals).

Early on, many of your posts were non-commital- calling out lurkers, asking others opinions before giving your own, vote counts. "Helpful" things. Plus your reaction to xombie's slip (I'm not sure of whether it is as big a deal as you make it).

They feel like noob scum to me. Re-reading xombie, Hermit, ckd, Nelly, Oman, Sir Tornado...I'm not convinced that xombie is the lynch for today. Certainly not the way you are.

I'm still poking at Sir Tornado with my vote, atm. I'll be checking in later to see what's what.

I am not arguing with you on the point..I am pushing...but you still didnt answer the question, am I still FoSed if Para comes up scum?

[JordanA24]

This is a pretty bad slip, but I still think the town-tell that Oman said he'd prefer a Paradox vig over anyone else outweighs the scumtell you've pointed out there.

why is that? If I was Oman and I was trying to find a quick fix to get some town cred I would have fingered someone I knew was scum. Lets say Vollkan vigged Para (on Oman's insistance) instead and he turned out scum..wouldnt that have bought some Oman some cred?

Oman might have thought that we would think that he might have simply sacrificed one of his own to gain town cred. I'd imagine he would have gained some town cred, but not nearly enough to make him consider decreasing his chances of winning by that much.

So we dont really know why Oman picked who he did...that (in my mind) does not out weigh Para's scummy play.

I'm still 95% certain he'd pick a townie first.