Mini 517: Tree Stump Mafia: Game Over

[Mastermind of Sin]

I'm not against wanting an anti-ton person dead, I'm against wanting anyone dead on page 3.

It is never too soon to find scum.

How did you get find scum from what I said? In fact, a 3 page day is in no way helping to find scum.. in fact it is helping to not find scum at all!

FoS: MoS...

And I am voting for Korlash because he is very suspicious! He keeps stealing my stuff, the jerk...

...hello, logic please? When you find scum, you vote to lynch them. It doesn't matter if it's the first fucking page. You don't just sit around and say "hmm, we need another 8 pages before we can lynch this scum we found!" That's not how the game works. Quagmire is acting like scum, so I'm going to vote for him. Just because he slipped up trying to find a way to act blatantly scummy and get away with it on Page 1, does not mean that we can't lynch him.

[Quagmire]

I'm not against wanting an anti-ton person dead, I'm against wanting anyone dead on page 3.

It is never too soon to find scum.

How did you get find scum from what I said? In fact, a 3 page day is in no way helping to find scum.. in fact it is helping to not find scum at all!

FoS: MoS...

And I am voting for Korlash because he is very suspicious! He keeps stealing my stuff, the jerk...

...hello, logic please? When you find scum, you vote to lynch them. It doesn't matter if it's the first fucking page. You don't just sit around and say "hmm, we need another 8 pages before we can lynch this scum we found!" That's not how the game works. Quagmire is acting like scum, so I'm going to vote for him. Just because he slipped up trying to find a way to act blatantly scummy and get away with it on Page 1, does not mean that we can't lynch him.

slipped up?

no, i said before the game started that i wasn't going to read my role pm

[Korlash]

No no no no no.. you misunderstand me...

If you lynch Quagmire now we start day two off just as day one started with three people (most likely dead) and out of those at least one of them will be a towny, with the other two as very likely townie. So saying its ok to begin day two with every single person unknown means you don't have the town's best interests in mind MoS. You say you found a scum? Good, go find another one moron.

[PookyTheMagicalBear]

I firmly believe in my bones that every townie should stump himself as an alternative to being lynched because it will limit the number of NK possibilities for the Mafia.

If anyone wants to dispute that, I would like them to speak up and tell me exactly why I am wrong about that.

If not, I would like to use the threat of lynch to force each and every player to promise to "stump themselves" if they are indeed pseudo-lynched in order to limit the number of nightkill attempts the mafia will be given.

Since Quagmire has said that he will not stump himself regardless, he is deviating from the optimal protown strategy, and there is no question in my mind that we should eliminate him earlier rather than later.

[Korlash]

So in other words.. you want to limit the NKings... yet... want to start the game off with two town dead anyways, which means less stumps, which means.. your going against your own plan, which means... Your kinda full of BS I think.

I agree with you that Quagmire is a hindrance who should be dealt with (Eventually) given time he may damage himself more, or even start playing who knows, I also agree we should stump instead of lynch.

So, heres the deal, keep your vote on Quagmire. If other townies feel he needs to go, they can lynch him. I, and I hope you, will use this time to scum hunt and gain some info we can use day two.

[PookyTheMagicalBear]

how do you know Quagmire is town?

[Korlash]

I don't... But I know there is a higher chance he is town then he is mafia. And a pretty equal chance he is power role town and vanilla town. But you have made it clear you do not care if he is town or mafia, you just want him dead. So why do you suddenly care if he is town?

[PookyTheMagicalBear]

The higher chance he is town then he is mafia thing is true for every player.

What the heck do you mean pretty equal chance he is power role town and vanilla town?

We don't have any power roles.

My point is that every player has the same probability of being scum in my eyes(except for me because I know I am town).

However, 1 of those players has stated clearly that he will choose to deviate from what I believe is the optimal protown playing strategy(which is to stump if you are pseudolynched).

It's my belief that punishing deviation from the best protown strategy will lead to less deviation from the best protown strategy and result in a better chance for the town to win.

My point is that my options are between lynching Quagmire and lynching any other random possibly protown player, I would choose to lynch Quagmire because that would decrease the number of deviators from what I believe the best protown strategy should be.

[PookyTheMagicalBear]

1) i'm a townsperson and you guys lynch me: then i'm doing the town a minor inservice by allowing a nightkill. OOH! it's not like this game isn't broken in the town's favor anyway as it is

2) i'm mafia and you guys lynch me: then i'm doing the right thing right now, and the town is one-up

3) i'm a townsperson and i stump: then i'm doing the right thing by implementing a part of gameplay that makes this game pretty unbalanced. also, i die, meaning that if the townspeople win then i don't really win because i'm dead

4) if i'm mafia and i stump: then i just fucked the mafia up by fucking over a nightkill and killing myself.

1)This game is not broken in the town's favor, your job as a townie if you are one is to make it as likely as possible that the town wins, it is not to "balance" the setup towards the scum because of whatever perception you may have towards the town's "overpoweredness"

2)If you're mafia, you are not doing the right thing because you are drawing attention to yourself and putting the mafia in a hole early. If you are mafia then you have been a detriment to your team and this game.

3) Pretty unbalanced? Your job as a townsperson if you are one is to do the best you can to win for the town, not to use your opinion of what the game "should be" to "balance" it the way you want. It is not up to you to redefine your win condition as a townie if you are a townie.

4) If you're mafia, you're "fucking the mafia up" right now by drawing all the attention on yourself. The best play for the mafia is to say that they will stump and then when the time comes, basically refuse to. By saying outright that you will choose to deviate from the best protown strategy, you are doing your mafia team an INCREDIBLE DISSERVICE IF YOU ARE MAFIA. You are basically putting a giant "LYNCH ME" sign on your back.

Frankly speaking, you are doing your side a tremendous disservice regardless of which team you happen to be on. The later you make it into the game, the more your distraction will be a detriment to the town and the more powerful your vote will be.

I don't like the idea of a vote being in the hands of a player who is going to play halfassed like this, and I'll do my best to get rid of him early rather than to have him screw us up late.

[Adele]

I don't... But I know there is a higher chance he is town then he is mafia. And a pretty equal chance he is power role town and vanilla town. But you have made it clear you do not care if he is town or mafia, you just want him dead. So why do you suddenly care if he is town?

Do you mean, in general? Because when we play the game we intuitively use bayesian probabilities to adjust the likelihood up or down. As in:

given that

X is acting so scummy, he's more probably scum.

Now, I don't know if Quagmire looked at his role pm or not. It appears to me that he said that he hadn't and wouldn't

after

it arrived; so he could very well have read it, found himself to be scum, and decided to try to get a free pass (because he "doesn't know" so is "probably town") for acting thouroughly anti-town (eg refusing to stump under pressure, when it's clear that refusing to stump and thus forcing the town to lynch you only causes more nights which benefits the scum). He's acting scummy, and we're taking his word that he doesn't know if he's scum or not?
Scum

have

been known to lie, you know.

There also appear to be people who say that if someone refuses to stump then, rather than lynch them, we should harrass someone who

is

willing to stump into stumping. If

that's

our policy, then I will refuse to stump (as a last-ditch effort to save myself) and so should everyone else; it becomes the dominant strategy for town and scum alike. Let me clarify: we should ask people to selfstump

in place of

being lynched; if they refuse we should lynch them. We should therefore, obviously, treat a stumping as seriously as a lynching, as it might turn out to be just that if they refuse.

At the moment I think it's about even odds that Quag's scum or town, and so far it's been going up every time he posts. Let's see if that trend reverses...

[Korlash]

We don't have any power roles.

Wow... i totally got the Trimvetra que and this game mixed up somehow... Right... Scratch that one off... >.> <.<

Do you mean, in general? Because when we play the game we intuitively use bayesian probabilities to adjust the likelihood up or down. As in: given that X is acting so scummy, he's more probably scum.

And while this is true, the only real lynch worthy evidence against him would be trying to entice a lynch with no basis. yet the only reasons I tend to see people actually stating is him not looking at his role. Neither of these, or even both together, should call for a lynch this early. (Page three) I just think, as bad a player he is this game, the rest of you seem to be just as equally bad... Although I do admit this game has special circumstances...

In short, I firmly believe in the phrase "Short days are bad for town" and by going after Quagmire with the intent of a lynch, means you are going against that.

[JDodge]

Hi scum

Unvote, vote: SilverPhoenix

Not much of an analysis, I'm afraid. Your vote is irrelevant if you don't have anything to back it up with. Also, you didn't complain when Pooky did the same thing. So I am not buying your vote at all....nor should anyone else.

You

assume

I have nothing. I actually find it rather odd that you're trying to cast my vote off as nothing, and saying that everyone else should do the same.

Vote: Quagmire
I can't take it anymore. I'd rather kill you now then have to deal with your horrible play. It's not just that you are acting scummy, you are just playing horribly. I would rather someone inactive than someone who refuses to play correctly.

Here you essentially say that you just want him lynched regardless of his alignment; how is that in any way good for the town?

I am mainly annoyed by telling everyone who to vote for. You set your target as Adele since before the game even started, and then you use OMGUS for your target tomorrow. Just horrible.....

And here you assume OMGUS and not the same reasoning behind the votes for Adele. Guess which would probably seem scummier to people?

I wouldn't have pointed this out normally, but since Quagmire refused to change his tactic from the beginning, I can assume that he was seriously playing from then. So what does this mean? Well...it seems like randomness buy why? Why do they (and Bapa Bail) agree with him, and then avoid any real discussion? Is there something I'm missing? Or is this really that easy?

FoS: JDodge, Bapa Bail, Scotmany

Time to start playing seriously, guys.

Is playing unseriously a scumtell?

[Quagmire]

Frankly speaking, you are doing your side a tremendous disservice regardless of which team you happen to be on. The later you make it into the game, the more your distraction will be a detriment to the town and the more powerful your vote will be.

I don't like the idea of a vote being in the hands of a player who is going to play halfassed like this, and I'll do my best to get rid of him early rather than to have him screw us up late.

i'm not playing "half assed," i don't know how many times i need to pound this into your thick skulls

there's a good reason that i'm not reading my role pm, and i've detailed this earlier, and i will not repeat this again

there are good reasons that i'm not stumping, which i've already detailed. pooky, your argument before the part of your post that i quoted sucks so badly, i'm not even going to address it with anything other than you're trying to back me into a corner instead of actually try and figure out what i am (because if i were to respond to anything you say, you'll just dismiss it as wifom and call me scum or whatever)

and i find this pretty ironic that you guys feel like you're trying to guess what i am, because i don't know what i am, so there's absolutely no way that anyone could guess what i am based off of my actions

[Adele]

Frankly speaking, you are doing your side a tremendous disservice regardless of which team you happen to be on. The later you make it into the game, the more your distraction will be a detriment to the town and the more powerful your vote will be.

I don't like the idea of a vote being in the hands of a player who is going to play halfassed like this, and I'll do my best to get rid of him early rather than to have him screw us up late.

i'm not playing "half assed," i don't know how many times i need to pound this into your thick skulls

there's a good reason that i'm not reading my role pm, and i've detailed this earlier, and i will not repeat this again

The "good reason" is about benefiting you specifically, not the side you are on. Unless you are a survivor role, you are not working towards your WC.

there are good reasons that i'm not stumping, which i've already detailed. pooky, your argument before the part of your post that i quoted sucks so badly, i'm not even going to address it with anything other than you're trying to back me into a corner instead of actually try and figure out what i am (because if i were to respond to anything you say, you'll just dismiss it as wifom and call me scum or whatever)

Actually, pooky's arguments make sense to me. Saying "your argument sucked but if I point out how you'll just ignore me" is a really appalling argument, and something which I can't see any better option to do with than dismiss. It's not a counterargument of any kind whatsoever, so how can I take it into account? You disagree with Pooky that you're full of crap? Well, shocker.

and i find this pretty ironic that you guys feel like you're trying to guess what i am, because i don't know what i am, so there's absolutely no way that anyone could guess what i am based off of my actions

And one more time: how do I know you aren't lying about that? How do I know you didn't make the "won't check my role pm" as a pre-emptive once you'd read taht you were scum?

OK, let's draw a larger point. Let's universalise your maxim. Say no-one opened their role pm and everyone played blind. What would the result be? A random D1 lynch and no additional information to work off of the next day (by which time people presumably are aware). This is a disservice to the town, when each individual is more likely to be town than scum. Is it balanced by a much larger service to the scum? No, it's the same size. Meanwhile, you've wasted however much time playing a game that isn't mafia, and hopped into a swingier setup.
So, why does your plan make sense for the one, but not the many? I'm serious: you claim it benefits you (which it might, but only once you attain a bad metagame rep), but I don't see how it benefits whichever side you are on today.

[SilverPhoenix]

You assume I have nothing.

Considering you didn't post anything, yeah I assumed you had nothing. It is not like it was incorrect, you didn't post anything!

And here you assume OMGUS

I was talking about Quagmire targeting MoS for tomorrow. Which it basically was.

Here you essentially say that you just want him lynched regardless of his alignment; how is that in any way good for the town?

Because he isn't playing town. He is playing neutral, and he might as well be lynched for doing so. Can't you see that he is screwing up the town advantage in this game? Should someone who is screwing up the town be lynched? My answer is yes.

Is playing unseriously a scumtell?

Look, you guys seemed to obviously have some prior discussion before this game started about who to target, since Quagmire told you and scotmany to vote for Adele and you guys did obediently. And now you are defending someone whose alignment you don't even know? That seems like scum trying to shut up a dumb-ass scum partner to me.

[JDodge]

And here you assume OMGUS

I was talking about Quagmire targeting MoS for tomorrow. Which it basically was.

Huh, I could've sworn there was more to what you quoted.

Here you essentially say that you just want him lynched regardless of his alignment; how is that in any way good for the town?

Because he isn't playing town. He is playing neutral, and he might as well be lynched for doing so. Can't you see that he is screwing up the town advantage in this game? Should someone who is screwing up the town be lynched? My answer is yes.

If a scum is playing town he must never be lynched.

Your willingness to off someone simply for playing

neutral

is rather odd. Being unreadable =/= being scum.

Is playing unseriously a scumtell?

Look, you guys seemed to obviously have some prior discussion before this game started about who to target, since Quagmire told you and scotmany to vote for Adele and you guys did obediently.

And now you are defending someone whose alignment you don't even know? That seems like scum trying to shut up a dumb-ass scum partner to me.

Everyone, please read the bolded part

very carefully

. Can you see what I see?

[JDodge]

So, if a scum is playing town he must never be lynched?

now that that's fixed

[SilverPhoenix]

So, if a scum is playing town he must never be lynched?

That isn't what I said. I said that we should lynch obvious neutral because they do not help the town (or the scum, for that matter) whatsoever. As Pooky said, it is better to get rid of him now than later. I am talking about strictly neutral people, not scum playing town or vice versa. I never mentioned Quag being scum/town anywhere, because obviously no one has any clue, including yourself.

[JDodge]

So, if a scum is playing town he must never be lynched?

That isn't what I said. I said that we should lynch obvious neutral because they do not help the town

(or the scum, for that matter)

whatsoever. As Pooky said, it is better to get rid of him now than later. I am talking about strictly neutral people, not scum playing town or vice versa.

I never mentioned Quag being scum/town anywhere, because obviously no one has any clue, including yourself.

Tell me how a town

lynch

helps the town

[SilverPhoenix]

Tell me how a town lynch helps the town

YOU DON'T KNOW QUAG IS TOWN! NEITHER DO I! NEITHER DOES QUAGMIRE, FOR PETE'S SAKE!!!

[JDodge]

Tell me how a town lynch helps the town

YOU DON'T KNOW QUAG IS TOWN! NEITHER DO I! NEITHER DOES QUAGMIRE, FOR PETE'S SAKE!!!

THAT'S MY WHOLE POINT RIGHT THERE

[Quagmire]

there are good reasons that i'm not stumping, which i've already detailed. pooky, your argument before the part of your post that i quoted sucks so badly, i'm not even going to address it with anything other than you're trying to back me into a corner instead of actually try and figure out what i am (because if i were to respond to anything you say, you'll just dismiss it as wifom and call me scum or whatever)

Actually, pooky's arguments make sense to me. Saying "your argument sucked but if I point out how you'll just ignore me" is a really appalling argument, and something which I can't see any better option to do with than dismiss. It's not a counterargument of any kind whatsoever, so how can I take it into account? You disagree with Pooky that you're full of crap? Well, shocker.

[/quote]

I have a counterargument, I just chose not to say it. Because my counter in that situation is all WIFOM, and we all know that all experienced players just say "oh that's wifom vote quagmire," so it's not like i'd get anywhere

and i find this pretty ironic that you guys feel like you're trying to guess what i am, because i don't know what i am, so there's absolutely no way that anyone could guess what i am based off of my actions

And one more time: how do I know you aren't lying about that? How do I know you didn't make the "won't check my role pm" as a pre-emptive once you'd read taht you were scum?

OK, let's draw a larger point. Let's universalise your maxim. Say no-one opened their role pm and everyone played blind. What would the result be? A random D1 lynch and no additional information to work off of the next day (by which time people presumably are aware). This is a disservice to the town, when each individual is more likely to be town than scum. Is it balanced by a much larger service to the scum? No, it's the same size. Meanwhile, you've wasted however much time playing a game that isn't mafia, and hopped into a swingier setup.
So, why does your plan make sense for the one, but not the many? I'm serious: you claim it benefits you (which it might, but only once you attain a bad metagame rep), but I don't see how it benefits whichever side you are on today.

[/quote]

i'm not immanuel kant

and, as of right now, i'm working on myself. here's why i don't look at my PM:

I always like to look at the game that I'm playing in in a totally neutral sense; if I feel like I'm dissociated from the game, but just viewing it as an outsider, then I feel that I get a better perspective on the game itself than if I'm already playing on a side. I say that because, when I'm mafia, I tend to try too hard to play like a townsperson, and that bites me in the ass. If I'm a townsperson, I'm too focused on picking up on subliminal mafia tactics, so I don't get a good handle of the bigger picture. Being neutral tends to take away those disadvantages for me, for whatever reason.

Day one is always the worst. There's no information and people just jump on bandwagons for the stupidest and littlest things just to get things going -- there's nothing I hate to hear more than to vote for someone "just to get things started." To do this, I get as much information that I can. I do this in a number of ways that I won't tell you. However, my voting-for-adele policy before the game is a trap, in a sense. I won't say how.

Today I haven't been able to scumhunt so much because I've had to spend most of the time detailing why I won't stump myself or why I won't read my PM that I haven't been able to really get information about specific people.

Going back to the first few paragraphs, though. This helps me. If I find out that I'm a townie, then I've got a good basis and list of things to delve into once a new day dawns -- it's like I've set up an outline of stuff for myself and things to look at, and to give myself direction in that sense helps ground me in figuring out what I want to know. If i turn out to be mafia, I've got a good sense of how to act and what to pursue. It's very simple, really.

[scotmany12]

I am not liking the votes on quag. While I do wish he would look at his role, I have not seen him really do anything scummy. I do not know if he looked as his role or not. He most certainly could have and is lying to us all. But so far, that is your only reason for voting for him, which quite frankly is bs. The best thing to do with quag is to wait and see what develops.

I am actually going to

Unvote

and

Vote: SilverPhoenix

. You seem opportunistic to me, and you came right out and said you don't particularly find Quag scummy. You just want him out because he is playing at a neutral standpoint,

[scotmany12]

EBWOP: I was wrong, you guys are also voting for him cause he does not want to stump. If this was anyone else, then I would find this scummy, but after spending time with Quag on scumchat, this doesn't surprise me. I think it is just who he is, so that is why I am not looking into that too much.

[Thok]

Nothing to see in this post