Newbie 694 (over)

[urielzyx]

Confirming that I received pm. I'm looking forward to playing this game, but I may be in another time zone than most of you.

me 2...

[urielzyx]

Confirming that I received pm. I'm looking forward to playing this game, but I may be in another time zone than most of you.

me 2...

me 3

r we allowed to speak before the game starts? if so where r u guys from?

[urielzyx]

wait, I didn't get that part, what does rank and avatar have to do with being mafia? mafia is chosen randomly, isn't it?

[urielzyx]

I'm from Israel, I'm actually only 1 timezone away from belgium and 2 from england, so thats pretty close...

and just so I understand, r everybody pointing FoS and Voting randomly and/or for no good reason? because thats the way it seems...

if so, y?

[urielzyx]

Ok than,

VOTE: Elannaro

because he's from belgium(I'm half french:P)...

[urielzyx]

Ok than,

VOTE: Elannaro

because he's from belgium(I'm half french:P)...

EBWOP: then**

[urielzyx]

Oh?

They why ask "Why can't we all get along"?

That's a backtracking scum if I ever saw it.

You better have a good explanation.

I actually think that's what he ment in the 1st place, because he spoke about senseless acts of accusation, the moment you do have suspisions(is that how u spell it?) then it's allright to vote or point a Fos, just that he probably thinks there are other ways to open up a conversation(btw, I still don't see how random voting does that)...

[urielzyx]

Yeah, I get your point, clockworkruse.

Mod, I have unvoted, so my name shouldn't be there.

I think he ment I voted you...

and I think there is enough of a conversation running to stop RVs, also, I do not want Elennaro to be lynched accidentally, so I'll

Unvote

.

[urielzyx]

Acts of violence are OK, just not senseless ones.

Oh?

They why ask "Why can't we all get along"?

That's a backtracking scum if I ever saw it.

You better have a good explanation.

Nothing out of the ordinary here. As I see it GIEFF was having a joke, I found it pretty funny but I am just simple. Xtoxm replies asking for an explanation, what I find particularly weird is urielzyx defended him. GIEFF then said nothing more on the subject. I understand the whole thing was in jest but it is the only thing as of yet which had me thinking so I thought I would post it

Thanks for the information ClockworkRuse. I usually ask the mod because I am playing in a really fun mini, all of the other players have the "mafia scum" tag underneath there names so there was no defined IC's, so I ask the mod.

I actually thought that Xtoxm was serius...

[urielzyx]

Just so u guys know, I'm not going to be able to post for the next 26 hours or so because I'm a religious jew, so have fun without me, Ok?

[urielzyx]

I'm back, missed me?

am I the only one that noticed that RV didn't open any discussion except for one about RV?

[urielzyx]

can anyone suggest a way of opening up a productive conversation from here? or any leads from what we al(l?)ready saw?

[urielzyx]

My point about logic was this:

The mafia knows exactly who is town and who isn't, and so don't NEED to use logic - their votes are based on their knowledge of who the other team is.

The town DOES need to use logic, though - they don't have the information the mafia does. If someone cannot explain the logic behind a vote, then that person is likely to be mafia.


In what way is emotion useful, Xtoxm?

It is useful because when u can not pinpoint the best move for mafia/townie, u can only use logic to a certain(spelled right?) extent, also, using logic u may have a WIFOM every once in a while.
on the other hand, trying to judge if a person is telling the truth using ur emotions is more risky(because there r people who r more convincing and carismatic than others), but may be utillized with about the same chances of an accurate guess in pretty much every situation...

[urielzyx]

My point about logic was this:

The mafia knows exactly who is town and who isn't, and so don't NEED to use logic - their votes are based on their knowledge of who the other team is.

The town DOES need to use logic, though - they don't have the information the mafia does. If someone cannot explain the logic behind a vote, then that person is likely to be mafia.


In what way is emotion useful, Xtoxm?

So why doesn't scum need to use logic behind a vote? Wouldn't they have to use just as much to appear townie? The scum aren't just voting nilly-willy. They are going to have some form of logic.

Vote: ClockworkRuse

Discuss.

scum do use logic, but not to decide who to kill, only to decide the order...

[urielzyx]

Hey urielzyx, I'm sorry if it's a personal question, but could you explain why your religion means you couldn't post for a while? I'm not trying to attack you or anything, just interested.

Well, in our(jews) belief, and actually in muslim and christian belief to, God created the world in 6 days, and "rested" on the seventh, so he made the seventh day sacred, and so jews r supposed to rest on saturday, the thing is, that it is not really rest the way u would think about it, there r few(39) things that we r not allowed to do to "prevent" us from working(as inno writing, no building, no lighting fire etc). The reason this prevents internet access is that using electricity is also prohibited, as it derives from one of the 39 forms of work prohibited on saturday, we r allowed to use light, but not to put it on or off, friday evening u turn the light on or off and thats the way it stays for 25 hours.

[urielzyx]

I think his point was solely to create a discussion...

I don't thimk that anything that has to do with voting is going to be the discussion opener in this game...

can anyone think of something...

[urielzyx]

EBWOP: Can anyone think of something?

[urielzyx]

Asking someone else to create discussion strikes me as silly. I'm not sure if it's scummy.

I will

Vote Militant

.

I think that last post sounds kind of like he's forcing himself to say something.

I am not sure I understand the reasoning behind your vote. In Clockwork's post, he said discuss, that is what I was doing, I was posting my thoughts on Clockwork's actions. As I stated in the post I didn't really get why Clockwork did what he did which is why my post was kinda short.

I don't think he spoke about the length, I believe he ment that it looked like u had nothing to say and just posted something that was pretty obvious.

as to Xtoxm: I don't consider what militant did very scummy.
First of all, we were triyng to open a conversation and he may have simply been triyng to contribute even though he didn't have a lot to say.
Second of all, u should remember, this is a newbie game, and thus u can assume that militant is a newbie, that may be one of the reasons that he discussed the suggested discussion topic even with barely anything to say...

[urielzyx]

u could let everyone FoS the lurker, and let him know if he doesn't claim or contribute until some deadline, you'll lynch him.

Clockworkruse: I never thought of self voting, but it would seem that it is not strictly one or the other, it is very context related.

About policy lynching, I think it depends what that policy is, lynch all liars is a bad policy, lynch all lurkers may be a good policy, I would probably lynch a probable scum over a lurker, but if u don't have suspicions u may have just as much chance of lynching a scum or a power role as with non lurkers, the difference is that a lurker won't help as much if he's vanilla as an active player does...

[urielzyx]

Actually, when u think about it, he only has 6 posts in the thread,

1st post - confirmation.
2nd post - we asked where everybody lives and he says florida.
3rd - vote Xtoxm(RV).
4th - mentions he loves RV.

After that he disappears for a long time, until we start talking about lurkers, then he jumps out with a wierd question, and doesn't contribute anything.

In addition, he did not cancel his RV yet.

Vote: infamousace2

[urielzyx]

I never said you should lynch lurkers without giving them a chance to defend themselves. And anyway, the only town power role who should really try to remain hidden is the doctor, and he could play active townie just as well, it should be really easy for him, because he has no knowledge the town does not have (unless he prevents a kill, and even then it doesn't mean anything in games with a vig). Lurking should not be a good way to keep a low profile. But, of course I'd rather lynch a probable mafia than a lurker.

What's wrong with lynching liars, by the way? I mean, of course exceptions must be possible, but what is wrong with it in general?

Lets say there i'm a watcher, ok?
Now, I know u targeted the guy that died last night, ok?
So I claim cop and say that I have a guilty on u, and ask u to claim.
if u claim miller, then I'll know your scum because miller doesn't target, if u say I can't be cop because ur not scum(ur vig or cop or something), then I'll know u may be telling the truth.

now, after that happens, if u claim miller, and I claim watcher and tell everyone that I just wanted to check if u r scum or vig.

after that happens, a guy with a Lync all Liars policy would lynch me next day(this day lynch the scum) just because I lied...

get it?

[urielzyx]

Lets say there i'm a watcher, ok?
Now, I know u targeted the guy that died last night, ok?
So I claim cop and say that I have a guilty on u, and ask u to claim.
if u claim miller, then I'll know your scum because miller doesn't target, if u say I can't be cop because ur not scum(ur vig or cop or something), then I'll know u may be telling the truth.

now, after that happens, if u claim miller, and I claim watcher and tell everyone that I just wanted to check if u r scum or vig.

after that happens, a guy with a Lync all Liars policy would lynch me next day(this day lynch the scum) just because I lied...

get it?

There is no watcher in this setup. Let's try to keep the theoretical discussions relevant to the game ahead of us. I don't see where a similar incentive to lie would happen in this game; a townie claiming a power role risks outing that power role, and should not be done. Power roles should of course claim vanilla town if pressed, but this is not really a lie so much as sound strategy, and there isn't really any way for this "lie" to be caught in the setup we are using.

So uri, do you agree that in the current setup someone caught in a lie is very likely to be scum?


Regarding the lurker-lynching: I do agree that it is better than a completely random lynch, but hopefully we can find a better lynch by getting a mafia member to slip up.

yes, I do agree with ur opinion about this specific setup, but I Elennaro didn't ask y we shouldn't lynch liars, only whats the problem with doing it...

in general I think u should lynch a liar unless his lie was a real strategical step...

[urielzyx]

I thought the below might be useful - it is a history of votes and FoS's with hyperlinks to the relevant posts. I can continue to do this throughout the thread if you find it helpful.

infamousace2

FoS: ClockworkRuse Post 22
Vote: Xtoxm Post 32

hambargarz

vote: Xtoxm Post 26
Unvote, Vote: militant Post 95
FOS: ClockworkRuse Post 110

militant

Vote: GIEFF Post 28

urielzyx

VOTE: Elannaro Post 30
Unvote Post 57
Vote: infamousace2 Post 121

RealityFan

Vote: Gieff Post 43

ClockworkRuse

Vote: ClockworkRuse Post 82
Unvote, Vote hambargarz Post 96

Xtoxm

Vote Militant Post 88




infamous, militant, and RealityFan all still have their random votes "on;" infamous for Xtxom, and the other two for me. Is it customary to simply unvote after the random voting stage has passed, or to leave the vote on the random target until a better target presents itself?

And infamous, I am curious to hear your answer to Xtoxm's question in #129.

thx, it has been very enlightning, if we have something like that every few pages(in addition to the mods vote count), it will be easyer to follow who is doing what...

[urielzyx]

How much info can you really get on the first day before the first lynch?

Yea...we can discuss all day...people will claim whatever...and we still won't lynch anyone...but just for the sake of speeding up the game...I'll unvote...lol

Unvote: Xtoxm

I see a conflict here. You claim that you are unvoting Xtoxm to "speed the game up," but that doesn't make any sense. How does UN-voting speed up the game?

Personally, I think you are unvoting Xtoxm because your random vote is still on him, and the random voting stage appears to be over. I think that this is a perfectly legitimate reason to remove a vote, so why not just tell us that is the case instead of claiming it's only to "speed up the game?"

Inf, what do you think Mafia is about, and why did you sign up for this game? - This is a genuine question.

I think a few of us are interested in your response to this question.

he answered a moment later, also, I do not think he removed the vote because RV is over, otherwise he would have said so, I think when we specified his RV still being on this deep in, he thought(as do I), that it might look a little scummy...

[urielzyx]

RealityFan and militant are the only two people who still have their random votes active (both on me, incidentally). I'm going to

FoS militant

, as RealityFan appears to be inactive.

>.<

I still have my random vote "on" because I have not yet wanted to chancge my vote to anyone else. As soon as we start discussing things relevant to the game to you just expect me to vote somebody else. It is not going to happen. I find it strange that you would Fos me but as you stated in your post RealityFan is lurking wo why don't you Fos him?

first of all, the moment we start voting for real reasons the RV stage is over.
second, even if u do not want to vote someone else u may unvote ur RV.
about FoSing, I actually understand it, I mean, the only two who still have there RV on r voting for the same guy, wich is pretty weird.
also, he didn't say that reality fan is lurking, he said he is inactive, as in he is going to leave the game anyway...

[urielzyx]

L-2? L-3?

[urielzyx]

Unvote

If realityfan is going to post in time, I think he/she has some questions to answer. But that seems to be unlikely. I don't want his/her probable replacement to inherit a vote he/she didn't earn, so I'm unvoting.

If I act like scum and get replaced, then y shouldn't the guy that replaced me have the same role as me?

[urielzyx]

EBWOP: I'm gone for saturday again, bye...

[urielzyx]

Yes, I thought there were 7 people, not 9. My point still stands, I think. I notice you STILL haven't unvoted.

I am more interested in my questions to infamous in post 152, though, and we're getting sidetracked from that.

Fine

Unvote

Happy now?

Unvoting to make someone happy? XD

Vote: Militant

That is pretty much two accounts of appeasement.

Way to go, you just put me at L-2.

Why exactly is unvoting to appease someone scummy?

Because u don't change policy just because 1 dude dislikes u, and u sure don't need to care that much about one person accusing u, if he conviced u then change ur vote because ur convinced that he has a point, if not, y change it?

MOD EDIT:

Although this is understandable, could you(and everyone else), please use full english words? It makes it much, much easier for everyone to understand your posts. Thanks

[urielzyx]

Because there was no reason for it in the first place? I fail to see how that is scummy - you guys attacking him actually looks scummier in my eyes.

Actually, I do not think it is scummy enough to be a reason for putting a guy at L-2(certainly not L-1, witch is one of the two reasons I didn't vote for militant), I was just explaining why someone else might find it scummy, I do think that a guy that doesn't stand behind his opinion has a problem, but not that he is automatically scum.

Also, I would not vote for him because I still find inf's behavior scummier...

[urielzyx]

the opinion wasn't that gieff is guilty, it was that you shouldn't change your RV until something better comes along...

[urielzyx]

It was because everyone else took away their random votes...so I did it when I got on...

no one unvoted between your unvote and your previous vote, also, I still do not see why you said it was to speed things up, and it still doesn't look like sarcasm to me...

[urielzyx]

If you change your opinion just to please someone it either means that you don't want to get lynched or that it's not really your opinion...

[urielzyx]

When he was talking after I said discuss, I felt that was some minor appeasement too.

And I think you need to explain your question a little more, I'm not exactly following.

Do you mean the question about post 96? (here is Post 95, in which you FoS'd hambargaz. Are you still suspicious that hambargaz focused on militant instead of other lurkers?

I really don't think that what militant did in post was appeasement. You, an IC, asked for discussion on a point of theory, and he provided some. That is not appeasement; that is simply responding to your request for some discussion.

Also, why was no suspicion thrown on uri for his post 83? What is different about his response and militant's response in 85?

post 83 wasn't a discussion about the self voting, since I thought(and apparently so did others, because they did vote for militant) that there was nothing to discuss, everyone thought that this self voting was to create conversation, everyone thought it to be "pro town" and I don't think anyone could find a reason except for creating discussion.

My post on the other hand was about an on going discussion that I wished to express an opinion on, when people disagree(as we did) they express there own opinion about a subject in response to the other persons opinion.

Also, when and if I have time I will try and make an analysis of infamousace2's posts, since I still think he is scum...

[urielzyx]

First of all, welcome CarnCarn.
I read the hole post, it gave me a lot of insight(is that correct spelling?), and I will try to answer the questions that were adressed to me:

About policy lynching, I think it depends what that policy is, lynch all liars is a bad policy, lynch all lurkers may be a good policy

I have to disagree with you and ClockworkRuse. I think lynch all liars is a generally good policy. The idea to discourage anti-town behavior early in the game by avoid the chaos caused by mass lying. However, in later stages, when mass-claiming, etc., the policy should be relaxed or discarded.

That was my point(see quote under this), at least as I understood it. policy lynch means that you have a criteria and everybody who fits is lynched, so lynch all liars would be bad, because at some cases you shouldn't lynch a liar, on the other hand I agree that in most cases lynching liars is good.

Lets say there i'm a watcher, ok?
Now, I know u targeted the guy that died last night, ok?
So I claim cop and say that I have a guilty on u, and ask u to claim.
if u claim miller, then I'll know your scum because miller doesn't target, if u say I can't be cop because ur not scum(ur vig or cop or something), then I'll know u may be telling the truth.

now, after that happens, if u claim miller, and I claim watcher and tell everyone that I just wanted to check if u r scum or vig.

after that happens, a guy with a Lynch all Liars policy would lynch me next day(this day lynch the scum) just because I lied...

get it?

This really doesn't seem like the best way to go about it. You are essentially asking for a claim from someone and you are fake-claiming yourself. If the person you

tracked

(not watched, since watchers only know if someone was targeted, not who they targeted) is town, you are outing a PR. If they are scum and lie about their role, and you backtrack with your own role claim, we get into a back and forth about who is lying, and end up nowhere.

I'm sorry for the watch/track thing, I got mixed up.
about the flaw that you say there is:

if the guy is town and not scum then I am not outing a power role because initially I said I had a guilty, if I'm wrong I could always claim sanity issues and keep to myself that I know who the vig is.
if he does claim miller or something of the sort, I claim tracker and since he admits that a cop would get a guilty on him then as far as others are concerned there are two options, either he is scum or I am lying about being tracker, now why would I lie? If I'm a cop then I have the town in my best interest and not try lynching a miller, if I am not a cop and not a tracker then it is to great of a risk to just call someone guilty

and

false claim all together...

[urielzyx]

None of that discussion is relevant to this game, uri, and is becoming distracting. I think we have all agreed that there is pretty much no reason for town to lie in this setup, and the fact that infamousace2 has lied TWICE now about his reasons for unvoting Xtoxm is a large part of why I find him so suspicious.

First off, I'd like to remind you I have a vote on Infamousace2 already, so convincing me is not supposed to be at the top of your concerns.

Secondly, I have stated several times(if I'm not mistaken) that I wasn't speaking about a specific setup but about the policy in general, and that in this case I would agree you should lynch the liar.

Last but not least, about the fact it is becoming distracting, I had not brought it up this time but only responded to a question that looked like a suspicion.

Btw, not that I terribly mind, but my name is Uriel and not Uri...

[urielzyx]

Picking up the prod, I am sorry if it looks like I'm inactive, it's just that I log in only at very different hours then most of you so there is nothing worth noting that I can see and that no one had said yet, I just see it as pointless to repeat someone else, and that is why I did not write anything, every time I do notice something that no one else seems to have noticed I post, also, I post every time I am asked a question that needs answering, if anyone can specify another situation where I should probably post, I will gladly do so...

[urielzyx]

No one person has stood out to me as his scumpartner, though inf and uri are up high on my list.

I would like to know why me please...