Newbie 838 (Game Over!)

[rustyshark]

confirm

[rustyshark]

Regarding the rvs. If you're not asking for the votes to be truly random, then asking for "randomness" can actually mean asking for

non-randomness

, or else it means asking for people to not know what is/isn't random or to act independantly of such knowledge. For example, someone voting in a way that's actually

not

random (whether or not they thought it was), or by someone assuming that someone else's vote was nonrandom (whether that vote was random or not).

This means there are specific ways the RVS can end (and thus just saying "don't make it too long or too short" is generally useless). Someone could end it accidentally (by presenting nonrandom information), or someone could assume it is already over (because they think someone else's post contains nonrandom information) and act accordingly (present actual nonrandom information, thus ending it for real). The only way to intentionally end the rvs is if someone has information that makes the entire thing unnecessary (from before the beginning of the thread, which presumably none of us have).

So if you have made the same assumptions as me, it means that:
1. It is impossible for a townie to intentionally end the rvs. Ending the rvs requires information that presumably no townie has, unless/until a mafia slips up.
2. The RVS is not guaranteed to produce any useful information. Because the rvs only ends when useful information is known, this means the rvs might never end. Someone else once joked (which I take somewhat more seriously) about how the rvs usually ends in lylo.
3. I've seen people in other games advocate a no lynch to give the power roles time to do something. But if there AREN'T any power roles (which is possible in the current setup), then a no-lynch is just a disaster that accomplishes nothing. Which basically means that there's no choice. Either sit here and do nothing and getting picked off one by one, or continuing and hoping the scum make a mistake.

So come on, you scum out there. Start making mistakes so we can lynch you.

Vote: Carrick16

for trying to make it look like you're

not

trying too hard.

[rustyshark]

*note to self: don't make sarcastic jokes involving death during a game of mafia.*

Anyway that line was meant as a direct continuation of the previous part of my post - I had just got done trying to say that the only way out of RVS is for scum to make a mistake, so then I tell the scum to make a mistake. Maybe it was a silly thing to say but ehh, I don't see it as being any

less

silly for a scum to try to say it.

And my whole argument was in response to My Milked Eek's question on what people thought about the "random voting stage". So does anyone

else

have an opinion on the RVS? It would help to get as much knowledge and experience on the subject as possible, while we're still in that area of the game.

Let me see if I can dig an example out of my finished games.

yes please do; experience from previous games is always a good thing.

I'll hold off on responding to the rest of your RVS argument till then, since getting an actual example of a town ending the RVS would be way more clear than trying to argue about whether it's possible or how it could be done.

[rustyshark]

unvote

not rvs anymore, so yeah.

I don't like posts and unvotes like these.

Exactly my point. The only way a "random" vote can be helpful is if it has at least

some

amount of non-randomness to it, which means that voting/unvoting

just

because of the rvs is a bad idea.

[rustyshark]

@rustyshark can you please get an avatar?

done.

@ rustyshark & Carrick16; What is your favorite role to play in mafia?

haven't really played enough games to be certain,

Since you asked for an example here is an example of me ending the RVS in another game,

You completely forgot the website existed? So you /in for nexted... replied promptly to your role PM, and then up and forgot that the website even existed? And as soon as a vote is cast against you all of a sudden remember that you're playing this game and respond to it?

hmm that seems exactly like what's happening now with Crunchi..
did the player in question turn out to be scum? is this normally considered a scummy thing to do, or is it a bit like lurking ( where it might be scum trying to hide, but it could just as easily be a town who doesn't like getting voted for? ) maybe it's not very beneficial for the town, but I'm not sure that's necessarily a reason to be voting for someone. Especially when it's even

worse

for the town if the person doesn't respond at all to the lurking accusation - at least with a response, you get a discussion happening.

Considering Crunchi's gut reaction to this accusation, I'm leaning toward town for her. Scum overanalyze their posts and plan elaborate strategies for making themselves look townish, while town just react emotionally to being accused of scum, and don't consider whether or not it would make them look bad.

startransmission seems to turn everything scum related, which makes it seem like he's scum, but maybe he's just being active.

Sure he's active, but what has he done so far? Besides his initial analysis post, accuse Crunchi of lurking.

Now, his initial list of things on each player. On the one hand, it's a good sign - scum don't need to keep notes on each player, since they already know who's town and who's not. But on the other hand, the stuff he said about the players was pretty obvious, things you get just by reading the thread. Posting things that are already known to make it seem like they're being helpful, is an easy thing for scum to do,

Regarding his accusations toward Crunchi. Lurkers are an easy target for scum. If I'm scum, and nobody is acting suspicious enough to complain about, what do I do? Pick on lurkers.

unvote, vote startransmission.

[rustyshark]

hmm that seems exactly like what's happening now with Crunchi..

How so? You took my quote out of context.

You didn't

give

any context, or even link to the game in question. Also, the example you gave was of a player who didn't post anything for a while until he got voted for, and then immediately responded by giving an excuse. Which is exactly what happened in the Crunchi situation; I thought you were doing the same thing here and didn't know about any previous scumminess the player (bagsquad) did that wasn't in your post.

I'm mystified why you feel that her gut reaction to my accusation would lead you to believe she's town. Care to point out what this gut reaction is?

I'm talking about stuff like:

Instead of waiting for others to do the job, why not participate and make it easier for us?

Because it's easier for me.

Sure it's not a particularly pro-town stance, but for scum to say something like this would be an incredible risk with no real benefit. She was being honest, while for scum it would be easier to just sit back and restate her earlier claim of not having anything to say. And look at the incredible amount of flak she took for it in the next three posts, hence my statement that town are less likely to consider the effects of looking scummy.

Chainsaw Defense is:

defending another player by attacking his/her attacker.


Thus, yes, Rusty is chainsaw defending crunchi. It cannot be more clear cut and obvious than this.

I'm not attacking startransmission for attacking Crunchi, I'm attacking him for his assumption that lurkers are automatically scum. Crunchi just happened to be who he was going after.

Probably the best proof of what I'm saying is that startransmission himself replaced someone who barely posted anything at all - clearly the amount posted is determined by the person doing the posting more than the role they have.

[rustyshark]

Also something has come up unexpectedly and I've asked to be replaced; I'll try to respond to stuff for the next day or so if anyone has any unsaid points.