Newbie 892 - The Future of Magic. Game Over! Mafia Win

[The Tracker]

The Im all out of Fudge Vote count

Jackabomb: Easjo682
Dimaba: Doctor, Yosarian2
cdubs: LordChronos
RayFrost: Jackabomb
The Tracker: RayFrost, Dimaba

Not voting: cdubs

Deadline is 26th January 2010, 9pm England time.

Lots of Love,
Hayl

Hello hello everyone, sorry for missing the first 24 hrs of this.

@Dimaba and Cdubs

If either of you are active could we have reasons for why you are not interacting with the rest of the group?

No problem. I have a test coming up tomorrow that I had to study pretty hard for. I've been doing that + sleeping for the past 24 hours. The test'll be done tomorrow and I won't be lurking after that.

vote: The Tracker

Because I support RayFrost's reasoning.

2. seems to be attempting to bring support for the LaL[urkers] policy, which is terribly anti-town, since the town gets very little information from a lurker dying (easy mislynch, no connections to other players makes it low info, etc). He obviously knows about prods and replacements, so his support for LaL[urkers] is scummy.

3. He says there is not enough information to scumhunt, yet he does nothing to provide information to aid in scumhunting. Very " well, we can't do our job without information, but I'm not gonna put myself out there *baits somebody else to do so* " type of thing.

And I'll add a tiny thought of my own which I admit is farfetched.
Considering this...

Even just joking about a doctor, or anything like that, can give hints, either hints from the person making the joke, or hints based on how other people react to a joke.

... Tracker's joke about Doctor roleclaiming in his name could theoretically be an attempt to draw a reaction.

My my Dimaba, you certainly seem to be jumping on the vote right off the bat. Yeah, okay, Frost's reasoning makes sense but mind bringing some of your own ideas to the table instead of just following the SE?

@Yos: I unvoted since my vote wasn't serious. That is all.

@Frost: It wasn't. That's all I have to say about the RVS vote.

[RayFrost]

I said something about the RVS vote?

Also, responding to my reasoning will give you a +

[The Tracker]

I'm ashamed of Yos2.

unvote

vote: tracker

1. Fakeclaiming in his name. ( )

2. seems to be attempting to bring support for the LaL[urkers] policy, which is terribly anti-town, since the town gets very little information from a lurker dying (easy mislynch, no connections to other players makes it low info, etc). He obviously knows about prods and replacements, so his support for LaL[urkers] is scummy.

3. He says there is not enough information to scumhunt, yet he does nothing to provide information to aid in scumhunting. Very " well, we can't do our job without information, but I'm not gonna put myself out there *baits somebody else to do so* " type of thing.

I'll start with 2. First, anti-town doesn't equal scummy. Besides, lurking is in and of itself anti-town, so really it all comes down to your personal feelings on the matter. I will not go with a policy lynch unless I see no better alternatives (which hasn't happened yet), and even then I would prefer we lynch someone who's more scummy.

Eh, depends on your view. When I posted that there was literally no one online to pressure and I had no useful reads from anyone else. It's just the time of day and I had already posted my thoughts enough. In short, there was nothing to stimulate conversation at the time.

[Jackabomb]

You don't combat anti-town behavior with more of the same. Two wrongs don't make a right. If there's nothing interesting to say, I either: a. Go do something else. Or b. Read back and look for a new angle on old material. Never box your mind in.

Eh, depends on your view. When I posted that there was literally no one online to pressure and I had no useful reads from anyone else. It's just the time of day and I had already posted my thoughts enough. In short, there was nothing to stimulate conversation at the time.

I honestly don't see what view has to do with it. Somebody doesn't have to be online for you to pressure them. A word to the wise, You're never done posting your thoughts for the day. When there's nothing to stimulate conversion, don't point out the lull, or if you do, that automatically obliges you to fill it.

[The Tracker]

Right. Thanks for the advice.

[Jackabomb]

However, this may not satisfy ray. Even by my reckoning, you still have some explaining to do for his second point. What made you think Lynching lurkers who haven't posted would be a good idea?

[RayFrost]

They can't [active] lurk if they haven't even posted at all.

[RayFrost]

I would also like to point out that there not being much conversation means you should be starting some, much like I have.

Nothing to stimulate conversation?

Stimulate it by being insanely aggressive! One of my many tactics.

[Yosarian2]

@Yos: I unvoted since my vote wasn't serious. That is all.

Let me back up a little.

There really isn't a "random voting stage".

Random votes can be useful, to add pressure, create information, and get the game moving, but they're mostly pointless if you then remove it at some arbitrary point in time.

[Yosarian2]

Hey Yos2, while you are here, why don't you say who you think is scum?

If I had a suspect, I'd certainly say so.

I'm trying to get a feel for everyone at the moment.

[Jackabomb]

Surely you have some opinions you want to voice, or advice to offer? What's your take on Tracker, for instance?

[Doctor]

I would also like to point out that there not being much conversation means you should be starting some, much like I have.

Nothing to stimulate conversation?

Stimulate it by being insanely aggressive! One of my many tactics.

I tried, but it seems I was failing till you hopped in on it haha!

Well it seems Dimaba has posted. so I will

Unvote

lynching not active newbies probably not a good idea, if theyve made a few posts, but still refuse to take a major part in the conversation despite help rom more experience players, then and only then would I feel a policy lynch or at least some pressure votes would be in order.

[RayFrost]

Key part of being aggressive - aggressiveness.

You get up in a person's face and stare 'em down kind of thing.

[Jackabomb]

I'm sorry, dimaba.

A

post doesn't cut it, mate. Move it and post!

Doctor, aggression works slightly better when you aren't doing it to someone who isn't there. It also helps to talk to the audience(the rest of the town) more than to the person.

[The Tracker]

However, this may not satisfy ray. Even by my reckoning, you still have some explaining to do for his second point. What made you think Lynching lurkers who haven't posted would be a good idea?

I said I would support it if it came down to it. I never said it was a good idea. Yes, it clears out a valuable read for the town and I'd much rather be lynching someone who's more likely scum, but again if there are no better alternatives I would support a policy lynch. Supporting a play and thinking it's a good play are two different things. I consider a policy lynch a last resort, nothing more.

[Yosarian2]

Unvote

Vote:LordChronos

He's been posting, but hasn't really commented on anything yet.

[Jackabomb]

Well, I personally like the lynch all lurkers policy. Problem is, in a newbie game there are Townies that lurk because they 'don't know what to say'. Not an excuse, IMO, since it mixes up the game pretty good.

I said I would support it if it came down to it. I never said it was a good idea.

I beg to differ. You only started calling a last resort when it came under fire. And the above post looks an awful lot like calling it a good idea, if you ask me.

[The Tracker]

See, what you're doing is attempting to read between the lines. Let's use an analogy: I like George Bush. Is voting for George Bush a good idea? No.

My point is, I never NOT called it a last resort. I made a relatively vague statement and got more specific when I started being attacked for it. I said I liked it, but then if you notice I said there was a glaring problem with it, which was following that policy and relying on it to find scum can and will lead to a mislynch.

[easjo682]

holy fuck, Im away for work and people decide to start posting then?

while we're on the topic of lurking, I could understand if someone was to lurk for up to 12 hours, to get a feel for people before they add anything any possibly change what information is brought forward, but much longer makes it bloody annoying on every one and every role.

[RayFrost]

The only kind of lurking that is considered scummy is

active lurking

, which is the posting of stuff that is not helpful for scumhunting instead of aiding in scumhunting.

[Jackabomb]

Not an excuse, IMO

I said I liked it, but then if you notice I said there was a glaring problem with it,

Need I say more?

My point is, I never NOT called it a last resort.

Ah. True. However, this brings up my next question. Why did you feel we were at our "last resort" for a lynch on page 3?

[easjo682]

policy lynching from what I've seen almost never pays off, you can't just eliminate a player from existence because they don't post while at the same time not keeping them alive inspite of it. you just have to hope you have a good mod who corrects this behavior. In the mean time if you have someone or more than one someone who isn't posting look around you at your surrounding players, get a feel for them for now and if it does come to lynch day you day one need to vote preferably for an active player especially if there is suspicion cast upon them, if everyone is equally possible try eliminating one or two players as almost definite (seeing as nothing is 100 sure) townies or town roles. if that isn't possible and everyone is dead equal in chances of being scum, use a dice, there are codes to use one.

just my veiws

[The Tracker]

Votes may not pressure enough and they can ignore pushing. Best to get rid of them.

I assume you mean this? I was posting a general rule of thumb. Obviously if I thought there was a need for the last resort, I would have pointed out one of the lurkers and started attacking him. Or I would have at least voted. I wasn't trying to steer a lynch, I was posting a personal feeling.

[Jackabomb]

I see. I, for one, feel the subject has thoroughly explained all suspicious actions and answered all relevant question in adequate manner. Now that we're done with that, I'd like the scum to claim as such, if you don't mind.

Anyway, I hope to see a change in said 'personal feelings'. They're not as pro-town as they ought to be.

[RayFrost]

Hows abouts we lynch tracker and see what we can dig up from the site we found him at. (wiki + obituary reference = win)