Mafia 85 - Murder at the Bus Stop (game over)

[Mana_Ku]

I didn't know that the random voting stage is still going on.

Vote: Wall-E

as I don't like YOUR playing style.

Mod edit
Votecount:
fouxdufafa (2): Slicey, Megatheory
Azuma (1): Empking
Empking (1): RestFermata
Xtoxm (1): farside22
Slicey (1): Wall-E
Alabaska J (1): fouxdufafa
farside22 (1): martin413
RestFermata (1): Riceballtail
Megatheory (1): Moratorium
Surye (1): Demon Pineapple
Wall-E (1): Mana_Ku

Not voting (13): Xtoxm, al4xz, Azuma, Surye, armlx, Alabaska J, Sir Tornado, Shanba, Elmo, Cream147, Jebus, Slepz, DynamoXI

[Sir Tornado]

vote Farside22

I'd like to know why you voted Xtomx in your first in game post here. The mod has clearly stated that he is V/LA. What were you going to achieve by voting for a player who isn't here?

[Sir Tornado]

I didn't know that the random voting stage is still going on.

Why does it matter?

Vote: Wall-E as I don't like YOUR playing style.

Is that a general statement, or specifically for this game?

[Sir Tornado]

Also, Shanba, if I understand you correctly, you are giving lurkers a free pass in this game? Why? I don't think I have ever seen you do this before.

[Empking]

In this game, we absolutely have to come down hard on lurkers. With 25 people and two week deadlines, it will be extremely easy for scum to keep their heads down and let the townies lynch each other if we don't.

This is very, very true.

I'm not down with lynching lurkers only because they are lurking.

Neither am I. Pressuring lurkers is what I want.

Unvote:

Vote: Cream147

How can you pressure lurkers when you say you don't want to lynch them?

[Mana_Ku]

It matters, because some ppl don't like a random vote outside the random voting stage. That's why it matters. As for my reason, it's in general.

You pressure them by voting, although it's stupid to mention this. Now, everyone knows this including the lurkers. Due to this, they won't care about your vote.

[DynamoXI]

In this game, we absolutely have to come down hard on lurkers. With 25 people and two week deadlines, it will be extremely easy for scum to keep their heads down and let the townies lynch each other if we don't.

This is very, very true.

I'm not down with lynching lurkers only because they are lurking.

Neither am I. Pressuring lurkers is what I want.

Unvote:

Vote: Cream147

How can you pressure lurkers when you say you don't want to lynch them?

You could be a agressive and keep asking questions but sometimes that doesn't work.

[Shanba]

Also, Shanba, if I understand you correctly, you are giving lurkers a free pass in this game? Why? I don't think I have ever seen you do this before.

Nope, I'm just not going to lynch lurkers unless their lurking is scummy (because don't get me wrong, lurking can be a scumtell. But it's not always a scumtell.)

[Lawrencelot]

BlakAdder replaces Elmo.

[Empking]

In this game, we absolutely have to come down hard on lurkers. With 25 people and two week deadlines, it will be extremely easy for scum to keep their heads down and let the townies lynch each other if we don't.

This is very, very true.

I'm not down with lynching lurkers only because they are lurking.

Neither am I. Pressuring lurkers is what I want.

Unvote:

Vote: Cream147

How can you pressure lurkers when you say you don't want to lynch them?

You could be a agressive and keep asking questions but sometimes that doesn't work.

Does that ever work?

[Moratorium]

It's the Matlock theory to Mafia.. ask enough questions, and you are guaranteed to get a full-fledged confession on the stand, lots of tears and anger, and everything wrapped up in time for sweet tea on the porch.

Oh Matlock.

[Cream147]

In this game, we absolutely have to come down hard on lurkers. With 25 people and two week deadlines, it will be extremely easy for scum to keep their heads down and let the townies lynch each other if we don't.

This is very, very true.

I'm not down with lynching lurkers only because they are lurking.

Neither am I. Pressuring lurkers is what I want.

Unvote:

Vote: Cream147

How can you pressure lurkers when you say you don't want to lynch them?

You could be a agressive and keep asking questions but sometimes that doesn't work.

Does that ever work?

Admittedly, you'd need to stick a couple of votes on to truly pressure them. However, in a game of this size, a couple of votes doesn't constitute lynching them.

[Empking]

In this game, we absolutely have to come down hard on lurkers. With 25 people and two week deadlines, it will be extremely easy for scum to keep their heads down and let the townies lynch each other if we don't.

This is very, very true.

I'm not down with lynching lurkers only because they are lurking.

Neither am I. Pressuring lurkers is what I want.

Unvote:

Vote: Cream147

How can you pressure lurkers when you say you don't want to lynch them?

You could be a agressive and keep asking questions but sometimes that doesn't work.

Does that ever work?

Admittedly, you'd need to stick a couple of votes on to truly pressure them. However, in a game of this size, a couple of votes doesn't constitute lynching them.

But votes only bring pressure if they couldf lead to a lynch.

[Sir Tornado]

Nope, I'm just not going to lynch lurkers unless their lurking is scummy (because don't get me wrong, lurking can be a scumtell. But it's not always a scumtell.)

So, suppose I disappear today, and don't post in this game till deadline (this is how I usually lurk), how do you determine whether my lurking is scummy or not?

[farside22]

vote Farside22

I'd like to know why you voted Xtomx in your first in game post here. The mod has clearly stated that he is V/LA. What were you going to achieve by voting for a player who isn't here?

It's just a random vote.

[Cream147]

But votes only bring pressure if they couldf lead to a lynch.

If a few people put a vote on you, you feel under pressure, regardless of whether they intend to lynch you or not. Trust me, you don't have to have intent to lynch to pressurise people.

[Shanba]

But votes only bring pressure if they couldf lead to a lynch.

If a few people put a vote on you, you feel under pressure, regardless of whether they intend to lynch you or not. Trust me, you don't have to have intent to lynch to pressurise people.

Yeah, you do. It's like the gold standard used to work. You may not be thinking "oh no, I have three votes on me, that's x away from a lynch" in the same way that under the gold standard you wouldn't say to the shopkeeper each time you bought an apple that the money you were paying him was backed up by gold, but nevertheless, both things are true.

[Empking]

Are you saying you'd feel pressure if three people voted you, while making it completely clear that they didn't want you lynched?

I wouldn't.

[farside22]

But votes only bring pressure if they couldf lead to a lynch.

If a few people put a vote on you, you feel under pressure, regardless of whether they intend to lynch you or not. Trust me, you don't have to have intent to lynch to pressurise people.

Yeah, you do. It's like the gold standard used to work. You may not be thinking "oh no, I have three votes on me, that's x away from a lynch" in the same way that under the gold standard you wouldn't say to the shopkeeper each time you bought an apple that the money you were paying him was backed up by gold, but nevertheless, both things are true.

This isn't true if xtoxm is on V/LA for long.

unvote:
vote: Wall-e

No matter the alignment you always seem scummy.

[Shanba]

This isn't true if xtoxm is on V/LA for long.

What does this have to do with the general game theory I was discussing in my post?

[Moratorium]

This isn't true if xtoxm is on V/LA for long.

What does this have to do with the general game theory I was discussing in my post?

Um, well...

It's like the gold standard used to work. You may not be thinking "oh no, I have three votes on me, that's x away from a lynch" in the same way that under the gold standard you wouldn't say to the shopkeeper each time you bought an apple that the money you were paying him was backed up by gold, but nevertheless, both things are true.

...I'd say it relates as well as vote pressure does to the gold standard.

As in, it doesn't relate much at all.

[Shanba]

heh. Oh well, there's another failed analogy. I don't think its quite as bad as my forest one, though...

[BlakAdder]

Okay, I'm here. I've reread already.
Regarding the lurker issue, lynching lurkers is okay, depending on the circumstance. Most of the time, I'm good with it.
In other news,

vote: Cream147

. She seems to be trying to get the town to lynch lurkers, but she doesn't want to go against the town's wishes so she invents the "I don't want them lynched, I want them pressured" excuse.

[Sir Tornado]

It's just a random vote.

And, what does it achieve?

If a few people put a vote on you, you feel under pressure, regardless of whether they intend to lynch you or not. Trust me, you don't have to have intent to lynch to pressurise people.

Is this a general statement, or related to this particular game?

Are you saying you'd feel pressure if three people voted you, while making it completely clear that they didn't want you lynched?

I wouldn't.

Duly noted.

[Cream147]

If a few people put a vote on you, you feel under pressure, regardless of whether they intend to lynch you or not. Trust me, you don't have to have intent to lynch to pressurise people.

Is this a general statement, or related to this particular game?[/quote]

It's a general statement, from my experience. People get unnerved when a few people vote for them.

BlakAdder, if lurkers aren't pressurised, then isn't it a very viable tactic from scum to lurk the game out? It seems like it to me.