|
On January 21 2011 09:13 LSB wrote:
I'm going to ignore the Nemesis issue right now. I have made a decision on the bandwagon I want to see where it goes before I say anything.
Remember, although we are talking about lynching inactives, there are only two people I see that are in danger of being inactive. ShoCkeyy likes to lurk, and Chaoser can disappear at times (well, Chaoser had an excuse).
Lurker- Avoids positions, attention, and tries to pretend that he is contributing, but really isn't. For example, Annul was technically a lurker in XXXV (Notice that besides answering questions, he did not comment on anything else). Generally Mafia
Inactive- Doesn't post besides a "sorry, I'm inactive". Defiantly Ainti-town.
I'm cool with killing both Lurkers and Inactives. But remember, the Inactive kill is more of a policy lynch, while the Lurker kill should only accompany analysis proving that the lurker is mafia.
I'm going to try and be as active as possible this game since I don't really have to fly out of town, lol... But either way, I usually lurk in the mornings while I'm at work to try and keep up with the thread.
|
Let's take a look at this for a moment shall we? Pandain was all about lurkers in XXXV.
+ Show Spoiler +On December 28 2010 04:49 Pandain wrote:Okay seems like roughly 8 people have voted for me. I find that slightly disturbing and random but okay, I will defend myself? I wasn't even sure what to defend myself about but lets go forward. But first, I'd like to congragulate everyone and helping keep this thread so far much better than others, with long posts and everything. Fadoodle yeah! But going forward, I still see no reason to vote me. So far I have been doing what I do every game, that is, getting town in a postive way forward with content oriented posts. What I'm doing actually isn't so much getting more analysis(although it is), its encouraging an atmosphere of contribution and thought. I voted Mr. Wiggles because he hadn't really been contributing, he had just been spamming. But lately he has actively been contributing with long well thought out posts. Mission accomplished. I voted Jackal for the same reason, but actually am inclined now to vote for someone else with his excuse, but will actively be pressuring him in PM land to contribute more so. Jackal, that's why your being voted. Contribute more and I'll lay off you.But as I was reading, Lunar destiny was right. What if they're just afk? Then we could just spend a whole day voting osmeone but they won't even read the thread to be able to respond! Which is partly why I'm unvoting jackal as of now. I will be looking for someone else to vote. You guys are voting me. I urge you to help me in getting this town on the right track. Too many times town ends up in day 2 with nothing more than like 10 one line posts over the course of day 1, because there was just too much spam/not real discussion. So far I've been pleased with how this has been going so far. But just want to now start talking about what's currently been happening. 1.I do not think we should vote LSB. Plainly, he has been contributing alot so far, more than most of the people already. Plainly, if he is mafia, then we'll most likely catch him anyway. We should not be lynching actives, even if we have a slight suspicion that he's mafia. Obviously if we have a good inkling I suppose we should go for it(as in team melee mafia 2 incog fingered lsb day 1) but right now there's really nothing on LSB, and I wouldn't want to lynch an expierenced player. Plus there are some problems with your analysis, but I'll just name a few. 1. If you are hit, then u should claim. LSB was right. Becuase mafia can't tell if ur vet or just protected or what. 2.You're mistaking jokes for real content. (aka when lsb said coag got banned so dr. h could join) 3.The only real suspicious thing about him is his somewhat spammy nature. The most important of which being number 3, but that is certainly not a reason to lynch him when he's already contributed alot. As for the DT checks, that's more appropiate for talk during the night(less time for mafia to manipualte) but we can talk about it now. Personally I'm leaning towards checking people who "contribute without contributing." Don't just check the inactives, they're most likely bored townies. Don't just check big name players, most likely they're going to be framed/picked godfather. We should pick those who seem to be pro town, but fail to actually contribute. Obviously this can change. If you really have a good read on someone, check them But that's just some advice.
Now he's all about getting them involved. I'm not here to rehability and reintegrate. That's a different game. Is Pandain trying to make his mafia lurker nest nice and cozy?
FoS Pandain.
|
Day 1 Vote Count
BloodyC0bbler (1)
Hesmyrr
Nemesis (2)
Pandain
GMarshal
ShoCkeyy (1)
Nemesis
Voting closes in 27 hours. If you see anything wrong here, please let me know.
|
On January 21 2011 06:50 Pandain wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2011 06:11 Nemesis wrote:On January 21 2011 01:47 Pandain wrote:Hello everyone its Pandain the Panda, hoping he won't ruin town again for everyone. And as Pandain always learned when young, the best way to get from A to B when theres a brick wall in front of you is to not go around the wall, but keep on running into it until it breaks! In other news, just some general thoughts: 1.Blue's dont claim unless you are about to be lynched. If you find a red, don't claim. Instead prepare an analysis on him and get him lynched without claiming. If you find green, and they're about to be lynched, express support for him, but don't claim unless its near lylo. 2.I agree we should not let inactives survive in this town. But considering we've hardly started, "inactives" is hardly the word to call them. So let's get things moving. ##Vote NemesisOn January 20 2011 22:08 Nemesis wrote:
@Jackal I wouldn't say that lynching actives is a big mistake. I wasn't paying attention to what happened in XXXVI, but we should lynch scum, and mafia is not always inactive.
And I guess back to the usual first day topic. Lynching inactives. Since lynching a scum is very hard in the very first day. Lynching inactives would be a very good start as it would prevent mafia from lurking.
I'm going to wait a bit for people to talk since the game has just started. What is this? Clarify this for me, because as I understand right now you just said we should lynch scum, and then say we should lynch inactives. Plus I want to see more contribution. Come on people, pressure is pointless if only one person votes. Let's get things moving. Yes, I did say that we should lynch scum, but day 1, it is very hard to actually lynch scum because we don't have a lot of information available to us. Which is why I suggested that we should lynch inactives for the first day. As it has been said before, inactivity is a big problem which we do not want to see in this game. Lynching inactive first day encourages people to participate more in the discussion and be more active which makes it is easier to find mafia, as the more discussion we have as there is more information available to analyze. ##Vote ShockeyyI haven't seen you post anything useful at all so far other than excuses for being inactive and useless one-liners. I don't like this post either. Let's take a look at it. First off, lynching inactives itself is a bad strategy. I shall be lenient to him because even I make this mistake, but lynching inactives is a horrible thing to do. When we say "lynch inactives", we mean "lynch lurkers." We want to differentiate the lurkers from the inactives/bored. You are just arguing semantics here. Besides, you can't exactly tell a lurker from an inactive unless they make it obvious.If we say we'll lynch the inactives, the inactives won't respond. IF we say we'll lynch the inactives, the bored won't really respond. Only the mafia will respond if we say lynch the inactives. Which is why you never want to end up LYNCHING an inactive, just pressuring all of them to post. If they don't respond, that does not necessarily mean that they are bored townies. Just take a look at TMM3. Subversion(he was red that game) claimed he was roleblocked, and then disappeared afterwards. There were plenty of FoS on him after that, and he was up for lynch next day, but he still didn't respond. It is pretty much impossible to tell the difference between a lurker and an inactive townie.Furthormore, he just repeated information without actually adding anything to it. Finally he goes for the "easy" kill. There was pretty much nothing else that people were discussing about. I gave my opinion on what we were currently talking about. What else could I have added to the discussion? It is not like anyone else was trying to generate new topic. At least I was trying to further the discussion.
I just woke up, I was still half-asleep when I checked this forum. I rather dislike it when town loses because everyone is inactive, and when I saw Shockeyy post "sorry I'm inactive, I promise I'll be active later," I wanted to pressure him to make sure that he actually keeps his promise and doesn't disappear as soon as we forget about him.This is typical mafia to me. I now offer Nemesis as a viable option for a real lynch.
|
I didn't think I'd have to go in detail about this, but I guess here it goes.
In mafia, there are two different extremes of people. Those who don't post, and those who do. The active, and the inactive. Mafia will usually end up taking either one of those extremes, either posting alot but not contributing(bill murray for instance), or not posting really at all(most lurking mafia.)
There is a vital different between lurkers and inactives. Most inactives are town. Usually when people are inactive they are bored/don't have time. They didn't get a "fun" role, so just have decided to play SC2 instead of play mafia. You will NOT find mafia in the inactive category. Mafia aren't inactive, they are paying plenty of attention to the game. As you will see, they simply decide to lurk, which is different from being inactive.
Lurkers are a portion of the inactives, but different in a vital way. While inactives don't pay attention to the thread, lurkers do. Lurkers just choose NOT to post because one of mafia's favorite things to do is let each day go by, while no one has said anything. Lurkers is where you will find mafia.
Being inactive, while anti town, is not a "scummy" thing to do. Lurking, however is. That is where we must analyze. And that is where Nemesis strikes me as scummy.
Repeats old information, went for the easy lynch, and just overall strikes me as scummy. I'm not saying by any means he's 100% scum, but we should at the VERY least pressure him.
@Jackal, any concerns can be put aside by reading in the last paragraph of that post.
+ Show Spoiler +Don't just check the inactives, they're most likely bored townies. Don't just check big name players, most likely they're going to be framed/picked godfather. We should pick those who seem to be pro town, but fail to actually contribute.
|
On January 21 2011 10:53 Nemesis wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2011 06:50 Pandain wrote:On January 21 2011 06:11 Nemesis wrote:On January 21 2011 01:47 Pandain wrote:Hello everyone its Pandain the Panda, hoping he won't ruin town again for everyone. And as Pandain always learned when young, the best way to get from A to B when theres a brick wall in front of you is to not go around the wall, but keep on running into it until it breaks! In other news, just some general thoughts: 1.Blue's dont claim unless you are about to be lynched. If you find a red, don't claim. Instead prepare an analysis on him and get him lynched without claiming. If you find green, and they're about to be lynched, express support for him, but don't claim unless its near lylo. 2.I agree we should not let inactives survive in this town. But considering we've hardly started, "inactives" is hardly the word to call them. So let's get things moving. ##Vote NemesisOn January 20 2011 22:08 Nemesis wrote:
@Jackal I wouldn't say that lynching actives is a big mistake. I wasn't paying attention to what happened in XXXVI, but we should lynch scum, and mafia is not always inactive.
And I guess back to the usual first day topic. Lynching inactives. Since lynching a scum is very hard in the very first day. Lynching inactives would be a very good start as it would prevent mafia from lurking.
I'm going to wait a bit for people to talk since the game has just started. What is this? Clarify this for me, because as I understand right now you just said we should lynch scum, and then say we should lynch inactives. Plus I want to see more contribution. Come on people, pressure is pointless if only one person votes. Let's get things moving. Yes, I did say that we should lynch scum, but day 1, it is very hard to actually lynch scum because we don't have a lot of information available to us. Which is why I suggested that we should lynch inactives for the first day. As it has been said before, inactivity is a big problem which we do not want to see in this game. Lynching inactive first day encourages people to participate more in the discussion and be more active which makes it is easier to find mafia, as the more discussion we have as there is more information available to analyze. ##Vote ShockeyyI haven't seen you post anything useful at all so far other than excuses for being inactive and useless one-liners. I don't like this post either. Let's take a look at it. First off, lynching inactives itself is a bad strategy. I shall be lenient to him because even I make this mistake, but lynching inactives is a horrible thing to do. When we say "lynch inactives", we mean "lynch lurkers." We want to differentiate the lurkers from the inactives/bored. You are just arguing semantics here. Besides, you can't exactly tell a lurker from an inactive unless they make it obvious.If we say we'll lynch the inactives, the inactives won't respond. IF we say we'll lynch the inactives, the bored won't really respond. Only the mafia will respond if we say lynch the inactives. Which is why you never want to end up LYNCHING an inactive, just pressuring all of them to post. If they don't respond, that does not necessarily mean that they are bored townies. Just take a look at TMM3. Subversion(he was red that game) claimed he was roleblocked, and then disappeared afterwards. There were plenty of FoS on him after that, and he was up for lynch next day, but he still didn't respond. It is pretty much impossible to tell the difference between a lurker and an inactive townie.Furthormore, he just repeated information without actually adding anything to it. Finally he goes for the "easy" kill. There was pretty much nothing else that people were discussing about. I gave my opinion on what we were currently talking about. What else could I have added to the discussion? It is not like anyone else was trying to generate new topic. At least I was trying to further the discussion.
I just woke up, I was still half-asleep when I checked this forum. I rather dislike it when town loses because everyone is inactive, and when I saw Shockeyy post "sorry I'm inactive, I promise I'll be active later," I wanted to pressure him to make sure that he actually keeps his promise and doesn't disappear as soon as we forget about him.This is typical mafia to me. I now offer Nemesis as a viable option for a real lynch.
Yes? I don't see anything wrong with what he posted, it's quite true.
|
Firstly I'm going to point out that there probably aren't going to be any inactives this game. But the question still stands
Pandain, why shouldn't we kill inactives?
|
On January 21 2011 11:11 LSB wrote:
Firstly I'm going to point out that there probably aren't going to be any inactives this game. But the question still stands
Pandain, why shouldn't we kill inactives?
99% of time mafia do not fall into the realm of inactives. We want to find lurkers, not inactives.
Note I have always been ferevent about getting town talking, and this game should be no different. While we should pressure inactives to TALK, we should be VOTING lurkers.
For example as of now almost everyone has given a good post with the exception of shockkey. Do you really think(given 3 mafia), that mafia are going for the "inactive" role if town always says "lynch inactives."
We want to find those who seem to contribute but don't, not those who don't contribute and don't seem to either.
|
Pandain all you did is define inactive/lurker. You still haven't answered how we can differentiate between them.You are just repeating the same points over and over again without really answering that question.
The only thing that we can really do is prevent everyone from heading that way in the first place by pressuring/lynching inactives.
|
I didn't bother following XXXV, the game was lost on day 1. But in Pokemafia, Ocianic got by posting "I am busy" every day, as did drag_ in Mini Mafia IV.
|
|
|
Note I have always been ferevent about getting town talking, and this game should be no different. While we should pressure inactives to TALK, we should be VOTING lurkers.
How exactly do you plan on pressuring inactives talk without voting them?
|
Pandain, the point is, why is saying "lets kill an inactive" is a bad thing?
I'm going to say it right now.
If there are inactives, lets lynch them.
|
On January 21 2011 11:17 Nemesis wrote:
Pandain all you did is define inactive/lurker. You still haven't answered how we can differentiate between them.You are just repeating the same points over and over again without really answering that question.
The only thing that we can really do is prevent everyone from heading that way in the first place by pressuring/lynching inactives.
Mafia will never go inactive if we threaten to lynch inactives. They really never do. Instead they will go "Just above" the threshhold of "contribution", while not really contributing.
As for examples?
Lurkers: Obviously paying attention, talking about unrelated stuff/not topic of debate, repeating same stuff(can fall under inactives too though so be careful), bad reasoning/mafia tells(wishy washy ness, other stuff)
|
Day 1 Vote Count
BloodyC0bbler (1)
Hesmyrr
Nemesis (2)
Pandain
GMarshal
ShoCkeyy (1)
Nemesis
Pandain (1)
Chaoser
Voting closes in 25.5 hours. If you see anything wrong here, please let me know.
|
Because mafia will never go inactive.
As for pressuring them....
For example, we can threaten to lynch people. When for 2 days in a row you only say "I'm busy", that's unnacceptable, and we lynch them. As of now though there is no one I would consider truly "inactive inactive." There really the only way to differentiate is by lynching them, such as soulfire and george clooney, who wouldn't talk even if pressured.
But no one is doing that now. So for now, lynching "inactives" is not what we should be doing.
|
On January 21 2011 11:24 Pandain wrote:
Because mafia will never go inactive.
As for pressuring them....
For example, we can threaten to lynch people. When for 2 days in a row you only say "I'm busy", that's unnacceptable, and we lynch them. As of now though there is no one I would consider truly "inactive inactive." There really the only way to differentiate is by lynching them, such as soulfire and george clooney, who wouldn't talk even if pressured.
But no one is doing that now. So for now, lynching "inactives" is not what we should be doing.
Go read XXXIV, or Micro Mafia IV.
That or even read XXXV. I don't know what happened at the end, but I'm assuming that inactives still lost you guys the game.
It doesn't matter, even town aligned Inactives hurt the game and Inactives in LYLO causes town loss.
|
On January 21 2011 11:26 LSB wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2011 11:24 Pandain wrote:
Because mafia will never go inactive.
As for pressuring them....
For example, we can threaten to lynch people. When for 2 days in a row you only say "I'm busy", that's unnacceptable, and we lynch them. As of now though there is no one I would consider truly "inactive inactive." There really the only way to differentiate is by lynching them, such as soulfire and george clooney, who wouldn't talk even if pressured.
But no one is doing that now. So for now, lynching "inactives" is not what we should be doing. Go read XXXIV, or Micro Mafia IV. That or even read XXXV. I don't know what happened at the end, but I'm assuming that inactives still lost you guys the game. It doesn't matter, even town aligned Inactives hurt the game and Inactives in LYLO causes town loss.
No LSB, I lost town the game. And I was really active that game.
And you can't say "it doesn't matter". Again, we want to pressure inactives to vote, not lynch them.
Let me ask you some questions:
1.Do you think mafia will lurk, or be inactive, and why?
2.Would you rather lynch a lurker or an inactive, and why?
3.You said you had opinions on Nemesis, what is that?
|
I've been dealing with inactive many many times. XXXIV was me trying to deal with inactives. Read it if you want to see how "pressuring people to vote" worked.
The town decided to off smart people instead.
The issue is who are you going to bring with you to LYLO. You aren't going to bring Shockeyy if he doesn't do anything by stare at us. You want to bring smart people who actually does analysis.
Firstly, lets set up definitions.
Lurker- Avoids positions, attention, and tries to pretend that he is contributing, but really isn't. IE Brownbear in Pokemafia
Inactive- Doesn't post besides a "sorry, I'm inactive", IE
Mafia Lurker- Lurker with in depth analysis on him proving that he is mafia. IE, Shockeyy in Pokemafia
Lurker- For example, Annul was technically a lurker in XXXV (Notice that besides answering questions, he did not comment on anything else). Generally Mafia
Inactive- . Defiantly Ainti-town.
1. Mafia does both. It is natural for mafia to lurk.
They do this because it is easy an wins game.
And inactive mafia is a mafia who doesn't want to play anymore, but is willing to show up for the team. The difference is that usually inactive townies get modkilled as they don't see any reason to actually vote
2. I'd kill both. I've explained above in a different post.
But order of
Mafia Lurker>Inactive>Lurker
3. My opinion of Nemesis is that your argument is bs and relys on purported scum-tells that aren't true.
|
I think this is the extent to which either of us are going to budge.
Arguing any more will just be pointless/lead to arguments.
Moving forward, I am currently satisfied with the state of nemesis, or at least am going to wait. I have a new suspect: Hesmyrr.
On January 20 2011 22:46 Hesmyrr wrote:Seconding the opinion that discussing town PR action is rather pointless, since the setup isn't themed or anything. Trying to direct their actions just open up tons of WIFOM on the later days. Is lynching inactives good idea? Hum, let me throw down the gauntlet. ##Vote BloodyC0bblercheck the thread faster 
Doesn't really say anything.
On January 21 2011 02:53 Hesmyrr wrote:
Since everyone seems to be piping up, I shall take on the role of Devil's Advocate. Note that the current situation is 8-3. Assuming nothing happens with town keep failing lynches:
8-3
6-3
4-3
That is 2 ML available to eliminate 3 mafia. If vig misfires the available mislynch decreases to 1. Holy jeez, I'd love to have been stuck with F11 setup with these odds. Random bantering aside I am questioning that whether it is wise to religiously throw away one of these valuable lynch opportunity in banner of activity. Of course inactivity is hugely anti-town (thus a scumtell) but it should not be given greater weight than ordinary accusation even in day 1. At least the latter would help draw towns discussion more toward post of actual players.
Does a common mafia tell, instead of actually analyzing just gives voting list.
On January 21 2011 03:06 Hesmyrr wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2011 02:57 LSB wrote:
Hesmyrr, you played Pokemafia and you probably know how badly activity screwed over the town.
Of course, remember, the activity lynch is just something we should consider as an alternative to the top scummy target of day one. If the day one lynch is actually good, rather than a bunch of random screaming that doesn't make sense, I'm all for lynching the mafia. I just wanted to note that inactivity issue should be treated with less emphasis in small roster setup (Mini-mafia) like this. Will try to look for fos suspects I can post about later on.
Semi contradicts previous post that inactivity is a huge scum tell, now says we should place less emphasis on it.
Overall hasn't really said anything. For a more seasoned player, I would expect more out of him.
##Vote Hesmyrr
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://images.paraorkut.com/img/pics/glitters/y/yay_we_did_it-6035.gif)
