EPTStudent Mafia (New/Newish players welcome)
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
Blazinghand
United States25559 Posts
| ||
|
Blazinghand
United States25559 Posts
| ||
|
Blazinghand
United States25559 Posts
On December 04 2011 12:52 xsksc wrote: I don't understand your part about lynch all liars. Think about it logically, if we say, "Lie and you're gonna get lynched" then no townie is going to lie, are they? It's not just to teach a lesson, scum benefit greatly from lies and deceit. I want lynch-all-liers in effect today. Also, on day 1 it's very easy for scum to post nonsense and get away with it, because day 1 can be such a mess, hell, sometimes the most active players are scum. Just because someone posts a lot doesn't make them town, lol. Look at the last newbie mini-game. Ciryandor was scum, and he posted more analysis than anyone, everyone assumed he was town and that was a big reason why town lost. It's acceptable for not everyone to agree on "lynch all liars"-- as long as a fair majority of us do, Nobody will lie. But lying or not, I think the thing we should focus on here is lynching lurkers. I say this because we NEED to make it so mafia talks. Everyone has to contribute. The reason lurking is considered a "viable strategy" is because the less a mafia guy talks, the less mistakes he makes, and the less chances there are that he'll seriously blunder. If there were no serious repercussions, a Mafia guy will barely talk at all. This game begins with assymetric information-- Mafia know who's town (but not blue), but each individual townie/blue doesn't know anything but his own alignment. In this case, it's absolutely vital we encourage mafia members to talk so we can flush them out. They won't slip up unless they have the opportunity to do so. This is the prime reason why lynching lurkers is a good idea. If we all strongly believe in this policy, there will be no lurkers. All the townies will be contributing, and all the mafia members will be torn between contributing AND trying to be unhelpful. It puts a huge amount of pressure on the mafia members. The additional reason for lynching lurkers is that we need all of the help the townspeople can give. It's important also to provide a lively conversation for the Blues (we have 2) to take part in. We have a cop and/or a rolechecker and they can't adequately get their information into the conversation without there being a conversation to begin with. If it turns out we have a lot of townie lurkers even implementing this policy, we're dead anyways. The idea that we shouldn't lynch lurkers because there might be a lot of townie lurkers is inherently flawed-- if there's 1 townie lurker, it's good to get rid of him anyways, and if there are a lot of townie lurkers we're basically boned. So, we should Lynch All Lurkers. Anyone who disagrees with me better have a damn good reason why. | ||
|
Blazinghand
United States25559 Posts
On December 04 2011 13:01 Velinath wrote: I disagree. I feel like if we simply implement this as a policy lynch now, we will be able to go into the middle of the game and be able to build more effective cases on people given that town would have no reason to create contradictions in their posts. The fact of the matter is, Lynch All Liars discourages lies. Even if we don't adopt this as a town policy, as long as it's known that a fair number of us are doing this, Mafia feels more pressure. We need to make it so they don't have a lot of breathing room. | ||
|
Blazinghand
United States25559 Posts
On December 04 2011 13:10 Velinath wrote: Blazinghand: Let's implement Lynch All Lurkers conditionally. If we have a case on someone else in the thread, we should use those lynches above a lurker lynch. If we have no good cases on anyone who's been actively posting, THEN lynch a lurker. Yes, lurking is anti-town, but we should be more focused on scumhunting from posts in the thread. Lynching people who are actively trying to misdirect the town should be a better option, right? (Given that, we may want to look at lynching a lurker today, if any remain by tomorrow (that's tomorrow in real time, by the way). I doubt we'll have any strong cases built by the end of day 1.) You say that like we all have to be in perfect agreement. You have the freedom to implement LALurkers conditionally in your own actions. Barring a good case on a Mafia member, though, I will lynch a lurker. ##Vote Electricblack http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=291067&user=235503 ElectricBlack literally hasn't posted. ElectricBlack, come out and start talking, or I see no reason to change my vote. That being said, if you come by and start contributing, I see no reason to vote for you :D I'm mostly doing this to get you out here and helping. So hurry up. | ||
|
Blazinghand
United States25559 Posts
On December 04 2011 13:17 xsksc wrote: Blazinghand, lynching ALL lurkers simply because they are lurking, is a very bad idea, especially in a game with newbies. Lurking should be discouraged, and you will draw suspicion to yourself if you lurk. I strongly disagree with policy lynching lurkers though. there's a difference between the Town as a whole lynching all lurkers and a few townies believing in that. I don't think everyone should believe in lynching all lurkers, but if a couple of people believe in it and push lurkers into the spotlight, that helps us immeasurably. Please, vote how you believe. I will flush out all the lurkers and bring the mafia to the surface. If I have to do it alone, I will do what I must. | ||
|
Blazinghand
United States25559 Posts
On December 04 2011 13:20 Velinath wrote: Since there was some clarification posted on Lynch All Liars by xkskc (you and xtf are going to confuse me all game with your similar names): I would like to add that if you see what you think is a lie, it's probably best to bring it to the attention of the thread. I feel that if we implement Lynch All Liars, the posters in this thread will be good judges of what's a lie and what's a misunderstanding. Given that, we can probably safely implement a Lynch All Liars policy. I think we have, what, 3 or 4 people currently in favor of this? If we get three or four more, we can consider this policy implemented, as that will give us an unshakable majority. jaybrundage, what do you think of my modification to Lynch All Lurkers at the bottom of the last page? To be fair, with 3/4 people believing in Lynch All Liars, that's already fairly solid-- Mafia will automatically have 3/4 people all up on them if they get caught in a lie. Corollary: Townies, don't lie. Just don't. | ||
|
Blazinghand
United States25559 Posts
| ||
|
Blazinghand
United States25559 Posts
| ||
|
Blazinghand
United States25559 Posts
Hassybaby has not posted yet. Please post. Tunkeg has not posted yet. Please post. | ||
|
Blazinghand
United States25559 Posts
That's ok. Once EB wakes up and posts, I'll unvote him. | ||
|
Blazinghand
United States25559 Posts
ey215 has made a single post so far: On December 04 2011 13:01 ey215 wrote: Hi all!  Lynch all Liars is rough, sometimes you need to use your head and be able to tell the difference between a lie and a misunderstanding or misstatement. In games where people are posting a lot it's very easy for people to misspeak not realizing what exactly they've said in the past. I would think some common sense would help here. If it's an outright lie, by all means lynch away. If it's a misstatement and we've got a better case on someone it's better to let it slide. On the lurker bit, I do think there's a time and place for lynching. If we don't have a case on someone it's better to lynch a lurker than someone active. If they're lurking then they're not contributing or giving us something to go on. Of course, if we've got a good case on someone it's better to lynch them. Looking forward to this. He basically says... absolutely nothing. He indicates that we need to use common sense about lies, and that we should lynch scum before lurkers if possible. That's very accurate, ey215, but it's clever how you've managed to say nothing of any import, and this is your sole post, AND you're awake (american). No substance, all fluff. Noob or Mafia? too early to tell. On December 04 2011 13:11 BroodKingEXE wrote: Hey guys! Great to be joining. I think that when we vote we should make sure people did not mispeak. I think that we all need to figure out what we want to do as a group. What do you think? Another guy with literally 1 post that says nothing. obvious we shouldn't lynch people for misspeaking. And... of COURSE we need to figure out what to do as a group. We VOTE on the lynch. What do I think? I think you're either absurdly unhelpful or a mafioso doing a bad job of blending in. You're the same as the people who haven't posted yet, because YOU HAVEN'T POSTED ANYTHING YET. | ||
|
Blazinghand
United States25559 Posts
| ||
|
Blazinghand
United States25559 Posts
| ||
|
Blazinghand
United States25559 Posts
##Vote ElectricBlack | ||
|
Blazinghand
United States25559 Posts
##Unvote ElectricBlack BKEXE, you have earned my scorn. ##Vote BroodKingEXE I want to hear what you have to say. Don't flop around like you did in your first post. Be a man. Do the right thing. | ||
|
Blazinghand
United States25559 Posts
The time zone difference is a problem, but that's why we start discussing early-- so we have several rounds of discussion before the lynch. This is why it's crucial to get talking and voting as soon as possible. What do you think of "Lynch All Liars" and/or "Lynch All Lurkers"? I'd like to hear your thoughts on these policy issues. | ||
|
Blazinghand
United States25559 Posts
BKEXE you'll note that you have yet to convince me to unvote you. | ||
|
Blazinghand
United States25559 Posts
I think you make a lot of good points. I take issue with your statements here, though: On December 04 2011 14:55 ey215 wrote: Fuck, I can say you've hardly posted anything but baseless accusations therefore you're scum just trying to get the town fighting among themselves. Not to mention you're trying to get a bandwagon started on someone for either not posting because they're asleep or because of some assumed fluff. I'm fine with a lurker today, but I'm not deciding on which until closer to the deadline. My accusations are not baseless. In fact, I never even said you were scum-- I just noted you're a lurker, and you need to post. In fact, given that I addressed 4 people, it's literally impossible that I think they're all scum. But making a single vague post is not acceptable. If you'd accurately read my posts, you'd note that I unvote people who are asleep, and I'm not trying to bandwagon-- i'm trying to get people talking so they can show their true colors. Given how minor my analysis of you was, this is a very strong OMGUS (omg, no u suck) response. I'm doing my best to help town. If you disagree with my methods, we can have a fruitful discussion. Am I the one throwing out baseless accusations, or is that you? But you must admit, I've gotten lurkers (including you) to stop lurking. Is that not helpful? | ||
|
Blazinghand
United States25559 Posts
On December 04 2011 15:04 xsksc wrote: Blazinghand, don't be so trigger-happy. Day 1 always starts like this, we have nothing to talk about so we create discussions. People aren't posting because there's no meangingful discussion going on. I got some going about policy lynches, we've discussed that to death though. Nobody is "lurking" right now because there is no meaningful discussion going on. I successfully made EY and BKEXE return to the thread. I also unvoted the europeans once I realized my (noobish) mistake; they're clearly asleep. I'll admit I made a mistake in my initial vote, but I quickly realized it and rectified the situation. The fact of the matter is, we have very limited time. We MUST lynch today, according to the rules. I want to lynch a lurker, but I'd really really rather we had no lurkers. I'll do what it takes to draw people out of lurk mode. I don't care if I step on your precious toes to do it. The mafia will have to hide by talking, not by being silent. | ||
| ||
