|
On March 12 2012 01:29 layabout wrote:+ Show Spoiler [ tedious LaL crap] +On March 12 2012 01:20 Jitsu wrote:
What do you think it means?
Accountable means subject to the obligation to report, explain, or justify something; responsible; answerable.
If a player lies, and can't do the above, we kill him.
If he can justify it, and it's a logical and clearly visible motive, we don't.
Why do you think a player who lies shouldn't be lynched? Is it you're opinion that lying isn't Anti-Town? Town lie all the time. Town make illogical moves all the time. Town play anti-town all the time. But if we think they are town we do not lynch them.
Can I quote you for my law project?
|
On March 12 2012 01:29 layabout wrote:+ Show Spoiler [ tedious LaL crap] +On March 12 2012 01:20 Jitsu wrote:
What do you think it means?
Accountable means subject to the obligation to report, explain, or justify something; responsible; answerable.
If a player lies, and can't do the above, we kill him.
If he can justify it, and it's a logical and clearly visible motive, we don't.
Why do you think a player who lies shouldn't be lynched? Is it you're opinion that lying isn't Anti-Town? Town lie all the time. Town make illogical moves all the time. Town play anti-town all the time. But if we think they are town we do not lynch them.
So, a player that is, according to you:
1. lying
2. playing illogically
3. playing anti-town
...has the potential to not be lynched because we might think they are town?
No. That person will be getting my vote, and I will be doing what I can to push for their lynch, especially if those three things come up. You can do whatever you want with your vote, I guess.
|
On March 12 2012 01:37 Jitsu wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2012 01:29 layabout wrote:+ Show Spoiler [ tedious LaL crap] +On March 12 2012 01:20 Jitsu wrote:
What do you think it means?
Accountable means subject to the obligation to report, explain, or justify something; responsible; answerable.
If a player lies, and can't do the above, we kill him.
If he can justify it, and it's a logical and clearly visible motive, we don't.
Why do you think a player who lies shouldn't be lynched? Is it you're opinion that lying isn't Anti-Town? Town lie all the time. Town make illogical moves all the time. Town play anti-town all the time. But if we think they are town we do not lynch them. So, a player that is, according to you: 1. lying 2. playing illogically 3. playing anti-town ...has the potential to not be lynched because we might think they are town? No. That person will be getting my vote, and I will be doing what I can to push for their lynch, especially if those three things come up. You can do whatever you want with your vote, I guess.
The steps to overcoming the belief that town players will do what is best for town
1. Click on this link
2. Scroll down
3. When you reach the playerlist click on Toadesstern and rgtheschworz
4. Read through both fliters, paying particular attention to the numerous lies both of them make
5. Discover that townies lie, play anti-town and play illlogically
6. Apologise to layabout
Jitsu, being able to guess whether or not a player is town or scum is quite difficult even if players are all acting sensibly. You have to learn to deal with the additional complexity introduced by players playing poorly, illogically or even against their own win condition.
|
United States2095 Posts
Anyway my brief reason for not revealing who I will PM is this:
In the last game everyone I was PM'ing was killed right when I started PM'ing them. I don't want this happening again.
I figure its more of to mafia advantage to know who each person is PM'ing. They can use that information to kill support groups or things like that if we feel like we have confirmed little circles. The townie benefit to knowing who everyone is talking to is to know who is influencing others. However I don't think the benefits out way the negatives personally. So yea those are two reasons I won't share who I'm PM'ing.
|
On March 12 2012 02:01 layabout wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2012 01:37 Jitsu wrote:On March 12 2012 01:29 layabout wrote:+ Show Spoiler [ tedious LaL crap] +On March 12 2012 01:20 Jitsu wrote:
What do you think it means?
Accountable means subject to the obligation to report, explain, or justify something; responsible; answerable.
If a player lies, and can't do the above, we kill him.
If he can justify it, and it's a logical and clearly visible motive, we don't.
Why do you think a player who lies shouldn't be lynched? Is it you're opinion that lying isn't Anti-Town? Town lie all the time. Town make illogical moves all the time. Town play anti-town all the time. But if we think they are town we do not lynch them. So, a player that is, according to you: 1. lying 2. playing illogically 3. playing anti-town ...has the potential to not be lynched because we might think they are town? No. That person will be getting my vote, and I will be doing what I can to push for their lynch, especially if those three things come up. You can do whatever you want with your vote, I guess. The steps to overcoming the belief that town players will do what is best for town1. Click on this link2. Scroll down 3. When you reach the playerlist click on Toadesstern and rgtheschworz 4. Read through both fliters, paying particular attention to the numerous lies both of them make 5. Discover that townies lie, play anti-town and play illlogically 6. Apologise to layabout Jitsu, being able to guess whether or not a player is town or scum is quite difficult even if players are all acting sensibly. You have to learn to deal with the additional complexity introduced by players playing poorly, illogically or even against their own win condition.
Just because someone is town doesn't mean its not a good idea to lynch them sometimes. If townies are shitting up the thread, playing illogically and anti-town and in general causing an atmosphere that only serves to help mafia, then getting rid of them helps town in the long run.
|
i'd just like to say that people who say that we shouldn't lynch people for lying are already thinking about lying. And why would a townie want to lie right now? While their point is valid, they are just running interference for themselves.
gumshoe and jitsu come to mind here. At least one of you is mafia. The other is probably a stupid townie. i say we lynch one of them... after we kill doctor h, of course.
here's why we kill doctor h:
a) doctor h is town
mafia will likely be disorganized this round, so whether or not we kill him this does nothing.
b) doctor h is mafia
we take out mafia and their probable leader.
having played with doctor h numerous times i can tell you that he is a leader type. and if we take out the mafia leader we'd really fuck up the mafia organization and strategy.
tldr: one of jitsu and gumshoe is scum, we should kill doctor h because whether or not he's town or mafia, the worst thing that could happen is that we lose someone who would probably get hit early anyways, whereas at best we would take out somebody that is really essential to a mafia team's strategy.
|
On March 12 2012 02:42 Caller wrote:
i'd just like to say that people who say that we shouldn't lynch people for lying are already thinking about lying. And why would a townie want to lie right now? While their point is valid, they are just running interference for themselves.
gumshoe and jitsu come to mind here. At least one of you is mafia. The other is probably a stupid townie. i say we lynch one of them... after we kill doctor h, of course.
here's why we kill doctor h:
a) doctor h is town
mafia will likely be disorganized this round, so whether or not we kill him this does nothing.
b) doctor h is mafia
we take out mafia and their probable leader.
having played with doctor h numerous times i can tell you that he is a leader type. and if we take out the mafia leader we'd really fuck up the mafia organization and strategy.
tldr: one of jitsu and gumshoe is scum, we should kill doctor h because whether or not he's town or mafia, the worst thing that could happen is that we lose someone who would probably get hit early anyways, whereas at best we would take out somebody that is really essential to a mafia team's strategy.
Node
Mr. Wiggles
Caller
Pandain
deconduo
Replace DocH with any of them. Personal vendetta?
|
On March 12 2012 02:42 Caller wrote:
i'd just like to say that people who say that we shouldn't lynch people for lying are already thinking about lying. And why would a townie want to lie right now? While their point is valid, they are just running interference for themselves.
gumshoe and jitsu come to mind here. At least one of you is mafia. The other is probably a stupid townie. i say we lynch one of them... after we kill doctor h, of course.
here's why we kill doctor h:
a) doctor h is town
mafia will likely be disorganized this round, so whether or not we kill him this does nothing.
b) doctor h is mafia
we take out mafia and their probable leader.
having played with doctor h numerous times i can tell you that he is a leader type. and if we take out the mafia leader we'd really fuck up the mafia organization and strategy.
tldr: one of jitsu and gumshoe is scum, we should kill doctor h because whether or not he's town or mafia, the worst thing that could happen is that we lose someone who would probably get hit early anyways, whereas at best we would take out somebody that is really essential to a mafia team's strategy.
Jitsu and me could both be town getting pushed into the spotlight or we could both be scum, us being on opposite sides of the field does not say anything about our alignment, jitsu could just be trying to create an ideal town environment and generate discussion and I'm trying to prevent us from forming rock hard policy that can be used against us. so far you've advocated to kill a potential leader(you've said so yourself) and two players who are actively discussing a key note of this particular game(role of pms and honesty), I haven't read any of your old games so I'm not sure if this is what you usually do but I don't think your way is a healthy approach to the game, for instance in your reasoning for lynching doc you only consider him from the perspective that he is a threat, you don't consider the fact that if doc is town he could be of huge aid. Why would you lynch one of our best players because he could be scum?
Also in regard to no lynch vs lynch I really don't want waste our kill point unless theres a really good reason, if we decide right now to no lynch day one the pressure goes off of the mafia and conversation stifles because theres nothing at stake, if we do no lynch it should be a decision we make an hour before the dead line(but not last minute because if we have a suspect that were just about to lynch but we leave alive he will remain a weak point for town that mafia can continuously attack for good reason)
Caller whats your stance on a no lynch vs lynch and a lynch dead line?
|
On March 11 2012 22:31 Jackal58 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 11 2012 18:19 prplhz wrote:
Hey guys
I'm surprised that Jackal58 is openly advocating that people announce who they are in PM contact with immediately. It's somewhat okay when a guy like Mattchew hides behind the "more information for town"-mantra, but I expect more from Jackal58.
If player A and player B are in contact with each other and they're both town, then why does the rest of the game need to know this? Scum can shoot into people to prevent town circles this way (as Mr. Wiggles already pointed out) and that's pretty bad. You are just giving scum extra information.
The PM mechanism is a town favored mechanism and we shouldn't be so afraid of it as everybody seems to be. We should instead encourage people to use it wisely. Fear mongering such as "Oh, BloodyC0bbler used this in some game to kick town's ass so lets all be afraid of PMs" is harmful, while "Be ware that people might be scum, don't just trust them because they're in PM contact with you. Use your brain." is a lot more useful for the single townie and for town as a whole.
Also, Mr. Wiggles advice on "state in thread when someone rolefishes" is bad. Use your brain. If a guy asks you for his role then there's no real harm in that, both townies and scum would benefit from it. If he insists on you telling him his role while you're trying to talk about reads and analysis, then you can start getting suspicious.
I'm not going to announce who I'm in PM contact with, unless they're scum. Every townie who says that they're going to say in the thread who they're in contact with is making it less likely that other people contact them, which is a bad thing.
I'll probably write a list of people I think are going to be very active in this game and then RNG one of them and PM contact that guy. I didn't really decide yet. My advocacy is not set in stone. Hence why I asked for a dissenting viewpoint. The discussion is much better than the typical day 1 LaL/Lurker conversation we've all seen a million times already. Mr Wiggles - Why state the obvious in your disadvantages? Of course scum know who's town.
I said that mafia know "more or less" who's town, because there's a traitor in the game. So, they don't know 100% that anyone is town, and that they won't be shooting their traitor. Secondly, I never said that mafia knowing who town is was the disadvantage, I said that because mafia knows you're town, if they see you talking to another strong townie (who they'll also know is town), they can just shoot you and stop you from collaborating. In the first little bit of PMing, you're likely to be more wary of the other person while you try to establish a read, meaning that mafia can eliminate your PM threat before you accomplish anything, if you announce it. I'm not sure how you read that.
On March 11 2012 18:19 prplhz wrote:
Hey guys
I'm surprised that Jackal58 is openly advocating that people announce who they are in PM contact with immediately. It's somewhat okay when a guy like Mattchew hides behind the "more information for town"-mantra, but I expect more from Jackal58.
If player A and player B are in contact with each other and they're both town, then why does the rest of the game need to know this? Scum can shoot into people to prevent town circles this way (as Mr. Wiggles already pointed out) and that's pretty bad. You are just giving scum extra information.
The PM mechanism is a town favored mechanism and we shouldn't be so afraid of it as everybody seems to be. We should instead encourage people to use it wisely. Fear mongering such as "Oh, BloodyC0bbler used this in some game to kick town's ass so lets all be afraid of PMs" is harmful, while "Be ware that people might be scum, don't just trust them because they're in PM contact with you. Use your brain." is a lot more useful for the single townie and for town as a whole.
Also, Mr. Wiggles advice on "state in thread when someone rolefishes" is bad. Use your brain. If a guy asks you for his role then there's no real harm in that, both townies and scum would benefit from it. If he insists on you telling him his role while you're trying to talk about reads and analysis, then you can start getting suspicious.
I'm not going to announce who I'm in PM contact with, unless they're scum. Every townie who says that they're going to say in the thread who they're in contact with is making it less likely that other people contact them, which is a bad thing.
I'll probably write a list of people I think are going to be very active in this game and then RNG one of them and PM contact that guy. I didn't really decide yet.
What the hell? How's there no harm in someone asking you for your role? Why would another townie want to know your role, or more importantly need to know your role? If you're a townie, and you're rolefishing, you're just being dumb. You look like scum. Scum love to rolefish, because it lets them shoot blues for free, without the town having any idea why that person was shot. I completely fail to see why asking someone if they're a detective, or a medic, or whatever, is good for town. If you're a blue, you're really a VT. As soon as you tell people you're blue, without coming out in the thread, you compromise yourself, and you should be aware of that.
|
On March 12 2012 02:01 layabout wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2012 01:37 Jitsu wrote:On March 12 2012 01:29 layabout wrote:+ Show Spoiler [ tedious LaL crap] +On March 12 2012 01:20 Jitsu wrote:
What do you think it means?
Accountable means subject to the obligation to report, explain, or justify something; responsible; answerable.
If a player lies, and can't do the above, we kill him.
If he can justify it, and it's a logical and clearly visible motive, we don't.
Why do you think a player who lies shouldn't be lynched? Is it you're opinion that lying isn't Anti-Town? Town lie all the time. Town make illogical moves all the time. Town play anti-town all the time. But if we think they are town we do not lynch them. So, a player that is, according to you: 1. lying 2. playing illogically 3. playing anti-town ...has the potential to not be lynched because we might think they are town? No. That person will be getting my vote, and I will be doing what I can to push for their lynch, especially if those three things come up. You can do whatever you want with your vote, I guess. The steps to overcoming the belief that town players will do what is best for town1. Click on this link2. Scroll down 3. When you reach the playerlist click on Toadesstern and rgtheschworz 4. Read through both fliters, paying particular attention to the numerous lies both of them make 5. Discover that townies lie, play anti-town and play illlogically 6. Apologise to layabout Jitsu, being able to guess whether or not a player is town or scum is quite difficult even if players are all acting sensibly. You have to learn to deal with the additional complexity introduced by players playing poorly, illogically or even against their own win condition.
I don't have to click that link, because those were the two people I was thinking about from Arkham as well. Part of me thinks that they were allowed to run rampant around because they weren't held accountable for the shit they did.
If I remember correctly, RGTS made it alive to the end, or close to it. Instead of him, would you think town would have benefit from someone who didn't spout lies every other post? I certainly do.
So again, just because townies lie, don't think logically, and play anti-town, yes, I, and I hope you, will hold them accountable for that.
|
On March 12 2012 03:05 Jitsu wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2012 02:01 layabout wrote:On March 12 2012 01:37 Jitsu wrote:On March 12 2012 01:29 layabout wrote:+ Show Spoiler [ tedious LaL crap] +On March 12 2012 01:20 Jitsu wrote:
What do you think it means?
Accountable means subject to the obligation to report, explain, or justify something; responsible; answerable.
If a player lies, and can't do the above, we kill him.
If he can justify it, and it's a logical and clearly visible motive, we don't.
Why do you think a player who lies shouldn't be lynched? Is it you're opinion that lying isn't Anti-Town? Town lie all the time. Town make illogical moves all the time. Town play anti-town all the time. But if we think they are town we do not lynch them. So, a player that is, according to you: 1. lying 2. playing illogically 3. playing anti-town ...has the potential to not be lynched because we might think they are town? No. That person will be getting my vote, and I will be doing what I can to push for their lynch, especially if those three things come up. You can do whatever you want with your vote, I guess. The steps to overcoming the belief that town players will do what is best for town1. Click on this link2. Scroll down 3. When you reach the playerlist click on Toadesstern and rgtheschworz 4. Read through both fliters, paying particular attention to the numerous lies both of them make 5. Discover that townies lie, play anti-town and play illlogically 6. Apologise to layabout Jitsu, being able to guess whether or not a player is town or scum is quite difficult even if players are all acting sensibly. You have to learn to deal with the additional complexity introduced by players playing poorly, illogically or even against their own win condition. I don't have to click that link, because those were the two people I was thinking about from Arkham as well. Part of me thinks that they were allowed to run rampant around because they weren't held accountable for the shit they did. If I remember correctly, RGTS made it alive to the end, or close to it. Instead of him, would you think town would have benefit from someone who didn't spout lies every other post? I certainly do. So again, just because townies lie, don't think logically, and play anti-town, yes, I, and I hope you, will hold them accountable for that.
If you know someone's town, or strongly believe someone to be town, why would you kill them 'just because'?
|
On March 12 2012 03:04 Mr. Wiggles wrote:Show nested quote +On March 11 2012 22:31 Jackal58 wrote:On March 11 2012 18:19 prplhz wrote:
Hey guys
I'm surprised that Jackal58 is openly advocating that people announce who they are in PM contact with immediately. It's somewhat okay when a guy like Mattchew hides behind the "more information for town"-mantra, but I expect more from Jackal58.
If player A and player B are in contact with each other and they're both town, then why does the rest of the game need to know this? Scum can shoot into people to prevent town circles this way (as Mr. Wiggles already pointed out) and that's pretty bad. You are just giving scum extra information.
The PM mechanism is a town favored mechanism and we shouldn't be so afraid of it as everybody seems to be. We should instead encourage people to use it wisely. Fear mongering such as "Oh, BloodyC0bbler used this in some game to kick town's ass so lets all be afraid of PMs" is harmful, while "Be ware that people might be scum, don't just trust them because they're in PM contact with you. Use your brain." is a lot more useful for the single townie and for town as a whole.
Also, Mr. Wiggles advice on "state in thread when someone rolefishes" is bad. Use your brain. If a guy asks you for his role then there's no real harm in that, both townies and scum would benefit from it. If he insists on you telling him his role while you're trying to talk about reads and analysis, then you can start getting suspicious.
I'm not going to announce who I'm in PM contact with, unless they're scum. Every townie who says that they're going to say in the thread who they're in contact with is making it less likely that other people contact them, which is a bad thing.
I'll probably write a list of people I think are going to be very active in this game and then RNG one of them and PM contact that guy. I didn't really decide yet. My advocacy is not set in stone. Hence why I asked for a dissenting viewpoint. The discussion is much better than the typical day 1 LaL/Lurker conversation we've all seen a million times already. Mr Wiggles - Why state the obvious in your disadvantages? Of course scum know who's town. I said that mafia know "more or less" who's town, because there's a traitor in the game. So, they don't know 100% that anyone is town, and that they won't be shooting their traitor. Secondly, I never said that mafia knowing who town is was the disadvantage, I said that because mafia knows you're town, if they see you talking to another strong townie (who they'll also know is town), they can just shoot you and stop you from collaborating. In the first little bit of PMing, you're likely to be more wary of the other person while you try to establish a read, meaning that mafia can eliminate your PM threat before you accomplish anything, if you announce it. I'm not sure how you read that. Show nested quote +On March 11 2012 18:19 prplhz wrote:
Hey guys
I'm surprised that Jackal58 is openly advocating that people announce who they are in PM contact with immediately. It's somewhat okay when a guy like Mattchew hides behind the "more information for town"-mantra, but I expect more from Jackal58.
If player A and player B are in contact with each other and they're both town, then why does the rest of the game need to know this? Scum can shoot into people to prevent town circles this way (as Mr. Wiggles already pointed out) and that's pretty bad. You are just giving scum extra information.
The PM mechanism is a town favored mechanism and we shouldn't be so afraid of it as everybody seems to be. We should instead encourage people to use it wisely. Fear mongering such as "Oh, BloodyC0bbler used this in some game to kick town's ass so lets all be afraid of PMs" is harmful, while "Be ware that people might be scum, don't just trust them because they're in PM contact with you. Use your brain." is a lot more useful for the single townie and for town as a whole.
Also, Mr. Wiggles advice on "state in thread when someone rolefishes" is bad. Use your brain. If a guy asks you for his role then there's no real harm in that, both townies and scum would benefit from it. If he insists on you telling him his role while you're trying to talk about reads and analysis, then you can start getting suspicious.
I'm not going to announce who I'm in PM contact with, unless they're scum. Every townie who says that they're going to say in the thread who they're in contact with is making it less likely that other people contact them, which is a bad thing.
I'll probably write a list of people I think are going to be very active in this game and then RNG one of them and PM contact that guy. I didn't really decide yet. What the hell? How's there no harm in someone asking you for your role? Why would another townie want to know your role, or more importantly need to know your role? If you're a townie, and you're rolefishing, you're just being dumb. You look like scum. Scum love to rolefish, because it lets them shoot blues for free, without the town having any idea why that person was shot. I completely fail to see why asking someone if they're a detective, or a medic, or whatever, is good for town. If you're a blue, you're really a VT. As soon as you tell people you're blue, without coming out in the thread, you compromise yourself, and you should be aware of that.
For the record I suggested you use pms to talk to a blue that you've confirmed and you don't want to reveal T_T it wasn't a fishing proposal.
|
On March 12 2012 02:59 Jackal58 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2012 02:42 Caller wrote:
i'd just like to say that people who say that we shouldn't lynch people for lying are already thinking about lying. And why would a townie want to lie right now? While their point is valid, they are just running interference for themselves.
gumshoe and jitsu come to mind here. At least one of you is mafia. The other is probably a stupid townie. i say we lynch one of them... after we kill doctor h, of course.
here's why we kill doctor h:
a) doctor h is town
mafia will likely be disorganized this round, so whether or not we kill him this does nothing.
b) doctor h is mafia
we take out mafia and their probable leader.
having played with doctor h numerous times i can tell you that he is a leader type. and if we take out the mafia leader we'd really fuck up the mafia organization and strategy.
tldr: one of jitsu and gumshoe is scum, we should kill doctor h because whether or not he's town or mafia, the worst thing that could happen is that we lose someone who would probably get hit early anyways, whereas at best we would take out somebody that is really essential to a mafia team's strategy. Node Mr. Wiggles Caller Pandain deconduo Replace DocH with any of them. Personal vendetta?
i can come up with arbitrary lists too
jackal58
jackal58
jackal58
jackal58
jackal58
replace jackal58 with any of them. Any questions?
You havne't really procc'd my scummy as fuck trigger yet though. keep going though.
as for gumshoe:
Jitsu and me could both be town getting pushed into the spotlight or we could both be scum, us being on opposite sides of the field does not say anything about our alignment, jitsu could just be trying to create an ideal town environment and generate discussion and I'm trying to prevent us from forming rock hard policy that can be used against us. so far you've advocated to kill a potential leader(you've said so yourself) and two players who are actively discussing a key note of this particular game(role of pms and honesty), I haven't read any of your old games so I'm not sure if this is what you usually do but I don't think your way is a healthy approach to the game, for instance in your reasoning for lynching doc you only consider him from the perspective that he is a threat, you don't consider the fact that if doc is town he could be of huge aid. Why would you lynch one of our best players because he could be scum?
Also in regard to no lynch vs lynch I really don't want waste our kill point unless theres a really good reason, if we decide right now to no lynch day one the pressure goes off of the mafia and conversation stifles because theres nothing at stake, if we do no lynch it should be a decision we make an hour before the dead line(but not last minute because if we have a suspect that were just about to lynch but we leave alive he will remain a weak point for town that mafia can continuously attack for good reason)
Caller whats your stance on a no lynch vs lynch and a lynch dead line?
you're wifoming like shit
nobody cares about an "ideal town environment" and "discussion" and "against us"
i alerady explained why doctorh should be lynched bro, nash equilibrium look it up
and finally i don't give a shit about policy. my job is to find mafia and get them killed. anything else is pointless.
|
If I know or strongly believe someone is town, then I will put them on my ignore list, if they are cluttering up the thread with useless things.
I can also tell you I won't "strongly believe" someone is town if they are playing anti-town.
|
On March 12 2012 03:08 Mr. Wiggles wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2012 03:05 Jitsu wrote:On March 12 2012 02:01 layabout wrote:On March 12 2012 01:37 Jitsu wrote:On March 12 2012 01:29 layabout wrote:+ Show Spoiler [ tedious LaL crap] +On March 12 2012 01:20 Jitsu wrote:
What do you think it means?
Accountable means subject to the obligation to report, explain, or justify something; responsible; answerable.
If a player lies, and can't do the above, we kill him.
If he can justify it, and it's a logical and clearly visible motive, we don't.
Why do you think a player who lies shouldn't be lynched? Is it you're opinion that lying isn't Anti-Town? Town lie all the time. Town make illogical moves all the time. Town play anti-town all the time. But if we think they are town we do not lynch them. So, a player that is, according to you: 1. lying 2. playing illogically 3. playing anti-town ...has the potential to not be lynched because we might think they are town? No. That person will be getting my vote, and I will be doing what I can to push for their lynch, especially if those three things come up. You can do whatever you want with your vote, I guess. The steps to overcoming the belief that town players will do what is best for town1. Click on this link2. Scroll down 3. When you reach the playerlist click on Toadesstern and rgtheschworz 4. Read through both fliters, paying particular attention to the numerous lies both of them make 5. Discover that townies lie, play anti-town and play illlogically 6. Apologise to layabout Jitsu, being able to guess whether or not a player is town or scum is quite difficult even if players are all acting sensibly. You have to learn to deal with the additional complexity introduced by players playing poorly, illogically or even against their own win condition. I don't have to click that link, because those were the two people I was thinking about from Arkham as well. Part of me thinks that they were allowed to run rampant around because they weren't held accountable for the shit they did. If I remember correctly, RGTS made it alive to the end, or close to it. Instead of him, would you think town would have benefit from someone who didn't spout lies every other post? I certainly do. So again, just because townies lie, don't think logically, and play anti-town, yes, I, and I hope you, will hold them accountable for that. If you know someone's town, or strongly believe someone to be town, why would you kill them 'just because'?
Lying can be very harmful, town needs to feel that they are taking a risk when doing so, if there aren't at least some repercussions townies are free to be reckless, but I personally would rather discredit liars and simply agree to ignore them, not have liars serve as meat shields for scum.
|
On March 12 2012 03:15 Jitsu wrote:
If I know or strongly believe someone is town, then I will put them on my ignore list, if they are cluttering up the thread with useless things.
I can also tell you I won't "strongly believe" someone is town if they are playing anti-town.
Alright, so long as we're able to differentiate between bad play and scum, then we agree.
|
In response to gumshoe I think withholding information is completely fine. This would mostly affect our blues. If someone is role fishing you and you dont trust them then not giving them information. By ignoring the question or even straight up lying in that instance is fine.
Also I am firmly with the policy lynch all liars however more in the thread then pms. In Arkham City we had Rg lying multiple times in the thread making it hard for the town to get information, and completely discrediting himself. End game the town ended up lynching him Because they could not trust him at all. If he had been gone sooner town would have been better off. Also if we put this policy/guideline in place it will discourage people from blatantly lying, fake roleclaiming, and so on.
Regarding PMs i think that they would be better saved for late game usually. Announcing who you are PMing should be fine. I can see both arguments so it should be up to the individuals discretion although i am leaning on announcing.
This players have not posted in the thread yet. And i suggest we lynch one of them.
Katina
VisceraEyes
Node
[Uon]Sentinel
Pandain
RgTheSchoworz
Curu
|
[/QUOTE]
and finally i don't give a shit about policy. my job is to find mafia and get them killed. anything else is pointless.
[/QUOTE]
So your like zasz?
![[image loading]](http://media.giantbomb.com/uploads/8/85841/1409417-zasz_large.jpg)
Also you started the wifome by saying either me or jitsu was scum, your basis was what, that we were fighting each other? And at least one person in every fight is scum, right?(I thought scum try to avoid conflict...) I replied by saying me and jitsu fighting over pms could mean anything, isn't that anti wifome?
Furthermore are you me that you are not going to answer any questions unless it is directly relevant to scum hunting? This is a team game, if your town I don't see what you gain by being nigh unapproachable.
|
@Mr. Wiggles What's your role mate?
@Caller
Excluding the "he used pro-town as the first player" argument, the only argument you have against DoctorHelvetica is that he's supposedly more scary as scum than as town. This is somewhat irrelevant unless we can't find anybody else who is scum + Show Spoiler +and you're not using "nash equilibrium" right, unless maybe you're using it make your case sound smarter than it actually is
It's self contradictory how you're saying "my job is to find scum and lynch them", and then you want to lynch a guy, not because he is scum but because in your opinion he's more scary as scum than as town. How does that make any sense? Why don't you want to lynch into Jitsu and gumshoe? You said at least one of them is scum, that's 50% chance to lynch scum just by dumb luck and a smart guy than you can probably increase those odds.
You should shape up or you are going to get lynched.
|
On March 12 2012 03:40 prplhz wrote:@Mr. Wiggles What's your role mate? @Caller Excluding the "he used pro-town as the first player" argument, the only argument you have against DoctorHelvetica is that he's supposedly more scary as scum than as town. This is somewhat irrelevant unless we can't find anybody else who is scum + Show Spoiler +and you're not using "nash equilibrium" right, unless maybe you're using it make your case sound smarter than it actually is . It's self contradictory how you're saying "my job is to find scum and lynch them", and then you want to lynch a guy, not because he is scum but because in your opinion he's more scary as scum than as town. How does that make any sense? Why don't you want to lynch into Jitsu and gumshoe? You said at least one of them is scum, that's 50% chance to lynch scum just by dumb luck and a smart guy than you can probably increase those odds. You should shape up or you are going to get lynched.
oh no no you have my argument wrong
town mafia
don't kill him: 0 -5
kill him: 0 5
as for the latter bit, if you can't see where i'm going with this there's no point in me continuing to explain.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
