Newbie Mini Mafia XXIII - Page 4

I'd like to know what the next things mean : Fluff, OMGUS, WIFOM, FOS !

On August 08 2012 10:21 Blazinghand wrote:
I think the concern is trivial, though Marv may disagree lol

On August 06 2012 08:06 Hapahauli wrote:
‘Sup town!

Much to my delight, I’ve rolled Vanilla Townie this game – I hope strength in numbers shall prevail this game!

I ended up rolling mafia-goon in the last newbie game I played (Newbie Mafia XXI), and two members of my scumteam got away with blatant-lurking for days because of poor D1 discussion and a disorganized town. Our scumteam ended up winning that game in large part to this lack of productive discussion.

So to get things moving in a good direction, howabout some policy talk? I propose the following:

• We will not lynch highly-active members D1! Often, the most active members in games are townies. I suggest we be very mindful of bandwagonning on active/controversial players D1 – they often get lynched in newbie games and almost always flip town.
  
• We will focus our lynching efforts on less-active lurkers! Lack of discussion is bad for the town, and most mafia lurk/semi-lurk through the first few days of the game while they figure out how to play. I propose we keep the pressure up on non-posters day 1. Hell I don’t even mind a lynch-all-lurkers policy: in Newbie Mafia XXI, town would have had a 50% chance of lynching scum D1 if they went after lurking posters.

On August 09 2012 09:02 Dandel Ion wrote:
As for policy, I'd like to policy-lynch YourHarry. I call it the "YourHarry-lynch-policy". The goal is to lynch YourHarry.

I don't really think we neeeeeeeeeeed to go over too much of the policy stuff. Just get the thoughts from the 3 new guys (Axero, Kronen, Goodkarma). Anybody else can add what they want to add, but the policy shit should be in their filters already.

On August 09 2012 09:46 Lvdr wrote:
D1 went well I think. We got a good amout of information that would have been useful later on.

[b]On that note, sideni is mafia because he doesn't fit his town meta!![b/]

On August 09 2012 09:56 Lvdr wrote:
He's not llurking 0.0

On August 09 2012 10:04 Axero wrote:
I agree with Hapa's policy of not blindly lynching due to high activity.

I'm torn on the lurking policy, just because I'd feel bad if I accidentally voted for a fellow townie; but we must do what we must do to save our homes!

On August 09 2012 10:08 goodkarma wrote:
Regarding the proposed "lurker lynch" policy:
So here's some policy talk from one of the "new guys." Day one lurker lynching is a policy I used to favor, but no longer. It can really limit our ability to put pressure on people now, meaning less information later. Day one may feel useless, as from what I've seen of the statistics it's easy to mislynch day one. But the information gained today from others can be referenced all game. Behavioral patterns become important as the game progresses, and that extra day of information gained from pressuring early is priceless.

On August 09 2012 10:18 YourHarry wrote:
Guys, just because I act erratically in the beginning doesn't mean it's scummy. I just like getting reactions, OK? Is this allowed? I think after the last game, if I show an inkling of trolling, I would be policy lynched. Do I have a permission to be myself without having to worry about being lynched?

Thanks much <3

On August 09 2012 11:06 Lvdr wrote:
Both hapa and yh are mafia or both are town?

On August 09 2012 11:18 YourHarry wrote:
Also. Town motives can be faked and scum motives could be made inconspicuous or accidental, with right choice of words and such.

Calgar, agreed?

On August 09 2012 11:27 Kronen wrote:
I'm of a mind that while it may not be good policy meta-wise to lynch for first night inactivity, if someone is inactive on the first night there's a strong possibility their level of activity will wain or at least be inconsistent... Just newb speaking though.

There is someone earlier however that mentioned that they will be inactive first night right? I forget who posted that.

On August 09 2012 11:43 Kronen wrote:
I mean that I am a fan of active players and active participation. If someone is inactive on the first night, they will probably be inactive on the following nights.

Your criticism is duly noted.