United Kingdom30774 Posts
+ Show Spoiler +On September 04 2013 07:36 Chairman Ray wrote:
Regardless of the math, a day 1 lynch as the norm gets people talking. No lynch = no incentive to give up information. Unless everyone is super cooperative and gives great information, we lynch.
+ Show Spoiler +On September 04 2013 08:16 Chairman Ray wrote:
A lynch on day 1 incentivizes people to avoid being the scummiest looking player since that player WILL be lynched
A possible no lynch on day 1 doesn't achieve this incentive since unless you completely crumble and blurt our something incriminating, then you don't get lynched
So under the first case, as long as every genuine townsperson is being very active and contributing, then mafia is forced to do the same. Even if we lynch a town on the first day, we're still on a good start. If not every genuine townsperson is active or contributing, lynching them isn't a big loss.
+ Show Spoiler +On September 05 2013 03:32 Chairman Ray wrote:Show nested quote +On September 04 2013 23:36 infii wrote:Chairman Ray: On September 04 2013 08:16 Chairman Ray wrote:
A lynch on day 1 incentivizes people to avoid being the scummiest looking player since that player WILL be lynched
A possible no lynch on day 1 doesn't achieve this incentive since unless you completely crumble and blurt our something incriminating, then you don't get lynched
So under the first case, as long as every genuine townsperson is being very active and contributing, then mafia is forced to do the same. Even if we lynch a town on the first day, we're still on a good start. If not every genuine townsperson is active or contributing, lynching them isn't a big loss. Took part in the early discussion about Day1 lynch with 2 posts saying the exact same thing. Also I disagree a bit with you here, because you don't have to actually execute the lynch to get people talking. A lynch threat is more than enough. Don’t you think lynching a less active townmember early on is a loss? Because they could still improve on Day 2 for example. Since there's already been a few people suggesting they would rather no lynch than risk killing a quiet townie, then I'm gonna go ahead and say it: yes, there's a possibility of voting no lynch on first day. We threaten to lynch on the first day, and in the back of our minds we think about the option of no lynch. However the threat of a first day lynch no longer is a threat if people say it's just going to be a threat. By vocalizing that it's just a threat and we're actually allowing quiet people to live the first day, then the mafia will know that they have that option. So what we're all supposed to do is pretend that lynch is mandatory until the very end to make people think they need to talk, and then at the very end, we decide what's best. Now that this info is out there, I think we should actually do mandatory lynch. myRZeth has not said anything yet, and if that keeps up, then I will definitely be voting him. Who's in agreement?
These 3 posts are all talking about no-lynching. This is fair enough seeing as the topic at the time was that, however, the third post was after the whole conversation had ended and infii had posted this post: + Show Spoiler +On September 04 2013 23:36 infii wrote:I would also love to see more participation from the people with the lower post counts (of course including me), so I did dive a bit into the filters. heavenz: Show nested quote +On September 04 2013 15:26 heavenz wrote:
Umasi, is very aggressive, which is a townlike nature, but beeing aggressive on the first day with everyone just getting into isn't a big feat, so that reduces my town read of him at the moment, at least he called me out for my opening post, which was indeed worthless, and thought to be just a bit of a discussion starter before I went to bed (I didn't think the game would actually start yesterday). Considering the fact that the discussion about yes/no-lynch on D1 was already going on for about 1 hour at the time you posted this, why did you go ahead and claim it to be 'a bit of a discussion starter' with your second post? myrzeth: Yup... we need to hear more from you merzeth. What is your opinion on lynching the most inactive player on Day1? Pharcyd: Show nested quote +On September 04 2013 09:44 Pharcyd3 wrote:
Heavenz post was extremely bizarre. I'm not sure what that post accomplishes but to make people distrust you His only post, though he stated before that he would have plenty of time to keep up with the thread. So why not also contribute to the discussion? Chairman Ray: Show nested quote +On September 04 2013 08:16 Chairman Ray wrote:
A lynch on day 1 incentivizes people to avoid being the scummiest looking player since that player WILL be lynched
A possible no lynch on day 1 doesn't achieve this incentive since unless you completely crumble and blurt our something incriminating, then you don't get lynched
So under the first case, as long as every genuine townsperson is being very active and contributing, then mafia is forced to do the same. Even if we lynch a town on the first day, we're still on a good start. If not every genuine townsperson is active or contributing, lynching them isn't a big loss. Took part in the early discussion about Day1 lynch with 2 posts saying the exact same thing. Also I disagree a bit with you here, because you don't have to actually execute the lynch to get people talking. A lynch threat is more than enough. Don’t you think lynching a less active townmember early on is a loss? Because they could still improve on Day 2 for example. Ok basically everyone listed above should step up and contribute to the discussion. You can start by answering my questions. On another note: Show nested quote +On September 04 2013 14:23 Umasi wrote:
##UNVOTE HOLYFLARE
Do you think what I did was bad play? you can go to bed and address this when you wake up/whenever you want, I'm going to do homework.
tbth, this entire thing is pro-town since people will be able to talk about it, and it gives me more to go off of concerning you (and the people who comment about it), and possibly you more to go off of (regarding me and the people who comment), assuming you're town. If you're scum w.e.
For everyone, just a psa about me
I normally keep the person I think is the scummiest as my vote target, but since there are quite a few people I'm leery of, it rests on no one for now. Don’t you think the effect of a lynch threat will be reduced when you always have someone voted? If you want other players to know who you are targetting just write it in this thread for everyone to see.
To insinuate further confusion he posted this: + Show Spoiler +On September 05 2013 04:03 Chairman Ray wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2013 03:43 LoneMeow wrote:
While we're at it:
Chairman Ray, ignoring myRZeth who hasn't posted even once, who do you think is scum and why? And what do you think about the Umasi/HolyFlare argument? I am currently working on my scum reads right now, and will post them in a sec. As for Umasi/HolyFlare, one of the best scum tactics is to have two scum ragging on each other the first day. It monopolizes the discussion preventing productive town discourse, paints them both as very pro town, and in the case that one of them turns mafia, there's a strong argument for the other one being town. Because of this, I am not willing to read them both as town. Right now, there's a possibility of both being scum, both being town, or one being mafia, so lynching one will not give us ANY headway, I say keep them both alive on day 1. Based on who gets lynched and who gets killed by mafia, we may be able to eliminate one of the possibilities.
What better way to confuse townies than put them against each other? Stating that one of them is mafia and one of them is town is planting the seed for later when people get confused and re-read these things. Not to mention his 'scum' reads that come later are just as lackluster (will post that bit further down). The conversation had already stopped between me and umasi and then it was brought up again with possibilities. He states that a mafia strategy can be to divert attention to their argument and stifle the town but that whoever gets killed or lynched will reveal the alignment of the other. That is not true either, nothing can be sought at from those posts as they were merely a heated discussion about policies etc.
This is where it gets the most scum like. READ THIS ABOVE ALL ELSE. Who was his previous post about? Me and Umasi. Who did he say not to lynch day 1 because it would be a mistake? Me and Umasi.
Who is his scum read on?
+ Show Spoiler +On September 05 2013 06:07 Chairman Ray wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2013 05:28 Umasi wrote:On September 05 2013 04:03 Chairman Ray wrote:On September 05 2013 03:43 LoneMeow wrote:
While we're at it:
Chairman Ray, ignoring myRZeth who hasn't posted even once, who do you think is scum and why? And what do you think about the Umasi/HolyFlare argument? I am currently working on my scum reads right now, and will post them in a sec. As for Umasi/HolyFlare, one of the best scum tactics is to have two scum ragging on each other the first day. It monopolizes the discussion preventing productive town discourse, paints them both as very pro town, and in the case that one of them turns mafia, there's a strong argument for the other one being town. Because of this, I am not willing to read them both as town. Right now, there's a possibility of both being scum, both being town, or one being mafia, so lynching one will not give us ANY headway, I say keep them both alive on day 1. Based on who gets lynched and who gets killed by mafia, we may be able to eliminate one of the possibilities. ......so in other words, you prefer to ignore the entire thing because one or both of us might be scum or town. Here, ray, let me say this much a good scum tactic is to look town. (shocking, I know). Based on who gets lynched and who gets killed by mafia I agree with the who gets killed by mafia, kind of. If I get shot, it slightly implicates holyflare because of my read on him. However, based on who gets LYNCHED? HOLYFLARE HAS SPECIFICALLY KEPT HIMSELF AWAY FROM ASSOCIATIONS. CLEARLY. Like, did you even pay attention to anything? That was the original point, he didn't want to share reads. That paragraph is pretty null, as in you said little of worth. Why do you think that pressure, however obvious, is counterproductive discourse? My intention was not to suggest ignoring the entire discussion. My intention was two things: firstly, to the few people suggesting that either you or Holy may be town (or both), I disagree completely and I would like to consider both of you just as much as everyone else. Secondly, your discussion with HolyFlare and everyone else set up a lot of variables and a few equations. This is the best thing to carry into the second round since we have almost enough information to deduce pairs of people who cannot both be mafia. This is why I'm suggesting lynching either you or holyflare first turn is unproductive for town. I will give my first set of reads. When HolyFlare said that he was withholding his reads, he dug himself an obligation. By the end of this day, he must make a play justifying that he withheld his reads with good reason, or else he's mafia. If we see his posts and decide that there's no reason why he didn't give his reads in the first place, I think he's a good mafia candidate. When you started attacking HolyFlare and threw in a vote, I don't think at that point there was any good indication that HolyFlare is mafia. I think that either both of you are mafia, in which case the discourse was counterproductive for town because you misled everyone, or you are town, in which case you were both pressuring HolyFlare and seeing who would ride the lynch train. This gives me a reason to ease up on the possibility that you are mafia and HolyFlare is town.
Me and Umasi. lol? It isn't even a scum read or anything it just states the same thing as his last post. That we could be both town both mafia or one of each, that's just nothing of value.
Not to mention the rest of his posts.
+ Show Spoiler +On September 05 2013 07:48 Chairman Ray wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2013 07:35 Lord Velocity wrote:
Nvm. This post was irrelevant, let me fix my keyboard brb in a few hours Irrelevant post? Fixing keyboard? How do these two things even relate? Did anyone see the post before it was edited? I actually think we had a slipup. #vote Lord VelocityWhat was the post before you edited?
He jumps right on top of velocity and hasn't unvoted him since. With no new information at all.
That is why instead of voting out the lurker who may just be total crap to begin with I think this is a bigger scum tell for me so;
##Unvote
##Vote: Chairman Ray
|
EPT
