Mafia CLVI: Charity Mafia: -- Pure of Heart Win!

Moderators: Zoomzip, Telleo, bkbkbk, condude1, sjg11

Re: Charity Mafia: Day 1

Postby Thyrfing » 10 Dec 2016, 00:03

Thyrfing wrote:
Telleo wrote:I expected to get exactly what I asked for. Why do you find my question to be a dangerous breach of security, but asking about the motivations behind it isn't?

Yes, I do. Asking the town questions about their roles with no objective other than knowing information about their roles (that's what you just stated you expected to get) is scummy as hell. As in information fishing.
Questioning scummy behaviour is my job as a townie.

Still interested in that Telleo
User avatar
Thyrfing
Premium Member
 
Posts: 2067
Joined: 29 Jan 2011, 01:16
Location: Barcelona
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: (1663)
All-game rating: (1874)
Timezone: GMT+1

Re: Charity Mafia: Day 1

Postby Thyrfing » 10 Dec 2016, 00:16

Harb wrote:Thyrfing, what value do you see in "not planning" that isn't fulfilled by the two groups plan? What value do you see in a cig remaining secret?

I just don't see any value in the plan... If understood correctly you suggest that a group of people selected at random targets their best townread and the other group targets their best scumread?
As you yourself said, per the plan investigative and protective roles can end up directed against scumreads, but I am also concerned that townies with "negative" roles (for example a blocker) end up targeted against townreads just because the plan dictates so.

Not so sure about the second question tbh... A town aligned vig can be useful towards the end game if we are able to effectively direct it... but honestly I am not so hard opposed to it... I am just generally against role reveals and don't see any benefit for its reveal on the other hand.
User avatar
Thyrfing
Premium Member
 
Posts: 2067
Joined: 29 Jan 2011, 01:16
Location: Barcelona
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: (1663)
All-game rating: (1874)
Timezone: GMT+1

Re: Charity Mafia: Day 1

Postby Happymeal » 10 Dec 2016, 00:19

Sorry that I haven't been around. Super busy the past x amount of hours. I'll be back tonight and able to do some shit. I skimmed over the pages and noticed a bit of momentum on condude. I don't necessarily agree or disagree, and I'll address this in full a little later, but there have been a few things that have worried me a bit with the interactions between condude and sjg which, like I said, I'll go over in detail later today. I'll also hopefully be able to respond to the rest of the players as well. Apologies for this, normally I'm more able to actually post more than the pack, but with the stuff I've been doing alongside the amount of people who really came here to play the game makes it a little more difficult this time around (luckily I only have two finals next week so it won't take a huge toll on my activity).
It's true I'm nervous, but why do you think I'm mad?
User avatar
Happymeal
 
Posts: 1900
Joined: 28 Mar 2012, 14:08
Class: Diplomat
All-game rating: (1000)
Timezone: GMT

Re: Charity Mafia: Day 1

Postby condude1 » 10 Dec 2016, 00:24

Ok guys, I'm around for a bit. I'm getting votes, nothing unusual there.

Rather than responding to the army of responses to my vote, I'll go over my case again, explaining specifically the differences between Justy and Keirador.

Firstly, I think it's fair to assume that there's one scum among {Keirador, justy, Sjg, Telleo}. I think that scum would want townSjg dead ASAP if possible, and his slip there might be a perfect opportunity to off him.

Both Telleo and Keirador had the same, reaction, namely "How do you know it's 7:2? SCUMSLIP!" Their reactions were short, and to the point, and I do believe they were in similar situations, and keirador hadn't seen Telleo's post when he voted. Both of them had the certain bloodlust in their posts that I'd expect from townies finding a scumslip, and neither post was particularly polished. I don't think either post had much of an element of critical analysis beyond "Gotcha". Justy, on the other hand, took the time to make a rather well presented case based on Sjg missing a word in his sentence. The whole point is that I don't see a townie who took the time to analyze the scumslip coming to the conclusion that Justy did.

So, that's the start of the read. Later, justy unvotes. Between those times, very little had developed on his points Re: Sjg. At the same time, people were trickling in saying that they disagreed with the case. My point here is that he's voting based on what he thinks people will buy, rather than whether his target is likely to be scum. Of course, I still need to reread that to see whether the impression was accurate, but I made the vote thinking that the momentum had shifted.

So, of the four people I'm comparing, Justy comes out the scummiest and I vote him.

Justy's since responded to my case by OMGUS voting me, and using exactly the reasoning I used against him against me.

Sjg: A big part of my issue with him is centered around the fact that he had the time to think through his vote on you, yet he came to the same conclusion that the hasty votes did, which I think is fundamentally flawed. Justy's lack of engagement was around the unvote.
Telleo wrote:I don't think I've ever met someone who more perfectly embodied Chaotic Neutral than Condude1.


Moderator of the Mafia Subforums!

Silver member of The Classicists!
User avatar
condude1
 
Posts: 8160
Joined: 06 Feb 2013, 03:41
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: (1368)
All-game rating: (1307)
Timezone: GMT-8

Re: Charity Mafia: Day 1

Postby Harb » 10 Dec 2016, 00:43

Thyrfing wrote:
Harb wrote:Thyrfing, what value do you see in "not planning" that isn't fulfilled by the two groups plan? What value do you see in a cig remaining secret?

I just don't see any value in the plan... If understood correctly you suggest that a group of people selected at random targets their best townread and the other group targets their best scumread?
As you yourself said, per the plan investigative and protective roles can end up directed against scumreads, but I am also concerned that townies with "negative" roles (for example a blocker) end up targeted against townreads just because the plan dictates so.


Hold on, this doesn't seem to jive with your previous thoughts on my plan expressed here:
Thyrfing wrote:
Harb wrote:We give up a lot for this, in terms of having potential investigative roles pointed at scum targets. We're still likely to end up with a dead townie cause we don't have a lot of information to go on yet but at least it'll be someone that generated some suspicion somehow.

I'm making this up on the fly, I haven't put a lot of thought into second order implications here.

Alternatively, we can call for the Vig to reveal if there is one. Then at least we'll know.

That could work... but again we are going to let people explain their behaviour based on town organisation... so no


The only concern you seem to be expressing here is about lack of accountability. Now I'm asking about how my plan still harms that accountability and you're talking about totally different objections.

As for speaking to your new objections: If I'm a role that wants to target townies, I target a scumread who is in the "target townie" group. If I'm wrong, I'm pointed at somebody's townread at least. If I'm right, then likely the scum is pointed at a townie anyway and whatever positive effect I'm directing is still pointed at a townie. Right?

Thyrfing wrote:Not so sure about the second question tbh... A town aligned vig can be useful towards the end game if we are able to effectively direct it... but honestly I am not so hard opposed to it... I am just generally against role reveals and don't see any benefit for its reveal on the other hand.


Fair enough. What do you think about how much effort we're putting into containing a vig? If we knew there wasn't one, we could move on to other things it seems. Also, if we have a vig then forcing a claim now means scum can't claim it later, when it's safer because more townies are dead or there hasn't been a vig kill. If we force "vig/not vig" claims, and choose an order based on scumreads, we can also force scum to commit to a "not vig" claim because they can't anticipate whether there will be a CC.
---------
I have the honor to be your obedient servant,

A. Harb
User avatar
Harb
 
Posts: 4623
Joined: 03 May 2012, 15:08
Class: Diplomat
Standard rating: (971)
All-game rating: (971)
Timezone: GMT-5

Re: Charity Mafia: Day 1

Postby Harb » 10 Dec 2016, 00:51

condude1 wrote:Justy's since responded to my case by OMGUS voting me, and using exactly the reasoning I used against him against me.


Seriously. It's not OMGUS just because you get voted by someone you're voting. Quit doing this. It took a pretty big event to convince me you weren't scum in Fable after you minimized my case this way.

Why is it fair to assume there's scum in that group of 4?

Also: Thyrfing

@sjg - Curious about your condude position following his latest post.
---------
I have the honor to be your obedient servant,

A. Harb
User avatar
Harb
 
Posts: 4623
Joined: 03 May 2012, 15:08
Class: Diplomat
Standard rating: (971)
All-game rating: (971)
Timezone: GMT-5

Re: Charity Mafia: Day 1

Postby Telleo » 10 Dec 2016, 00:53

Thyrfing wrote:
Telleo wrote:
sjg11 wrote:Mechanics:
Ok let's get this started.

Firstly, I think the vig-targeting plan I proposed on Day One is the minimum we should be doing. We either need to do that or have the vig reveal depending on how important random Doc saves are to us. We need to decide which one quickly so the vig has time to reveal if he exists.

I have changed my mind on condude's plan. I think it could have the issue that certain players accidentally end up having to reveal their roles by being forced into the group and being forced to self-target.

In theory I quite like Harb's plan but if we're going to do it we need to decide to do it quickly and get organised.


If I had to pick a plan right now, it would be Harbs. I think it gives our roles enough room to hide without the scum tracking them down, and provides cover against busdrivers/blockers as best as can be expected. RE: Harb wondering how to split us up: I'm in favor of first 5 target townreads, second 4 target scumreads. Let's proceed thusly. For those wondering, that means

Thyrfing ---> Townread
Keirador ---> Townread
Telleo ---> Townread
SJG11 ---> Townread
Happymeal ---> Townread
Condude1 ---> Scumread
Harb ---> Scumread
Fuddin ---> Scumread
Justy ---> Scumread

So, you're saying you are most comfortable with the plan proposed by one of your scum reads??


I have no idea where you get the idea that Harb is any kind of scumread from me. What gave you that impression?

Also, for the record, just because I scumread someone doesn't mean the plan they propose is bad- see Sjg's point that as scum, he'd propose town-positive plans because it's what he'd do as town.
Harb wrote:Telleo is gender-bent Chaucer from A Knight's Tale

Moderator of the Mafia Subforum!
Proud Owner of a limited-edition Medal of Idiotic Valor.
"Russian Roulette is not the same without a gun." -Lady Gaga.
Third time's the charm.
User avatar
Telleo
 
Posts: 5473
Joined: 03 Jun 2013, 17:39
Class: Ambassador
Standard rating: (951)
All-game rating: (908)
Timezone: GMT

Re: Charity Mafia: Day 1

Postby Harb » 10 Dec 2016, 00:57

Telleo wrote:I have no idea where you get the idea that Harb is any kind of scumread from me. What gave you that impression?

Also, for the record, just because I scumread someone doesn't mean the plan they propose is bad- see Sjg's point that as scum, he'd propose town-positive plans because it's what he'd do as town.


Actually, I sort of did the same thing when I saw your organization in a PPE. It looks like a list of your reads, not who people are supposed to target. I couldn't figure out how you suddenly had scumreads on condude, me, fuddin, and justy.
---------
I have the honor to be your obedient servant,

A. Harb
User avatar
Harb
 
Posts: 4623
Joined: 03 May 2012, 15:08
Class: Diplomat
Standard rating: (971)
All-game rating: (971)
Timezone: GMT-5

Re: Charity Mafia: Day 1

Postby Telleo » 10 Dec 2016, 01:12

Harb wrote:
Telleo wrote:
Thyrfing wrote:That could work... but again we are going to let people explain their behaviour based on town organisation... so no


That's weak. You really think people won't have to explain why they targeted people when the only instruction is "Target someone you think is scummy/townie?"


What's the implication here? Does Thyrfing have some motive for weak opposition to my plan versus other plans?

In general, I'm interested in more impacting from you Telleo. I like the avenues that you seem to be pursuing, but I don't feel like I have a great idea of what they're making you think regarding players' alignments.


Ugh. I hate doing quotes on my phone.

My point is stemming from a general distrust of Thryfing saying he's against plans in general. He's not giving good reasons to oppose, he's just placing vague "that's not good enough" statements in the way. It doesn't feel genuine.

And as far as wanting more impacting, here ya go:

Thyrfing.

I don't like the way you're engaging on these plans. I don't like the reasons you have for throwing shade towards Sjg. I don't like that you're willing to volunteer for a plan you've opposed in thread. I don't feel like you're doing much scum hunting. A more compete case will have to wait until I'm at an actual computer.

For the record re: Sjg -

I don't like the 7:2 moment. Harb's point that Sjg owned up to knowing about the lack of a ruling doesn't hold a lot of water for me, because Sjg also knows that copping to a mistake will seem more townie than trying to worm out. After all that's done and said, however, I can't take issue with the other engagement Sjg's had, with the minor exception of not explicitly talking about Thryfing until being pushed to. In the end, the 7:2 moment feels off, but I feel like I'm TRYING to make a case instead of finding one.

Thryfing, meanwhile, is the opposite. There's no "Aha!" moment, but I'm getting shaky vibes from too many of his posts to ignore, and I'm going to go back and see if I can shake out something more concrete. In the meantime, I don't think he's got a high opinion of me right now, and I'd like to see what he does with a vote on him.
Harb wrote:Telleo is gender-bent Chaucer from A Knight's Tale

Moderator of the Mafia Subforum!
Proud Owner of a limited-edition Medal of Idiotic Valor.
"Russian Roulette is not the same without a gun." -Lady Gaga.
Third time's the charm.
User avatar
Telleo
 
Posts: 5473
Joined: 03 Jun 2013, 17:39
Class: Ambassador
Standard rating: (951)
All-game rating: (908)
Timezone: GMT

Re: Charity Mafia: Day 1

Postby condude1 » 10 Dec 2016, 01:49

Harb wrote:
condude1 wrote:Justy's since responded to my case by OMGUS voting me, and using exactly the reasoning I used against him against me.


Seriously. It's not OMGUS just because you get voted by someone you're voting. Quit doing this. It took a pretty big event to convince me you weren't scum in Fable after you minimized my case this way.

Why is it fair to assume there's scum in that group of 4?


Firstly, sorry about the OMGUS accusation, although I do think that OMGUS is more common than you think: compare the amount of counter-votes placed to the number of people who get voted and then vote someone other than the voter. I'll do my best to stop claiming OMGUS. If I do it again, just tell me I'm a stupid amnesiac, and quote this post.

I think it's fair to assume there's scum in the group of 4 because, if Sjg's town, that slip is an easy case to push, on a player that generally gets stronger later on in the game. I'd think scum would leap on the bandwagon. Plus, if I just picked 4 random players, I'd have a 75% chance of hitting at least 1 scum :mrgreen: . But mostly the former reason. If Sjg is scum, then, well, there's scum in the group of 4.

Obviously I could be wrong, but for D1, it's a decent place to start.
Telleo wrote:I don't think I've ever met someone who more perfectly embodied Chaotic Neutral than Condude1.


Moderator of the Mafia Subforums!

Silver member of The Classicists!
User avatar
condude1
 
Posts: 8160
Joined: 06 Feb 2013, 03:41
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: (1368)
All-game rating: (1307)
Timezone: GMT-8

PreviousNext

Return to Game Threads

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 24 guests