Push and Pull Mafia Game Thread Game Over - Mafia Victory!

[Keirador]

Telleo/Smith: You realize that using the same value report, you guys arrived at different ratings numbers for the players, right? I probably screwed up generating the value report, but you guys might want to try a couple iterations of that where you get the same numbers if you want to push this plan through.

busywork. The point is that it can be done.

Oh no, my hair's caught fire.

It doesn't concern you at all that the person whose plan you are following and you yourself were unable to reach the definitive conclusions you both believe will be the benefit of this plan? So far, it is not obvious that it "can be done" because it has not been done. Following this plan does require the careful and diligent performance of busywork. I am not up to the task because I'm still not that clear on how definitive, unambiguous values are derived here. You're claiming they can be, so it's kinda on you.

[Telleo]

@Telleo: I think you're misunderstanding Crunkus' point here. Crunkus is saying that, in a context where we have a clear scumslip and a clear runaway bandwagon, the way he makes a vote and the timing of that vote is different to how it is in a close vote. In a close vote, the timing of the vote is something which Crunkus focuses on more than when it's a runaway vote, as this was clearly going to turn into. Votes are more important in a close vote than they are in a runaway bandwagon vote. I remember something similar coming up as a topic of conversation in Hot Potato when Crunkus didn't vote when some players felt he SHOULD have voted for someone and he gave a similar response.

Ok. I understand this. If this is what Crunkus is talking about, it's not what I am.

I'm not interested in the timing of Crunkus's vote as it relates to other votes. I'm interested in Crunkus's timing as it relates to Crukus's thought process. He represents that he's caught HM red-handed. He doesn't vote. YOU appear and represent catching HM red-handed in the same lie. Crunkus votes. I don't understand what's different between those two points in time. I don't understand why this doesn't matter just because there isn't another lynch wagon.

Crunkus can correct me if I'm wrong here but the impression I got is that:
Crunkus started reading Fable 8 and, from his impression of that game, he thought that happymeal was lying about this issue
The GM of that game then comes in and confirms that happymeal was lying about this issue

I mean, me coming in and confirming it's a lie means something doesn't it? It makes the evidence far stronger than it was originally when Crunkus was working off of in-thread impressions from Fable.

I mean, it makes the point stronger. But when Crunkus comes in at first, he's not exactly waffling over the issue, is he? He claims he's caught HM lying, not that he thinks HM might be lying. I'm not sure why Crunkus's responds to me with "There's no threshold over which I need to vote" when obviously there's a threshold over which he DOES vote, and I'm asking him about the moment he crosses it.

I mean, most of the town seems to think I'm chasing my own tail here. Is this really just completely normal to everyone?

[Telleo]

If you want it literally, then, I think it would be very rare for a scum to aggressively go after Crunkus in this kind of scenario.

So Telleo does something that you think it would be rare for a Mafia to do? And yet you don't think this is town indicative because...?

Is Telleo not renowned as an exceptional scum player? If anyone would fake it, it would be her.

You're not wrong.

[shadowface]

As to your last post SF: You state that you are pro-blue voting here if happymeal is town. That sort of involves, y'know, blue voting today. So saying "I'm for blue-voting vig kill if happymeal comes up town but I can't bluevote because I'm not scumhunting today for the contingency of if happymeal's town" makes no sense at this point.

shadowfriend

Come on, sjg, this isn't fair at all. Let's go back to the start and track the progression here:

• For a long time I was floating this idea:
  

  Why don't we get Happymeal to choose our target instead of blue voting? In the scenario in which we do the vig dogpile, he's confirmed town, so he's the best person to choose our target.

  
  
• Your reply is literally, the time for yakking about mechanics is over. Not for me, right? I disagree with the inherent strategy behind both of the plans you've proposed.
  

  Shadowfriend, Vig plan or Telleo's plan if happymeal flips town? The time for yakking about mechanics is over, it's time to actually come to a consensus and make a decision.

  
  
• I point out that I actually don't agree with either of the plans you've proposed, and would rather the vig plan but with Happymeal choosing the target. I'm very transparent about this.
  

  Calm down, sjg, we have all day to discuss this.
  I'd rather the vig plan, but if we don't democratically come to a vig target we feel confident about I would rather Happymeal make the decision. If we're basically choosing the vig target out of a hat, I would rather go with random pushing and pulling of random targets.

  
  
• I add myself to the list under supporting a vig kill, because I do, and you were making it sound like there's no support for that idea. I don't know if you meant to do this, but that was the impression I got. But it's not like there was any ambiguity as to how I want the vig kill to happen, based on my previous posts on the topic. Perhaps I should have said this explicitly, for about the 10th time, in this post.
  

  If happymeal is TOWN
  People for Telleo's plan: Telleo, sjg11, dodgy
  People for blue-vote vig: smith, shadowfriend

  
  
• You respond to this by pointing out that I haven't blue voted. No, I haven't, because that's not how I want to do the vig kill.
  

  Ok, anyone you feel like blue-voting currently shadowfriend? I don't feel like I have any insight into your thought process currently and I'd like to gain that insight.
  

  
  
• I reply that it's not reasonable for me to structure a paradigm in which Happymeal is town when I'm so sure it's scum. That's what blue voting, for me, would demand: I'd have to have a concept of the entire game, from that perspective. Currently if I had to kill someone else it would be Jordan, but that read is so heavily founded in Happymeal being scum that it doesn't work here.
  It's a silly exercise to re read the entire game under an assumption I strongly believe to be false when we have a cleared townie under this same assumption who we should definitely listen to. Thus:
  

  Sjg, if you want my thought process, I think Happymeal is lying scum. So trying to work in a world where he isn't scum isn't remotely natural for me.
  Like I said earlier, I want Happymeal to tell us who we should vig kill tonight. He's cleared as town in this instance, right? So not only can we trust him, but he's really the only on who could operate under the assumption that he is town and perform a reasonable analysis of the game under that assumption.
  Happymeal: who is your top scumread right now?
  If he's town, he should be very eager to help his team in this way. It's the one thing he could do right now to help the town.
  The fact that he doesn't seem to care to confirms my suspicions even more, and makes this whole discussion sort of moot.

  
  
• You assume I'm pro-blue voting, which I'm just not. I'm pro vig kill, but you've tried so hard to slot me into a category that doesn't fit that you think this is a contradiction. The problem is that you are being closeminded to what I'm actually saying, trying to organize everyone onto a list.
  

  As to your last post SF: You state that you are pro-blue voting here if happymeal is town. That sort of involves, y'know, blue voting today. So saying "I'm for blue-voting vig kill if happymeal comes up town but I can't bluevote because I'm not scumhunting today for the contingency of if happymeal's town" makes no sense at this point.
  
  shadowfriend

[Keirador]

Is Telleo's scum game sufficiently good to get that extreme level of respect? Is she merely a competent scum player? Should we be fearing her scum game MORE than, say, sjg's scum game? Or Keirador's?

Yes. See Spy vs. Spy.

[Telleo]

If happymeal is TOWN
People for Telleo's plan: Telleo, sjg11, dodgy
People for blue-vote vig: smith, shadowfriend

Ok, anyone you feel like blue-voting currently shadowfriend? I don't feel like I have any insight into your thought process currently and I'd like to gain that insight.

Sjg, if you want my thought process, I think Happymeal is lying scum. So trying to work in a world where he isn't scum isn't remotely natural for me.
Like I said earlier, I want Happymeal to tell us who we should vig kill tonight. He's cleared as town in this instance, right? So not only can we trust him, but he's really the only on who could operate under the assumption that he is town and perform a reasonable analysis of the game under that assumption.
Happymeal: who is your top scumread right now?
If he's town, he should be very eager to help his team in this way. It's the one thing he could do right now to help the town.
The fact that he doesn't seem to care to confirms my suspicions even more, and makes this whole discussion sort of moot.

This doesn't answer Sjg's question, and brings mine back up.

I don't care if you think HM is scum. WHO ELSE do you think is scum? What scumhunting are you doing? Why do you think it's okay to just say "HM's scum, no more work to do today?"

[sjg11]

Ok. I understand this. If this is what Crunkus is talking about, it's not what I am.

I'm not interested in the timing of Crunkus's vote as it relates to other votes. I'm interested in Crunkus's timing as it relates to Crukus's thought process. He represents that he's caught HM red-handed. He doesn't vote. YOU appear and represent catching HM red-handed in the same lie. Crunkus votes. I don't understand what's different between those two points in time. I don't understand why this doesn't matter just because there isn't another lynch wagon.

Crunkus can correct me if I'm wrong here but the impression I got is that:
Crunkus started reading Fable 8 and, from his impression of that game, he thought that happymeal was lying about this issue
The GM of that game then comes in and confirms that happymeal was lying about this issue

I mean, me coming in and confirming it's a lie means something doesn't it? It makes the evidence far stronger than it was originally when Crunkus was working off of in-thread impressions from Fable.

I mean, it makes the point stronger. But when Crunkus comes in at first, he's not exactly waffling over the issue, is he? He claims he's caught HM lying, not that he thinks HM might be lying. I'm not sure why Crunkus's responds to me with "There's no threshold over which I need to vote" when obviously there's a threshold over which he DOES vote, and I'm asking him about the moment he crosses it.

I mean, most of the town seems to think I'm chasing my own tail here. Is this really just completely normal to everyone?

I'm also considering my recollection of a similar moment in Hot Potato (which I do need to re-visit) as some evidence that this is a Crunkus mentality. Give me a moment to go back to the demonstrable lie section. And thoughts on my blue vote for shadowfriend?

And people who haven't done so (Crunkus, Keirador, Harb, Jordan) could you go on the record about which of the plans you prefer?

@Keirador: Selling yourself a bit short there aren't you? Read Greed is Good 1 for evidence of that.

[sjg11]

Happymeal you're representing that you didn't read your role pm AT ALL before posting? Like you didn't even know your alignment? Am I misreading you? Have you ever posted in thread before reading role pm before?

Yes I have. I went into the recent fable game I played with my lynch the anointed plan before reading my PMs. I was town there. I gained immediate traction for it, but we ended up following it because it was a good plan. I don't remember if someone here was in that game. I believe Harb and Keirador was in that game. They can testify that day 1 I received a majority of votes until halfway through the day because of it.

I think Happymeal is lying here in a demonstrable way.

I just went back and re-read the beginning of Fable 8. I think you all should do the same. It doesn't square with this at all, particularly when you consider the roles and the possibility he could be advocating the death of himself if he didn't read his role pm. Look at the details of those posts, Happymeal had read his role pm.

I just don't buy this at all.

Telleo, important words in this post being "I THINK" which is what makes my clarification important surely?

[Telleo]

Telleo/Smith: You realize that using the same value report, you guys arrived at different ratings numbers for the players, right? I probably screwed up generating the value report, but you guys might want to try a couple iterations of that where you get the same numbers if you want to push this plan through.

We came to different conclusions because the numbers were wrong. We both concluded that the numbers were wrong, and therefore stopped trying to work through all possibilities. Had we NOT concluded that the numbers were wrong, we would likely have come to agreement (although that doesn't necessarily mean that we find out EVERYONE's number).

[mhsmith0]

...
But that's not how questions work. If I'm asking you to explain your thought process, you don't get to go "Explain my thought process to me because I want to know how you think." I'm asking because I don't understand. I'm asking because I want you to explain yourself. Neither of us gets anywhere if I have to just guess at what you're thinking.

Turning the question around and asking you to engage with it is an attempt to get you to engage critically with it. You say you were interested in my thought process, but I was interested in yours. That is an entirely valid thing to ask for, even if you don't like it.

Also, what does that have to do with the "awesome scum trap" bit you tossed out? That's still something that I don't think I'd ever represented.

...no. I asked you a question. You responded by demanding that I answer my own question. That's not fair engagement. And that's not a fair representation of what I'm doing.

It actually is fair engagement. And it's certainly true that you declined to answer. The only way it would be unfair engagement is if somehow I was incapable of answering the question, and was somehow deflecting it back on you because I couldn't answer, which I'm pretty sure I've demonstrated isn't the case.