Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[shraeye]

That analysis is some great shit, DatSwan.  Haven't read any of the words yet, so I might disagree entirely.  But props to that work effort.

[Uncleeurope]

Well that’s a jump from null to a vote, right there.

Not that I disagree with the paths you took to get there, but it is weird.


Also don’t forget yourself in the basket of non-MiXers. There is a scum in

[Uncle, Joseph, SS, Ari, DatSwan]

[shraeye]

Detailed self defense will have wait until after vla. I'll just say that DatSwan had to read very selectively not to see the motivations behind my actions. In case it isn't clear, the L1 MiX vote was entirely to avoid no lynch.

You gotta try that no lynch sometime.  Embrace it; it's better than you think.

[shraeye]

faust, is raerae scummy or not?

Ari, whatchu think about Joseph?

[Swowl]

Well that’s a jump from null to a vote, right there.

Not that I disagree with the paths you took to get there, but it is weird.


Also don’t forget yourself in the basket of non-MiXers. There is a scum in

[Uncle, Joseph, SS, Ari, DatSwan]

obviously I remove myself from my own lynch pool. but I get your point. It was from my POV (thus the title of "extremely bias...")

[Swowl]

Detailed self defense will have wait until after vla. I'll just say that DatSwan had to read very selectively not to see the motivations behind my actions. In case it isn't clear, the L1 MiX vote was entirely to avoid no lynch.

No I get your point... I mean I will let you make your point, but I did consider that line of reasoning.

[Debatepro]

@SS what do you think about Datswan's analysis and conclusions?

[Swowl]

I think refusal to share reasons for things is something we should generally discourage. It can be justified in some scenarios, but most of the time it's not good.

Do you have some examples we can be on the look out for? In my world it's the only thing one can evaluate because anyone can make an assertion.

There's only reason for it if somebody has information they want to hold on to for a while. For instance, if somebody cop'd somebody and wanted to look at a wagon before sharing that information, that sort of stuff. D1 there's no legitimate reason to not share something unless you know you're not going to be the NK.

No one tell Awaclus I ever said this - but, no... you are incorrect.

Then correct me.

cooking dinner - quick real world example.

Situation 1) It is downright mutually considered that Player X is Town. 8/13 players say they think Player X is town. Player X never gets lynched sure... but who do we not have when we wake up the next day?

Situation 2) It is downright mutually considered that Player X is Skum. 8/13 players say they think Player X is Skum. Player X either gets lynched or is derailed or whatever. If we lynch and are wrong then thats all the same, but if we do not lynch player X they are not left alive and we are sitting there eating WIFOM stew.

Just to be clear I am generally a huge fan of divulging info. I am just pointing out that there is not "literally no reason at all" not to share a specific piece of info.

[shraeye]

There is almost for sure at least one skum in [Uncle, Joseph, SS, Ari].

Hmmmmmmmm

[Swowl]

There is almost for sure at least one skum in [Uncle, Joseph, SS, Ari].

Hmmmmmmmm

do you disagree?
*again - ppe of me openly saying in the original post that that list was my "super bias" sr list.

[shraeye]

Situation 1) It is downright mutually considered that Player X is Town. 8/13 players say they think Player X is town. Player X never gets lynched sure... but who do we not have when we wake up the next day?

Situation 2) It is downright mutually considered that Player X is Skum. 8/13 players say they think Player X is Skum. Player X either gets lynched or is derailed or whatever. If we lynch and are wrong then thats all the same, but if we do not lynch player X they are not left alive and we are sitting there eating WIFOM stew.

Just to be clear I am generally a huge fan of divulging info. I am just pointing out that there is not "literally no reason at all" not to share a specific piece of info.

I don't get it.  How are these arguments for "sometimes it is valuable to withhold information."  Those scenarios seem completely tangential to anybody having a specific piece of info.  What info is even being had???  Who has it?? What is it??

[raerae]

cooking dinner - quick real world example.

Situation 1) It is downright mutually considered that Player X is Town. 8/13 players say they think Player X is town. Player X never gets lynched sure... but who do we not have when we wake up the next day?

Situation 2) It is downright mutually considered that Player X is Skum. 8/13 players say they think Player X is Skum. Player X either gets lynched or is derailed or whatever. If we lynch and are wrong then thats all the same, but if we do not lynch player X they are not left alive and we are sitting there eating WIFOM stew.

Just to be clear I am generally a huge fan of divulging info. I am just pointing out that there is not "literally no reason at all" not to share a specific piece of info.

I'm not hanging with you, wouldn't it be best in Situation 1 for town to have shared their reasons for their reads before dying?  And in Situation 2 wouldn't you prefer scum also share their reads so we have something to analyze?  I'm very confused what your situations have to do with sharing information.

[Swowl]

Situation 1) It is downright mutually considered that Player X is Town. 8/13 players say they think Player X is town. Player X never gets lynched sure... but who do we not have when we wake up the next day?

Situation 2) It is downright mutually considered that Player X is Skum. 8/13 players say they think Player X is Skum. Player X either gets lynched or is derailed or whatever. If we lynch and are wrong then thats all the same, but if we do not lynch player X they are not left alive and we are sitting there eating WIFOM stew.

Just to be clear I am generally a huge fan of divulging info. I am just pointing out that there is not "literally no reason at all" not to share a specific piece of info.

I don't get it.  How are these arguments for "sometimes it is valuable to withhold information."  Those scenarios seem completely tangential to anybody having a specific piece of info.  What info is even being had???  Who has it?? What is it??

What?
It is majority theory concept. If everyone thinks someone is town (without knowing they are town) then the team that KNOWS they are or are not town can use that information to their best case scenario.
Whereas (and again.. I am not promoting this)... but if town never posted anything ever for all of Day 1 (extreme example) Skum would have to pick randomly among town in regards of who to kill at night.

[Uncleeurope]

If scum know a player is universally accepted then it creates an easy NK, if the scum knows a teammate is universally found out the found one will shut up and the others will hop on board instead of trying to bring the mob away from their buddy.

Basically, opinions that are too openly given can be bad, especially if it is an opinion in consensus with another. The mob behaving like a mob, AND having clear intentions can be bad for town.

Some town members might even prefer killing themselves to avoid giving this scum his information.

[shraeye]

I don't get anything about this.

[raerae]

Situation 1) It is downright mutually considered that Player X is Town. 8/13 players say they think Player X is town. Player X never gets lynched sure... but who do we not have when we wake up the next day?

Situation 2) It is downright mutually considered that Player X is Skum. 8/13 players say they think Player X is Skum. Player X either gets lynched or is derailed or whatever. If we lynch and are wrong then thats all the same, but if we do not lynch player X they are not left alive and we are sitting there eating WIFOM stew.

Just to be clear I am generally a huge fan of divulging info. I am just pointing out that there is not "literally no reason at all" not to share a specific piece of info.

I don't get it.  How are these arguments for "sometimes it is valuable to withhold information."  Those scenarios seem completely tangential to anybody having a specific piece of info.  What info is even being had???  Who has it?? What is it??

What?
It is majority theory concept. If everyone thinks someone is town (without knowing they are town) then the team that KNOWS they are or are not town can use that information to their best case scenario.
Whereas (and again.. I am not promoting this)... but if town never posted anything ever for all of Day 1 (extreme example) Skum would have to pick randomly among town in regards of who to kill at night.

But if nobody says anything town is shooting blind too and if that's the case then we may as well encourage computers to play Mafia because it's just a point and click game at that point.

[raerae]

This is treading into a meta discussion which isn't wildly helpful.  We disagree and can leave it at that I guess.

@shraeye, got anything other than questions for the crowd tonight?

[shraeye]

Nope; probs not.

[shraeye]

But at least some of the questions are very important ones.

[shraeye]

ooooh, and

Vote: UncleEurope

[raerae]

ooooh, and

Vote: UncleEurope

Any particular reason for that vote? 

That should be my f-ing signature at this point.

[Debatepro]

Re: information sharing

Maybe getting bogged down in the line-by-line, and maybe i'm misreading, but i think the crux of Datswan's case is that in some situation it's OK to withhold info if your town. I think Faust even said this in day 1 see #753.

Is this usually controversial?

[mail-mi]

so there's a lot of theory stuff going on that I'm not following. Now that I'm only in one game I should have more time for this one... but unfortunately not tonight.

[Swowl]

This is treading into a meta discussion which isn't wildly helpful.  We disagree and can leave it at that I guess.

@shraeye, got anything other than questions for the crowd tonight?

I agree on the meta part and we can just drop it at this point

[faust]

MiX (6): Debatepro, shraeye, arishipshape, raerae, mail-mi, LaLight
mail-mi (3): silverspawn, MiX, EFHW
raerae (3): Joseph2302, DatSwan, faust
DatSwan (1): Uncleeurope

-----The point to be had here is that the people shifting in and about the MiX wagon very much could of been doing so due to their level of confidence that pretty much everyone, except the potential LL and Faust spots, were not going to move.

Good point here. D1 I was looking at that vote count above and asking myself if we could get another decent wagon. There were people off MiX that had said they weren't going to vote raerae, so I didn't think that wagon had a fighting chance. I did not want to lynch mail-mi over MiX, and starting another wagon felt unlikely.