Hello everyone.
I might be able to provoke an argument this way: I am actually fine with not killing anyone on Day 1 if I don't believe we have a good chance of actually killing a mafia member. (When I argued otherwise in Mafia II, I was a member of the mafia).
I'm not voting 'No Lynch,' and I'm not saying that should be the goal--but if we run out of time, and we have no reason to suspect anyone more than anybody else... it's better to have an additional townsperson alive on Day 2 rather than mislynch. In my view, at least.
Do you really think we'll run out of time, given the late deadline and how much talking we've done in less than ten hours? I think I agree with you in general, but I'm having a hard time seeing how, given the amount of information we'll likel have even just at the end of this week, we won't have a better-than-random chance of hitting scum.
I would rather have a Vanilla Town lynched than not lynch at all. Even if it's me. The math simply supports that being the better move. I would also rather lynch a VT than a Role. And above all that, I would rather lynch Mafia.
[/quote]
This is just a disagreement between me and Galzria. I would rather lynch no townie than a Vanilla Townie. The more innocent people alive at any given time, the better. Though I do not want to go all the way to the deadline either. I plan to vote for someone eventually, as I always do, but I won't compromise just so we get a kill, any kill.
Now, a word on humor and the mafia:
We can't be looking for obvious tells, but we should hunt for subconcious ones. Robz expressed (in MIII) that when he played as mafia (in MII) he wrote a lot of posts and deleted them. Mafia are playing carefully. So I think people playing carelessly are less likely to be scum (myself included). Of course, that does not preclude the possibility of carefully trying to appear careless. Still, I think our rapid-fire posting should make it hard to fake erratic play (i.e. think carefully about appearing not to think carefully). Should our hypothetical mafioso then decide his or her only defense is to actually stop being so careful, well great - all the more likely they'll slip up in some actionable way.
When I deleted posts in Mafia II, I wasn't deleting funny or erratic posts. I was deleting purposeful, substantive, evidence-based, accusatory posts. I had crafted a terrific additional to the encyclopedia on why we should kill Kuildeous in Round 2... and then I deleted it. Why? I decided it was against my interests. People weren't talking about me, and they were moving toward K anyway. Why take a risk? Some of the posts I deleted were responses to questions directed at me. Why bring it up again, if it was somewhat past and the person wasn't going to pursue it? Things like that.
My point is I wasn't writing and then deleting useless or funny posts. Those are easy for anyone to make, and they don't tend to be incriminate especially early on. So, I tend to suspect people making a lot of them. I am inclined to believe the mafia are in a constant state of, "I need to say something! What should I say?" paranoia. Maybe not, but that's how I felt when I was mafia. So I look at substance free posts and they make me suspicious, now.
That doesn't mean I don't appreciate humor, and it doesn't me I suspect every person who posts something silly or stupid. Especially in this game, where
so many people are posting substance-less things, my method is a little challenged, right now. And I know Galzria has a specific way of playing, and so does O, and so it's not like their weird posts really stick out to me. Anyway, I'll have to look back at some point and see who appears to be most guilty of this without mitigating factors (by mitigating, I mean being Galzria or O).
Oh, and
I don't mind there being a quicktopic or any other form of outside game discussion amongst non-players and the dead.I might not be back for awhile. I tend to post between noone and 5:00 PM (EST) and then again after midnight until 3:00 AM.