he is my ideal lynch for today and that will probably not change until he starts contributing

Agreed.

Zinger-wagon Hoooooooo (aka, I'm all for LaL, with the caveat that I'll be inadvertently lurking due to going on vacation starting tomorrow evening. I'll be around, but yeah, not quite as active as I'd like).

Unvote;Vote: Zinger

@KoD: that WAS poor logic, you can't fish for non-existent role information, and since we actually know what all of the roles are, there is absolutely zero way that what Niklor did was fishing.

Actually Fred, yeah you can fish for nonexistent information. All it takes is some unwitting bafoon to volunteer information.

Let me rephrase, looking at it again it technically was fishing sure, but it was the most obvious bait-y fish I've ever seen in my life, because as I said, the role he was fishing for CAN'T EXIST.

You jumping on it that hard was more scummy than what he did.

I've played with you enough to know better than spell it out for you.

You're just being too dense to recognize the subtle details.

No, I'm saying you're overreacting to something that was clearly meant to bait someone out into overreacting and/or be a conversation starter or even a joke.

I even alluded to something similar in my remark to Lilan earlier, its not like I was trying to get him to claim anything role related, if anything its an inquiry to why he was using this 'strategy' that he was doing. You could say that's the same thing Niklor was alluding to as well.

Dense, maybe, I am rather tired after back to back long work days.

Either way, I'm not a fan of going 'to great lengths to talk' about something, because generally (and as you and JD did last game) the conversations start going in circles, are usually town blowup events, and only lead to being super distracting and rarely actually helpful.

the question is who's the fisherman?

First, I saw just how much you loved talking last game. You did so much of it. I trust you'll understand if I don't intend to count on you to actually do any meaningful talking.

Second, you're incorrectly comparing what Lilan and Niklor were doing. Lilan specifically voting someone to get a reaction out of them is one thing. Niklor posing a question that anyone can answer (in a variety of ways) can lead to eliminating who is vanilla town. They are in no way similar in terms of strategy (aside from the fact that you're attempting to get someone to talk -- Niklor's approach is way much subtle depending on the mindset of the person reading his post).

Now I love how you call it overreacting. Hell, why stop there? You flat out called me scummy for pointing out his fishing. Yet, you even admitted it is fishing what he was doing. The only difference between you and I is that you think his fishing is useless whereas I see it differently since I believe there is information to be obtained pending on how someone replies to him.

Lol, the end of last game was mostly just rambling because no one was doing anything and everyone was acting scummy.

I said what I did in response to Lilans early mimicing of you, not what Lilan was doing.

Really, the main reason I gave in and called it fishing is because Niklor himself called it fishing. I'd call it more akin to trapping personally, which is basically a null tell on your end, and possibly a scum tell on his end. So I guess I don't even completely disagree that it was a scummy post, but because it is a 'fishing' post? No.

And now you're just putting words in my mouth, I am in no way calling you outright scummy for your overreaction, nor have I actually mentioned anything about his 'fishing' being actually useless. Its started the first actual meaningful conversation this game, how is that useless?

I am now present.

I will not lie this game, as usual.

Oh, hey Freddeh-scum. How I missed you.

Vote: Freddeh-Scum

So, how bout that weather, huh? Cloudy, with a chance of werewolves.

Even the lurkers want to policy lynch lurkers, these days. Poor guys.



I was fishing and said as much. I have confirmed KoD's "poor logic." What's your excuse for employing it?



I was a bit sad he was the one to jump on it, but, KoD is right that all it takes is one fool to ruin it. I was anticipating that most people knew how to play mafia, though, and it would spark some discussion. Which it did. Great success.



Considering the lack of reaction by everyone else, I'm glad someone helped me get the ball rolling. It would be overreactionary if there was anything else going on, IMO, but its hard to overreact when there is nothing more pressing, again IMO.



We should just not talk unless we have something to talk about then. Like D1, screw conversation. Nothing to talk about, we should just roll a dice and lynch someone.

Oh wait, no that's really dumb.

While certain lines of discussion can distract the town from scumhunting, that is certainly not the majority of discussion. Painting trying to get the ball rolling as unhelpful is just...I'm not sure what to call it. I can't think of a reason scum would try to attack discussion.



I doubt anyone would accuse you, my lifelong scumbuddy. Would accuse you for not saying anything while a lot of information is presented to you, though.

FoS: Lilan



My approach is probably riskier at ending up being harmful, but since we both know you are a rather experienced Mafia player, the odds of you just telling me your role because I asked if you were somehow a muted player seem very slim.



I'm sure I can guess any number of reasons you find Freddeh scummy, but could you elaborate a little on it.

For your NLP: Have you ever worn a Tutu?

You can't just apply policy to every lynch Rubik, that leaves you vulnerable to a large amount of scum manipulation.

I also don't see the issue with advocating LaL and pursuing regular cases Day 1. We haven't had a huge amount of time pass, so it isn't quite clear who the egregious lurkers are, nor can we just ignore the subtleties of Day 1. I don't like your stance, and I certainly don't like the feeling that you want people to advocate lynching lurkers over active players. You LaL mostly as a threat, and sometimes you act on that threat, but if someone is overtly scummy enough you still lynch them.

Expecting a consistent LaL or anti-LaL strategy just isn't healthy for the town.

Super suspicious.

We're I'm a position with a single scum who can propagate once. Regardless of what we learn, the information on half the scum will only be based on behavioral inconsistencies between today and yesterday. The scum can freely choose between infecting lurkers or infecting active town players.

I'd prefer to force the wolf to infect someone active enough to slip. It's nearly impossible to differentiate between lurking town and lurking scum and I don't want to let scum propagate into that pool.

We're in a position*

On a phone, auto correct hates me.

That is a terrible strategy for scumhunting. The Wolf could choose anyone regardless of activity/inactivity. Frankly, as I see it, your lynch a lurker so we can better scumhunt tomorrow just encourages the wolf to choose a lurker. Because obviously you want him to choose an active member so you can start scumhunting tomorrow instead of today.

Why give up a potential win today in order to make it harder on ourselves tomorrow?

Lynching lurkers as a matter of policy is designed to deter lurking in future games, as they will be aware that they won't be able to just cruise through the game quietly. It doesn't mean we literally abandon trying to play the game. It means that if I think you are the wolf, but I believe that lurking should be discouraged, toward the end of the day, I actively choose to not do the thing best for this game. I policy lynch because I want to discourage lurking in future instead of jumping on the highly suspicious individual right in front of me.

What you are doing is trying to advocate lynching a lurker on the basis that it might pay off D2, which it is probably not likely to do, since your strategy to do so is terrible.

I'm not at all abandoning playing the game and I'm not suggesting that everyone just put their vote on lurkers and sit there. I do, however, think it's important that a few players keep voting pressure on lurkers to encourage them to post.

Zinger, NeoSilk, and SeTiny are all complete deadweight right now. I'd like them to read the thread and give their input on something relevant to the game or I'd like them to replace out for someone who will. There are slightly less lurky players who I'd also like to see more from, but none so bad as these first few.

If you think it's better to ignore the fact that players are lurking until just before the deadline and then kill them instead of giving them a chance to improve, that's your prerogative. It's not my fault that your strategy is bad.

I'd been working for the majority of the time this game has been up, and after work Friday all that had happened was a relatively pointless conversation about when lylo would be and trying to direct when the hunter should shoot. I didn't feel the need to rush to talk and I needed some sleep for work, so I did that instead.



Yeah, yeah, on my re-read I noticed that. I still call it more trapping than fishing, due to reasons already outlined, but whatever.



Which I thought was the obvious intent, and is why I was surprised that KoD was so gung ho over going after you hard for it.



It became overreactionary when he basically called everyone to action to lynch you.



This shows you have absolutely no idea what I actually meant, so that's probably my fault. What I mean by 'great lengths' I mean stupid stuff like what JD and KoD argued about for like 2 pages of posts in the last game, something that both of them like to do on a regular basis. Obviously I don't mean we shouldn't talk about anything, that's just stupid.

Maybe I SHOULD just lurk this game, because I already have two people that love misrepresenting what I'm saying.



I already know the answer to this, but I'll let him go for it XD.

@Zinger: you too!

@Rubik: Have you forgotten that its been the weekend since the game started actually having relevant discussion? Also, Neosilk doesn't deserve to be on that list, and PoPa does. Until recently Neo had done far more than me, and PoPa has done literally nothing. Setiny was at least a little active on Friday as well, so ruling him out over the first weekend strikes as overreactive as well.

I mean, last game sucked and all, but thats no reason to force LaL as the first line of voting, especially when we're not more than THREE DAYS into the game. That said, I fully support LaL if there's a rather obvious lurker/active lurker by the end of the day, and nothing else super scummy otherwise, but stop calling out people that aren't even actually lurking and ignoring people that are.

Oh I somehow overlooked PoPas first real post.

Either way, I'd call it Rubik just being reactive from last game more than actually scummy from this line of thought.