Print

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

[Jack A T]

To get the discussion out of the BM 47 thread, this thread has been made.

[RangerCado]

...Wouldn't that discussion be better sent to the Game Thershold, or the Banter thread? Things like these tend to get locked and banned by Toady pretty quickly with GWG. No offense meant, but you do like to argue Gold.

[Jack A T]

How do you tell honest-mistake answers from mafia-coverup answers? Hope that the mafia give obviously flawed reasons?

What's the boundary between "panicky" and "not panicky"? Wouldn't it logically depend on the personality of the actual player? Isn't all of this making it so subjective as to be almost useless?

On telling honest-mistake answers from mafia-coverup answers: A major part of this is determining whether the answer makes sense for the specific player as town.  That, however, is only part of the process.  Observing the player's behaviour before and after the answer, and how it works with the answer (and, for that matter, all other answers they give, and the activities around them in the game), is another part.

To be quite honest, you're not going to catch the scum very often with just a single question.  Scum gets caught through accumulation of evidence.  Accumulation of oddities and of discrepancies.  Scumtells are mostly behaviours noted to be worth investigating.

On the panicky/not panicky boundary: You are correct that it depends on the personality of the actual player.  Everything does.  Pretty much everything in Mafia depends on the context of the game, the actions within the game, the roles available in the game (perhaps the player is a cop?), and the players in the game.

On subjectivity: Subjective, in this case, does not mean useless.  It means context, at the personal level and the game level, must be kept in mind and used in investigation.
RangerCado: Perhaps. Game Threshold is not the right place for this sort of discussion, and I'd rather not flood the Banter thread.  I shall at least try to keep this a calm and respectful discussion.

[Leafsnail]

Not including the rule in the OP was an oversight.  Basically the policy should be something like
 http://forum.mafiascum.net/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=30908

[griffinpup]

PTW cuz I give a hoot

[flabort]

Maybe introducing GWG to Mafia.Tiruin was a not so great idea.
They both like to argue their points in a similar fashion. Neither will drop it until there is a clear cut winner, in my experience.
This may just be their architectures, though. I don't remember GWG being as argumentative last year.

GWG: 1) The rule that you don't talk about a game in other threads IS a written rule, it's in the New Player's Guide, in the Basic Tutorial, and in the Banter threads. Especially the Banter threads.
2) The reason for such a rule doesn't truly matter. The reason for any rule doesn't truly matter. One can see a sign with a rule on it, and generally assume "OK, so whatever is banned by the rule was once making a problem, so they made a rule about it".
3) I am being silly when I say you're argumentative. However, chill, dude.

Tiruin: Do not wake the dragon.

[GreatWyrmGold]

How do you tell honest-mistake answers from mafia-coverup answers? Hope that the mafia give obviously flawed reasons?

What's the boundary between "panicky" and "not panicky"? Wouldn't it logically depend on the personality of the actual player? Isn't all of this making it so subjective as to be almost useless?

On telling honest-mistake answers from mafia-coverup answers: A major part of this is determining whether the answer makes sense for the specific player as town.  That, however, is only part of the process.  Observing the player's behaviour before and after the answer, and how it works with the answer (and, for that matter, all other answers they give, and the activities around them in the game), is another part.
To be quite honest, you're not going to catch the scum very often with just a single question.  Scum gets caught through accumulation of evidence.  Accumulation of oddities and of discrepancies.  Scumtells are mostly behaviours noted to be worth investigating.

So, what you're telling me is that the important parts were parts not even mentioned in your summary of how to scumhunt?

On the panicky/not panicky boundary: You are correct that it depends on the personality of the actual player.  Everything does.  Pretty much everything in Mafia depends on the context of the game, the actions within the game, the roles available in the game (perhaps the player is a cop?), and the players in the game.

So, isn't providing something so very, very subject to individual personalities as a scumtell...a bit misleading?

On subjectivity: Subjective, in this case, does not mean useless.  It means context, at the personal level and the game level, must be kept in mind and used in investigation.

And how does one use this stuff? That seems like important information.

[Leafsnail]

Talking about ongoing games gives you an unfair advantage or ruins the game in many cases and it is banned.  End of discussion.  Either follow the rules or get out.

[Cheeetar]

Plus, we already have a thread for miscellaneous discussion.

[GreatWyrmGold]

Talking about ongoing games gives you an unfair advantage or ruins the game in many cases and it is banned.  End of discussion.  Either follow the rules or get out.

I didn't actually respond to your comments about that rule. You're such a good reader!

[Toaster]

This was done before and got locked.  Take it to PMs (note I haven't followed the original thread)

[Jack A T]

Alright, got it.  Shutting down thread.