Print

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

[Shakerag]

I survived the holidays.  Playing catch-up.  Unvote.

Shakerag: You appear to be experienced in RVS, why not describe, as if you were talking to a newbie, how it should be played.

As time has gone on, I've started to dislike the RVS phase more and more.  A good summary of RVS playing, IMO, is:
-Fire off an initial volley of questions.  Somewhere between 3 and 6.  One (two, tops) can be humorous.
-Good questions: Things that establish behavior patterns (that you can possibly call someone on later), things that give you a read as to how passive/aggressive a player may be, things that give you a read as to how careful/reckless a player may be. 
-Check responses.  Look for anything odd, and question the player about it. 
-If nothing noteworthy in responses, and other players aren't arguing yet, fire off another volley of questions.
-If this is boring, find a legitimate but non-standard answer to a question and drill that player, looking for slips.
-Etc.

Because I am an asshole, he is a shitlord, and I'm not his buddy.

Works for me.

Shakerag:Do you think there will be a "theme" to abilities in this BYOR, like the ressurrections in the last one?

It's always possible.  I think webadict will do as webadict wills, theme or no theme.  I wouldn't put it past him to intentionally not have a theme just because we might be expecting one.  He's a bastard like that.  But I'm sure I'll get screwed either way.

Generally, whoever looks scummiest in the first 24 hours.  [humor]Alternatively, you, just so I can comment that "the king has left the building".[/humor]

Cute.  Let's say you don't have any scumminess to go on and it just comes down to what player you least want around.

I'd still pick you.  Looking at who I think is a strong player and who I have difficulty reading, the union of those two sets puts you at the top. 

Shakerag: Wow, your RVS questions really remind me of another player's... Did you, by chance, base them on mine?

Imitiation is the sincerest form of flattery.  Or maybe I just hate coming up with new RVS questions every game. 

Actually, I like any question. Why you asking?

Looking for inspiration.  Also, thought it might be amusing to ask.


I think that's everything directed at me.  Re-reading for additional posting next.

[ToonyMan]

The timing, we have many days to resolve it...including D2 onwards. You seem jumpy on the matter there.

The faster we resolve the game the better, why slow it down if everything is understood?

Survivors are only not a form of scum if the town wins easily as in BYOR 10.  If the town is going to win easily anyway we can afford to lynch the survivor first.  So no bad can come of lynching you and good can.  Hence you'd have to be nuts to not lynch a survivor outside of lylo.

That's such utter, utter bullshit. You are completely ignoring the fact that survivor can still do something useful and that when we are lynching survivor we aren't lynching scum. I'm tired of all the scummy crap you're pulling off. Leafsnail. Mr.Celt is still scum.

If we ignore all this "survivor vs. scum" arguing there is this vast assumption where we assume Urist Imik is telling the truth you know.  And guess what scum like to do when role-claiming.

[ToonyMan]

To put it in better words, if Urist Imik claimed town would you still have this argument?  No.  You would assume they're lying to try to wiggle free from a lynch with a role-claim, which while harmful might end up saving them in the end (their role should get revealed when they die either way after all).

[Urist Imiknorris]

The fact that inspections exist sort of makes you wrong.

[Dariush]

If we ignore all this "survivor vs. scum" arguing there is this vast assumption where we assume Urist Imik is telling the truth you know.  And guess what scum like to do when role-claiming.

Claiming survivor doesn't make it any more nor less probable for him to be scum. That doesn't change the fact that LS's entire argument is completely idiotic.

[Leafsnail]

Again, there are two possibilities if we lynch Urist Imiknorris:
1. Urist Imiknorris is a survivor.  Lynching him will definitely cause no harm to the town and is potentially beneficial if he were to try and work with scum (hint hint survivors always do this unless the town would be able to win without them anyway).
2. Urist Imknorris is scum.  Lynching him is good for the town.

If we lynch any other player there is a third possibility that the player is town, and that lynching them hurts the town.

Thus there is absolutely no reason not to lynch him.  Why would you want to lynch someone else and risk a day one mislynch (bad for the town) when you can perform a completely risk-free lynch?  It boggles my mind.

That's a nice justification of why you're all for lynching the survivor

Yes, it is.  Glad you agree that you need to be lynched.  I'm not going to try and argue that you look like mafia rather than survivor because mafia members and survivors are pretty much indistinguishable in terms of behaviour (that's why mafia members like to claim survivor) but I will say that whichever you are you need to die.

I'd still pick you.  Looking at who I think is a strong player and who I have difficulty reading, the union of those two sets puts you at the top. 

I wouldn't agree with your selection method but that's a perfectly credible answer.

The fact that inspections exist sort of makes you wrong.

I like this argument because if you followed it you'd never lynch anyone at all

[Dariush]

You're missing a veeeery minor thing. Scumhunting exists so that we'd be able to lynch a guy who is vastly more likely to be scum than any other alignment (you) rather than a guy who's pretty much equally able to be both scum and survivor (UI).

[Leafsnail]

So basically from your perspective claiming survivor is a magical button that halves your scumminess because there's no way of telling which flavour of scum you are.  That's an interesting perspective, seems quantum or something

[Tylui]

Jack A T:

Dariush:
So far, I'd say Dariush and Urist seem most scummy to me, though perhaps not on the same team. They are both posting often but not a lot of substance.

Tylui: As compared to the average RVS-stage posting habits of the average player?

Yes. To me RVS is an institution put in place by the town that says basically "You have to follow suit, otherwise you're going to start looking scummy right away". It's a set of rules that everyone has to follow. like a screening process. Just because it's boring that doesn't mean you can half-ass your posts and not participate even a little without eliciting some negative attention.



Bookthras:

Tylui:

Leafsnail, Deathsword, MrCelt, and Bookthras: I've never seen you on Bay12 at all, I don't think, though I don't lurk as often as I used to. When did you join the forums and why?

First of all, as has been said before: do not ever, ever, EVER! edit your posts in a mafia game. That's massively uncool and is likely to get you modkilled if you do it again. I understand that mistakes happen, please make sure you understand it was a mistake and that it should not happen again.

As to your question: yes, we've played together before: back on BYOR5, where you were Samus Aran, and ToonyMan was the Webadict, I accused you of being the webadict yourself. At the time, I was using the moniker "Zathras", I am now "Bookthras". Details are complicated, let's just say I'm what's left after life's mandibles chewed up and excreted the remains of Zathras and Book... but it's still me who said that then.

I joined a little over two years ago. I had played forum mafia a bit elsewhere, and when that group dissolved someone pointed me here; I lurked for a few weeks reading old games, and came to the conclusion I liked the style and the fauna, so I joined BMXIV  and a bit later BYOR4.

...the rest, as they say, is history.

Thank you again for the edit reminder. As I said I hadn't even thought about it; the only thing I changed was moving around the peoples' names that I was directing my discussions to; and it won't happen again.

I remember Zathras, just never put the two together! So you joined just to play our Mafia boards?



Dariush:

So far, I'd say Dariush and Urist seem most scummy to me, though perhaps not on the same team. They are both posting often but not a lot of substance.

Wow, you must be an Oracle. As of your post, the game lasted less than a day. I made whopping two posts during this time that consisted of three paragraphs combined. Yet you managed to already deduce that I'm acting scummy. Do you classify anything that doesn't conform to the traditional 'X, whom do you like playing with, Y, whom are you afraid of, Z blahblahblah' formula as scummy?

I'm not an Oracle. I'm just a man playing mafia, and you seem the most scummy. You may have only made two posts, but your attitude speaks at a louder volume than your words. You do defend yourself passionately, but, Mr. Defensive, are you going to start playing as a townsperson and try to find out who is mafia scum? If you really are innocent, you shouldn't have to be so defensive! If the entire purpose of the "conformity" is to try to weed out scum, then YES most things that DON'T conform to a pro-town institution is, guess what, scummy.

Also, you imply that Shakerag's RVS questions serve NO purpose, and yet the only question you've asked all game is "Why did you waste a PFP on this?". Doesn't really seem like an RQS question.

Did I say this was an RVS question? No, it wasn't. I wanted to get tangible information out of his answer. Do you classify asking non-RVS questions during RVS as scummy too?

Did >>I<< say this was an RVS question? No, I didn't. I was pointing out that the only question you asked during the RQS had nothing to do with an RQS question.

MrCelt:

Is that why you chose to question them?

Actually, they both appeared to be active when I asked them.

...Did you really just directly contradict your earlier statement that you asked them for the directly opposite reason (that they are inactive)? Why are you summoning up excuses?

He didn't contradict himself, but I think you know that since you didn't include his earlier quote. You sure are trying to get the attention off of you any way possible but actually voting!


Leafsnail

@Dariush:

The difference is taking robust accusations and questions that seem related to people's alignments.  And the anger seems directed at hunting, which is a change from the "I'm not angry until someone accuses me" or the "GRR I'M ANGRY FOR NO REASON AND AT NOTHING IN PARTICULAR" I associate with scum-Dariush.

There is bussing, but using mislynching strategies against your own buddies defeats the purpose of it.  I have examined the possibility of UI being town and it doesn't square with the scumhunting technique he laid out.  Also if UI is trying to bus then he is a mafia member who needs to die anyway, so I have no problem voting him.

I am leery of your defending Dariush. The only thing "directed at hunting" That he has done is vote for MrCelt. First it was Tiruin because he didn't contribute much to RVS. Then Toaster for deflecting attention away from his lurking. And then it was Dariush for MrCelt having contradicted himself. Which he didn't.

You laud the efforts of Dariush's scumhunting when he doesn't have any, but then you say that you are suspicious of the technique that UI laid out, which is none. He said he randomly chooses and pressures someone, but he also said that he didn't do that this time because something else looked suspicious! Funny, he didn't mention what though.

@Leafsnail general:
That's some singular focus on Leafsnail, however there is one point I do like:

It's never too early to set up a mislynch on Dariush.

What makes you think it'd be a mislynch?

As for your second question, firstly this is the most townie I've ever seen Dariush play.  Secondly your explanation for your Dariush vote is a strategy for mislynching people (which works especially well on Dariush because Dariush acts scummy as hell once you get him angry), not a strategy for identifying scum.  This implies Dariush is town because mafia members don't usually try to mislynch their buddies.

This is just making up bullshit to cover up a possible slip.  Leafsnail.  I don't see why you'd have to respond that much if you're town.

Still at Leafsnail: I agree with ToonyMan. Leafsnail slipped that he thinks Dariush is 100% town. Instead offering an explanation of your slip(like saying mislynch is a term for an uneducated lynching, not just a wrongful lynching), you reinforced it with a weak argument. One that I personally don't buy into, and one that Dariush himself is even weirded out by. "Uh... Thanks, I guess?"



Urist Imiknorris:
What was suspicious that drew your attention away from pressuring Dariush?





indirected:
Sorry I haven't posted! Not only did I have Thanksgiving but my daughter's first birthday part was this weekend! Phew!


This is something I'd like to add to bookthras and leafsnail's conversation awhile back. I think "mislynch" could be defined as a lynch that happened without enough suspicion/evidence, whether the lynched was mafia or town. Although I do find it wildly interesting that Leafsnail said in such a hip-fired way.


We're probably out of RVS by now, but Urist Imiknorris, let's say you are a townsperson in a game with ten town and five mafia. Someone points out that the well-known poster JeffereyJenkins is lurking! He doesn't have any other posts on the forum, and you guys have been going around in circles for two day-extensions. Suddenly, everyone is jumping on the "hammer the lurker!" bus. What can you deduce about the person who started the bus?

Also, what happens in a vote tie? no lynch or double lynch?

[Tylui]

Again, there are two possibilities if we lynch Urist Imiknorris:
1. Urist Imiknorris is a survivor.  Lynching him will definitely cause no harm to the town and is potentially beneficial if he were to try and work with scum (hint hint survivors always do this unless the town would be able to win without them anyway).
2. Urist Imknorris is scum.  Lynching him is good for the town.

If we lynch any other player there is a third possibility that the player is town, and that lynching them hurts the town.

Thus there is absolutely no reason not to lynch him.  Why would you want to lynch someone else and risk a day one mislynch (bad for the town) when you can perform a completely risk-free lynch?  It boggles my mind.

First of all Unvote. I would vote Leafsnail, but I don't know what happens in a tie, so I'll wait.

Question for everyone/anyone:
Look at Urist's roleclaim. He's unkillable by scum. I'll have to think about how I would personally play with such a role, but initially, I think I would side with the town. The only why I can die, other than crazy role powers, is to be lynched by the town. If you can't be hurt by the mafia, do you side with them or play against them?

[Dariush]

So basically from your perspective claiming survivor is a magical button that halves your scumminess because there's no way of telling which flavour of scum you are.  That's an interesting perspective, seems quantum or something

Halves? Because without claiming survivor you have 100% chance of being scum, right? That's some weird-ass logic you have going on there. Where did I even mention halving, or even at all changing the possibility of the survivor-claimer being scum? He becomes more likely to be survivor and completely unlikely to be town, yes. That and not a bit more.

Tylui:

Did >>I<< say this was an RVS question? No, I didn't. I was pointing out that the only question you asked during the RQS had nothing to do with an RQS question.

That really doesn't seem like a thing confirmed town would say.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Did >>I<< say you were confirmed town? No, I didn't.

I'm not an Oracle. I'm just a man playing mafia, and you seem the most scummy. You may have only made two posts, but your attitude speaks at a louder volume than your words. You do defend yourself passionately, but, Mr. Defensive, are you going to start playing as a townsperson and try to find out who is mafia scum?

Oh hey, two posts (at the moment) in and you already magically determined that I'm being way overdefensive, despite never having actually being in a game with me! Now would your oracular ass be so kind as to quote exactly where I was being overdefensive during the RVS?

This paragraph looks more like you trying to asspull a case out of thin air than anything else...

...Did you really just directly contradict your earlier statement that you asked them for the directly opposite reason (that they are inactive)? Why are you summoning up excuses?

He didn't contradict himself, but I think you know that since you didn't include his earlier quote. You sure are trying to get the attention off of you any way possible but actually voting!

...And this paragraph continues the trend. Why are you repeating the answer he gave several days ago while you were lurking your ass off and claiming that I'm not voting despite the fact that I voted several days ago while...

...wait for it...

...while you were lurking your ass off? (unexpected ending, isn't it?)

[Shakerag]

No, it isn't. What makes you think this is rolefishing?

It's a question that can only be answered by referring to your own role

Bullshit. I'll prove it: yes, I think there is a theme on this game, because wuba has said he does that and he has indeed done that in several recent games, so it's likely he did it here too. I didn't have to look at my own role to make that determination at all, and even if I had tried, it wouldn't have helped: I can't know whether anything in my role has a theme with others, because I don't know others' roles, duh. I may have a "cluck like a chicken and lay an egg" power, or even three, but I wouldn't know whether there's a chicken or farm animals theme going on unless I knew others had similar powers, yes?

So no, still not rolefishing, and your doubling down on that stance is scummy.

To add my own thoughts here, I concur with Bookthras.  Everyone knows their own role.  While you could potentially work out a theme from implying things about your role and possible interactions, that doesn't necessarily indicate a theme either.  It could just be a role/counter-role situation.  However, an affirmative response to a question like that (Do you think there's a theme?) could be helpful in so far as that it may indicate the answerer is on a team.  If said person knows more than one role D1 and can identify a theme amongst those roles, then it is safely assumable they are on a team, which is most likely to be scum (or masons, or survivor masons, etc., but scum is the most likely team to appear regardless). 

So I don't think an accusation of rolefishing is fair, but it's certainly a potential "teamfishing" question (which doesn't seem like a terribly bad thing to me). 

[...] Dariush is a player who almost invariably turns up something suspicious when you tunnel him, so this is a mislynching strategy.  [...]

Waitaminute.  This smells like bullshit I've addressed in a previous game.  If Dariush "almost invariably turns up something suspicious when you tunnel him", then it's an expected and standard behavior.  If it's expected and standard for Dariush to act in a certain way, even if someone else doing it would be (potentially) scummy, how would that indicate Dariush is scummy?  Anyone trying to drive a lynch on Dariush because "omg he got teh madz" is a fool at best and scum at worst. 


I think being trigger happy with the rolefishing accusation (which I am getting tired of seeing every damn game), stating hanging Dariush would be a "mislynch", and being gung-ho about lynching a supposed survivor over looking for actual scum D1 makes me feel comfortable voting Leafsnail.

If we somehow happen to not bag scum D1 or D2 (or whenever would be appropriate), then we can lynch UI before he could be a potential asset to the scumteam.

[Urist Imiknorris]

Again, there are two possibilities if we lynch Urist Imiknorris:
1. Urist Imiknorris is a survivor.  Lynching him will definitely cause no harm to the town and is potentially beneficial if he were to try and work with scum (hint hint survivors always do this unless the town would be able to win without them anyway).

Again, they'd have to kill me before they'd have the leverage to make me side with them. And then I'd be bitter, and I have ways of fucking with their kills.

That's a nice justification of why you're all for lynching the survivor

Yes, it is.  Glad you agree that you need to be lynched.  I'm not going to try and argue that you look like mafia rather than survivor because mafia members and survivors are pretty much indistinguishable in terms of behaviour (that's why mafia members like to claim survivor) but I will say that whichever you are you need to die.

Way to quote mine and ignore the rest of what I said. Especially the "Come back with even one other suspicion" bit.

The fact that inspections exist sort of makes you wrong.

I like this argument because if you followed it you'd never lynch anyone at all

I like this rebuttal because you act like I'm saying things that I didn't say and suggesting it as a general strategy. A claimed survivor is probably going to draw an inspect, and when it returns survivor then oops, guess he's not mafia after all.

Tylui: Regarding your RVS question:
a) I'd think the one starting the bandwagon was scum, because if the person hasn't been online, then it probably wasn't intentional lurking.
b) Why are you asking an RVS question?

What was suspicious that drew your attention away from pressuring Dariush?

My realization that I was being a moron. I've said this before.

And tie == no lynch.

Look at Urist's roleclaim. He's unkillable by scum. I'll have to think about how I would personally play with such a role, but initially, I think I would side with the town. The only why I can die, other than crazy role powers, is to be lynched by the town. If you can't be hurt by the mafia, do you side with them or play against them?

Revives are one-shot. It'd still take too much effort and hope on their part.

[Tiruin]

Hold it, trying to get the deal between Leafsnail and UI, and probably Dariush who is thrown into their battle somehow.

So leafsnail begins on using UI's statements on Dariush, adding in the idea that he believes Dar is town because of his antics (or lack thereof) and continues with an idea that smells like meta, and including seemingly factual evidence to back it up.

UI on the other hand, claims for...some reason. I'm unsure anyone asked. Why did you claim? What does Leafsnail have to do with your claim?

Also, Leafsnail, I believe you're trying to put WIFOM on a claim of survivor, including probably misrepresenting UI's words while terming your own along the lines of mislynch, and fabricating a case of Survivor claim = mostly scum here, I presume? He may be town, third-party or scum in my eyes. Directly claiming townie as a townie has the chance to cause speculation. Claiming survivor as a townie seems like a basis for conversation. Survivor as scum > last resort, I'm guessing? I'm not that experienced in these matters but I feel like you're attempting to narrow down the possibilities UI is using with that claim without even asking him why he did so, but instead attacking it directly.

[Urist Imiknorris]

UI on the other hand, claims for...some reason. I'm unsure anyone asked. Why did you claim? What does Leafsnail have to do with your claim?

I didn't have any better ideas. He was one of the people whose votes put my head on the chopping block.

Claiming survivor as a townie seems like a basis for conversation.

Claiming survivor as a townie means having wrong priorities.