PDA

View Full Version : You-Solve-It Mafia Game


Pages : 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8

zuma
12-14-2007, 10:06 PM
OK, let's start with the original player list, but remove Rugger, Pleonast, and Diomedes.
1.storyteller0910
2.HazelNutCoffee
3.Freudian Slit
4.brewha
5.MHaye
6.ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies
7.sachertorte
8.Hawkeyeop
9.ShadowFacts
10. One And Only Wanderers
11. Rysto
12. Hal Briston
13. faithfool
14. zuma
15. Hockey Monkey
16. Kat

Utah/Portland is in the second quarter as I type this, and LA/Golden State is in the first.

Take the total number of points from Utah/Portland, take whatever the remainder is after evenly dividing by 16. Add 1, and that person reveals first. Maybe someone can word it better than me, but let's say there is 190 points scored. 190 can be evenly divided by 16 11 times, with a remainder of 14. Add 1 and Hockey Monkey would reveal first.

Second person to reveal would be LA/Golden State, with the list trimmed to 15.

Sound fair? Then we can proceed beyond that with tomorrow's games.

I understand some people may not favor revealing, but let's at least get a randomized list out of the way if we choose to use it in the future.

Rysto
12-14-2007, 10:09 PM
FTR, I'm totally against revealing but if we're going to do it zuma's suggestion is brilliant.

zuma
12-14-2007, 10:11 PM
Yeah, we just need to get a random list in order instead of having the people in favor of it just revealing. Who knows what advantage scum could gain by putting their reveals in particular spots.

Boozahol Squid, P.I.
12-14-2007, 10:20 PM
I'm pretty sure that NAF1138 sent all of our PMs. Put down the torches and pitchforks, everyone.

Then what about the 'other confirming', then? It sounds patently like what an unthinking scum might reveal... and it could very well be that NAF is handling the vanilla players and mtgman is handling the scum.

I claim my second amendment right to keep and bear pitchforks.

zuma
12-14-2007, 10:22 PM
Here is my proposed schedule for determing placement on the random list:

Friday:
1 - Utah/Portland
2 - LA Lakers/Golden State
Saturday:
3 - Charlotte/Atlanta
4 - Memphis/Orlando
5 - Sacramento/Washington
6 - Philadelphia/Cleveland
7 - Indiana/Miami
8 - New Jersey/New York
9 - Phoenix/New Orleans
10- Dallas/Houston
11- Minnesota/Milwaukee
12- Denver/San Antonio
13- Seattle/Utah
Sunday:
14- Golden State/Detroit
15- Boston/Toronto
16- Portland/Denver

Until then I don't think anyone should reveal any more.

Boozahol Squid, P.I.
12-14-2007, 10:29 PM
OK, let's start with the original player list, but remove Rugger, Pleonast, and Diomedes.
1.storyteller0910
2.HazelNutCoffee
3.Freudian Slit
4.brewha
5.MHaye
6.ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies
7.sachertorte
8.Hawkeyeop
9.ShadowFacts
10. One And Only Wanderers
11. Rysto
12. Hal Briston
13. faithfool
14. zuma
15. Hockey Monkey
16. Kat

Utah/Portland is in the second quarter as I type this, and LA/Golden State is in the first.

Take the total number of points from Utah/Portland, take whatever the remainder is after evenly dividing by 16. Add 1, and that person reveals first. Maybe someone can word it better than me, but let's say there is 190 points scored. 190 can be evenly divided by 16 11 times, with a remainder of 14. Add 1 and Hockey Monkey would reveal first.

Second person to reveal would be LA/Golden State, with the list trimmed to 15.

Sound fair? Then we can proceed beyond that with tomorrow's games.

I understand some people may not favor revealing, but let's at least get a randomized list out of the way if we choose to use it in the future.

That sounds a little overly complicated. Why not just go with the remainder of the Jazz/Blazers game/16 as the 'seed', and count down from there?

zuma
12-14-2007, 10:35 PM
Yeah, I guess we can do that. We're making the assumption that the scum were randomly chosen from the player list. Even if they were not it could hurt scum as much as help them, depending on the first to claim.

Hockey Monkey
12-14-2007, 10:38 PM
Why exactly do we add the 1? I don't have anything to hide. In fact, I have something interesting to contribute. But if we don't add the 1, then zuma would be the first to reveal. I have to wonder if he arbitrarily added the 1 so he wouldn't have to go first.

I was about to post this tidbit anyway because I think it's important. Apparently I share an attribute with a killer because I once drove a VW Beetle through the front door of a 7-11. Knowing that I am a very happy and satisfied associate, I now know that the disgruntleds do not have "unique only to scum" attributes. I have no idea how this puzzle is going to be put together in the end. I think it is some sort of logic puzzle, and I'm fairly good at those.

My full dossier:
Hockey Monkey - I graduated from college over 9 years after enrolling, and I was nearly expelled twice.

I got an autograph from Billy Crystal on top of the World Trade Center.

I'm in favour of making mandatory both organ donation and the use of human corpses as a source of meat. (eww!)

I once drove a VW Bug through the front door of a 7/11.

I have gone to Disney World 3 times and Disneyland at least 5 times

I have held 5 American Bald Eagles.


All but 2 of my attributes have numbers in them. I'm already starting to see some patterns in what others have revealed compared to mine. I won't do any premature dossier analysis until we have them all. Anyone who refuses to reveal will get a FOS from me.

zuma
12-14-2007, 10:40 PM
Why exactly do we add the 1?

Because if the score is evenly divisible by 16, the remainder is 0. There is no player 0. Max the remainder can be is 15, hence adding the 1.

zuma
12-14-2007, 10:41 PM
Hockey Monkey, the game is not final. I pulled a number out of the air as an example. Looks like the list as at 15 now :I

Rysto
12-14-2007, 10:48 PM
That sounds a little overly complicated. Why not just go with the remainder of the Jazz/Blazers game/16 as the 'seed', and count down from there?
That way we have to agree on a method to generate random numbers from the seed, and personally I'd rather not try to figure out if somebody's trying to scam us with the random number generator.

zuma
12-14-2007, 10:50 PM
1.storyteller0910
2.HazelNutCoffee
3.Freudian Slit
4.brewha
5.MHaye
6.ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies
7.sachertorte
8.Hawkeyeop
9.ShadowFacts
10. One And Only Wanderers
11. Rysto
12. Hal Briston
13. faithfool
14. zuma
15. Kat

It's nearing the end of the third quarter. We'll use the remainder after evenly dividing by 15 now. Then if we're going to do it, we just proceed down the list in that order.

zuma
12-14-2007, 10:52 PM
You think we're better off going with the original plan, Rysto?

zuma
12-14-2007, 10:55 PM
Screw it, let's just go with the original complicated plan. It'd be the closest to purely random as we can get.

First two will be determined by tonight's games.

Rysto
12-14-2007, 10:55 PM
I'd much prefer the ordering be totally random. It guarantees that there's no funny business going on and I'm troubled enough with how things are progressing as it is.

zuma
12-14-2007, 10:58 PM
Alright, we'll generate the random list as outlined in my post 255 (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=9273767&postcount=255). The sixteenth game is now no longer necessary.

Let's not reveal anything until we get the random list generated.

faithfool
12-14-2007, 11:13 PM
For everyone waiting with baited breath on how the pitch-forkee might respond, hold on and I'll be right back with a more comprehensive post....

Kat
12-14-2007, 11:16 PM
Can someone explain the list order for us morons?

zuma
12-14-2007, 11:21 PM
We're basically using upcoming basketball games as a random number generator to come up with an order in which we should reveal information. All this revealing information up front may be hurting us. Hence, if we are going to reveal, we should do it in a purely random order. The first game is almost over and we'll have the first on the "reveal list" soon.

Of course there are arguments to be made for not revealing anything at all, but if people are going to do it, the order should be random.

Rysto
12-14-2007, 11:22 PM
Can someone explain the list order for us morons?
We're going to use the scores of upcoming basketball games to generate the order. Because nobody can predict the scores in advance, they'll be essentially random which means that nobody in this game could manipulate the order in which we'd reveal our dossiers.

faithfool
12-14-2007, 11:32 PM
Alright, here I go clarifying as best I can, knowing full well it'll be seen as a lie by my disingenuous scum-sucking self. Anyway....

1.) I'm keeping track of all you, you trader folks, who've voted for me to die right off the bat when I don't know what the hell I'm doing. What a nice way to welcome the newbie, right? And just to be the impartial judge that I am, I'll remember that it was ShadowFacts that started the pile-on. Mmmhmmm.

2.) BWAHAHAHAHA to Zuma!! The link Mtgman sent me was because of a request that I sent him. It was this (http://www.sitesled.com/members/mik...mafiascum04.swf), simply a tutorial (a very easy one at that) on how to play the game. Now anyone with half a brain understands that one wouldn't need "keep up" with that, but one must know that I have NEVER played any sort of role playing (is that what this is?) game online. So, even the most basic concepts I have to go over and over again. I also saw someone mention "meta-gaming" and I'd suggest that if you're really into that, check any of my posts on the board to see just how illiterate I am in regards to this sort of subject.

3.) "Other confirming" meant that I had said I was good to go in the thread and then had to go back /B] to my PMs to relate that to both our moderators. In other words, I do believe people are reading way too much into my clumsy beginning. So [B]Hockey Monkey is number 3. < eyes her suspiciously >

4.) Thank you to anyone who started the ball rolling on the fact that I just might be innocent. Or at least think I need a bit of time to prove otherwise. Until proven guilty and all that. I will now be your new bestfriend, I swear. :p :D I also appreciate those who might later take up my cause. Pffft.

5.) I am a girl / female person / persuassion that has boobs / likes chocolate around (what used to be) monthly occasions. Get that straight if there is to be more flashing. Otherwise, I'll take my appendages and keep them to meself.

6.) I have no idea the point system that y'all have going on regarding when to disclose our dossiers.

7.) That said, I'm tempted to say I won't share if y'all are mean to me, but will gladly do so now out of the goodness of my heart. :cool: Either way, you'll regret it if you off me anyway, because then it'll be a good thing for the bad guys, right?

8.) Now I suppose that's all I have to say about all that. I'm about to post my list if no one objects. Count down in 5 .... 4 .... 3 .... ;)

Boozahol Squid, P.I.
12-14-2007, 11:37 PM
1.) I'm keeping track of all you, you trader folks, who've voted for me to die right off the bat when I don't know what the hell I'm doing. What a nice way to welcome the newbie, right? And just to be the impartial judge that I am, I'll remember that it was ShadowFacts that started the pile-on. Mmmhmmm.
Shadowfacts was just the first to vote for you. I had the all-important third vote, a true sign of scumminess and bandwaggoning. Hate me before you hate him. (I'll let you know, though, that jumping on any bandwagon, even my own, is one of my trademarks in this game)

8.) Now I suppose that's all I have to say about all that. I'm about to post my list if no one objects. Count down in 5 .... 4 .... 3 .... ;)

I object. We're going to do this in order, according to zuma's plan. Actually, I suppose it doesn't really matter that much to me: I'm still going to push for your lynch today, whatever you post.

zuma
12-14-2007, 11:37 PM
NO! don't post your list!

Boozahol Squid, P.I.
12-14-2007, 11:38 PM
(just saw the ;) at the end of faithfool's post.)

Doh! I got wooshed, didn't I?

zuma
12-14-2007, 11:40 PM
Utah/Portland is now final. By amazing coincidence, they did, in fact, score 190 points.

190 is divisible by 15 12 times, with a remainder of 10. Add 1, and Rysto, player number 11, is first.

zuma
12-14-2007, 11:43 PM
The Golden State/LA game will use the same list with Rysto removed, and the remainder after evenly dividing by 14 will generate the next one. Sorry for blathering, but I want to make this as clear as possible.

1.storyteller0910
2.HazelNutCoffee
3.Freudian Slit
4.brewha
5.MHaye
6.ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies
7.sachertorte
8.Hawkeyeop
9.ShadowFacts
10. One And Only Wanderers
11. Hal Briston
12. faithfool
13. zuma
14. Kat

faithfool
12-14-2007, 11:44 PM
I object. We're going to do this in order, according to zuma's plan. Actually, I suppose it doesn't really matter that much to me: I'm still going to push for your lynch today, whatever you post.

Then does this mean I'm out already?? Having 3 votes??

NO! don't post your list!

As someone who still doesn't quite understand this game and the information that can be used against her before we even start, why should I care what anyone else thinks / what I do, if you guys are gonna vote for my death anyway? That doesn't sound right for someone who is >thisclose< to swinging.

(just saw the ;) at the end of faithfool's post.)

Doh! I got wooshed, didn't I?

Yeah. I hear that's a common problem on them thar intarwebs, not exactly discerning the meaning of someone else's intent. Jus' sayin'.

Boozahol Squid, P.I.
12-14-2007, 11:45 PM
Utah/Portland is now final. By amazing coincidence, they did, in fact, score 190 points.

190 is divisible by 15 12 times, with a remainder of 10. Add 1, and Rysto, player number 11, is first.

Hmm... now I'm suspicious. What if you're an amazingly devious scum who also happens to live in a sportsbook? :dubious:

:p

Boozahol Squid, P.I.
12-14-2007, 11:50 PM
Then does this mean I'm out already?? Having 3 votes??


No, I'm sorry... Me being the third person to vote for you is the (theoretical) scum-tell, not you having three votes. You still have plenty of room before you're lynched.

HazelNutCoffee
12-14-2007, 11:52 PM
You SHOULD care, because this game is not about individual victory/defeat. It's about your TEAM winning. If you are a townie that's about to swing, you should do your best to convince everyone otherwise, since a townie death is a blow for the town. (Unless the town has something to gain from your death that will ultimately benefit them in the long run.) Even if you die, if your team wins, then you win as well.

This is really important to keep in mind. I can't remember which mafia game it was, but the town got screwed by a particular player who was playing to keep himself alive rather than to help the town win as a whole. Bad idea, because even if you survive til the end, if your team loses, you lose too.

And no need to get your panties in a twist. The Day has barely begun and you need a hell of a lot more votes if you are to swing.

Rysto
12-14-2007, 11:56 PM
No, I'm sorry... Me being the third person to vote for you is the (theoretical) scum-tell, not you having three votes. You still have plenty of room before you're lynched.
Bringing up "the third vote is a scum tell" is a scum tell.

* Waits for someone to post that bringing up that "bringing up 'the third vote is a scum tell' is a scum tell" is a scum tell* :)

faithfool
12-14-2007, 11:56 PM
You SHOULD care, because this game is not about individual victory/defeat. It's about your TEAM winning. If you are a townie that's about to swing, you should do your best to convince everyone otherwise, since a townie death is a blow for the town. (Unless the town has something to gain from your death that will ultimately benefit them in the long run.) Even if you die, if your team wins, then you win as well.

This is really important to keep in mind. I can't remember which mafia game it was, but the town got screwed by a particular player who was playing to keep himself alive rather than to help the town win as a whole. Bad idea, because even if you survive til the end, if your team loses, you lose too.

And no need to get your panties in a twist. The Day has barely begun and you need a hell of a lot more votes if you are to swing.

HazelNutCoffee, no need for anyone to get upset. I've been saying everything, since my opening salvo after reading I was about to be strung out to dry, as tongue in cheek. I wouldn't want to harm anyone else's game and I simply thought that I'd been around long enough for folks to know I was joking. Apparently not, so I'll offer my mea culpas now and await for further instruction.


I simply thought that it was funny, given that I'd actually managed to survive the night, to open the thread and find myself on the chopping block. Nothing but dark humor intended.

faithfool
12-14-2007, 11:58 PM
Oh, and just so everyone else will be clear.... that was why I had (what I thought) was a liberal use of smilies in that post. I'll try to do better.


:)

Boozahol Squid, P.I.
12-15-2007, 12:11 AM
Bringing up "the third vote is a scum tell" is a scum tell.

* Waits for someone to post that bringing up that "bringing up 'the third vote is a scum tell' is a scum tell" is a scum tell* :)

Nobody's going to do that. Because bringing up that bringing up the third vote is a scum tell is a scum tell is a scum tell, is, in itself, a scumtell.

Hockey Monkey
12-15-2007, 12:15 AM
Somebody has to be first. :p

Don't take it to heart. If you get lynched today, it just means you get to play again sooner! We'd love to have you in a game on the off-board site! I'm going to unvote you for now because your explainations seem plausible, and it's early in the day. I can always vote for you again. :D

Unvote Faithfool.

zuma
12-15-2007, 12:24 AM
Golden State/LA Lakers is final. 214 total points. 214 is evenly divisible by 14 fifteen times, with a remainder of 4. Add 1, and player 5, MHaye is number 2.

Tomorrow's Charlotte/Atlanta game will determine #3, and will use the same list with MHaye removed.

1.storyteller0910
2.HazelNutCoffee
3.Freudian Slit
4.brewha
5.ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies
6.sachertorte
7.Hawkeyeop
8.ShadowFacts
9. One And Only Wanderers
10. Hal Briston
11. faithfool
12. zuma
13. Kat

I'll also propose that if anyone reveals info prematurely, we just continue generating the random list with them still in it, until we get the full random list of 15 names, otherwise it'll get confusing if someone reveals info in the middle of the games.

Until then I guess we can discuss whether or not it's in our best interest to reveal any more at all, but if we do we need to do it in a random ordered manner.

HazelNutCoffee
12-15-2007, 12:31 AM
HazelNutCoffee, no need for anyone to get upset. I've been saying everything, since my opening salvo after reading I was about to be strung out to dry, as tongue in cheek. I wouldn't want to harm anyone else's game and I simply thought that I'd been around long enough for folks to know I was joking. Apparently not, so I'll offer my mea culpas now and await for further instruction.


I simply thought that it was funny, given that I'd actually managed to survive the night, to open the thread and find myself on the chopping block. Nothing but dark humor intended.
Oh. Er ...

:: goes away to untwist panties ::

Boozahol Squid, P.I.
12-15-2007, 12:39 AM
Until then I guess we can discuss whether or not it's in our best interest to reveal any more at all, but if we do we need to do it in a random ordered manner.

I can't see how more information can possibly be detrimental to the town. There are no power roles for the scum to be plucking off, so the Mystery of the Dossier (and whatever secrets it holds) must be a pro-town mechanism.

I'm now starting to question why Rysto hasn't come forward with his own dossier. He's up first, he's still online, he's posted since zuma named him as the first person to post....

What's keeping you, old bean? Blood on your hands?

Rysto
12-15-2007, 12:43 AM
I can't see how more information can possibly be detrimental to the town. There are no power roles for the scum to be plucking off, so the Mystery of the Dossier (and whatever secrets it holds) must be a pro-town mechanism.

I'm now starting to question why Rysto hasn't come forward with his own dossier. He's up first, he's still online, he's posted since zuma named him as the first person to post....

What's keeping you, old bean? Blood on your hands?
I haven't posted because I'm not convinced that revealing our dossiers is good for the Town. You say it must be a pro-town mechanism. I say bollocks. Personally, I am certain that we don't have all of the information about how the Dossier system works, and that making assumptions about them so early in the game is foolhardy.

zuma
12-15-2007, 12:56 AM
I don't think Rysto or anyone else should be posting any more info at all at the moment... We still have a week. There's plenty of time to discuss it. If we decide to go forward, I just wanted to have a randomized order to go in. I don't think just blurting out info at this point is going to be helpful (and I was guilty of it by revealing one of mine). If we're going to do it, we can't let scum manipulate the order.

Ultimately I think I'll be on the side of thinking we should all reveal, but I want to think about it more.

Rysto
12-15-2007, 01:00 AM
Well, there is one argument against it: waiting would give the scum a better chance to come up with a more convincing lie. But then, if MHaye and I were to post our dossiers tonight that would give scum a chance to study them and might help them lie, too. So maybe that's a wash.

Boozahol Squid, P.I.
12-15-2007, 01:39 AM
Well, there is one argument against it: waiting would give the scum a better chance to come up with a more convincing lie. But then, if MHaye and I were to post our dossiers tonight that would give scum a chance to study them and might help them lie, too. So maybe that's a wash.

The whole point of the randomized order is that, ideally, some of the scum will be caught in the early game, although some will have plenty of time and more information to perhaps puzzle out the dossier themselves before they are forced to claim, the ones in the beginning may be caught.

You're currently on the clock, and I still can only see one reason why someone would want to hide information in a game where there aren't any pro-town power roles.

Rysto
12-15-2007, 01:50 AM
You honestly can't see a valid pro-town reason for not wanting to reveal information whose meaning we don't fully understand? How can you be so sure that revealing our dossiers won't help the scum?

zuma
12-15-2007, 01:59 AM
Although, if revealing information helped the scum, why would Santo Rugger include his in his death scene? I guess there's the possibility he was forced to...

Pleonast
12-15-2007, 02:12 AM
You honestly can't see a valid pro-town reason for not wanting to reveal information whose meaning we don't fully understand? How can you be so sure that revealing our dossiers won't help the scum?I can't think of any reason. We know that everyone revealing won't break the game. Five Scum out 19 players (and them even getting a free kill) is slightly in the Scum's favor, so any net benefit of the Dossiers will help us rather than them (I trust that the mods are good enough to make a balanced game).

I don't expect revealing the Dossiers will immediately help us (since we know it won't break the game). But it will lay the groundwork for us to suss out the Scum in the late game. Delaying the revelations only gives them more time to come up with good lies. (That's the main problem with this reveal process. Better to do it as fast as we can.)

Look at Rugger's death post. It's not entirely clear what his Dossier was, is it? And because of that it's hard to be certain what his killer's trait is. If we all know everyone's Dossier (and we shouldn't lie for this reason), it will be very easy to pick out the killer's traits. And that is the next important step to actually finding them.

And, finally, forcing everyone to reveal their Dossier quickly will force the Scum to lie. Perfect opportunity for them to make a slip. And even if we don't see the slip immediately, the record is there for everyone to be looking at the Dossiers to find them. More eyes is better.

Sometimes you have to hold your info close, but this isn't one of them.

Boozahol Squid, P.I.
12-15-2007, 02:21 AM
You honestly can't see a valid pro-town reason for not wanting to reveal information whose meaning we don't fully understand? How can you be so sure that revealing our dossiers won't help the scum?

In other games, scum seek information because they're trying to make their kills most effective. In this game, the scum don't need information, the only roles are them and town vanillas. They need to limit information, in order to keep them from being outed.

Guess what you're doing? Limiting info.

zuma
12-15-2007, 02:25 AM
I can't think of a good reason not to reveal them either. Pleo brought up a good point about game balance:

5 scum out of 19 (well 18 really, with the night 0 kill) is a large amount of scum considering the town has no power roles. The only thing we do have is information in the dossiers. If that info helped scum more than town, then the game would be broken.

Also, I think the information should get out there before night 1, when scum have a chance to strategize. Count me in favor of everyone revealing in a non-scum controlled order, starting with Rysto and followed by MHaye.

Boozahol Squid, P.I.
12-15-2007, 02:57 AM
Also, I think the information should get out there before night 1, when scum have a chance to strategize. Count me in favor of everyone revealing in a non-scum controlled order, starting with Rysto and followed by MHaye.


That's really the key. If the scum are smart, they'll have already compiled their dossier information, and taken a good look at what the public reveals were. (Those were set at the time of PMing... leading me to believe that if we can solve the logic puzzle that is the dossier, the public reveals will be a key to determining the scum...)
Now that three players have publicly shown their hand, the scum will have even more information with which to decode their dossier, and determine what they need to conceal collectively. If we don't force their hand toDay, they're that much further ahead.
We need some sort of impetus to force Dossier-claims. I can think of only one.

unvote: faithfool
vote: Rysto

Boozahol Squid, P.I.
12-15-2007, 03:27 AM
I'd like to add, as further jsutification for my above vote, that we really need to get this deal rolling along. While a week seems like a long time, it's necessary that we get it done, and we will have at least 5 players who will try to drag out dossier reveals as long as possible. At some points, we may have to mark an intransigent player up as likely scum, and skip him in the order of role reveals.

MHaye
12-15-2007, 05:30 AM
Here is my proposed schedule for determing placement on the random list:

Friday:
1 - Utah/Portland
2 - LA Lakers/Golden State
Saturday:
3 - Charlotte/Atlanta
4 - Memphis/Orlando
5 - Sacramento/Washington
6 - Philadelphia/Cleveland
7 - Indiana/Miami
8 - New Jersey/New York
9 - Phoenix/New Orleans
10- Dallas/Houston
11- Minnesota/Milwaukee
12- Denver/San Antonio
13- Seattle/Utah
Sunday:
14- Golden State/Detroit
15- Boston/Toronto
16- Portland/Denver

Until then I don't think anyone should reveal any more.This means exactly nothing to me. What's it about?

Please try not to assume everyone is American. Thank you.

MHaye
12-15-2007, 06:41 AM
Now I've caught up, I understand your suggested procedure a bit better.

Nevertheless, you are discriminating against me, a citizen of a state other than the US. This is an arbitrary distinction, and when we return I will be making a formal complaint to Human Resources about your discriminatory behaviour.

I have not yet thought through the issues about whether or not revealing dossiers is a pro-town action. You'll have to give me a few hours to think the issue through.






[gamemode=Off]

(Sorry if I sounded a bit sharp, but the assumption that we'd all know what you were on about irked me. A lot.

[gamemode=On]

Boozahol Squid, P.I.
12-15-2007, 06:47 AM
[gamemode=Off]

(Sorry if I sounded a bit sharp, but the assumption that we'd all know what you were on about irked me. A lot.

[gamemode=On]

I thought it was a wonderfully pan-global random number generator that zuma came up with... after all, nobody, either American, European or otherwise cares about the NBA, right?

zuma
12-15-2007, 06:52 AM
I am posting from my phone so ill be brief. mhaye sorry for the american centric thing. diomedes sums up my feelings. mhaye please be ready to reveal after rysto tnday. i too will vote rysto if he refuses to reveal

zuma
12-15-2007, 07:19 AM
Also mhaye was riight. i did not even use the word us basketball. id be irked too. consider me slapped by hr. but us basketball games have the advantage of being high scoring and a good random no. generator for our game.

One And Only Wanderers
12-15-2007, 07:37 AM
Rugger's dossier

This is what I have put together from his death post

One of my high school classmates was killed in the attack on the USS Stark.
I have performed an exorcism
I believe that zombies are inherently funny

These ones are pretty certain, the top one being his public attribute, the next 2 after that matching with hawkeyepop and MHaye's public attributes. These next ones are a guess from the death text

I have eaten Rocky Mountain Oysters
I have eaten at Fat Tuesdays with Ricky Plant

has anyone got anything better?

zuma
12-15-2007, 08:35 AM
Last post from my phone. i agre with din that we nef to get thir rolling. if mhaye agrees that he was chosen randomly, then i proposd that he reveaj today whether or not rysto refuses.

MHaye
12-15-2007, 09:58 AM
Also mhaye was riight. i did not even use the word us basketball. id be irked too. consider me slapped by hr. but us basketball games have the advantage of being high scoring and a good random no. generator for our game.Thank you zuma. I'll withdraw my planned complaint to HR.

I'm fully on board with the need to uncover the Silent Pigs1 and impose Company discipline. I was going to propose defenestration from the dining-hall, which has such a spectacular view of the plummet into the ravine.

I now have a better understanding of your rationale for the proposed determination. I do think we need a method capable of generating a wide band of numbers. My counter-proposal would be using the highest run-scorer from a sequence of one-day cricket matches - the Cricket World Cup played earlier this year provides a suitably large series of games. (Hands up who here plays cricket? Or even would have known about the Cricket World Cup, absent the sensationalism?)

My core hesitation though is still that I'm uncertain about whether this is ultimately a good plan for those of us who are not Silent Pigs. Give me a few more hours to think about it, OK?









1A friend of mine on another board has a sig that reads

"If a pig loses his voice, is he disgruntled?"

Hence Disgruntled Associates L.L.P. is composed of Silent Pigs.

sachertorte
12-15-2007, 01:41 PM
It seems that the Town is leaning towards a mass dossier reveal. I'm not quite convinced yet. Hockey Monkey's revelation:
Apparently I share an attribute with a killer because I once drove a VW Beetle through the front door of a 7-11. Knowing that I am a very happy and satisfied associate, I now know that the disgruntleds do not have "unique only to scum" attributes. I have no idea how this puzzle is going to be put together in the end. I think it is some sort of logic puzzle, and I'm fairly good at those.

So either Hockey Monkey is Town who happens to share a commonality with Santo Rugger's killer.
OR
She's scum.

I'm leaning towards Hockey Monkey being town because jumping out and saying what Santo Rugger's death post means is pro-town. But it would also be a feasible move by scum to do the same. So do we lynch Hockey Monkey or not (rhetorical)? If we reveal Dossiers, I fear that we will be tempted to lynch people who share attributes with scum rather than actual scum.

If we reveal Dossiers, I think scum will be able to use that information to manipulate us. Scum will lie to their best advantage, and kill based on dossier information to their advantage, not ours.

The only compelling reason put out so far for revealing dossiers is the possibility that we might be able to discern lies. While this might be true, we don't know that this is the case or that our analysis of the dossiers will accurately point to lying scum. (In other words, we don't know that lies will be apparent to us, and we don't know whether or not NAF/mtgman gave a few pro-town roles anomalous, fake-looking dossiers). If we choose to reveal dossiers and our analyses fail to turn up scum then we will have given up much for very little.

Boozahol Squid, P.I.
12-15-2007, 02:40 PM
The only compelling reason put out so far for revealing dossiers is the possibility that we might be able to discern lies. While this might be true, we don't know that this is the case or that our analysis of the dossiers will accurately point to lying scum. (In other words, we don't know that lies will be apparent to us, and we don't know whether or not NAF/mtgman gave a few pro-town roles anomalous, fake-looking dossiers). If we choose to reveal dossiers and our analyses fail to turn up scum then we will have given up much for very little.


I fail to see what we'll have given up. The dossiers are information that will point towards scum... I fail to see how the town is going to do -anything- with the information contained within the dossiers unless we pool our information. If we don't pool our information, we have a very small chance of winning (we go to lynch or lose on Day Five, with no cop to guide us or doc to extend that).

Rysto
12-15-2007, 02:41 PM
May I suggest a small change for determining our schedule? I'd prefer to get the whole schedule set tonight, so instead of using NBA games from tomorrow to set the last two positions why not use NHL games? There are 11 games scheduled to start tonight at 7 PM Eastern or later. I propose using the aggregate score of 6 of those games to determine the 14th position and the aggregate score of the other 5 to determine the 15th position(the 16th position is no longer necessary because Hockey Monkey revealed her dossier).

For the 14th position let's use the following games:
CBJ/BOS
CHI/BUF
TOR/MON
ATL/OTT
PIT/NYI
CAR/PHI

For the 15th position:
FLA/DET
WAS/TBL
NAS/COL
VAN/EDM
MIN/LAK

Is this ok with everybody?

Freudian Slit
12-15-2007, 03:02 PM
Hey guys, sorry to be so silent...

I'm going to try to catch up today and tomorrow...have had some off-board things to deal with. I read a bit about the random procedure for revealing dossiers. I think it looks good...

Boozahol Squid, P.I.
12-15-2007, 05:48 PM
May I suggest a small change for determining our schedule? I'd prefer to get the whole schedule set tonight, so instead of using NBA games from tomorrow to set the last two positions why not use NHL games? There are 11 games scheduled to start tonight at 7 PM Eastern or later. I propose using the aggregate score of 6 of those games to determine the 14th position and the aggregate score of the other 5 to determine the 15th position(the 16th position is no longer necessary because Hockey Monkey revealed her dossier).

For the 14th position let's use the following games:
CBJ/BOS
CHI/BUF
TOR/MON
ATL/OTT
PIT/NYI
CAR/PHI

For the 15th position:
FLA/DET
WAS/TBL
NAS/COL
VAN/EDM
MIN/LAK

Is this ok with everybody?

Looks great. We're stil lstarting with you, though.

storyteller0910
12-15-2007, 06:20 PM
Folks -

Just arrived home from an extended period away from my computer, and I'm sorry to throw stuff out there and then disappear on the conversation. I am absolutely too tired to compose a coherent post of any length or substance right now, but will certainly do so tomorrow. In the meanwhile, whether or not we choose to reveal dossiers en masse, I have two suggestions that I genuinely can't see a downside to:

1. If you are Night killed, make certain to reveal every element of your dossier in your final post; otherwise we will lose the information in question for ever and ever.

2. Similarly, if you are pro-town, and if you are about to be lynched - post your dossier before you die. Your death will confirm the truth of your list. Since, as far as I can tell, lynch-ees don't get to write a death scene, there will be no post-lynch opportunity to share the information that only you have.

Anyone disagree with either of these points?

More tomorrow.

ShadowFacts
12-15-2007, 07:05 PM
1. If you are Night killed, make certain to reveal every element of your dossier in your final post; otherwise we will lose the information in question for ever and ever.

2. Similarly, if you are pro-town, and if you are about to be lynched - post your dossier before you die. Your death will confirm the truth of your list. Since, as far as I can tell, lynch-ees don't get to write a death scene, there will be no post-lynch opportunity to share the information that only you have.

Anyone disagree with either of these points?


I completely agree with #1.

I'm confused about #2. Given that the dead person writes their own death scene, how does their death confirm their list?

storyteller0910
12-15-2007, 07:15 PM
I completely agree with #1.

I'm confused about #2. Given that the dead person writes their own death scene, how does their death confirm their list?

I knew I didn't explain that one correctly. Say Poster X is pro-town, but knows he is about to be lynched. His best defense has gone for naught; we are a crazed mob. His last act should be to post his dossier. When he dies, and his pro-town identity is confirmed, we will know that - because he is pro-town and has no reason to lie - he was telling the truth.

ShadowFacts
12-15-2007, 07:16 PM
I fail to see what we'll have given up. The dossiers are information that will point towards scum... I fail to see how the town is going to do -anything- with the information contained within the dossiers unless we pool our information. If we don't pool our information, we have a very small chance of winning (we go to lynch or lose on Day Five, with no cop to guide us or doc to extend that).

I have similar reservations to the Dossier reveal plan that sachertorte has expressed. But perhaps I am just not understanding, so I'm hoping you and/or Pleonast could spell it out for me.

Let's assume for a moment that we all go forward with the plan as you and others have outlined. OK, then all the information is there on the table. Presumably scum will lie about some or all of their traits. Presumably Town will be straight-up and post their true lists.

What next? How do we use the information to catch scum? What exactly is the plan?

Here's one problem I foresee: Let's suppose for example that one of my traits is "I played college football until I got injured." (It's not, really). Let's further suppose that a couple of scum share this trait with me, but lie about it. Then one of them kills you, and you see that your killer played college football until he got injured. Where does that leave me? I'll have suspicion all over me for having that trait, whereas the real scum are happily hiding and voting for me! Since scum are going to lie about their lists, how do we really glean anything true?

Can someone please tell me what I'm overlooking here?

I really think we need to think this through. I look forward to having my fears allayed.

ShadowFacts
12-15-2007, 07:20 PM
I knew I didn't explain that one correctly. Say Poster X is pro-town, but knows he is about to be lynched. His best defense has gone for naught; we are a crazed mob. His last act should be to post his dossier. When he dies, and his pro-town identity is confirmed, we will know that - because he is pro-town and has no reason to lie - he was telling the truth.

Ah, got it - makes perfect sense now.

Mtgman
12-15-2007, 07:48 PM
Everyone who dies will have the opportunity to write a death scene. Unless you're modkilled. No info about scum will be revealed to lynchees, but they still get a chance to post their closing thoughts, as it were.

Enjoy,
Steven

storyteller0910
12-15-2007, 07:58 PM
I really do believe that we're best served by revealing the dossier contents, but am open to further discussion on the matter.

In the present situation, I can see absolutely no downside to increasing the net amount of information possessed by the group as a whole, because with the exception of the "7% secret," about which I think speculation is basically useless, there's no way for information to help the scum. Their entire goal is going to be to force five mislynches. The simplest answer to the fear that ShadowFacts raised is simply not to rely exclusively on dossier clues to find scum. We'll have to do behavior analysis in addition, and use the puzzle represented by the dossiers to supplement, not replace, that analysis.

More on this tomorrow, but for now, how about some of that behavior analysis:

That's really the key. If the scum are smart, they'll have already compiled their dossier information, and taken a good look at what the public reveals were. (Those were set at the time of PMing... leading me to believe that if we can solve the logic puzzle that is the dossier, the public reveals will be a key to determining the scum...)
Now that three players have publicly shown their hand, the scum will have even more information with which to decode their dossier, and determine what they need to conceal collectively. If we don't force their hand toDay, they're that much further ahead.
We need some sort of impetus to force Dossier-claims. I can think of only one.

unvote: faithfool
vote: Rysto

Color removed for clarity.

No.

Just no.

I disagree with Rysto on this subject. His opinion seems to be in the minority. But that does not make him scum, or even scummy. These games have turned into festivals of lynching people with minority opinions on strategy. It's an easy reason to vote for someone - "he has an idea with which a lot of people disagree! Let's string him up!" This is a bad way to identify scum, and I'll be pickled and forced into twenty-five hours of SOP Training before I'll let this group go down that road again.

It's a bad way to identify scum.

But it's a good, easily defensible way to get townies to vote for another townie. And so I'm going to:

vote Diomedes

Hawkeyeop
12-15-2007, 08:21 PM
I have similar reservations to the Dossier reveal plan that sachertorte has expressed. But perhaps I am just not understanding, so I'm hoping you and/or Pleonast could spell it out for me.

Let's assume for a moment that we all go forward with the plan as you and others have outlined. OK, then all the information is there on the table. Presumably scum will lie about some or all of their traits. Presumably Town will be straight-up and post their true lists.

What next? How do we use the information to catch scum? What exactly is the plan?

Here's one problem I foresee: Let's suppose for example that one of my traits is "I played college football until I got injured." (It's not, really). Let's further suppose that a couple of scum share this trait with me, but lie about it. Then one of them kills you, and you see that your killer played college football until he got injured. Where does that leave me? I'll have suspicion all over me for having that trait, whereas the real scum are happily hiding and voting for me! Since scum are going to lie about their lists, how do we really glean anything true?

Can someone please tell me what I'm overlooking here?

I really think we need to think this through. I look forward to having my fears allayed.

Assumeably the information can determine who the scum are, we just need to learn how to interpret it. Now given we have no idea what the pattern is, and that are information is going to be less then 100% accurate, this will be a difficult task. I think having scum have entirely different traits then town folk is too easy, but there has to be something. Maybe for each trait there are 2 town folks who share and 1 scum. Not that obviously, as the math doesn't quite work, but something. And the more information we have, the better shot we have at figuring out what the pattern is.

On the other hand, I also think there may be a hidden mechanic that allows the scum to use this information to their advantage which is what has kept me from being 100% behind this idea.

Boozahol Squid, P.I.
12-15-2007, 08:50 PM
What next? How do we use the information to catch scum? What exactly is the plan?

Here's one problem I foresee: Let's suppose for example that one of my traits is "I played college football until I got injured." (It's not, really). Let's further suppose that a couple of scum share this trait with me, but lie about it. Then one of them kills you, and you see that your killer played college football until he got injured. Where does that leave me? I'll have suspicion all over me for having that trait, whereas the real scum are happily hiding and voting for me! Since scum are going to lie about their lists, how do we really glean anything true?

Can someone please tell me what I'm overlooking here?

I really think we need to think this through. I look forward to having my fears allayed.

The starting information, along with the general tone of the dossiers we've seen so far has led me to believe that there's some sort of connection or clues to the identity of the scum hidden within the dossiers. I don't think the dossier is a red herring, and the only hidden information I think is in this game is the identity of the scum.

If we have all the information on the table, (even with scum misdirection), we'll have a chance to sort it out and possibly crack the code that I believe lies within.

Lacking the general agreement that that's what we should do, I think our next best option is to no-lynch until we have more information out of confirmed townies death scenes.

But I guess people like storyteller have a better plan. If you don't like the idea of fetching information out of the dossier, how do you propose we procede in our scum-catching. We don't have the margin of error in this game that we've had in the other games. By the way... I was voting for Rysto in order to encourage him to make the dossier reveals. I fully believe that the only people in this game with something to hide are scum... and so the people who will be holding things up will be scum. I think it's a pretty logical way of scum-finding.

(and, for the record, I'm not convinced Rysto's scum yet, either. but over-caution on the part of the town will be fatal in this game)

storyteller0910
12-15-2007, 09:31 PM
But I guess people like storyteller have a better plan. If you don't like the idea of fetching information out of the dossier, how do you propose we procede in our scum-catching.


Did you actually read my previous post, or just skim it?

For the benefit of those looking on - I actually am in favor of dossier revelation, and have stated so repeatedly. So this statement, aimed at me, suggests that you didn't really read much of my response, other than that I voted for you and mentioned Rysto. Skimming is a scum tell.

However, I'll answer your question anyway: the way you proceed with scum-catching in the absence of dossiers or investigative roles is to look at the way players act. Specifically, what I am always interested in is this: who appears to be creating, or attempting to create, an artificial rush in a particular direction? Who appears to be dissembling, talking out of both sides of the mouth? Who appears to be attempting to manipulate the group? Who appears to be behaving in an opportunistic fashion? And who carefully backs down from their vote when called on it?

In your case, what I see is that sort of opportunism. You saw Rysto expressing an opinion that ran contrary to the majority. For scum, that represents a great opportunity, because - as you've seen in past games - towns like to lynch the mutant (sorry, Rysto, I'm not calling you a "mutant," but you know what I mean), the lone wolf, the dissenter. So scum will throw a vote in the direction of the dissenter, hoping to start a bandwagon. But if the bandwagon doesn't start, and if someone challenges them on their vote, scum will often weasel - by saying something like: "I'm not convinced Rysto is scum." I mean, consider that statement.

There's no reason, at this stage, that you should be convinced that he is. You have virtually no evidence. It's a non-statement. The only reason to make this disavowal is to distance yourself from that vote now that someone has associated you with it.

Hell, I could be wrong. But trying to suss out the motivation underlying people's posts is surely going to be a better key to winning this game than obsessing over the contents of the dossiers.

Rysto
12-15-2007, 09:40 PM
Ok, we've had the following final scores from NBA games:

Score Total Points
3 - Charlotte/Atlanta 93-84 177
4 - Memphis/Orlando 123-119 242
5 - Sacramento/Washington 92-79 171
6 - Philadelphia/Cleveland 92-86 178
7 - Indiana/Miami 106-103 209
8 - New Jersey/New York 94-86 180
9 - Phoenix/New Orleans 101-98 199
If my calculations are correct, the order is:

1. Rysto
2. MHaye
3. ShadowFacts
4. HazelNutCoffee
5. Hawkeyeop
6. faithfool
7. Freudian Slit
8. sachertorte
9. ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies

The remaining players are:
1.storyteller0910
2.brewha
3. One And Only Wanderers
4. Hal Briston
5. zuma
6. Kat

We're waiting on the results of the late games to determine the rest of the order. If somebody could check my math, that'd be great.

Rysto
12-15-2007, 10:42 PM
Shoot, I messed up. I forgot to add 1 after taking the remainder each time, which means that original order that I showed was wrong. Here's the corrected(and complete) order:

Score Total Points
1 - Charlotte/Atlanta 93-84 177
2 - Memphis/Orlando 123-119 242
3 - Sacramento/Washington 92-79 171
4 - Philadelphia/Cleveland 92-86 178
5 - Indiana/Miami 106-103 209
6 - New Jersey/New York 94-86 180
7 - Phoenix/New Orleans 101-98 199
8 - Dallas/Houston 96-83 179
9 - Minnesota/Milwaukee 95-92 187
10- Denver/San Antonio 102-91 193
11- Seattle/Utah 96-75 171

12- NHL 7PM Games
CBJ/BOS 2-0 2
CHI/BUF 3-1 4
TOR/MON 4-1 5
ATL/OTT 7-3 10
PIT/NYI 3-2 5
CAR/PHI 6-5 11
Total 37
1. Rysto
2. MHaye
3. One And Only Wanderers
4. Freudian Slit
5. ShadowFacts
6. zuma
7. brewha
8. Hawkeyeop
9. sachertorte
10.Kat
11.ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies
12.HazelNutCoffee
13.storyteller0910
14.faithfool
15.Hal Briston

In case anybody is wondering how the full order can be set without waiting for the results of the late NHL games, zuma miscounted the number of random numbers that we needed. When there's only one player left there's no need for a random number.

Boozahol Squid, P.I.
12-15-2007, 11:53 PM
Did you actually read my previous post, or just skim it?

For the benefit of those looking on - I actually am in favor of dossier revelation, and have stated so repeatedly. So this statement, aimed at me, suggests that you didn't really read much of my response, other than that I voted for you and mentioned Rysto. Skimming is a scum tell.

However, I'll answer your question anyway: the way you proceed with scum-catching in the absence of dossiers or investigative roles is to look at the way players act. Specifically, what I am always interested in is this: who appears to be creating, or attempting to create, an artificial rush in a particular direction? Who appears to be dissembling, talking out of both sides of the mouth? Who appears to be attempting to manipulate the group? Who appears to be behaving in an opportunistic fashion? And who carefully backs down from their vote when called on it?

In your case, what I see is that sort of opportunism. You saw Rysto expressing an opinion that ran contrary to the majority. For scum, that represents a great opportunity, because - as you've seen in past games - towns like to lynch the mutant (sorry, Rysto, I'm not calling you a "mutant," but you know what I mean), the lone wolf, the dissenter. So scum will throw a vote in the direction of the dissenter, hoping to start a bandwagon. But if the bandwagon doesn't start, and if someone challenges them on their vote, scum will often weasel - by saying something like: "I'm not convinced Rysto is scum." I mean, consider that statement.

There's no reason, at this stage, that you should be convinced that he is. You have virtually no evidence. It's a non-statement. The only reason to make this disavowal is to distance yourself from that vote now that someone has associated you with it.

Hell, I could be wrong. But trying to suss out the motivation underlying people's posts is surely going to be a better key to winning this game than obsessing over the contents of the dossiers.

Meh. Skimming is a Diomedes tell.

I didn't leap opportunistically leap onto Rysto... I gave him plenty of time and chances to go along with the only chance I think we have. Plucking scum out based on our beliefs on underlying motives is a decent way to handle a lot of Mafia games, but I don't believe this set up gives the town a good chance of winning if we approach it the way we deal with most mafia games. There's a lot of places for mafioso to hide, and there's plenty of them if we do chance on one or two of them.

I can't imagine any sort of information that the dossiers will provide that will enable the scum to take an advantage over the town. If someone wants to spell out the dangers of dossier information-reveal to me, in small words of two syllables or less, I'll shut up about it. But until then, I can only see dossier-revelation as pro-town manuever, and therefore, moves to withhold dossier information as an anti-town manuever.

Ergo, my vote for Rysto. (for now)

Boozahol Squid, P.I.
12-16-2007, 11:25 AM
12 hour check-in... and nothing.

ShadowFacts
12-16-2007, 11:49 AM
I can't imagine any sort of information that the dossiers will provide that will enable the scum to take an advantage over the town. If someone wants to spell out the dangers of dossier information-reveal to me, in small words of two syllables or less, I'll shut up about it. But until then, I can only see dossier-revelation as pro-town manuever, and therefore, moves to withhold dossier information as an anti-town manuever.

This reminds me a lot of the Mafia: Conspiracy game we both just recently played. Remember the early going in that game when many of us, myself included, were pressing sachertorte to reveal all his info, but he was holding back? Many people were saying "There's NO reason not to reveal this info?" Turns out, there was good reason to hold back and we were all better for it.

The lesson: just because you can't see a downside, doesn't mean there isn't one. And those who disagree with you are not necessarily inherently anti-town. That kind of black and white thinking is counterproductive. Add on to it the rush rush rush! to reveal everything NOW! (or else!!) and that's not a good way to play. We should take our time and think it through, listening to all opinions on the matter.

Now, I posted some questions above about the reveal plan that were not really answered at all. I'd like you or Pleonast or anyone else who is confident in the plan to address my questions. In other words - convince me you are right and I will happily go along with the plan. Right now, I am not convinced, and I won't do it until I am. You can go ahead and vote for me for that if you want, or you can try to change my mind.

Freudian Slit
12-16-2007, 01:18 PM
Okay, I'm somewhat caught up. Yeah, ShadowFacts, that's a good point. In light of all that, I'm more inclined to be conservative about the info sharing this time out.

I'm also wary of lynching the noobs right away...though at this point it seems to soon to tell. I was a noobie last time (granted, I was scum) and most of the mistakes I made that made me look scummy weren't because I was actually scum, but because I just wasn't sure what was going on. No one has pinged my radar quite that strongly just yet in this game, though.

zuma
12-16-2007, 02:10 PM
Now, I posted some questions above about the reveal plan that were not really answered at all. I'd like you or Pleonast or anyone else who is confident in the plan to address my questions. In other words - convince me you are right and I will happily go along with the plan. Right now, I am not convinced, and I won't do it until I am. You can go ahead and vote for me for that if you want, or you can try to change my mind.
I'll try...

There are no power roles. zero. It's vanilla vs. scum. We've been conditioned to keep secrets in this game so far, because we want to protect all of our power roles. What is the motivation to keep secrets now?
NAF states as much in his opening posts on page one of this thread.

This game is going to be a tiny bit different from the others we have played here. It will be smaller, a bit slower, and much more traditional "real" mafia. No fancy schmancy bells and doodads on this on.

No Cops, no Vig, no SK, no Bombs, no Role Blockers, no Masons, no Recruitment, no Multiple Factions, forget pretty much everything you've known as Mafia on these boards and others. This is a flavor driven game, and the mechanics are VERY straightforward and out in the open(for 93% of the game's rules). The remaining 7% isn't something to count on, or lose sleep over. It's just a little something we threw in to keep y'all good and paranoid.

I'll choose to take NAF's word for it that the "7%" thing is nothing to lose sleep over, or to count on. It does seem to be making people paranoid, though.

This game is going to have three things that make it different from a normal vanilla vs scum game. We are calling them "The Twist" "The Dossier" and "The Secret" respectively.
And in case anyone is worried about there being a secret cop or some such, if NAF's "not something to count on or lose sleep over" comment doesn't do it for you, he also says this:
There is a secret element to this game. And we are not going to tell you about it. That's why it is a secret.

BUT we will not violate or contradict anything that we have told you is true. So there is absolutely, positively, 100%, without question, no recruitment in this game. Got it? Good.
He's told us we're all vanilla. I ask those who are resisting disclosing information, what good does it do us to hide it? To what end? Who are we protecting?

The "twist" itself, the fact that we learn the identity of one of the traits of the killers, tells me that these traits are key to determining who the scum are. The scum already know who we are, and they don't have to worry about targeting power roles because there aren't any. I see no likely scenario where being open hurts us. I see several where it hurts scum.

Maybe townies all share a few traits exclusively. Maybe scum do too. Maybe scum aren't allowed to lie about their traits. Maybe when all the traits are on the table, we'll find distinct semi-related "groups". I don't know.

The point is that the scum know who we are, none of us are worth killing more than others to them, and just possibly the traits are of use to us to catch scum. The death revelation twist seems to point in that direction.

Unless someone can point to a good reason not to reveal it, I'll be voting for one of the people resisting. Because the only group I can envision wanting to keep this information secret is scum.

zuma
12-16-2007, 02:15 PM
Also, Rysto, I ran the numbers and came up with the same list you did.

HazelNutCoffee
12-16-2007, 10:00 PM
Sorry for the lack of participation today - I have guests visiting from out of town. I'll catch up once I drug them they go to bed.

Boozahol Squid, P.I.
12-17-2007, 12:06 AM
Now, I posted some questions above about the reveal plan that were not really answered at all. I'd like you or Pleonast or anyone else who is confident in the plan to address my questions. In other words - convince me you are right and I will happily go along with the plan. Right now, I am not convinced, and I won't do it until I am. You can go ahead and vote for me for that if you want, or you can try to change my mind.

It's tough. See, I think I've figured out part of the logic puzzle that is the dossier. So I may be helpful in determining true from false dossier claims. But I can't give you that information until we have all the dossier claims, for what I hope are obvious reasons.

There was only one catch and that was Catch-22, which specified that a concern for one's safety in the face of dangers that were real and immediate was the process of a rational mind. Orr was crazy and could be grounded. All he had to do was ask; and as soon as he did, he would no longer be crazy and would have to fly more missions. Orr would be crazy to fly more missions and sane if he didn't, but if he was sane he had to fly them. If he flew them he was crazy and didn't have to; but if he didn't want to he was sane and had to. Yossarian was moved very deeply by the absolute simplicity of this clause of Catch-22 and let out a respectful whistle.
"That's some catch, that Catch-22," [Yossarian] observed.
"It's the best there is," Doc Daneeka agreed.

One And Only Wanderers
12-17-2007, 02:14 AM
I'll be very interested to see what you've figured out with only your own dossier, everyone's public statement & what we can derive of Rugger's. In fact I'd like to hear it BEFORE we reveal everyone's dossier. If it's too clever, it may indicate your membership in a group that can share information. And as we know, there's only one such group in this game.

Boozahol Squid, P.I.
12-17-2007, 05:43 AM
I'll be very interested to see what you've figured out with only your own dossier, everyone's public statement & what we can derive of Rugger's. In fact I'd like to hear it BEFORE we reveal everyone's dossier. If it's too clever, it may indicate your membership in a group that can share information. And as we know, there's only one such group in this game.

Pleo and Hockey have also revealed their dossiers as well.
And I'm afraid that if I reveal what I've figured out, then the value of my information becomes worthless. Or, at least, worth much less. if you guys hang me, I'll post what I've got in my death scene.... but as soon as it becomes public knowledge, it's too late to help us out the scum.

One And Only Wanderers
12-17-2007, 05:55 AM
I can see where you don't want to put out your theory first. How about you compose a post now detailing what you have surmised, and then post that with your updated one after the reveals? Also, I need to pay more attention, I have somehow missed the Pleo and hockey reveal. Off to have a look now.

Boozahol Squid, P.I.
12-17-2007, 06:32 AM
I can see where you don't want to put out your theory first. How about you compose a post now detailing what you have surmised, and then post that with your updated one after the reveals? Also, I need to pay more attention, I have somehow missed the Pleo and hockey reveal. Off to have a look now.


Good idea. I probably ought to also run down and make sure that my assumptions (based on some pretty decent initial analysis, I think) is entirely on point. I'll compose forthwith.

storyteller0910
12-17-2007, 08:15 AM
Hey, before we go diving into whatever Diomedes has in store for us, I just wanted to put on the record my opinion that this:

Meh. Skimming is a Diomedes tell.
Plucking scum out based on our beliefs on underlying motives is a decent way to handle a lot of Mafia games, but I don't believe this set up gives the town a good chance of winning if we approach it the way we deal with most mafia games. There's a lot of places for mafioso to hide, and there's plenty of them if we do chance on one or two of them.


...is absolutely false. Analyzing underlying motives is not only just as good a way to find scum as it has been in past games, it is actually better. In previous games, identifying scum based on evident inconsistencies or dissembling in their arguments was complicated by a significant confounding factor: the fact that the power roles needed to hide from the scum, and the behavior of pro-town power roles, in many cases, may appear similar to that of the scum.

In this game, there are no pro-town power roles. No pro-town player has any reason to be inconsistent or dissembling; behavioral analysis should be easier to do in this game than in others.

Further, I'd go so far as to say that the incredible emphasis we're placing on the dossiers so far is more likely to hurt us than to help us. I figured by discussing them quickly and reaching a consensus on how to handle them, we'd move on to a more behavior-based analysis mroe quickly, but instead we've become bogged down in revelation systems and dossier-based theories and whatnot. I'd be surprised, given their public statements on their design, if the moderators created the dossier system to be very much more than a fun MacGuffin; it seems plain that this game was designed to reward a more behavior-based analysis than past games, and the amount of attention we're paying to what is likely a terrifically small aspect of the game may be counterproductive.

In simpler terms: say everyone reveals their dossiers, and the scum all tell the truth. We've lost nothing. We've probably gained nothing. It'd be a wash, since I'd venture to guess that every trait is shared by at least two players. So we need to find better ways to find scum, which we will not do as long as we're devoting this much mental energy to discussing dossiers.

zuma
12-17-2007, 08:28 AM
It seems that ordered reaveals are nnt popular with scum and others. i have walked along the shore of the bay of pigs. my great great grandfather was a duke in scily.

One And Only Wanderers
12-17-2007, 08:28 AM
By the way, without a really strong lead, are we better "No Lynching" to reduce the body count to one per day? Obv if we have good reason to suspect someone is scum we can string them up.

Boozahol Squid, P.I.
12-17-2007, 08:46 AM
By the way, without a really strong lead, are we better "No Lynching" to reduce the body count to one per day? Obv if we have good reason to suspect someone is scum we can string them up.

What strong leads are you referring to? I think faithfool's messup re: confirming is about as strong a lead as we can hope for, and I think that's far from a lock for scum.

It's looking like dossier reveals aren't really going to happen, so we probably won't have any clues divined from those. The daily dead-man reveal won't give us any lock, either, unless the information given happens to be the piece of information given out publicly at the start of the game: even then, some of those items are duplicated in other player's dossiers. If we're going to play this as a straight vanilla-vanilla game, I don't see the benefit of no lynching.

One And Only Wanderers
12-17-2007, 08:49 AM
I was assuming we were going ahead with the dossier reveals. The only reason I haven't is that I am #3 on the list and #1/#2 haven't posted yet. When did revealing dossiers fall by the wayside?

zuma
12-17-2007, 08:49 AM
Ive travelled with royalty in torn jeans and tshirt aliens steal my socks. apollo landings were hollywood. i memorized d hn thd dictionararary.

MHaye
12-17-2007, 09:03 AM
I haven't yet decided against revealing. I just have this nagging worry I'm overlooking something obvious.

I'll decide in a few hours (say about 7pm GMT) and let people know.

zuma
12-17-2007, 09:05 AM
im posting by phone thd intererting thing about a pure vanilla game is how exposed we are. dio is town like me. many are nnt

sachertorte
12-17-2007, 09:15 AM
I'm still not keen on the Dossier reveal idea. If Diomedes can demonstrate the feasibility of trapping scum by a dossier reveal, then I'll change my mind; but my feeling is the game design would be created to prevent such things from happening. If dossier reveals out scum, then what would be the point of playing?

Part of the reason I feel this way is due to the postings NAF, mtgman, storyteller and I have had regarding... some other game. We had been running on the notion that town had drifted away from the core of mafia by becoming too reliant on power roles and night actions rather than post analysis and behavioral evaluation to catch scum. I was under the impression that this game was a 'back to basics' game, which is why I signed up. All my blathering doesn't really speak to whether we should or should not reveal dossiers, but I think everyone should know that NAF and mtgman were thinking when they created the game.

With that in mind, I'll explain why I'm against dossier reveals.

The main pro-reveal reason given so far is that we can use the reveals to catch scum. I do not believe this to be true. I don't know it to be false, but I can't imagine the game being designed in such a way that mass claims would out scum. Something has to be there that prevents such a thing from working. Also, someone stated that mass reveals won't break the game a a reason to do so. In my mind, that is not a reason to reveal; quite the opposite actually. For all we know 'not breaking the game' means mass reveals only hurts town a bit. We need to make sure that revealing helps town.
Things that could screw up a dossier analysis to find scum:
1) Game designed with townies having scummy looking dossiers
2) Game designed with moderator supplied fake dossiers

I think we need to understand how we should treat death post information alongside dossier information. Then I think we will be in a better position to understand how dossier reveals (or no reveals) will impact how the game develops.

How I (sachertorte) understand the dossier system, and what this means for Day One:
Santo Rugger is dead.
HockeyMonkey interprets Santo Rugger's death post as indicating the killer shares an attribute with HockeyMonkey.
So what should we do with this information? How do we interpret it? What do we do? We can't lynch HockeyMonkey for this because she could be town who just happens to share an attribute with Santo Rugger's killer. But we can't exonerate her because she could be clever scum.
My fear is that full dossier information will serve as a distraction for the town.

on preview:
I think storyteller is remembering the same discussion with NAF and mtgman as I am.

regarding no-lynch:
With 18 alive and 5 scum, the game ends when town mislynches 4 times, or correct lynches 5 times. One no-lynch still affords us 4 mislynches. So at some point in the game we can no-lynch once without adverse effects.

dossier reveals:
Why are we assuming that dossier reveals has been agreed to? We had a very quiet weekend. I don't think everyone has chimed in. I feel steamrolled about this.

Pleonast
12-17-2007, 09:17 AM
This reminds me a lot of the Mafia: Conspiracy game we both just recently played. Remember the early going in that game when many of us, myself included, were pressing sachertorte to reveal all his info, but he was holding back? Many people were saying "There's NO reason not to reveal this info?" Turns out, there was good reason to hold back and we were all better for it.

The lesson: just because you can't see a downside, doesn't mean there isn't one. And those who disagree with you are not necessarily inherently anti-town. That kind of black and white thinking is counterproductive. Add on to it the rush rush rush! to reveal everything NOW! (or else!!) and that's not a good way to play. We should take our time and think it through, listening to all opinions on the matter.I should point out that in my Mafia: the Conspiracy game, all the Town truthfully revealing wouldn't have automatically lost it for them, simply because the three other Sides would have still been playing against each other. The global reveal would have made it hard for the Town to win, but easily possible.

The primary reason I feel safe revealing our Dossiers is the slight advantage that's been built into the game for the Scum. If the net effect of the Dossiers helps the Scum, then the Town will need to play extremely well in order to win. So the question for me is: should we reveal piece-meal or all at once?

The piece-meal approach 1) prevents us from seeing all data, making analysis more difficult, 2) lets the Scum have plenty of time and examples to make good lies in their Dossiers, 3) gives the Scum the advantage of having more information than us (since they'll undoubtedly tell each other their own Dossiers). Revealing all at once 1) gives us an almost complete picture of the Dossiers, 2) forces the Scum to lie now with less information, 3) gives everyone time to look for any pattern in the Dossiers that will reveal Scum.Plucking scum out based on our beliefs on underlying motives is a decent way to handle a lot of Mafia games, but I don't believe this set up gives the town a good chance of winning if we approach it the way we deal with most mafia games. There's a lot of places for mafioso to hide, and there's plenty of them if we do chance on one or two of them.The problem with previous games is that the Town tends not to look for underlying motives but at superficial tells or disagreements. And then depend on being saved by either a few power roles or the scum making stupid mistakes. We won't have that luxury this game (I'm not going to depend on the scum making stupid mistakes, either).Further, I'd go so far as to say that the incredible emphasis we're placing on the dossiers so far is more likely to hurt us than to help us. I figured by discussing them quickly and reaching a consensus on how to handle them, we'd move on to a more behavior-based analysis mroe quickly, but instead we've become bogged down in revelation systems and dossier-based theories and whatnot. I'd be surprised, given their public statements on their design, if the moderators created the dossier system to be very much more than a fun MacGuffin; it seems plain that this game was designed to reward a more behavior-based analysis than past games, and the amount of attention we're paying to what is likely a terrifically small aspect of the game may be counterproductive.I don't expect the Dossiers will help us until closer to the end of the game. So I agree that over-emphasis on them at this point is likely to be unhelpful. But we need to make all the Dossiers public now in order to minimize the manipulation the Scum can try.

sachertorte
12-17-2007, 09:18 AM
im posting by phone thd intererting thing about a pure vanilla game is how exposed we are. dio is town like me. many are nnt
How do you know that dio is town like you?

Pleonast
12-17-2007, 09:27 AM
Is zuma posting drunk or via phone? Looks the same to me. :)

To everyone unsure about revealing Dossiers: We have three distinct choices here,

1) We all reveal our Dossiers soon.
2) We slowly reveal our Dossiers as we get killed.
3) We don't reveal our Dossiers, even when we're killed.

We could use a combination of the above, but that would mostly muddle our efforts.

I think we should go with choice 1; see my reasoning give earlier. Those of you who don't like choice 1 need to give reasons why you prefer choice 2 or 3. It's not enough to say our reasons for choice 1 are not convincing. Make a case for your own choice: do we slowly reveal with our deaths, or not even then?

One And Only Wanderers
12-17-2007, 09:33 AM
I personally am behind a full reveal now. This means we will have something to check against when we get death scene reveals. OK scum will probably doctor their dossiers, but this by itself may make them stand out. If for example all individual staements - "I felch goats" or whatever appear a certain number of times, and we have people with statements bucking that trend, then we have a candidiate population for lynching. Anything which betters our odds as opposed to a random lynch (assuming we have no strong leads on a given day) is OK in my book. Lets get the info and start data mining.

Pleonast
12-17-2007, 09:33 AM
As for voting: I want to place a vote, but I'd like to see more discussion about the Dossiers. Specifically, why delayed or no reveals is better than a mass reveal now.

I'm almost thinking one of the purposes of the Dossiers is to divert us from unproductive r##### votes. (Censored to avoid bring up that disaster.) Because I think scum and town have a fundamental difference over the advantages of the revelation of Dossiers, we can look for "funny" arguments from Scum over reasoning about the Dossiers.

Note: I'm posting a bunch now because I'll be too busy for much of today to check back in. I hope there's some juicy discussions to read when I get back.

brewha
12-17-2007, 09:34 AM
Sorry for the lack of participation over the weekend. I tend to only surf the dope at work, so I'm a bit behind.

As far as the dosiers go, if they are going to be revealed by everyone, I think it needs to be done before nightfall. There's already alot of info out there that the mafia will be able to talk about tonight (meaning the game 'tonight' that will happen in a few days). After that, they will likely have enough info to come up with a believable and not scummy looking dossier.

I can't see a reason not to do a mass reveal, but like others have said, that doesn't mean that there isn't one.

I'm torn on the no lynch idea as well. The mob hits are guarenteed to kill a good guy, at least with the lynches, we have a chance to take out mob. I opposed to straight out guessing at who to lynch, but if we can find someone who appears to be scum, I think it's worth a shot.

Hockey Monkey
12-17-2007, 09:38 AM
Re: Dossiers

I really don't think that the moderators would design the game such that a full reveal of dossiers will give us a bead on all the scum. I think that the dossiers are just a fun aspect of the game...a little extra tidbit to figure out. Revealing the dossiers upfront is neither going to hurt or terribly help us. What it will do is allow us to move on and get to the nitty gritty that is Mafia - analysis of players actions and motivations.

Re: No Lynching

I can't think of any reason right now that not lynching someone will be beneficial to the town. When we kill someone, we get confirmation of their actions and motivations which in turn can help us in analyzing the interactions with other players. The disgruntleds are going to kill every night. The only way we have to kill them is with a lynch. We don't have any fancy night actions to take them out or block them. We HAVE to lynch someone everyday because a chance of lynching scum is better than no chance.

Re: Diomedes

It is not impossible that Dio has figured out some of the dossier puzzle, because I have too. There is quite a bit of information that has already been revealed. I would caution that doing any public analysis before everyone reveals will be detrimental. The disgruntleds are going to have to either lie or tell the truth in their dossier. If we start doing analysis on the information we have already, the scum can come up with better lies. Please don't share what you think you know until we at least have a large majority of the dossiers to deconstruct. That being said, again, I don't think the dossiers are the key to winning, and if you do go ahead and share, it won't be that big a deal.

On preview and re-reading this, it seems to counter my first point, but I hold both points of view. The dossiers are a factor in the game, but not a game-breaking one. I like solving puzzles and mysteries so I am interested in the dossier aspect of the game. I don't think that solving the dossier puzzle is going to hand us all the scum, but I really want to have a go at solving it. I'm trying to ignore it as a major factor of the game, but still work the puzzle. Does that make any sense at all?

Re: zuma

:confused:

brewha
12-17-2007, 09:50 AM
I've noticed that I share some dossier tidbits with other players and have no idea what it means. I doubt that it is as obvious as mafia and town share no characteristics. If that were the case, it would be fairly simple to solve the game. Unless the mafia lie - like they likely will. Eeesh, I don't know.

I'm leaning towards a mass reveal before nightfall, so we can figure out if it will help us or not. I can't see it helping the mafia at all.

brewha
12-17-2007, 10:46 AM
I've noticed that there appears to be very little overlap in the dossiers that have been revealed. Maybe they won't tell us anything at all.

faithfool
12-17-2007, 10:47 AM
I've been reading along, although I still feel way out of my league, but figured I should at least contribute a stance on the issue of dossier reveals or not. So, I put my vote in for going head and telling what we know about ourselves. I understand that I have no clue what I'm talking about, however I wanted everyone to know that I'm trying to keep up and I do have an opinion on this matter.

Oh, and before anything can be discerned from what I'm about to ask, please remember that I am completely new to this and I'm just wondering about something much like Dopers do about everything. Therefore, can you vote to lynch yourself? Thanks for the help.

brewha
12-17-2007, 10:47 AM
I've noticed that I have two posts nearly an hour apart with exactly the same 1st three words :smack:

Stupid non edit rule!

NAF1138
12-17-2007, 10:52 AM
Therefore, can you vote to lynch yourself? Thanks for the help.

Was this a question you wanted a mod answer on or...

Hal Briston
12-17-2007, 10:55 AM
While I'd be fine with going ahead with the reveal system that was put in place, I'd prefer it one variation were put into play -- I'd very much like to see faithfool reveal her dossier ASAP.

With the early suspicion that was placed on her, I'd think it prudent to get hers out in the open.

Rysto
12-17-2007, 11:01 AM
I disagree. We randomly ordered the reveals for a reason.

faithfool
12-17-2007, 11:19 AM
Was this a question you wanted a mod answer on or...

Sorry NAF. I didn't even think about making that an official question, but was just throwing it out there. Since you're here though, would you mind answering after all? Thanks so much for being so prompt.

As to Hal's suggestion, I don't mind at all. Everyone simply please let me know what I'm to do.

ShadowFacts
12-17-2007, 11:54 AM
Is zuma posting drunk or via phone? Looks the same to me. :)

To everyone unsure about revealing Dossiers: We have three distinct choices here,

1) We all reveal our Dossiers soon.
2) We slowly reveal our Dossiers as we get killed.
3) We don't reveal our Dossiers, even when we're killed.

We could use a combination of the above, but that would mostly muddle our efforts.

I think we should go with choice 1; see my reasoning give earlier. Those of you who don't like choice 1 need to give reasons why you prefer choice 2 or 3. It's not enough to say our reasons for choice 1 are not convincing. Make a case for your own choice: do we slowly reveal with our deaths, or not even then?

At this moment, I would vote for #2. My main reason is that I'm still not sure what #1 gets us. No one seems to be able to explain what we will actually do with the dossier information once it is posted. What is the mechanism for finding scum with this information? From my point of view, we're going to get buried in a pile of facts, none of which we can be certain is true, and which the scum can then manipulate to their advantage. (See my example in a previous post about how the information can be used against town, which no one has refuted). I think there might be an advantage in keeping dossier information secret (for now) so that scum can never be certain what we have and cannot therefore mimic or manipulate our traits against us. Maybe that is the paranoid part of me.

I also agree with storyteller that this dossier stuff is more of a distraction than anything else.

I personally am behind a full reveal now. This means we will have something to check against when we get death scene reveals. OK scum will probably doctor their dossiers, but this by itself may make them stand out. If for example all individual staements - "I felch goats" or whatever appear a certain number of times, and we have people with statements bucking that trend, then we have a candidiate population for lynching. Anything which betters our odds as opposed to a random lynch (assuming we have no strong leads on a given day) is OK in my book. Lets get the info and start data mining.

See, and here is what I mean. The plan appears to be: "let's get all the information out there and analyze it or something and find scum." HOW?? Let me post a small example: Letís take the following fictional set of people. One of them is scum and has possibly lied about some or all of his/her traits. Can you figure out who it is?

Player A
I felch goats.
I saw no movies last year.
I once participated in a bull run.
Iíve been married three times.
I see dead people.

Player B
I once participated in a bull run.
Iím allergic to dairy products.
My dog has fleas.
Iíve seen ďPink Floyd The WallĒ 479 times.
Iím missing a finger on my left hand.

Player C
My dream girl has two heads.
I hate spaghetti.
I saw Antonin Scalia naked.
Spiders make me wet myself.
I see dead people.

Player D
I hate spaghetti.
I once killed an octopus with a cucumber.
My dog has fleas.
I was honorably discharged from the armed forces.
Iím allergic to gluten.

Player E
I once participated in a bull run.
I have six sons.
My athleteís foot wonít go away.
I like to bake cakes.
Chili peppers makes me sweat.

Player F is killed and sees his killer running with bulls.
Player G is killed and sees her killer pushing a plate of spaghetti away.

(Note: I am NOT posting this as an actual puzzle to be solved - that would be a total waste of time as I don't think it CAN be solved. I am posting it to show how I'm thinking about the data we would get. There's no way to know if any of those data points are true or not, and thus, as far as I can see, no way to glean any useful information out of them at this point).

Boozahol Squid, P.I.
12-17-2007, 12:04 PM
At this moment, I would vote for #2. My main reason is that I'm still not sure what #1 gets us. No one seems to be able to explain what we will actually do with the dossier information once it is posted. What is the mechanism for finding scum with this information? From my point of view, we're going to get buried in a pile of facts, none of which we can be certain is true, and which the scum can then manipulate to their advantage. (See my example in a previous post about how the information can be used against town, which no one has refuted). I think there might be an advantage in keeping dossier information secret (for now) so that scum can never be certain what we have and cannot therefore mimic or manipulate our traits against us. Maybe that is the paranoid part of me.

I also agree with storyteller that this dossier stuff is more of a distraction than anything else.


The dossier probably is more of a distraction that what it's worth. Let me say this, though, just to make a little more clear what I think we can get out of them:

There are certain things I've noticed about the dossiers so far which tend to point towards a pattern. Given that pro-town players will tell te truth about their dossiers (they have no reason not to) and scum may lie about certain parts of their dossiers (they don't want to reveal what might be a unique fact about them that later gets revealed in a death post, thereby implicating themselves), it is possible for an initial revelation of dossiers to perhaps give us some space to start determining scum. Maybe it won't work, maybe it will.

However, the real key is that we want to be able to use the information provided in the death posts. I don't think it's that big a leap to say that the post-death posts are, in theory, a pro-town mechanism (however weak it may be, due to the lack of verifiability of the dossier information). If we don't have any information about the dossiers, then we've lost what could be an advantage.

NAF1138
12-17-2007, 12:16 PM
Sorry NAF. I didn't even think about making that an official question, but was just throwing it out there. Since you're here though, would you mind answering after all? Thanks so much for being so prompt.

As to Hal's suggestion, I don't mind at all. Everyone simply please let me know what I'm to do.


I haven't talked to mtgman about this, but I don't really see him disagreeing with me. Sure, you can vote for yourself.

Freudian Slit
12-17-2007, 12:23 PM
I've always thought that voting for yourself was a little morbid...

faithfool
12-17-2007, 12:31 PM
I haven't talked to mtgman about this, but I don't really see him disagreeing with me. Sure, you can vote for yourself.

Thanks again NAF. If it ends up being okay with Mtgman as well, then I do believe I'll take that option.


I've always thought that voting for yourself was a little morbid...

You're probably right, but I usually have no problems with lambasting myself over something undoubtedly seen as morbid. :p Besides, I honestly don't feel like I'm cut out for this game after all and everyone would be better off having the cream of the crop continue to play, rather than me cluttering things up for either faction (and all the strategy planning).

So.... VOTE faithfool

Boozahol Squid, P.I.
12-17-2007, 12:34 PM
I've always thought that voting for yourself was a little morbid...
It's kinda fun when you know you're going to be lynched, I've found. especially if it makes the vote unanimous... makes the whole execution thing seem like a town holiday.

One And Only Wanderers
12-17-2007, 12:34 PM
a self vote is nearly always anti town. I am sorry you feel you cannot continue with this game, but I would rather scum hunt than vote you for the reasons you have given. Please reconsider and play the best game you can. The main objective should be to have fun. Don't worry about what you don't know, the best way to learn is to participate.

Freudian Slit
12-17-2007, 12:40 PM
Part of me thinks faithfool is just discouraged. Another thinks that she's scum trying to psych us out...like, playing the part of the martyred, I don't know what the hell I'm doing, newbie townie. Because that is kind of what I did in the last game.

ShadowFacts
12-17-2007, 01:45 PM
Part of me thinks faithfool is just discouraged. Another thinks that she's scum trying to psych us out...like, playing the part of the martyred, I don't know what the hell I'm doing, newbie townie. Because that is kind of what I did in the last game.

For my part, my vote on faithfool (the first) was entirely random. Just something to get the ball rolling - turns out it got rolling fairly far. I always planned to change my vote to someone I actually find scummy before the Day was out. I probably still will, but faithfool's reaction has been interesting, so I'll leave it there for now to see what happens.

Hawkeyeop
12-17-2007, 01:45 PM
I am going to go with choice 1 that everyone reveal their Dossiers. The name of the game is You Solve it Mafia, which to me implies that there is something to solve. Having a couple of players already finds patterns further emphasizes this. Having all the information in front of us makes this task a bit easier even if some of the info is likely false. If we find patterns that fit most of the data, then we may gleam who the scum are from outliers.

As for it being a waste of time, I don't see it. It provides a topic of conversation regardless of its usefulness. From looking at previous games the scumtells found on the first couple of days were just about always unfounded. I believe the reason for this is that the scum aren't likely to screw up if there isn't anything to talk about. Even if no reliable method of finding scum from the dossiers occurs, we can learn significant information from watching how people react to said dossiers.

However option 1 only works if all (or at least most) players are willing to reveal their dossier. Are the players voting option 2 or 3 willing to reveal their dossiers if that is what the consensus decides? Are you willing to partake in a majority vote to decide this?

faithfool
12-17-2007, 01:48 PM
For my part, my vote on faithfool (the first) was entirely random. Just something to get the ball rolling - turns out it got rolling fairly far. I always planned to change my vote to someone I actually find scummy before the Day was out. I probably still will, but faithfool's reaction has been interesting, so I'll leave it there for now to see what happens.

Please, I heartily vote that you keep your vote for me. I'm certainly up for campaigning if necessary. :)

NAF1138
12-17-2007, 01:49 PM
I think it's about time we had our first official vote count.


3 - Faithfool (shadowfacts, zuma, faithfool)

1 - Diomedes (Storyteller)

1- Rysto (Dio)


5 out of a possible 18 votes cast.

With 18 alive 10 starts the clock 12 ends the Day.


The Day ends...whenever I said it ended on Day 1. Sometime on Friday I think. Check the sig for important official posts. :D

ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies
12-17-2007, 01:55 PM
I'm catching up after an unplanned internet-hiatus over the weekend. I'm starting at post #232. I'll see you once I've caught up (on both this game and Blade Runner)...

NAF1138
12-17-2007, 01:57 PM
hmm, no sig in that last post. Odd, I know I checked the box.

Ah well, here it is again.

Hal Briston
12-17-2007, 01:58 PM
I disagree. We randomly ordered the reveals for a reason.Yes, we did -- we're hoping that a few scum are forced to reveal early. Since we have someone who is under suspicion -- and who, I might add, is volunteering to revel -- why would we not take her up on that?

faithfool, I can understand wanting more input into this, but I would very much like to see your dossier.


Man, that didn't sound nearly as dirty in my head...

Freudian Slit
12-17-2007, 02:00 PM
faithfool, I can understand wanting more input into this, but I would very much like to see your dossier.


Man, that didn't sound nearly as dirty in my head...
*snort*

I'm going to have to remember that one for when we have that open bar at the office party.

Hockey Monkey
12-17-2007, 02:00 PM
snip

See, and here is what I mean. The plan appears to be: "let's get all the information out there and analyze it or something and find scum." HOW?? Let me post a small example: Letís take the following fictional set of people. One of them is scum and has possibly lied about some or all of his/her traits. Can you figure out who it is?

snip.


I think so, yes.

storyteller0910
12-17-2007, 02:03 PM
I think so, yes.

You wanna' vague that up for me a bit?

Freudian Slit
12-17-2007, 02:04 PM
Perhaps one reason faithfool is giving up so easily is because she doesn't want to reveal the dossier? That is, she assumes that if she just votes for herself, she doesn't have to make a big reveal because it'll be moot. She does have a chance of squeaking by if she doesn't get an exact majority of votes, though.

Hockey Monkey
12-17-2007, 02:10 PM
You wanna' vague that up for me a bit?

I can't say how without giving the scum the ability to lie effectively, thus negating my (hopefully) ability to pick out the lie. Vague enough? :p Sorry, it's not a magic bag thing, but if I spell it out, then we lose any advantage I might have to be able to do it.

faithfool
12-17-2007, 02:10 PM
Perhaps one reason faithfool is giving up so easily is because she doesn't want to reveal the dossier? That is, she assumes that if she just votes for herself, she doesn't have to make a big reveal because it'll be moot. She does have a chance of squeaking by if she doesn't get an exact majority of votes, though.

Oh good grief. The real deal is, without question, that I don't know what I'm doing and being straight up is apparently not something done in this game. I am the same person online that I am anywhere else and unfortunately, I never considering being any other way. So, once again, I'm offering up my dossier (ha Hal!) because that's what I would've done regardless of which side of the factions I fell on.

And ultimately, since I believe in doing the greatest good, I won't even do what the evil little guy on my shoulder is hinting at.... I'll still oblige as suggested of letting out all the details when I'm offed. Because that's going to happen no matter what, sooner than later.

Hope that helps, although I doubt it will and everyone will assume I'm pulling some scam. So be it, but at least I've tried.

Hockey Monkey
12-17-2007, 02:21 PM
<game off>If you were so inclined, you could go back and read the Mafia 2 thread which was my first game and laugh at my colossal fuck-up. We all started with a first game. We have all made mistakes. It's not like you've posted something in the game thread instead of on the scum board! (heehee, couldn't resist) Roll with it baby! Have fun.<game on>

Freudian Slit
12-17-2007, 02:24 PM
It's not like you've posted something in the game thread instead of on the scum board! (heehee, couldn't resist) Roll with it baby! Have fun.<game on>
Did, ah, someone do that in the past?

ShadowFacts
12-17-2007, 02:26 PM
I can't say how without giving the scum the ability to lie effectively, thus negating my (hopefully) ability to pick out the lie. Vague enough? :p Sorry, it's not a magic bag thing, but if I spell it out, then we lose any advantage I might have to be able to do it.

So, you're saying you found the lying scum in my little fake scenario? I thought you were joking and implying that I was scum (which is fine, I can take it) :)

Without giving away your secrets, which one is it?

brewha
12-17-2007, 02:37 PM
So, you're saying you found the lying scum in my little fake scenario? I thought you were joking and implying that I was scum (which is fine, I can take it) :)

Without giving away your secrets, which one is it?

If I were to guess, I would say that Player D is the lying.

What do I win?

NAF1138
12-17-2007, 02:40 PM
Did, ah, someone do that in the past?

:grumble:

He is dead to us now. :mad:

Oh, and cookies did it in Firefly too. But I wan't playing in that one, so I care less. :p

Hockey Monkey
12-17-2007, 02:42 PM
So, you're saying you found the lying scum in my little fake scenario? I thought you were joking and implying that I was scum (which is fine, I can take it) :)

Without giving away your secrets, which one is it?

It has nothing to do with your fake scenario. Everything to do with the real scenario. I didn't even look that closely at your fake one. Sorry.

Hockey Monkey
12-17-2007, 02:44 PM
Did, ah, someone do that in the past?

I'm not saying any names but their initials are Cookies and Santo Rugger. :D :p

's all good. :cool:

Pleonast
12-17-2007, 05:23 PM
Very little conversation...

I expect everyone to state their opinion on how we should handle the Dossiers. I think most of us would agree that avoiding the issue is very suspicious. At some point I'll compile a list of what each player thinks we should do with the Dossier and anyone who hasn't hazarded an opinion will be at the top of my vote list.

ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies
12-17-2007, 05:55 PM
I also think we should all expose our Dossiers sooner than later, but I highly doubt we're going to arrive at a consensus as to a method for sharing it. We're already stuck in a situation where we each have to manage multiple categories of Dossier data:


Public data (mod-posted)
Private data (mod-pm'd)
Divulged data
Townie death-scene data
Scum death-scene data
Public data that matches other players
Private data that matches other players
etc...


As such, I fear that we will have opinionated townsfolk willing and able to throw votes at people based solely on how other players weigh on in any number of the Dossier-related debates. Even though such votes might land on a scum now and then, I fear that quite often those votes will be townies voting for townies.

In order to try and inject some method to our madness, I will hold onto my dossier items in the hopes that the basketball randomization will get some more traction. But if we continue to just stew in our current rut of simultaneous debates for more than another day or two, I will probably just share it.

I too noticed faithfool's statement, and the possible "out" that was provided by Mtgman. I'm inclined to agree with what has already been said, that from what I know of Mtgman he would not have gone out of his way to manufacture an alibi, even for a newbie. As such, I'm willing to give faithfool the benefit of the doubt. For now ;)

zuma
12-17-2007, 06:02 PM
My dossier, the english version:

(Public) I have walked along the shore of the Bay of Pigs.
My great-great-grandfather was a duke in Sicily.
I've travelled with royalty in torn T-shirt and jeans.
I believe that aliens are stealing my socks.
I believe that the Apollo moon landings were filmed in Hollywood.
I have memorized the entire \"D\" section of the dictionary.

faithfool
12-17-2007, 06:07 PM
Has there been a definitive decision on who posts when? Or is it one of those just-do-it-whenever things?

zuma
12-17-2007, 06:19 PM
I tried to construct a random order, but since Rysto and MHaye still haven't decided whether or not to participate, it seems like it's actually slowing the process down, which is why I went ahead and revealed mine.

faithfool
12-17-2007, 06:38 PM
Fine. Then I'll put mine up and spoiler it in case anyone decides that This Was a Very Bad Idea after all.


I believe the Honda Element is a good-looking car.
I enjoy practicing the cello.
I have performed an exorcism.
I provided a line in a song that became a top 20 hit for the band Traffic.
I have been shot in the head with a muzzleloading .45 caliber pistol and in leg with a bow and arrow.
I voted for a boy for prom queen.

Rysto
12-17-2007, 08:05 PM
Well, despite my misgivings it seems we're sharing dossiers. Here's my private traits:

I was in a biker movie.

I believe the cruelty makes foie gras all the more tasty.

Farts are really funny. People only pretend to not think they are.

I believe that the world would be a much better place if about 25% of the population were taken out back and shot.

I started a forest fire by playing with matches.


MHaye, you're up next.

zuma
12-17-2007, 08:14 PM
Wow, Rysto. A biker arsonist who promotes genocide and animal cruelty. I'd wanna keep that one under wraps too :)

zuma
12-17-2007, 08:42 PM
Also, faithfool, don't get discouraged on your first day in your first game. If it makes you feel any better, I've been lynched day 1 twice (once via dotchan), killed night 1 once, and forced to role-claim (one real, one fake) on day 3 twice.

I should just go ahead and change my user name to zuma v.2 :)

Kat
12-17-2007, 08:43 PM
I just got here (spending too much time at the Other Mafia Game) and want to weigh in to say that since two people already have found something that might be a pattern, I don't think it will hurt to reveal the dossiers, and it might help, and I hope people continue the reveals.

And what number am I?

zuma
12-17-2007, 08:55 PM
1. Rysto
2. MHaye
3. One And Only Wanderers
4. Freudian Slit
5. ShadowFacts
6. zuma
7. brewha
8. Hawkeyeop
9. sachertorte
10.Kat
11.ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies
12.HazelNutCoffee
13.storyteller0910
14.faithfool
15.Hal Briston

brewha
12-18-2007, 08:15 AM
I've been doing some research and comparing dossiers. I've found a pattern which everyone who's revealed matches. Everyone but Zuma.

Here's where I'm conflicted. If I'm right and Zuma is scum, why the push for dossier revelations?

Zuma, I believe that you have made up four of your traits. Either come clean with your real ones with an explanation why you lied about them, or I'm forced to vote for you.

for now,

FOS Zuma!

sachertorte
12-18-2007, 08:41 AM
Not much change from yesterday, but I have a vote now.

I am against dossier reveal. I feel steamrolled about the reveal process as people are revealing before a consensus can be reached about whether revealing is a good idea or not. Too many people are sitting back and not stating their opinion about dossiers. If the consensus is to reveal, then I will reveal mine, but the way we jumped to "Hey X, it's your turn to reveal now" bothers me.

I'm skeptical that Hockey Monkey and Diomedes have discovered a pattern. I question whether it is possible to discover a pattern with only 3 or 4 dossiers. I would think that in order to discover a pattern, they would also need to know the alignments of the dossiers presented. I'm sure its possible they think they see something, but I don't see how a true pattern could be revealed with so little data. Also, I don't see mtgman designing a dossier system that could be broken so easily and quickly.

from yesterday:
im posting by phone thd intererting thing about a pure vanilla game is how exposed we are. dio is town like me. many are nnt
I'd like zuma to explain how he knows "dio is town."

vote zuma
1. A pro-town zuma should not know dio's alignment.
2. I was surprised that he didn't respond to my previous query (not a big deal, but the delay is there)
3. zuma's randomization method, while brilliant, also has the effect of passive-aggressively prodding people into revealing dossiers before we discuss the issue.
4. zuma did not follow his own randomization order which further serves to prod people into revealing dossiers and violates zuma's stated purpose for the randomized order, namely not letting scum manipulate the reveal order. zuma's actions do not line up with his statements.

Hal Briston:
How do you interpret zuma's statement regarding dio's alignment?

Hawkeyeop:
What is your opinion of dossier reveals? Why do you feel that way?

on preview: brewha stole my thunder! Although it's for very different reasons.

Hawkeyeop
12-18-2007, 09:11 AM
Hawkeyeop:
What is your opinion of dossier reveals? Why do you feel that way?




Didn't my post on the previous page answer this? If not what else do you want to know?

storyteller0910
12-18-2007, 09:28 AM
I've been doing some research and comparing dossiers. I've found a pattern which everyone who's revealed matches. Everyone but Zuma.

Here's where I'm conflicted. If I'm right and Zuma is scum, why the push for dossier revelations?

Zuma, I believe that you have made up four of your traits. Either come clean with your real ones with an explanation why you lied about them, or I'm forced to vote for you.

for now,

FOS Zuma!

I'm getting frustrated by this sort of thing, frankly. "I see a pattern, and it implicates so-and-so, but I won't say anymore about it, because it might help the scum."

Well, look. If you see a pattern and it implicates someone strongly enough to convict them, then you really should out with it right now. I really doubt that NAF and mtgman designed a system that, analyzed de novo and with no alignment information, is going to give away all of the scum. If we can catch one - just one - with this info, we should.

But if you're not going to explain yourself, don't say anything at all. brewha, if you've actually detected a pattern and are right about zuma, then by telling us that you see something but not what you see you're giving the scum a head start on devising their own lies.

This whole "I've made a deduction but I'm not going to tell you about it" is worse than unhelpful - it's actively detrimental.

--------------------

sachertorte, in the interest of discussion: why are you opposed to dossier reveal? I am of the opinion that a full reveal is most likely to be neutral or very, very marginally pro-town, as I can see no way given what we have been told and what we know already that it could benefit the scum. What downside do you see?

Boozahol Squid, P.I.
12-18-2007, 10:12 AM
Well... a lot has happened since last I was sober.
First things, first: unvote: Rysto

Third things second, I agree with storyteller that zuma's assertion that I must be a townie is somewhat curious: but it makes a lot of sense if you agree with me that information is good (or is, at least, not bad) for the town. I also -really- don't like his early reveal: the whole point of the randomization was in order to help 'catch out' scum who came up early in the order.

That deserves a FOS, perhaps, but I'll toss my vote in faithfool's firetion, if that's what she wants.
vote: faithfool

brewha
12-18-2007, 10:16 AM
I know it sucks, but I can't say what the pattern is. If I explain it, the scum (if they haven't figured it out already) can easily make up a dossier to perfectly match that of any vanilla townie.

If that is what we want to do, I could explain what I know. We could, perhaps, lynch one scum based on it, but then the dossier's would be completely useless.

If everyone were to post their complete dossier, I would be happy to say what I know. Otherwise, I'm keeping my trap shut.

This would make much more sense if you saw the pattern I do.

storyteller0910
12-18-2007, 10:52 AM
Third things second, I agree with storyteller that zuma's assertion that I must be a townie is somewhat curious: but it makes a lot of sense if you agree with me that information is good (or is, at least, not bad) for the town.


I wasn't the one who pointed that out, although I certainly do agree that it is odd. I don't understand your explanation of it here, thought.


That deserves a FOS, perhaps, but I'll toss my vote in faithfool's firetion, if that's what she wants.


Why? Do you think she is scum? If so, why?


I know it sucks, but I can't say what the pattern is. If I explain it, the scum (if they haven't figured it out already) can easily make up a dossier to perfectly match that of any vanilla townie.


Except that - for the moment assuming that you are both: (1) town; and (2) correct, which are assumptions I'm making only for the purposes of argument, since I'm not sure about either - the scum already know whether you are correct, and if you are, they have almost surely identified the "pattern," because they have access


If that is what we want to do, I could explain what I know. We could, perhaps, lynch one scum based on it, but then the dossier's would be completely useless.


Is it your belief that analysis of the dossier system will, in and of itself and without any analysis of in-thread behavior, identify more than one scum? Is it your belief that the dossier system will or could identify all the scum?


If everyone were to post their complete dossier, I would be happy to say what I know. Otherwise, I'm keeping my trap shut.


Then why did you open your trap in the first place? Why say anything at all, directing suspicion in zuma's direction, if you weren't prepared to follow-up?

sachertorte
12-18-2007, 10:56 AM
Didn't my post on the previous page answer this? If not what else do you want to know?
Sorry.
I'm trying to get conversation going. I was just throwing out questions. I saw your an earlier post of yours which was unsure of an opinion at the time (Post 320 (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=9275929&postcount=320) ).

sachertorte, in the interest of discussion: why are you opposed to dossier reveal? I am of the opinion that a full reveal is most likely to be neutral or very, very marginally pro-town, as I can see no way given what we have been told and what we know already that it could benefit the scum. What downside do you see?

I accept that some people want to reveal unless proven that revealing is bad; just understand that I oppose revealing unless it can be proven to be beneficial.

My interpretation of the Dossier system is that the public information that we were given at the beginning of the game is pro-town. We have a 1/6 chance of the killer's public item being revealed. However, we also have a non-zero chance of the killer's private data matching a town's public data. What this means to me, is that when the death post item matches a public piece of data, we have someone whose likelihood of being scum has gone up. It doesn't mean that person is scum, but the the probability is higher.
To be honest, I formed this opinion with bias from my own dossier. However, Santo Rugger's dossier brings greater doubt to the probabilities in my mind. Santo Rugger's dossier had two private items that matched public characteristics. If scum dossiers are limited to a max of 2 private items matching town public characteristics, then the revelation the killer's item matching a public characteristic ups the probability of the holder of that characteristic to 33% or more. From there we analyze behavior to determine scumminess.

I feel that revealing private data will simply muddy the water.

I do not feel that dossier analysis will out scum. I do not know this, but I assume it because it would be poor game design. I think it is more probable that whatever patterns we discern are either false or intentionally misleading.

Simply put: I trust the public data. I do not trust the private data.

Hawkeyeop
12-18-2007, 11:06 AM
Sorry.
I'm trying to get conversation going. I was just throwing out questions. I saw your an earlier post of yours which was unsure of an opinion at the time

It's okay. I was just starting to think I was typing in invisible ink. Though I suppose there are worse things to happen in a Mafia game then being ignored.

Pleonast
12-18-2007, 11:07 AM
sach, do you advocate revealing Dossiers in death scenes, or never?

NAF1138
12-18-2007, 11:11 AM
bah...wrong game

brewha
12-18-2007, 11:13 AM
Except that - for the moment assuming that you are both: (1) town; and (2) correct, which are assumptions I'm making only for the purposes of argument, since I'm not sure about either - the scum already know whether you are correct, and if you are, they have almost surely identified the "pattern," because they have access
Everyone has access to the pattern. I don't want to be more specific, because if one scum figures it out, the will all know it tonight.



Is it your belief that analysis of the dossier system will, in and of itself and without any analysis of in-thread behavior, identify more than one scum? Is it your belief that the dossier system will or could identify all the scum?

I believe it could point to scummy behavior in more than one person. I do believe that there is no way that it would difinitevly point out all scum.


Then why did you open your trap in the first place? Why say anything at all, directing suspicion in zuma's direction, if you weren't prepared to follow-up?
I believe zuma is lying. I'm giving him a chance to explain him(her??)self. I'm perfectly prepared to follow-up by explaining what I see, but I think it would be very helpful to the mafia if I were to do that before all dossiers are revealed.

HazelNutCoffee
12-18-2007, 11:35 AM
Okay, just caught up. Sorry, I have guests staying with me 'til tomorrow. After that I can completely devote my life to this game. :)

I as well was reminded of the Conspiracy game where sacher sat on the information he had at the beginning. It worked for that game (for the Town, anyway) but in a game like this with no power roles, I really don't see how sitting on information is going to help any of us. The scum will most likely have already shared their dossiers, which means they are already working with more information than we have at hand. I don't see how we're supposed to make use of the dossiers unless they are revealed. Revealing the infomation in a trickle is something I really don't see the point of - if we're going to reveal our information, we might as well do it all at once and figure it out from there. Scum will probably lie about their dossiers, but at least we'll have something to work with. If there is no dossier reveal scum won't have to lie about much - which would make them harder to catch.

I'm having trouble seeing how dossier reveals are going to help scum (although I fully acknowledge that this doesn't mean it won't; it just doesn't seem obvious to me). Without any power roles in the game, what are the dossiers going to reveal that the scum don't already know? Scum know who they are and who the townies are. We don't know crap at this point.

I guess the reveal order is being disregarded, so here's my dossier.

(Public) I own an authentic 1920s lady's flapper outfit.

I worked as a professional audio engineer for three years.

I wear a size 7 shoe.

I can say 'hello' and 'thank you' in nine languages.

My great-great-grandfather was a duke in Sicily.

I watched as over 30 people jumped out of an airborne aircraft.

Hal Briston
12-18-2007, 11:38 AM
Thank you very much for revealing, faithfool.

To everyone else, faithfool is clean. Or at least she's not lying about her dossier. I'm going back to sipping Seagrams and listening to Stryper while watching Brad Pitt/Morgan Freeman movies.

Hal Briston:
How do you interpret zuma's statement regarding dio's alignment?Same way as just about everyone else -- with a resounding "Bwuh?"

HazelNutCoffee
12-18-2007, 11:45 AM
Thank you very much for revealing, faithfool.

To everyone else, faithfool is clean. Or at least she's not lying about her dossier.
Um ... how are you so sure she's not lying? :dubious:

brewha
12-18-2007, 11:45 AM
Or at least she's not lying about her dossier.

I can agree with this statement.

ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies
12-18-2007, 12:08 PM
I accept that some people want to reveal unless proven that revealing is bad; just understand that I oppose revealing unless it can be proven to be beneficial.



I think it is entirely possible that the determination of how revelation or secrecy of dossiers benefited or hindered town or scum won't be decided until the post-game discussion. I don't think it is "provable" one way or the other.

Hockey Monkey
12-18-2007, 12:17 PM
I can agree with this statement.


I also concur that faithfool has been honest with her dossier.

brewha
12-18-2007, 12:21 PM
I see a benefit to the town by revealing our dossiers. I see a benefit to the mafia for them to keep it hidden until tonight. I'm pushing for mass reveal.

Here's mine, since I don't see any order being followed either.

(Public) I am scared of moths.

I can say 'hello' and 'thank you' in nine languages.

I have performed an exorcism.

I was a trombone soloist in college.

I started a forest fire by playing with matches.

I've bowled two perfect 300 games


I think anyone who is hiding their dossiers may have more to hide!

Boozahol Squid, P.I.
12-18-2007, 12:35 PM
I also concur that faithfool has been honest with her dossier.

I don't knwo if she's been honest. But she either has been, or has figured it out herself.

sachertorte
12-18-2007, 12:50 PM
sach, do you advocate revealing Dossiers in death scenes, or never?
I don't think it would be bad to reveal in death scenes, but I don't see an advantage to it either. I feel this way because we will know the alignment of the dossier holder. In other words, this information becomes trusted information; unlike the lack of trust I have when looking at dossiers posted by unknowns.
But I admit I haven't thought this through very thoroughly.

faithfool
12-18-2007, 12:51 PM
I don't knwo if she's been honest. But she either has been, or has figured it out herself.

You know, I just don't think I have what it takes to play this game. Somehow I thought it would be much more different than it has been on Day 1. All I can say in my defense is that when I'd been trying to read up on the other versions that had been played on here, I must've not paid much attention to the beginnings because I felt confused that I didn't know enough. So, I trudged ahead to actually aim for understanding the mechanics. I suppose both have sailed right over my head.

That said, I'm simply trying to do my best. I realize that must sound like a ploy to some, but I've willing done what all has been talked about and explained myself ad nauseum. Honestly, I'm at a loss for what else to do. So, considering that this portion is what seems to be taking up all the focus now, I simply believe it'll be better to get me out of the way sooner than later. Put all that attention somewhere it'll be helpful. But as mentioned above, if I don't get enough of the votes to be axed, I'll keep on keeping on. Sadly though, I think that would be a mistake. Do as y'all will.

Finally, to those who've believed me and urged me to hang in there.... thank you. And to Dio, I appreciate you doing as I recommended. I'll certainly promote me for the Day 1 demise because it's beneficial to The Town, in my humble opinion.

Hal Briston
12-18-2007, 12:52 PM
Um ... how are you so sure she's not lying? :dubious:Because that's what the 7% secret was. I was given a copy of faithfool's dossier at the onset of game, and she was honest about her traits.

storyteller0910
12-18-2007, 12:59 PM
I don't knwo if she's been honest. But she either has been, or has figured it out herself.

I can't take this anymore. There are so many people right now refusing to share what they know or believe that actually finding scum is going to be impossible - if the putative townies are going to obfuscate and dissemble and float cryptic "yes she's telling the truth but know we won't say why" statements the way brewha and Diomedes have been doing, then there is nothing to distinguish them from the scum.

This sort of game will be won by deliniating those who are transparent, open, and honest (town) from those with something to hide (scum). Accordingly, my suspicion will continue to lie with those who appear to be obfuscating, in this case brewha, Diomedes, and zuma ("town like me").

brewha
12-18-2007, 01:02 PM
Honestly, I'm at a loss for what else to do.

Just sit back, observe, and don't die. Unless you're a bad guy - then go ahead and die.

I'm willing to believe that you made a silly post and are indeed town. Either that, or you are a very clever memeber of the dark side. Either way, there's not enough for my to vote you for a lynch, so just try and figure out who the bad guys are and let us know.

Here's a bit of consolation for you: No one knows what's going on right now!



Because that's what the 7% secret was. I was given a copy of faithfool's dossier at the onset of game, and she was honest about her traits.

I really hope this was a joke. Or a whoosh. Or something other than you admitting that you do indeed have super powers.

ShadowFacts
12-18-2007, 01:02 PM
Because that's what the 7% secret was. I was given a copy of faithfool's dossier at the onset of game, and she was honest about her traits.

What?! :eek:

brewha
12-18-2007, 01:10 PM
storyteller0910, I will explain myself as soon as Zuma explains why he lied on his traits.

The one thing I've learned since our last run in is that you are much better at this game than me. So, I'm not going to butt heads with you on this. I explain after we hear from Zuma.

Mtgman
12-18-2007, 01:14 PM
Here's a bit of consolation for you: No one knows what's going on right now!Well... that's not quite true.

Enjoy,
Steven

storyteller0910
12-18-2007, 01:16 PM
Well... that's not quite true.

Enjoy,
Steven

You're enjoying this, aren't you?

Freudian Slit
12-18-2007, 01:21 PM
Evil, evil mods!

Mtgman
12-18-2007, 01:32 PM
You're enjoying this, aren't you?
Messing with the player's heads is one of my favorite parts of modding. When it comes out who was scum and who wasn't, you can ask them. I taunted them several times through the Night.

Enjoy,
Steven

NAF1138
12-18-2007, 01:33 PM
Evil, evil mods!

Who us? Because we know things you don't?

That isn't why we are evil.

I mean...we are evil, don't get me wrong, but that isn't why.

Freudian Slit
12-18-2007, 01:39 PM
Who us? Because we know things you don't?

That isn't why we are evil.

I mean...we are evil, don't get me wrong, but that isn't why.
Nah, it was a compliment. :)

Hal Briston, I'm assuming that if you have other people's dossiers, you're not going to tell us who they are.

Hal Briston
12-18-2007, 02:02 PM
I really hope this was a joke. Or a whoosh. Or something other than you admitting that you do indeed have super powers.No joke, no whoosh -- I wouldn't exactly call these "super powers", but I would very much like to have all the cards (or dossiers, as the case may be) on the table before the day is out and I wind up being tossed off a mountain.
Hal Briston, I'm assuming that if you have other people's dossiers, you're not going to tell us who they are.That'd be a good assumption.

Hockey Monkey
12-18-2007, 02:21 PM
storyteller0910, I will explain myself as soon as Zuma explains why he lied on his traits.

The one thing I've learned since our last run in is that you are much better at this game than me. So, I'm not going to butt heads with you on this. I explain after we hear from Zuma.

Brewha, which traits do you think zuma lied about? You don't have to give me a why, just which ones?

MHaye
12-18-2007, 02:33 PM
Three things.

Firstly Faithfool; I think you've made one mistake, and that's voting for yourself. In all honesty, at this stage of the game voting for yourself is just shooting your own team in the foot. At least take a pot-shot at someone else?

We're all new at some point or another. Just follow on and contribute as you can. Even if your contributions are misguided, we won't roast you for it - and it may be you see something clearly that we miss because we're so used to things.

Secondly, there is zuma. I read his "town like me" post and went "what?" I'm sorry but at this point it pushes him to the top of my scum list. (My scumdar still needs calibrating though - it was definitely not working in BladeRunner mafia.)

I find it so off that I'm going to vote zuma.

I want to take a little time drafting the bit about dossier reveals, so bear with me for a little while.

brewha
12-18-2007, 02:49 PM
Brewha, which traits do you think zuma lied about? You don't have to give me a why, just which ones?

I'll tell you all about it - once we hear from Zuma.

Unfortunately, it appears that Zuma only posts while not at work - unlike the rest of us.

I'll try and check in later tonight to see if he responds.

Boozahol Squid, P.I.
12-18-2007, 03:09 PM
I can't take this anymore. There are so many people right now refusing to share what they know or believe that actually finding scum is going to be impossible - if the putative townies are going to obfuscate and dissemble and float cryptic "yes she's telling the truth but know we won't say why" statements the way brewha and Diomedes have been doing, then there is nothing to distinguish them from the scum.

This sort of game will be won by deliniating those who are transparent, open, and honest (town) from those with something to hide (scum). Accordingly, my suspicion will continue to lie with those who appear to be obfuscating, in this case brewha, Diomedes, and zuma ("town like me").

You do follow that if a town-oriented person figures out something consistent with the dossiers, they're not going to share what it is, because an inconsistency by a future reveal would point towards scumhood, right?
Right?

Pleonast
12-18-2007, 03:22 PM
Because that's what the 7% secret was. I was given a copy of faithfool's dossier at the onset of game, and she was honest about her traits.I don't have time for a full post at the moment, but I really want to see three things, in order:
1) Dossier posts from everyone, or at least a good explanation why withholding your Dossier until you're dead helps us.
2) Hal had better give a full explanation of exactly what he knows, because the quote above reads either as "power role" (which means I'll vote for simu-lynching NAF and Mtgman) or a bold scum move.
3) Any other explanations of patterns and accusations of lying.

Rysto
12-18-2007, 03:22 PM
Frankly, we need to get all of the dossiers out in the open before we can really start making any kind of conclusions about them. This "I see a pattern but I can't tell you what it is" thing is not helpful. I understand that, if you really do see a pattern, that you can't reveal it until all the dossiers are revealed. But I don't see how its helpful to just say "so-and-so is lying" and to vote for them at this point. We have unsubstantiated accusations being thrown around left and right and none of us can truly make any sense of it right now.

MHaye, you're up next for revealing your dossier.

storyteller0910
12-18-2007, 03:23 PM
You do follow that if a town-oriented person figures out something consistent with the dossiers, they're not going to share what it is, because an inconsistency by a future reveal would point towards scumhood, right?
Right?

<sighs>

OK, whatever, I give up. You're absolutely right. The dossier system is the best way we have to catch scum, you have clearly figured the entire game out, and dissembling with one another will help us win.

My dossier is as follows:


(Public) I've travelled with royalty in torn T-shirt and jeans.

I am the funniest person alive.

I have performed on stage at Branson, MO.

I own an authentic 1920s lady's flapper outfit.

I've been trodden on by an elephant.

I'm not fully convinced that Kurt Cobain committed suicide.


Knock yourselves out.

For my part, I am going to spend some time puzzling over what to do about Hal Briston. There are a few very significant problems, but I haven't yet gotten them clarified in my head so I can't explain them fully yet. For the moment, though, if there is anyone reading this who has reason to believe that they are the actual possessor of the 7% secret, this would be an excellent time to reveal this fact.

ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies
12-18-2007, 03:31 PM
Alrighty. Pandemonium it is then.

Here is mine:

(Public) I was a trombone soloist in college.
I believe that corporations and the wealthy are no longer sufficiently taxed.
I believe that spending years building kids' self-esteem does more harm than good, in the long run.
I believe that the Apollo moon landings were filmed in Hollywood.
I was in a biker movie.
I have performed on stage at Branson, MO.

Boozahol Squid, P.I.
12-18-2007, 03:31 PM
<sighs>

OK, whatever, I give up. You're absolutely right. The dossier system is the best way we have to catch scum, you have clearly figured the entire game out, and dissembling with one another will help us win.

Knock yourselves out.

For my part, I am going to spend some time puzzling over what to do about Hal Briston. There are a few very significant problems, but I haven't yet gotten them clarified in my head so I can't explain them fully yet. For the moment, though, if there is anyone reading this who has reason to believe that they are the actual possessor of the 7% secret, this would be an excellent time to reveal this fact.

Snarkiness doesn't become you, story. I don't have the game figured out. The dossiers don't promise and insta-win for the Town. They sure as hell can't hurt us, as far as I can tell, because they may give us some clues as to the identity of the killing scum.

Hal's reveal is obviously curious, however.

Boozahol Squid, P.I.
12-18-2007, 03:34 PM
But I don't see how its helpful to just say "so-and-so is lying" and to vote for them at this point. We have unsubstantiated accusations being thrown around left and right and none of us can truly make any sense of it right now.


I promise, if I see anything highly suspicious, personally, I'll immediately point it out, and state why I think it doesn't work with what I've got.
I haven't seen any real accusations tossed about other than the ones leveled at zuma... who is a lightning rod for them in these games, whatever side he's on.

storyteller0910
12-18-2007, 03:46 PM
Snarkiness doesn't become you, story.


Eh, these games make me snarky. I've learned to embrace it.


I don't have the game figured out. The dossiers don't promise and insta-win for the Town. They sure as hell can't hurt us, as far as I can tell, because they may give us some clues as to the identity of the killing scum.


You keep saying this as if I am disagreeing about the revelation of dossiers. For the third or possibly fourth time, I am in favor of mass reveal of dossiers, and I think I might have been the first person to come out in favor of same.

What I'm against is: "I have figured something out, but I'm not going to tell you what." This is utterly valueless. We're obviously not going to lynch someone on the basis of that sort of thing: "Well, I see a pattern, and he violates it, and you're just going to have to trust me on that," is not sufficient evidence. Given that, and if you're not going to follow through, why say anything at all? Just making the announcement gives the scum notice to look for a pattern. If you're not willing to explain the whole thing, don't mention it at all.


Hal's reveal is obviously curious, however.

I am inclined to believe it, provisionally, but it raises serious problems for us if he is lying. To wit, his claim is not readily testable - there may be a way to test it, but I haven't figured one out yet. More on this later tonight.

MHaye
12-18-2007, 03:47 PM
What do I think about dossier reveals?

Revealing the dossier publically does allow fo pattern analysis, provided that we can rely on the players to report accurately. With a full reveal, I suspect that we could do pattern analysis to spot anomalies and deduce whether someone has lied about their dossier.

Against this, the more people that have revealed their dossier, the better untruth a Silent Pig can construct. It's quite possible that a late-revealing SP can construct a dossier that cannot be told from a real dossier even with all the dossiers fully revealed. There is about a 1 in 3 chance that all of the last three players to reveal are Good Guys (assuming we use a random selection method). That means it's better than even odds that at least one of those players (whoever they are) is a Silent Pig, who will have loads of information to construct their dossier with.

Contrary to popular wisdom, Good Guys do have a reason to try and be among the last to reveal. If the Silent Pigs reveal first, they are more likely to make something up which is inconsistent with the Good Guy's dossiers.

The argument that the reveal would prevent important information being taken to the grave by good guys killed unexpectedly is not something I give weight to, because the death post enables the player to reveal it anyway. Consequently it doesn't sway me either way.

The problem I see with reveals is that if the Silent Pigs know all the details of every dossier (as they would if we implement full reveals) then we are handing them tools to deceive us. Unless a good guy lies about their dossier (and why they would do that escapes me) then the Silent Pigs can pick the killer with the best chance of revealing no unique facts to be the killer each Night by selecting the one that has most matches to the remaining Townies.

I believe that the killer must be selectable because otherwise the mechanism whereby the dead person is provided a fact about his killer from that person's dossier doesn't work unless the killer is a specific individual. It could be random selection by the Mods, of course, which would undermine that idea.

My conclusion? I'm still not 100% convinced that full dossier reveals are the right way to go. I'm strongly leaning that way, however.

Before I do so, though, I'd like to ask Hal Briston a question.

Hal, how many of the five private facts in my dossier are also public facts about other players? You don't have to answer, but if you don't want to please say that.

brewha
12-18-2007, 03:57 PM
What I'm against is: "I have figured something out, but I'm not going to tell you what." This is utterly valueless.

I've found something that looks suspicious about Zuma. I called him on it and am waiting for his response. I didn't ask for a vote to lynch him - I didn't even vote to lynch him.

It's early in the week. If he can explain what I questioned him on, I'll drop it.






Ahh fuck it. Truth of the matter is that the more that has become revealed since my first FOS, the more I'm convinced that Zuma is nobody. I was hoping that he'd come in here and respond. I was hoping that maybe I had stumbled on to something and his response would give something away.

The other thing I've learned about my prior mafia experience is that my crazy conspiracy theories could actually be crazy. Meh, I digress.

Hockey Monkey
12-18-2007, 04:12 PM
Santo Rugger's full Dossier
(public) One of my high school classmates was killed in the attack on the USS Stark.
I sat next to Robert Plant at Fat Tuesdays.
I have eaten bull testicles more than once.
I have performed and exorcism
I believe zombies are inherently funny
I believe the cruelty makes foie gras all the more tasty.

brewha
12-18-2007, 04:31 PM
Brewha, which traits do you think zuma lied about? You don't have to give me a why, just which ones?


Now it's down to "Aliens steal my socks".

But I getting the idea there more to what I was thinking than what I thought there was. <--No, that's not meant to mean anything.

Hockey Monkey
12-18-2007, 04:43 PM
I don't know if zuma was truthful with his dossier, but he didn't pull anything out of his ass. All of his statements are consistent with everyone else's.

One And Only Wanderers
12-18-2007, 04:54 PM
My conclusion? I'm still not 100% convinced that full dossier reveals are the right way to go. I'm strongly leaning that way, however.

Before I do so, though, I'd like to ask Hal Briston a question.

Hal, how many of the five private facts in my dossier are also public facts about other players? You don't have to answer, but if you don't want to please say that.


vote MHaye

what's the matter, you need to know whether or not Hal can out you as a liar before you post your dossier?

One And Only Wanderers
12-18-2007, 04:55 PM
EBWOP vote Mhaye

Hal Briston
12-18-2007, 05:02 PM
Hal, how many of the five private facts in my dossier are also public facts about other players? You don't have to answer, but if you don't want to please say that.I couldn't say. Please don't anyone take what I've said to mean that I have copies of everyone's dossier -- I don't -- not by a longshot. I was given copies of x number of player's dossiers, and will be very suspicious of those who fudge their facts or don't supply them at all. I'll also confirm anyone I can who posts a clean sheet.

The reason I called out faithfool by name was A) she was under heavy suspicion, and B) the b-ball score method of setting the reveal order put her in at second-to-last. I didn't want to wait that long to start confirming.

MHaye
12-18-2007, 05:45 PM
I couldn't say.I'll mark that as "Can not or will not say" then.

Please don't anyone take what I've said to mean that I have copies of everyone's dossier -- I don't -- not by a longshot. I was given copies of x number of player's dossiers, and will be very suspicious of those who fudge their facts or don't supply them at all. I'll also confirm anyone I can who posts a clean sheet.I was not expecting you to have everyone's; just that if you had my dossier, were willing to answer the question, and offered the right answer, then that might offer some corroboration of your claim when my dossier was revealed and you were seen to be right. (Conversely, if you were wrong that would go a long way towards disproving your claim).

Your actual answer is neutral, because you simply might not have my dossier, or perhaps you do and want to try and catch me in a fake. It's the answer I thought most likely, but it couldn't hurt to give you an option.

(@ OAOW : Now you know why I asked. You can choose to believe me or not.)

As for my dossier; my love of Zombie humour is well known.

("What do we want?" Braaaains
"When do we want it?" Braaaains.

Cracks me up every time.)

Some lesser known facts about me : I have handled and fed a lot of snakes, alligators and crocodiles.
I believe the Honda Element is a good-looking car.
I enjoy practising the cello.
I played piano with Sly Stone in a Holiday Inn restaurant.
I have met Chuck NorrisThat's about it for my dossier.

Who's next?

Rysto
12-18-2007, 06:02 PM
1. Rysto (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=9282574&postcount=395)
2. MHaye (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=9285974&postcount=453)
3. One And Only Wanderers
4. Freudian Slit
5. ShadowFacts
6. zuma (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=9282234&postcount=391)
7. brewha (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=9284535&postcount=418)
8. Hawkeyeop
9. sachertorte
10.Kat
11.ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=9285434&postcount=441)
12.HazelNutCoffee (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=9284341&postcount=412)
13.storyteller0910 (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=9285391&postcount=440)
14.faithfool (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=9282315&postcount=394)
15.Hal Briston

zuma
12-18-2007, 08:46 PM
Zuma, I believe that you have made up four of your traits. Either come clean with your real ones with an explanation why you lied about them, or I'm forced to vote for you.



I stopped beating my wife on December 20th, 2005.

zuma
12-18-2007, 08:48 PM
Regarding the "dio is town" statement. Yeah, I really believe he is. I've said before that I'm lousy at detecting scum, but pretty good at picking out town-aligned players. For now I choose to believe he is town. Obviously I don't know for sure, but I bet I'll be proven correct.

storyteller0910
12-18-2007, 09:23 PM
Regarding the "dio is town" statement. Yeah, I really believe he is. I've said before that I'm lousy at detecting scum, but pretty good at picking out town-aligned players. For now I choose to believe he is town. Obviously I don't know for sure, but I bet I'll be proven correct.

Would you be willing to share any reasoning, by way of convincing those of us who are currently voting for Dio? Your gut may have a good track record for you, but I'm certainly not going to rely on it for me. Why do you trust Dio?

zuma
12-18-2007, 09:34 PM
Mostly because he's been one of the most vocal about revealing the dossiers. As I've stated previously I can think of no good reason not to do it, and I think it's important to have them out there on day 1. I have similiar thoughts about Pleonast at this stage of the game. I guess it boils down to the fact that I tend to trust people in this game whose thoughts and actions most closely match my own. Now, of course, I could be dead wrong (although I don't think I am), but I find it easier early in the game to identify those who I think are town-aligned to help narrow my own search.

Boozahol Squid, P.I.
12-18-2007, 09:49 PM
Regarding the "dio is town" statement. Yeah, I really believe he is. I've said before that I'm lousy at detecting scum, but pretty good at picking out town-aligned players. For now I choose to believe he is town. Obviously I don't know for sure, but I bet I'll be proven correct.

For what it's worth: rest easy, you will be.

Not that that statement really means much, of course. :D

brewha
12-18-2007, 09:49 PM
I stopped beating my wife on December 20th, 2005.

Nice! Very Nice!

I have since come forward and said that I believe that you are just a vanilla town. No reason you can't be town and an asshole though is there?

Fuck Shit Ass Bitch Cunt!

OK, I got that out of my system.

Yes, Zuma I may have unfairly FOS'd you. let's get back to the topic at hand.

Mtgman
12-18-2007, 11:10 PM
Nice! Very Nice!

I have since come forward and said that I believe that you are just a vanilla town. No reason you can't be town and an asshole though is there?

Fuck Shit Ass Bitch Cunt!

OK, I got that out of my system.

Yes, Zuma I may have unfairly FOS'd you. let's get back to the topic at hand.
Less of this please. Insinuations of assholery violate both the rules of the game and the forum. This is a warning, you'll only get one.

Enjoy,
Steven

One And Only Wanderers
12-19-2007, 01:35 AM
OK, my turn, and whilst I agree with the dossier reveals, I wish I didn't have to reveal mine! I am one of those shameful individuals who shares an attribute with last night's murderer.

(Public) I once had sex in front of the Washington Monument.

I can say 'hello' and 'thank you' in nine languages.

I believe the Honda Element is a good-looking car.

I have had a conversation with Michael Chiklis

I've eaten grilled cow udder more than once.

I once drove a VW Bug through the front door of a 7/11.

brewha
12-19-2007, 06:56 AM
Less of this please. Insinuations of assholery violate both the rules of the game and the forum. This is a warning, you'll only get one.

Enjoy,
Steven

I apologize - to you and to Zuma. It was out of line. It seems I should have a breathalyzer between me and the dope. That will be the last of my drunk posting here.

storyteller0910
12-19-2007, 07:21 AM
Mostly because he's been one of the most vocal about revealing the dossiers. As I've stated previously I can think of no good reason not to do it, and I think it's important to have them out there on day 1. I have similiar thoughts about Pleonast at this stage of the game. I guess it boils down to the fact that I tend to trust people in this game whose thoughts and actions most closely match my own.

Well, that's fair enough, I guess, but it's pretty problematic, because it means - if you are not scum yourself - that you are making yourself pretty trivially easy to manipulate. Your opinion on the dossiers pretty much matches that of the large majority of the group, so for someone to agree with you (whether or not they "really" agree with you) costs them very little but gains them currency in terms of your trust.

For my part, now that most of this discussion appears to have shaken out, I'd put tiny pro-town check marks mostly in the columns of those who have argued most aggressively against dossier reveals, in spite of the fact that I myself am in favor of the reveals. My reasoning is this: I don't believe the advantage conferred by a full reveal will be particularly significant. I think it will play as mildly - very mildly - pro-town. It is thus not in the interest of scum to argue against it, as by so doing they would be bucking the majority and thus drawing attention to themselves. In a game where only a small-ish number of mislynches are required to ensure a scum victory, I don't think the scum would have made waves arguing against this idea. So, for my part, tiny - tiny - pro-town props in the direction of Rysto and sachertorte.

My suspicion list right now consists of Diomedes and, to a much lesser extent, zuma, based not on their opinion of the dossiers but on their behavior overall. I still think Dio's early attempt to gently shove suspicion in the direction of Rysto, and his disingenuous back-away from his own vote shortly thereafter, was a hinky move, and his subsequent discussion of his actions hasn't ameliorated that suspicion.

In the case of zuma, my suspicion stems mostly from that "town like me" comment, which could be an effort to curry favor with Dio if I am wrong and he (Diomedes) is, in fact, pro-town. This is pretty weak, of course, so my vote stays where it is for the moment.

Incidentally, it might be time to start getting a few votes on the record. The deadline is going to be upon us presently, and while I stand by my belief that a reasoned no-lynch is not a terrible outcome in every case, a no-lynch by default definitely is.

Boozahol Squid, P.I.
12-19-2007, 08:00 AM
My suspicion list right now consists of Diomedes and, to a much lesser extent, zuma, based not on their opinion of the dossiers but on their behavior overall. I still think Dio's early attempt to gently shove suspicion in the direction of Rysto, and his disingenuous back-away from his own vote shortly thereafter, was a hinky move, and his subsequent discussion of his actions hasn't ameliorated that suspicion.

Go back and read the post (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=9274183&postcount=298) I where I voted for Rysto. You may think my motives may have been shady, but I never backed away from anything: I made the vote with the specific intention of trying to force the random-order reveals. It wasn't intended to be a strong lynch-effort, nor was it specifically directed towards Rysto other than he was 'on the cock", so to speak.
It was intended as a strong impetus for the reveals to come out in order. When it became apparent that that method wasn't going to work (because nobody else followed me on it, and a single vote doesn't provide any further impetus) I backed off.

Boozahol Squid, P.I.
12-19-2007, 08:01 AM
EBWOP: Rysto wasn't "on the cock." He was "on the clock."

brewha
12-19-2007, 08:09 AM
"on the cock"

best typo ever!


I would agree that scum would be less likely to actively oppose dossier reveals - unless they were called to do it. Anyone keeping track of posting numbers? Has anyone been especially quiet?

Hockey Monkey
12-19-2007, 08:25 AM
Folks left to reveal: (in no particular order)

Freudian Slit
Mhaye
ShadowFacts
Hal Briston
Hawkeyeop
Kat
sachertorte

storyteller0910
12-19-2007, 08:25 AM
EBWOP: Rysto wasn't "on the cock." He was "on the clock."

BWAH!

----

On topic - I think the whole "I'm voting for you to make you do what I want" can be a sneaky tactic, in and of itself. It's a consequence-free vote, because you get to claim you never thought he was scum. Of course, had your one vote turned into five or six or seven, we'll never know whether you would have abandoned the bandwagon or stayed on it.

The bottom line is, I'm suspicious of you. I am by no means certain of anything, but given that no one has given me much cause to be more suspicious of them than I am of you, I'm going to keep my vote where it is.

storyteller0910
12-19-2007, 08:26 AM
I would agree that scum would be less likely to actively oppose dossier reveals - unless they were called to do it. Anyone keeping track of posting numbers? Has anyone been especially quiet?

Sorry for the double post, but this is a valuable point. I do think that every player should be required to either:

(1) Post their dossier

or

(2) Explicitly decline to do so.

Anything else looks like avoiding the question, which there really is no pro-town reason to do.

Boozahol Squid, P.I.
12-19-2007, 08:44 AM
Post Count:
These counts start from the beginning of Day One (I didn't include the night posts beause they were all pretty much just boob talk). I didn't include any mindless chatter, NETA/EBWOP posts, or similar flim-flam

1.storyteller0910 16
2.HazelNutCoffee 7
3.Freudian Slit 8
4.brewha 19
5.MHaye 7
6.ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies 6
7.sachertorte 8
8.Hawkeyeop 5
9.ShadowFacts 9
10.Santo Rugger 1
11. Pleonast 10
12. One And Only Wanderers 9
13. Rysto 19
14. Hal Briston 7
15. faithfool 12
16. zuma 34
17. Hockey Monkey 13
18. Kat 2
19. Diomedes 31

One And Only Wanderers
12-19-2007, 08:44 AM
Sorry for the double post, but this is a valuable point. I do think that every player should be required to either:

(1) Post their dossier

or

(2) Explicitly decline to do so.

Anything else looks like avoiding the question, which there really is no pro-town reason to do.

QFT

sachertorte
12-19-2007, 08:57 AM
I have been and continue to be against dossier reveals. However, since a majority of dossiers have been published, I feel that the negative impacts of dossier private information in the game has already been realized. Also, Hal Briston claims dossier-knower so that gives a solid reason for revealing. Therefore, I will post my dossier now.

I will continue to argue against conclusions that are based on dossier private information.
1) Scum lie
2) Scum will use the information to manipulate us
3) We do not know the intentions of mtgman and NAF regarding dossier private information

(Public) I've climbed to the top chamber of Cheops.
I've eaten grilled cow udder more than once.
I have gone to Disney World 3 times and Disneyland at least 5 times
I've been a model appearing on the cover of a nationwide catalog.
I watched as over 30 people jumped out of an airborne aircraft.
I got an autograph from Billy Crystal on top of the World Trade Center.

Rysto
12-19-2007, 09:06 AM
"on the cock"

best typo ever!I beg to differ.

I did not have sexual relations with that man.

Hawkeyeop
12-19-2007, 09:18 AM
Because that's what the 7% secret was. I was given a copy of faithfool's dossier at the onset of game, and she was honest about her traits.

I have a number of thoughts on this at least a few of which are contradictory.

This seems odd to me on a couple of levels. One it seems like a weird ability. If the dossiers are solvable, then this ability is not overly necessary. It would seem to take away from the analytical level of this game. I'm just not seeing why the game designers would include it.

Plus, if Hal Briston has this ability, it is a strange time to use it. While faithfool had a couple of votes upon her, she was no immediate danger of being lynched. Furthermore there were a couple of other players who already confirmed her dossier via patterns they found. Confirming that a player is not lying about their dossier has limited value. The player is more likely then not to be scum and being truthful does not mean that person is not scum. On the other hand, given there are no power roles, lying almost certainly means a player is scum. Why waste the secret power here?

Three possibilies come to me in answer of that last question in order of likelyhood.

1. Hal played his hand differently then I would. Certainly the most likely scenario.

2. Hal is a non affiliated scum trying to warn the other disgruntled employees.

3. Hal lied about his ability in order to trick the scum into being honest.

One other thought while I'm at it. We had a night start which I gather atypical. I'm sure the mods would of preferred to let everyone play a day before being killed. So there had to be some game mechanic that required the scum talk to each other before day 1. If various town members knew everyones dossiers then that could quickly break the game. Everyone would reveal their dossiers, and then town members would be able to call out who was lying. There might be some initial confusion, but the scum would be outed in short order. Which leads me to believe that at least 1 scum has extra dossiers, totally erasing my initial point.

ShadowFacts
12-19-2007, 09:53 AM
I have been and continue to be against dossier reveals. However, since a majority of dossiers have been published, I feel that the negative impacts of dossier private information in the game has already been realized. Also, Hal Briston claims dossier-knower so that gives a solid reason for revealing. Therefore, I will post my dossier now.

I will continue to argue against conclusions that are based on dossier private information.
1) Scum lie
2) Scum will use the information to manipulate us
3) We do not know the intentions of mtgman and NAF regarding dossier private information

I strongly agree with everything sach says here. But with most everyone already revealed, it seems pointless to hold back now. I am hopeful that if we can get all these out there, maybe other avenues of conversation and analysis will be opened. Anyway, here's mine:

(Public) I enjoy practicing the cello

I once met Cliff Burton from Metallica before he died.

I have a photo of myself with Dick Clark

I went trekking after gorillas in The Impenetrable Forest.

I believe that spending years building kids' self-esteem does more harm than good, in the long run.

I believe that the Apollo moon landings were filmed in Hollywood.

ShadowFacts
12-19-2007, 10:07 AM
On the topic of Hal Briston and his secret Dossier knowledge, upon reflection I am inclined to believe him for the moment, simply because I don't think it makes sense for scum to make it up. What's the motivation? To protect a fellow scum in faithfool? That doesn't make sense, as she's not in any real danger at this point. And if she gets lynched and we find out she is scum, Hal would be immediately next on the block. So it seems both unnecessary and risky to me. While I am not usually a fan of applying logic to scum actions, since they are inherently tricksy, in this case I just cannot see any advantage at all.

And speaking of faithfool, I do believe she is a newbie. This "I'm in way over my head so vote for me" strategy is either incredibly brilliant scum play, or just someone who feels way in over their head. I incline toward the latter.

Unvote faithfool

(That said, faithfool, if you really are town, cut the crap and play. Sacrificing yourself is detrimental to the town, period.)

storyteller0910
12-19-2007, 10:12 AM
And if she gets lynched and we find out she is scum, Hal would be immediately next on the block.

I do not agree with this statement. Hal may be telling the plain truth, and faithfool may be scum telling the truth about her dossier. The alignment of the one tells us precisely nothing about the alignment of the other.

NAF1138
12-19-2007, 10:17 AM
3 - faithfool - (shadowfacts, zuma, Dio)

2 - zuma (sach, Mhaye)

1 - Diomedes (Storyteller)
1 - MHaye (OAOW)


7 out of 18 votes cast.
With 18 alive 10 starts the clock and 12 ends the Day.

There will be no lynch without a majority.

Day ends no later then Friday December 21st at 1:30 pm Pacific (by board time).

That means you have about 2 days 5 hours and 15 minutes to start getting a concensus.

Go Team!

ShadowFacts
12-19-2007, 10:36 AM
I do not agree with this statement. Hal may be telling the plain truth, and faithfool may be scum telling the truth about her dossier. The alignment of the one tells us precisely nothing about the alignment of the other.


You're right. It is stupid to assume that scum will lie about their dossiers. My bad.

Hal Briston
12-19-2007, 11:01 AM
You're right. It is stupid to assume that scum will lie about their dossiers. My bad.Man, I need to get my snarkometer calibrated -- I simply cannot tell if you're being serious there or not.

Anyway, either the scum will tell tell the truth, and we'll hopefully be able to suss them out as more of us reveal their secrets (posthumously, unfortunately), or they'll lie and hopefully I'll be able to tell.

Mtgman
12-19-2007, 11:26 AM
I apologize - to you and to Zuma. It was out of line. It seems I should have a breathalyzer between me and the dope. That will be the last of my drunk posting here.
We're cool, thanks for the response. Now, game on.

Enjoy,
Steven

faithfool
12-19-2007, 12:10 PM
(That said, faithfool, if you really are town, cut the crap and play. Sacrificing yourself is detrimental to the town, period.)


I've been trying to play, but all the snarking and nitpicking haven't seemed a very conducive environment to welcome those who do. not. have. a. friggin'. clue. Kind of like the above statement, it's a bit off putting when you're still attempting to do your best (and have said so) FOR THE TOWN and yet you're branded as being some sort of.... what? The hell if I know. Geesh, how frustrating. But just in case anyone missed it before, I'll reiterate again that I am trying to do my part. And just to show that's the case:


unvote faithfool

ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies
12-19-2007, 12:28 PM
Fret not, faithfool on the Mafia playground, people run up and FOS/vote you in the arm or the shin because they like you. ;)

ShadowFacts
12-19-2007, 12:42 PM
I've been trying to play, but all the snarking and nitpicking haven't seemed a very conducive environment to welcome those who do. not. have. a. friggin'. clue. Kind of like the above statement, it's a bit off putting when you're still attempting to do your best (and have said so) FOR THE TOWN and yet you're branded as being some sort of.... what? The hell if I know. Geesh, how frustrating. But just in case anyone missed it before, I'll reiterate again that I am trying to do my part. And just to show that's the case:


unvote faithfool

I'm sorry if you found my comments to be unwelcoming. I am hardly a veteran myself - this is only my second game on the Dope and third overall. Nevertheless, let me be forward enough to offer some advice:

Don't take game comments personally. Mafia is a game of suspicion, accusation and paranoia, by definition. You're going to get accused and you're going to get nit-picked, but it's just part of the game. If someone thinks you are doing something anti-town, they're going to say so. Nobody means it personally (99.9% of the time, anyway).

I hope you stick around and play and have a fun time, and come to enjoy being called a scum :)

faithfool
12-19-2007, 12:52 PM
Thank you ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies (Gah! How does one shorten that?), I appreciate your encouragement and to all others who have been so as well. I'm just very, very frustrated. (See, I almost typed 'disgruntled' and then remembered what that stood for in the context of the game and how it would be seen by the other players.... :eek: )


I'm sorry if you found my comments to be unwelcoming. I am hardly a veteran myself - this is only my second game on the Dope and third overall. Nevertheless, let me be forward enough to offer some advice:

Don't take game comments personally. Mafia is a game of suspicion, accusation and paranoia, by definition. You're going to get accused and you're going to get nit-picked, but it's just part of the game. If someone thinks you are doing something anti-town, they're going to say so. Nobody means it personally (99.9% of the time, anyway).

I hope you stick around and play and have a fun time, and come to enjoy being called a scum :)

ShadowFacts, believe it or not, I thought I was prepared for all the things you mention. However, I didn't think they'd take place even before there was suspicion to be had anywhere. Like from pre-start comments or arguments pro / con about how to do stuff, etc.. I understood that as things progressed, everything would be considered circumspect and I was looking forward to it. But to have it directed at you, as a complete newbie, when you hadn't done anything (as far as I knew) to deserve it, has been difficult to eradicate (my ire, everyone's questioning, not feeling sure of myself anyway) all the way 'round.

Anyway, that's enough of my hijack for this morning. I pray that the focus will stay off me and yes, I'd have no problem coming to "enjoy being called a scum."


[Disclaimer: The last sentence is in direct response to ShadowFacts last sentence. It in no way indicates that I am or am not scum. No hidden meaning here, I swear.]

Rysto
12-19-2007, 02:26 PM
Ah, well now you know: Anything you say or do can and will be held against you by a rampaging lynch mob. Try not to let it get you down.</guy who's never been lynched before>

FWIW, I'm taking Mtgman at his word and believing that the think he sent you was for a Mafia tutorial.

MHaye
12-19-2007, 03:50 PM
Thanks Faithfool. :) Welcome back to the game.

Thank you ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies (Gah! How does one shorten that?)I call her DarkCookies. (I had to call her something, I needed to shorten it for my vote spreadsheet.)

I haven't had my head ripped off and stuffed up my backside. (Yet.)

I sort of assumed that if DarkCookies has problems with the name, I'll be told.

@HockeyMonkey : Please update your list : I revealed my dossier in 453.

ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies
12-19-2007, 05:51 PM
I think most folks just end up calling me Cookies.

Freudian Slit
12-19-2007, 08:34 PM
Here's mine:

(Public) Farts are really funny. People only pretend to not think they are.

I have been an assistant on an archaeological dig in the ancient Malian capital of Djenne.

I have had a conversation with Michael Chiklis

I've been a model appearing on the cover of a nationwide catalog

I was once bitten by a wild animal while visiting Dollywood.

I have performed on stage at Branson, MO.

Sorry for the delay...it's been a stressful weekend and a very busy day! I'll try to post some more tonight.

Kat
12-19-2007, 08:49 PM
Here's mine:

(Public) I played piano with Sly Stone in a Holiday Inn restaurant.

I interviewed Pete Townshend via email, and he posted it on his website.

I once had sex in front of the Washington Monument.

I wear a size 7 shoe.

I provided a line in a song that became a top 20 hit for the band Traffic.

I've bowled two perfect 300 games

Hal Briston
12-19-2007, 09:16 PM
Hawkeyeop, I believe it's down to just your dossier and mine remaining. Care to reveal?

Hawkeyeop
12-19-2007, 09:18 PM
Here we go:

(Public) I have performed an exorcism.

I've been on the cover of a Chicago area phone book.

I speak Swahili.

I was in a biker movie.

I've bowled two perfect 300 games

I've been a model appearing on the cover of a nationwide catalog

zuma
12-20-2007, 07:08 AM
I'd like to request that day 1 be extended.

7 real life days per Day. 2 real life days per Night. Length of Day and Night subject to fluctuation at Mod discretion, but this will most likely be the length for the majority of the game.

I would like the day to be extended for 48 hours. We've spent a week discussing dossiers and I think we need a couple more days to discuss voting. I invite everyone to discuss a day extension

We can have the day extended at mod discretion. Who here favors extending the day? Who here opposes this request?

brewha
12-20-2007, 07:13 AM
Hal - looks like all that's left is your reveal. I'll spell out the pattern as soon as you give your list.

zuma
12-20-2007, 07:17 AM
I'd like to spend the a few days examing the reveal of dossier discussions. In my opinion those that favored or opposed it stridently won't get my vote. Those that were wishy-washy about it are another story. I invite everyone here to ask the mods to extend our day at their discretion. If they don't, I'll unvote faithfool and vote: Mhaye

Mhaye promised to reveal his decision within hours, but waited a day, then made us wait hours more.

zuma
12-20-2007, 07:19 AM
I apologize - to you and to Zuma. It was out of line. It seems I should have a breathalyzer between me and the dope. That will be the last of my drunk posting here.

No apologies necessary. I will warn you that drunken posts tend to get you voted off. I'm starting to think that cell phone posts do the same.

One And Only Wanderers
12-20-2007, 07:19 AM
For the record, I would be behind any move to extend day 1. A rushed decision can only be bad ofr the town at this point.

brewha
12-20-2007, 07:30 AM
Extending the day won't do much for me. I'm leaving on Sat morning and will be travelling all over the place for Christmas. I should be able to find a computer here and there, but I can't guarantee anything.

zuma
12-20-2007, 07:31 AM
Yeah.. our mods said that the day could be extended at their discretion.. I think if there was an effort made on our part to get it extended that they would do it. I encourage everyone to lobby for a day extension. If they don't, we can at least take something from those who remain silent or resist a day extension. Plus I think that even if they don't extend, we can learn something from those who oppose or do not request the day extension.

I don't think 48 hours is too much to ask considering the time it has taken to work through the dossier mechanic.