Mafia 3 - Town victory

There are only two reasons I can think of for why bored was killed during the night.

As a general comment, I think it should be said that perhaps we are reading too much importance into the night kills. The mafia saw a talkative townie and they did silence him. Any drama we distill from this is little more than speculation, is it not?

1. Killing bored was intended to start the NESwagon again.
2. NES is mafia.

Hm. The mafia probably killed Bored to stir up drama.
If this isn't the case then, yeah. I disagree with point 2. You're saying that NES is probably evil so he silenced Bored? After I defeated Bored's main arguments against NES I doubt Bored would bring them back D2 and he wouldn't be a threat to NES really. And NES was pretty much free from heat from most of the town. So I don't see why NES would kill Bored. NES could be mafia because he behaved completely stupidly day one, drawing attention to himself and getting all drama-ous, but that's a different issue.
But strategically, killing Bored doesn't really make sense for a NES-mafioso.

He wasn't playing anyways, so he couldn't possibly have been a threat.

Fallacy. People lurking are of the highest threat to the town, perhaps regardless of their win condition.

FOS: Budja

Woah where did this come from?

FOS:Limelemon [...]

Pretty justified stuff right there.
Although we will look like right twats if we lynch Limelemon for a slip and he turns out to be a Townie (!). Although that is unlikely at the moment. There are others to check out.

Koromi cos he kinda flipped day 1. Has been pretty silent Day 1 and 2 and has brought as about as much to the table as a lost hippopotamus who is allergic to tables. And talking.

Was that a vote?
I have always been suspicious of lurkers, but it's really stupid to vote them just like that.

@Razzor and those with simular opinions, Sorry, I start a wagon on Igiari and I get the suspicion. Look at all the people who followed me, I was hardly alone .
We removed a dead weight which is a bit better than a ranodm lynch anyway.

Lunar is right, focusing too much on Bored's death is unhealthy for the town. the mafia don't choose there targets to help us, you know.
TBH, I am not too bothered by the death anyway as I was finding Bored a little scummy anyway.

Another thing, Townie's can disagree with townies. In general, a disagreement between two people is no way implies one has to be scum.

I don't find Limelemon's 'slip' particulary suspicious.

@Limelemon, why is it stupid to vote lurkers?

Since they haven't said anything, it's a random vote. Random votes are bad.

Fallacy. People lurking are of the highest threat to the town, perhaps regardless of their win condition.

True, but igiari wasn't lurking. He announced that he had not, and wasn't going to participate in this game of mafia. Purple pineapple even tried to replace him with Salmoneous, so I think its safe to say the he wasn't playing, and therefor not much of a threat to the town.

Quote from: Razzorman on July 02, 2009, 18:04:32

FOS: Budja

Woah where did this come from?

From here:

@all, vote Igiari or explain why not.

This was ok before igiari announced that he wasn't playing, but he didn't vote for igiari until a while after igiari quit.

I don't see what Razzor's argument is about the Igiari lynch.
He wasn't a threat yeah, but what if he was a wolf? Wouldn't we be very stupid if we dismissed him as too silent to be any threat?

I don't see the error in lynching lurkers as a matter of course. In fact, it is a viable strategy. Not only does it shrink the pool of potential wolf suspects, but also shrinks the pool of lurkers and quiet people, which helps twofold in helping the hunt against wolves.

Let me:

Lynching a talkative person:
   If he's town: We've lost a good supportive and active townie. He have helped the mafias in a big way.
   If he's mafia: Hooray! It doesn't really matter if he's talkative or not.

Lynching a silent person:
   If he's town: We haven't really lost a proper townie, so we aren't hindering the hunt of mafias, so we aren't helping the mafias.
   If he's mafia: Hooray! It doesn't really matter if he's talkative or not.

So knowing nothing, one would always go with lynching a silent person. It's the better choice obviously (at least in a perfect world). It is true that this is never the case, we always know something and can learn a lot more through the aforementioned channels of action, but seriously who could predict with more than 50% (say) accuracy (which is pretty crap in itself) on the first day who is mafia?

Concluding, I must say that if this day draws on and we find ourselves knowing nothing, or little, (either because of the towns bad playing or because of the mafias good playing) I will support a lynch of the most inactive player.

This does not mean I will not search actively for our enemies, nor does it mean I have resigned to a pre-set system of playing.

(That post was countering Limelemon (as well (?)))

I completely agree. Lynching inactive players is a good thing to do if you have no evidence against anybody.
However, lynching someone like igiari who isn't even playing just makes no sense to me.
I guess what I'm trying to say is; It didn't matter if he was mafia or not. Even if he was, he wouldn't have been assisting the other mafia member.

(That post was countering Limelemon (as well (?)))

Not to the same extent, but yeah, I'm a bit suspicious of him too.

I guess what I'm trying to say is; It didn't matter if he was mafia or not. Even if he was, he wouldn't have been assisting the other mafia member.

A mafia doesn't have to post in the thread to be useful. In fact, a mafia member benefits, as does the whole mafia, from not posting in the thread and encouraging (directly or indirectly) the townies to do the same. If we condone such behaviour, well, we lose.

You should also take this mod post into account:

Back when Igiari posted that, I PMed Salmoneous if he wanted to take his place. I haven't heard back yet, so if Igiari isn't lynched, he's going to die in his sleep. *shrug*

Which means some things, but I wont over analyze at the moment.

This too, about Koromi, I forgot to add:

vote:budja for the purpose of continuing the game. (though perhaps that is a bit hypocritical..)

Totally jumped on a bandwagon when the game was dying, seems like a last chance attempt to get a townie killed. With the interesting behaviour Koromi displayed D1 I totally support a Koromi lynch at the moment. He's inactive and theres a good chance he's mafia, so I see it as a win-win(lose) situation for the town. :3

I'm a bit suspicious of him too.

I am not suspicious of him.

Well, I'm kind of stuck. Having no analysis skills, I am forced to make my decisions based on someone else's arguments.
Not voting makes me suspect because then I'm inactive.
Voting based on somebody else's arguments makes me suspect because then I'm jumping on bandwagons.

Aaaaaaaaaaaaa.

Try to ask questions on behaviour or actions you don't understand or think are suspicious.

Expand on your thoughts if you can.

---

@Lunar, why is Koromi's bandwagoning more suspicious than the whole Igiari bandwagon?
@Limelemon, voting for lurkers is not random voting because it is based on something that could be scummy (lurking).

I don't like your "logic", Lunar.
We should encourage the lurkers to become more active instead of just killing them.
FOS: Lunar

@Lunar, why is Koromi's bandwagoning more suspicious than the whole Igiari bandwagon?

Koromi didn't really start a bandwagon since except from the first two votes nobody voted for you, but I digress, this is unimportant. I theorised that he may have wanted to start a bangwagon against Budja so an easy lynch of said Budja would be, and thus Koromi is likely to be scum.

What I found suspicious was the fact that it seemed that he felt that someone had to be killed, but he gave no reason to vote for you.
My vote was more of a randomish prod vote. Everybody was inactive, I thought I might jump start the game (a reason I voted for you is that I expected an answer or reaction from you).
Whereas a second vote on you meant increased and serious support for the killing of Budja in a much larger way, in my opinion, compared to my first vote.
And since there wasn't reason for that second vote on Budja by Koromi, it seems that Koromi was grasping for a lynch by starting a bandwagon. Koromi could counter this but he'd have to come up with something good soon.

The difference between a (albeit theoretical future) bandwagon against Budja and a bandwagon against Igiari, is that, in my opinion, the Igiari bandwagon, and later the Igiari lynch was justified and a reasonably good move for the town. By lynching you so short-sightedly would be hasty, at that point at least, to say the least.

I don't like your "logic", Lunar.
We should encourage the lurkers to become more active instead of just killing them.
FOS: Lunar

I don't see what you are disputing exactly. I think my argument was clear, and logically sound. If you disagree with it, then provide me with an alternative logical argument on the past and present events.

That being said, voting for and killing a player is very different.

That being said, perhaps my pessimism, or rather my realism on the subject of attempting to higher the standard of Mafia on this forum is clouding my view of a better solution to the problem. If you have one, fire away.

Yes my so-called so-called logic on that matter is based on the assumption that lurkers probably don't get active quick, if at all. But I think that it's a fairly accurate assumption that only fails if one takes into account weird cases of absence and sudden returnal or immense change in character of a player.

wanted to start a bangwagon against Budja

bangwagon