Long Game 26: Cognitive Dissonance

[Frozen Mint]

3 hours ago, The Young Bard said:

Thinking about Aman's plan, I think it would be a good idea that if someone is killed the previous night, someone from their world reveals the list from their world. That way, we get all the information that we need to trace the Eliminators while maintaining a measure of secrecy from the World Destroyer. Does anyone have any objection to that plan?

I'm all for this.

[STINK]

2 hours ago, Magestar said:

Why?  I don't really see a reason to lynch me.  I'm neutral, willing to help the village, and have done nothing wrong.

And I did not say I was going to bandwagon.  I said I was going to aid the Village in whatever they decide for the end of the cycle.

But theirs not really a village, so it sounded a bit odd.

You said you were going to bandwagon.

[Paranoid King]

3 hours ago, The Young Bard said:

Thinking about Aman's plan, I think it would be a good idea that if someone is killed the previous night, someone from their world reveals the list from their world. That way, we get all the information that we need to trace the Eliminators while maintaining a measure of secrecy from the World Destroyer. Does anyone have any objection to that plan?

Does anyone have confirmation that an eliminator needs to be on the same planet as someone else to make the kill? I mean, it's possible that the worlds are just for PM and goal purposes. And if not, you'll be chasing up the wrong tree.

But if you know that's how the kill works, by all means, go ahead. Good plan.

[AliasSheep]

3 hours ago, Magestar said:

So, I'll basically hop on the person with the most votes at the end of the cycle.

You know how I was worried about Stink setting a precedent to do this with his vote switching? You literally just said you were going to do exactly that; which, if you remember, is something you then used when accusing him.  You're not exactly being very consistent.  

Magestar

[Elithanathile]

Okay, so I just got myself caught up on the 5 pages of thread I'd missed, and it looks like it's down to magestar or STINK on the voting right now.

I'm not entirely sure that magestar meant to start a bandwagon, (and yes, I've seen what you posted, STINK,) but on the other hand, the random poke voting thing that STINK did?

A: I've done that before, (I died SO fast for that one,) and B: read STINK's signature. See all those quotes about his dubious mental state? (I'm sure you're perfectly sane!) Yeah. Those are legit quotes, and this tends to be STINK's playstyle.

So I don't really have a good reason to vote for either person, so I won't. Right now, it's at a tie, and I'm perfectly happy to keep it there. If another vote pops up, or more information or something, then I might change it, but right now, I don't have that many suspicions on other people, so I'm not gonna vote.

And last thought for this post? Just remember guys, that how we win is through our goals. We don't have to kill each other or do the whole lynchy thing.

Edited September 16, 2016 by Bridge Boy
Saw Sheep's last post, so now voting on STINK

[AliasSheep]

6 minutes ago, Paranoid King said:

Does anyone have confirmation that an eliminator needs to be on the same planet as someone else to make the kill? I mean, it's possible that the worlds are just for PM and goal purposes. And if not, you'll be chasing up the wrong tree.

But if you know that's how the kill works, by all means, go ahead. Good plan.

Well, from the Common Powers, most of the kills I can see are for Player(local), so I imagine that's more likely; that being said, a cross-world kill could definitely be a hidden ability.

[Magestar]

14 minutes ago, AliasSheep said:

You know how I was worried about Stink setting a precedent to do this with his vote switching? You literally just said you were going to do exactly that; which, if you remember, is something you then used when accusing him.  You're not exactly being very consistent.  

No, Stink was setting a precedent for randomly hopping and swapping.  I'm saying I'll work with the majority, and put down 1 vote at the end of the cycle.   These things are very different.

Also, BB is right.  We don't need a lynch.  However, I'm very ready to lynch STINK.

 

[AliasSheep]

1 minute ago, Magestar said:

No, Stink was setting a precedent for randomly hopping and swapping.  I'm saying I'll work with the majority, and put down 1 vote at the end of the cycle.   These things are very different.

This isn't LG25 where we know that the eliminators are going to manipulate the votes to get the people they want lynched, lynched.  I doubt there are that many vote manip abilities in the game, and if there are, not all the elims are going to have them, that would be stupidly inbalanced.  Building up such a strong lynch isn't nearly as necessary.  Thus, switching your vote at the end of the turn to someone else just lets a bandwagon build and lets you help get someone lynched with no contribution to the reasoning behind their lynch.  

[little wilson]

First, let me clarify what I meant about this being an elimination game and not a faction game. It's about emphasis. MR7 was a faction game that was played like an elimination game, with the discovery faction getting ganged up on and they couldn't do anything to defend themselves. MR 10 was an elimination game that was played like a faction game for the first half and the eliminators slaughtered the village because of it. MR 12 was a faction game with eliminators, and there were players who pushed for it to be played like an elimination game despite the fact that each individual faction only had to kill the eliminators in their own faction.

This game is a mix that we haven't seen before. On first glance, it seems most like MR12 , because there are (probably) some factions who don't have to worry about eliminators. But the factions in MR 12 had to worry about 2 eliminators, so that doesn't really work. But saying it's a pure faction game isn't exactly right because what about God's Own Hate? I would bet that they have a team kill. They can target anyone with that, regardless of alignment. So independents and/or non-Children still have to worry about potentially dying to this team. To the Children, this is an elimination game. To non-children, non-independents, non-God's Own Hate, it's a faction game, since everyone else is just on different factions. To independents, it's a free for all.

It's all about your perspective. But if we have to choose anything, it would be an elimination game with factions, because that eliminator team, even if you only view them as a faction or separate players, can still (probably) kill. Sure, their faction goal is likely to kill specific people, but do you really think their kill only works on those particular people? I highly doubt it. So you really think they're going to luckily kill only the people they have to kill? Again, I highly doubt it. This makes them a threat to everyone, even if your win con doesn't include killing them. I'll be honest: I'm not a child. I've no idea what the Child win con is, but I would imagine it's something to do with killing all of God's Own Hate, which is another faction I didn't know about (as in, know the name of) until it was revealed in the thread. I'm independent. I don't plan on helping either/any faction with their win con unless they want to help me with mine. But I do worry about that eliminator kill, since I have an 80% death rate to eliminators when I'm not one and I'd rather prefer not to die in the first couple cycles to a faction I don't have to deal with.

Also, my world PM is deader than dead. The conversation has basically just been asking people how they are and about SE. Needless to say, I'll be worldhopping elsewhere come the night.

[Paranoid King]

6 minutes ago, little wilson said:

But if we have to choose anything, it would be an elimination game with factions, because that eliminator team, even if you only view them as a faction or separate players, can still (probably) kill.

Hmm, good point. Well then, tonight we'll see whether they're a regular faction or a killing faction.

8 minutes ago, little wilson said:

Also, my world PM is deader than dead. The conversation has basically just been asking people how they are and about SE. Needless to say, I'll be worldhopping elsewhere come the night.

You should come to Scadrial. We don't ask each other how we are or about SE at all! (but seriously, we've got like three pages of discussion. If you're looking for activity, go to Scadrial. But if you're looking for relevant conversation...)

[Magestar]

5 minutes ago, little wilson said:

I would bet that they have a team kill. They can target anyone with that, regardless of alignment. So independents and/or non-Children still have to worry about potentially dying to this team. To the Children, this is an elimination game. To non-children, non-independents, non-God's Own Hate, it's a faction game, since everyone else is just on different factions. To independents, it's a free for all.

Which is why I'll be working with the Children, mostly.  I do want to help you guys, and I will.  

22 minutes ago, AliasSheep said:

This isn't LG25 where we know that the eliminators are going to manipulate the votes to get the people they want lynched, lynched.  I doubt there are that many vote manip abilities in the game, and if there are, not all the elims are going to have them, that would be stupidly inbalanced.  Building up such a strong lynch isn't nearly as necessary.  Thus, switching your vote at the end of the turn to someone else just lets a bandwagon build and lets you help get someone lynched with no contribution to the reasoning behind their lynch.

If I switch my vote at the end of the turn, then there won't be time for a bandwagon to build up, and I will still be going with the majority.  This is not a bad thing.  Plus, I did not say I'd only be doing that.  I will be using my suspicions to place votes, however, I do think there will be vote manips, and I don't see how it could be seen as problematic for me to help build a strong lynch.  Building a strong lynch is a very good thing, and I don't know why you don't like it.  It seems like you want the lynch to not be very firm, and easily swayable.  Also, usually, the lynch at the end of the game has some decent reasoning behind it, and I will make sure to see that I have a good reason to firm up the lynch, so you don't need to worry about that.

I still don't see a good reason not to lynch Stink;  In fact, more people have given reasons to lynch him since I last checked.  I'll probably be keeping my vote on him unless a very good reason not to appears.  

[Elithanathile]

I don't have any problems with you voting on STINK, I'm just saying that we don't need to.

I'll probably still try and keep the balance, but if people find enough reasons to vote for someone that they get lynched anyway, then I've got no problem with that.

[Magestar]

2 minutes ago, Bridge Boy said:

I don't have any problems with you voting on STINK, I'm just saying that we don't need to.

I know.  I don't think I refuted you...  I would be perfectly happy if there was no lynch today.  I honestly would almost prefer it.   However, I do see good reasons to lynch Stink, and I would rather he die than me.

[Elithanathile]

I would probably prefer that he died than you as well.

(#facepalmbuddiesforeverforthewin)

[Paranoid King]

#yourhashtagistoolongyouneedtofindawaytorephraseyourhashtagsothatitismoreconcise

[Magestar]

#hashbrowns

#besthashtagsevermadebyus

[Elithanathile]

#etubrute?

[STINK]

Just now, Magestar said:

However, I do see good reasons to lynch Stink, and I would rather he die than me.

Lol Mage. You know I've got a new vote coming up? 

Elenion.

Magestar.

If you want to make it an 'a or b' situation then might want to check that I'm not willing to get you lynched instead. You say that there are multiple reasons more to lynch me, but I have seen none, so if you could show them to me then that would be great.

However, I am seeing multiple reasons more to lynch you. After all, you're saying that you're going to bandwagon, but it's not bandwagoning because its 'strengthening the vote' without an opinion. It's bandwagoning because as you said yourself, you're not putting any thought into it, so it's a useless move. Using the fact that at the end of a game, a lynch usually has logic because there is lots of reasoning doesn't mean that everyone should just let you live for 5+ cycles while you put no thought into anything publicly, and could be killing others instead. 

Honestly, if I am lynched then I'll be pretty shocked, 'cause all the arguments brought up against me I have argued against and then they've just been left to be counted as arguments against me. Oh, and was it you saying that I had to defend myself? 'Cause I didn't see a response to my response on your post. But ah well, it's what I do that matters, yes? 

[little wilson]

18 minutes ago, Paranoid King said:

You should come to Scadrial. We don't ask each other how we are or about SE at all! (but seriously, we've got like three pages of discussion. If you're looking for activity, go to Scadrial. But if you're looking for relevant conversation...)

I'm actually going to head to Nalthis. I don't really care about discussion the world PM. When it comes to PMs, the only time I use group PMs are when I have reason to trust everyone in them, which I don't in this case, so I'm not going to use it unless absolutely necessary. I'd prefer to use the thread.

I've thing I forgot to mention in my other post: Why in the world are people targeting Stink? I've seen arguments for lynching him because he's playing differently and I've seen arguments for lynching him before he's playing the same. I've even seen the argument to lynch him because he's independent. How can someone be playing the same yet playing differently? Bridge Boy? Care to explain? How is Stink playing the same? His past playstyle was nonsensical. He's not being nonsensical right now. He's actually making a great deal of sense and caused a ton of good discussion. Which I can't say is often the case on day one. His playstyle is shifting. He's being more sensible and he's a good player with good ideas in his own right. But you want to lynch him because he's being different? Or is it because he's being the same because he jumped around in votes (which a lot of players have done in past games)? If it's because he's changing, that's not a way to tell people it's okay to change their playstyle to be more intelligent. And to make it worse, when you try to lynch him simultaneously for being the same as he always is, you basically tell him "we don't like you no matter what you do." He'd damned if he does and damned if he doesn't. That's super great. Nice way to keep players playing. I'm impressed.

I'm tempted to throw a vote on Mage but I don't really want to. I'm also tempted to vote on Bridge Boy for saying that Stink is playing the same when he's clearly not. At the same time, I want to vote on Silverblade because he accused Joe of trying to save Stink when that's not what Joe was doing at all.

Ah heck, why not. I'm not sure going to be able post again today, so Silverblade.

[Elithanathile]

2 minutes ago, little wilson said:

I've thing I forgot to mention in my other post: Why in the world are people targeting Stink? I've seen arguments for lynching him because he's playing differently and I've seen arguments for lynching him before he's playing the same. I've even seen the argument to lynch him because he's independent. How can someone be playing the same yet playing differently? Bridge Boy? Care to explain? How is Stink playing the same? His past playstyle was nonsensical. He's not being nonsensical right now. He's actually making a great deal of sense and caused a ton of good discussion. Which I can't say is often the case on day one. His playstyle is shifting. He's being more sensible and he's a good player with good ideas in his own right. But you want to lynch him because he's being different? Or is it because he's being the same because he jumped around in votes (which a of players have done in past games)? If it's because he's changing, that's not a way to tell people it's okay to change their playstyle to be more intelligent. And to make it worse, when you try to lynch him simultaneously for being the same as he always is, you basically tell him "we don't like you no matter what you do." He'd damned if he does and damned if he doesn't. That's super great. Nice way to keep players playing. I'm impressed.

I'm tempted to throw a vote on Mage but I don't really want to. I'm also tempted to vote on Bridge Boy for saying that Stink is playing the same when he's clearly not. At the same time, I want to vote on Silverblade because he accused Joe of trying to save Stink when that's not what Joe was doing at all.

Ah heck, why not. I'm not sure going to be able post again today, so Silverblade.

Well. I was just ranted at. Slightly. When I said that he was playing the same, I was talking about the poke votes. I honestly haven't done SE for the past couple months before this, so maybe I missed something, but I remember way back when it was rare for STINK's posts to be longer than 2 lines, and he would vote on 3 different people in the same cycle. At the same time. (He's THAT good.) I never said his reasoning wasn't good, just that I don't think we need a cycle 1 lynch, so I voted on STINK to try and even the vote out, so we get a tie. If there's a tie, then nobody dies. That is the reason why I voted for STINK. I am probably more likely to agree with magestar, (#facepalmbuddiesforeverforthewin) but only if I agree with his points.

[Magestar]

2 minutes ago, STINK said:

It's bandwagoning because as you said yourself, you're not putting any thought into it, so it's a useless move.

LoLno.  I never said anything like that.  

3 minutes ago, STINK said:

Honestly, if I am lynched then I'll be pretty shocked, 'cause all the arguments brought up against me I have argued against and then they've just been left to be counted as arguments against me.

Ok.  Provide someone else who it makes sense to lynch.  It makes about as much sense to lynch me as it does for me to lynch you.  None.  Unless you are an Elim, you have no good reason to lynch me.  Even if you are, I'm part of a helpful, neutral faction, which I have said before.  

5 minutes ago, STINK said:

Using the fact that at the end of a game, a lynch usually has logic because there is lots of reasoning doesn't mean that everyone should just let you live for 5+ cycles while you put no thought into anything publicly, and could be killing others instead. 

20 minutes ago, Magestar said:

Also, usually, the lynch at the end of the game has some decent reasoning behind it, and I will make sure to see that I have a good reason to firm up the lynch, so you don't need to worry about that.

Already dealt with that.  

I would not mind working with you Stink, seeing as you have defended yourself every time I've brought a case against you, and I actually have responded to every comeback you have made, as far as I know.  I just looked over the past couple of pages to check.  Also, I have been pretty consistently saying that I would rather lynch you than me and that if you provide another decent option, I will happily take my vote off of you.  Bolded to mean that I only want to do this because it looks like I will die otherwise for the first one, and the second because you still have not.   This does not mean that I will switch without a good reason:  I will only switch if it looks like it will mean I don't die.

I am a bit tired of defending myself when I have done nothing provocative.  Yes, you could say I've said I'm going to bandwagon;  I haven't.  If you look at the posts, I have clearly stated I will not bandwagon.  Several times.  And I have refuted it logically.

Stink, I'm going to take my vote off of you, and I'll only put it back on if there is not a better option.

[Nyali]

Vote Tally

• Magestar (5): Araris, The Only Joe, Clanky, AliasSheep, Stink
• Ecthelion (2): The Young Bard, Amanuensis
• Stink (2): Elenion, Bridge Boy
• The Only Joe (1): Silverblade
• Arraenae (1): Paranoid King
• Straw (1): Ecthelion
• Paranoid King (1): Arraenae
• Amanuensis (1): Darkness Ascendant
• Silverblade (1): Little Wilson

9 hours remain in Day One.

[Elithanathile]

Well, the voting is officially not tied anymore. So, STINK I guess.

 

[STINK]

5 hours ago, Magestar said:

So, I'll basically hop on the person with the most votes at the end of the cycle.

 

4 hours ago, Magestar said:

And I did not say I was going to bandwagon.  I said I was going to aid the Village in whatever they decide for the end of the cycle.

 

1 hour ago, Magestar said:

No, Stink was setting a precedent for randomly hopping and swapping.  I'm saying I'll work with the majority, and put down 1 vote at the end of the cycle.   These things are very different.

 

29 minutes ago, Magestar said:

Which is why I'll be working with the Children, mostly.  I do want to help you guys, and I will.  

If I switch my vote at the end of the turn, then there won't be time for a bandwagon to build up, and I will still be going with the majority.  This is not a bad thing. 

 

2 minutes ago, Magestar said:

I would not mind working with you Stink, seeing as you have defended yourself every time I've brought a case against you, and I actually have responded to every comeback you have made, as far as I know.  I just looked over the past couple of pages to check.  Also, I have been pretty consistently saying that I would rather lynch you than me and that if you provide another decent option, I will happily take my vote off of you.  Bolded to mean that I only want to do this because it looks like I will die otherwise for the first one, and the second because you still have not.   This does not mean that I will switch without a good reason:  I will only switch if it looks like it will mean I don't die.

I am a bit tired of defending myself when I have done nothing provocative.  Yes, you could say I've said I'm going to bandwagon;  I haven't.  If you look at the posts, I have clearly stated I will not bandwagon.  Several times.  And I have refuted it logically.

Here are the quotes where you talk about bandwagoning. So, what is bandwagoning? It's when multiple votes are placed on someone very quickly with little to no reasoning, so the two main aspects to it are the 'quickly' and the 'little to no reasoning'. More focus is placed on the 'little to no' reasoning however, because it is possible for many people to all analyse a post that was suspicious and post about it, while allowing people to read back on it and go 'they said they'd lynch X because of Y, which makes sense so I don't suspect them' while if there is no reasoning then it turns into 'X killed Y for no reason, why would they do that?'. 

So, we'll focus on the little to no reasoning. Let's start with the first quote. You say that you will just vote for whoever has the most, which shows almost no reasoning as your later posts say that it's because you'll be 'strengthening the lynch', but we'll come onto that later on.

Second quote, again you say that you won't think about your vote but instead just place it on whomever the 'village' decides it to be. Look at the vote tally though, and first consider that the majority of votes placed could be from the evils. You wouldn't know that, but you'd still just place your vote on whoever had the majority. Secondly, you have the most votes.

Third quote and we've still seen nothing to suggest it isn't bandwagoning. You say that my precedent was to change my votes and not bandwagon, and then say that your precedent will be to not think but instead put your vote down on the majority. You're correct in saying that those are two different things, because I am not bandwagoning and I am putting logic into my votes.

Onto the fourth quote, where you say that the bandwagon won't build up after you vote, but that's because the bandwagon is already built and you've hopped on. It is a bad thing, despite you saying it isn't.

Fifth quote, where we get the most words. So, I need to find another decent option for a lynch candidate? Rather than say, mindlessly putting my vote onto whoever has the majority? But I heard that strategy is good cause it strengthens the lynch!  Also, you've been working this whole time from the assumption that I was the one doing illogical moves, but I have showed at every stage an explanation for what I've done, and if I didn't do it at the time (such as my vote on Mark), I explained it later. Mage, you say you're tired of defending yourself when you did nothing, but I had three different people vote for me because I changed my votes. So I get it, writing posts that defend yourself can be kinda annoying. Also, I just showed that you didn't really say that you wouldn't bandwagon, but instead just phrased it in a different way.

[Magestar]

2 minutes ago, STINK said:

Fifth quote, where we get the most words. So, I need to find another decent option for a lynch candidate? Rather than say, mindlessly putting my vote onto whoever has the majority? But I heard that strategy is good cause it strengthens the lynch!  Also, you've been working this whole time from the assumption that I was the one doing illogical moves, but I have showed at every stage an explanation for what I've done, and if I didn't do it at the time (such as my vote on Mark), I explained it later. Mage, you say you're tired of defending yourself when you did nothing, but I had three different people vote for me because I changed my votes. So I get it, writing posts that defend yourself can be kinda annoying. Also, I just showed that you didn't really say that you wouldn't bandwagon, but instead just phrased it in a different way.

This is something of a misunderstanding.  I said it's good to do that at the end of the Cycle, when all the votes are pretty much firmed up.   Also, I've taken my vote off of you, and just because I did not retract a former statement, does not mean I have been operating under an assumption the whole time.  

 

 Also, does anyone actually have a good reason to vote on me besides actually bandwagoning, or because I apparently said I was going to?    Guys, I'm a neutral role, that does nothing to stop any faction.  There aren't really any good reasons to lynch me, plus, if I were not a neutral role, then this still does nothing, because roles/factions aren't revealed in this game.  So it will basically stalemate discussion next day cycle until someone else slips up, and gets attacked for it.

I will put my vote back on Stink if there is not a better option at the end of the cycle.   I really hope this does not end up being yet another in my list of games, of which I've survived none.