Long Game 35: L35 Miserables

[Stick. she/her]

4 minutes ago, Straw said:

*Sigh* Let's play good news, bad news!

Good news: I didn't die! Yay!

Bad news: The village's only kill was wasted.

Good news: At least STINK probably had some fun.

Bad news: STINK was anti-villager.

Good news: STINK is getting lynched!

Bad news: He's a neutral, not an Eliminator.

...should be good news for you because you got to live?

edit: yeah, just read the good news above this >>

It's not our only kill, though, right?

Edited July 2, 2017 by _Stick_

[asterion137 he/him]

I have no vials left (I wanted to get them all used in case I died) and I don't think any other village allomancers have claimed except the ringleader so I think we should be good on future STINK steals. However I think we kind of have to kill STINK now that we showed this much hostility since there's no chance he helps the village at all anyway 

Edit: forgot about PM roleclaims so ignore this

Edited July 2, 2017 by asterion137

[DeTess she/her]

I would actually advice not role-claiming any more than has already been done. Better to let the 'Inevitable' play out, than making sure it happens.

I'd actually prefer to take STINK out, in part for what Asterion mentioned above, but I'm down for pursuing an alternate target as well. If we do pursue an alternate target, the bandwagon on him should remind STINK that just because he's Neutral, he isn't above village retribution if his actions are perceived to be far too much in favor of the elims.

Speaking of alternate targets, if we do go that way I'd suggest Straw (keeping my vote on STINK for now as a quick majority hammer wouldn't be too bad in my opinion). There's been some suspicious circumstances around him (the defense by Yitzi, for example), and if he proves elim, it might clear some other main suspicions (such as Asterion).

[Steeldancer he/him]

Just now, randuir said:

I would actually advice not role-claiming any more than has already been done. Better to let the 'Inevitable' play out, than making sure it happens.

I'd actually prefer to take STINK out, in part for what Asterion mentioned above, but I'm down for pursuing an alternate target as well. If we do pursue an alternate target, the bandwagon on him should remind STINK that just because he's Neutral, he isn't above village retribution if his actions are perceived to be far too much in favor of the elims.

Speaking of alternate targets, if we do go that way I'd suggest Straw (keeping my vote on STINK for now as a quick majority hammer wouldn't be too bad in my opinion). There's been some suspicious circumstances around him (the defense by Yitzi, for example), and if he proves elim, it might clear some other main suspicions (such as Asterion).

I agree. Straw was my lynch for today, and I guess it'll just have to wait until tomorrow. 

[Stick. she/her]

1 minute ago, The Flash said:

I agree. Straw was my lynch for today, and I guess it'll just have to wait until tomorrow. 

We still can. Stink Straw 

I really hope Straw's an elim...

[BrightnessRadiant she/her]

I feel like we made our point at least, and since he can't steal from our ringleader any more at least, I would rather try to find an elim with the lynch so stinkstraw 

Please someone tell me how to do the right green color on mobile if this is wrong.

[DrakeMarshall he/him]

Well huh.

I'm caught up on this thread anyway.

Interesting. Lots of role reveals.

And then there's STINK. Personally I think it is somewhat inadvisable to ever trust STINK with a role reveal. But that damage is already done.

But honestly, regardless of STINK's actions and suspected position, he's not much of a threat (early in the game) if we just ignore him. Maybe we can lynch him later if we are getting close to lynch-or-lose conditions and we are worried that he will hammer us.

For now though, I'd like to advocate going after someone who might actually be an elim. It seems that the alternative candidate of choice is Straw

[asterion137 he/him]

STINK Straw I suppose...We'll have to kill STINK eventually though if he keeps only helping the elims

[StrikerEZ he/him]

Ugh, okay, I guess we all overreacted a bit on STINK. I guess I'll vote Straw, though I still don't like what STINK did at all. At some point, it might be a good idea to lynch him, though I do agree that right now it'd be a waste when we have the chance to (possibly) lynch an elim.

[Straw he/him]

Heh, might as well follow the bandwagon. STINK, Straw.

[BrightnessRadiant she/her]

3 minutes ago, Straw said:

Heh, might as well follow the bandwagon. STINK, Straw.

Um okay heh

[Stick. she/her]

._.

[BrightnessRadiant she/her]

@Straw no defense of any kind good sir? 

[DeTess she/her]

15 minutes ago, BrightnessRadiant said:

@Straw no defense of any kind good sir? 

Well, it's mostly bandwagon at this point with very few reasons given, so it's hard to defend against that. Once I've had some sleep, I will try to build an actual case past "yitzi defended him and evil straw clears people", and switch my vote around.

Edited July 2, 2017 by randuir

[BrightnessRadiant she/her]

5 minutes ago, randuir said:

Well, it's mostly bandwagon at this point with very few reasons given, so it's hard to defend against that. Once I've had some sleep, I will try to build an actual case past  yitzi defended him and evil straw clears people, and switch my vote around.

hmm yeah that's true....I was gonna do analysis too so I guess I'll tag him then to see what he says about it

[Straw he/him]

Passcode: noanb

Instructions: 2 up right

Message: qchz:6hq6vz6m5hthzvc-/

Table:

j 3 u k ( 7 i ; y !

) “ d 1 b f w ‘ n 6

v . ? p a m g x h o

: 5 t z - 2 l / q c

4 9 R 8 0 & , e s

Edited July 2, 2017 by Straw

[Arraenae]

I haven't payed very much attention in the past few days because I'm sick, and haven't felt up to any exertion, whether it was physical, emotional, or mental.  Sorry about that. If by the end of this Day I haven't made any significant contributions, please prod me with a few PMs.

[Orlok Tsubodai]

4 hours ago, randuir said:

<sarcasm> So wait, when I suggest we lynch a known criminal (and one that has actually been convicted of a crime at that) it's all "No Rand, don't do that", "You're being suspicious Rand", "You're alienating the Neutrals Rand", "Rand are you an elim". But when Aman suggests to do so it's all "let's get this bandwagon rolling people!" </sarcasm>

So first of all, I'm fine with lynching STINK for the reason that he's now clearly sabotaging the village past what is acceptable for someone staying merely Neutral.

However, I do see some other reasons coming for lynching STINK that I don't agree with. Specifically, complaints about his play-style shouldn't be addressed in this way, I think. That's what the board moderators are for, if I'm not mistaken.

I also don't think the 'blackmail' is something to be angry about out of game, unless he worded or approached it in a particularly unfriendly way, as leveraging information to your advantage is what this game is about. However, this is a completely valid reason to try to lynch him.

Looking back through, I think this post ought to be addressed.

Whilst I don't think there is underlying resentment in your initial point, and so won't address that, your other points do warrant discussing.

So, I'm not sure preventing a kill is actually "sabotaging the village" to the extent that he deserves lynching. I've already addressed that he may have seen it as a way to fulfil his win condition, and indeed stealing tin might arguably be yet more detrimental to the village. Regardless, it appears to be a moot point now, with the lynch moving onto Straw.

You express distaste for lynching Stink because of his play style, and argue that it's something the board moderators should resolve. His play style, whilst obnoxious this game, hasn't broken any rules as far as I can tell, which means we're discussing what we want the meta of our community to look like.

I'm of the view that the meta should be formed by the players, not the moderators. We, collectively, create our environment. We make it the special place on the internet it is; our wonderful corner of gentleman killers. It's like this because of how we interact with each other, not because Wilson, Meta, Gamma and Alv have told us to play in this way. It's for us as a community to decide if a style of play should be punished, if it's not hurtful or rude. If we, collectively, decide that Stink's blackmail is something we wish to discourage as a community, then we absolutely should lynch him for it, and we should make very clear that that's the reason we are lynching him.

I disagree wholeheartedly on your suggestion that blackmail isn't something to get angry about. I, and many other players, consider the most important part of SE to be having fun, and ensuring as many players as possible have fun, rather than necessarily winning. Blackmail reduces or destroys the autonomy of the targeted player or players, and in so doing, reduces their enjoyment of the game, in order to further someone's chances of victory. I'm of the view that we, as a community, should make a collective decision to discourage or ignore blackmail in games. I'll happily work with the eliminators if it serves my interest, just as I'll work with the village, but I will refuse to cooperate with either side if they seek to blackmail me.

[Steeldancer he/him]

Ok. So are we going to say we got our message across to stink and lynch our potentially elim straw instead? I can get behind that. 

@BrightnessRadiant I don't know how strongly you feel, but if you want I'd be willing to change the meta if necessary.

Edited July 2, 2017 by The Flash

[Haelbarde he/him]

5 hours ago, BrightnessRadiant said:

 

Please someone tell me how to do the right green color on mobile if this is wrong.

I'll add that the other green is more helpful mostly when the retraction is by itself. If it's a vote switch, the red tends to be more eye catching. And if it's too annoying to do on mobile, don't worry about it.

[Dalinar Kholin]

Ironically, Stink was the first one to suggest this lynch. Straw. Been my best guess for a while.

[DrakeMarshall he/him]

2 hours ago, OrlokTsubodai said:

Looking back through, I think this post ought to be addressed.

Whilst I don't think there is underlying resentment in your initial point, and so won't address that, your other points do warrant discussing.

So, I'm not sure preventing a kill is actually "sabotaging the village" to the extent that he deserves lynching. I've already addressed that he may have seen it as a way to fulfil his win condition, and indeed stealing tin might arguably be yet more detrimental to the village. Regardless, it appears to be a moot point now, with the lynch moving onto Straw.

You express distaste for lynching Stink because of his play style, and argue that it's something the board moderators should resolve. His play style, whilst obnoxious this game, hasn't broken any rules as far as I can tell, which means we're discussing what we want the meta of our community to look like.

I'm of the view that the meta should be formed by the players, not the moderators. We, collectively, create our environment. We make it the special place on the internet it is; our wonderful corner of gentleman killers. It's like this because of how we interact with each other, not because Wilson, Meta, Gamma and Alv have told us to play in this way. It's for us as a community to decide if a style of play should be punished, if it's not hurtful or rude. If we, collectively, decide that Stink's blackmail is something we wish to discourage as a community, then we absolutely should lynch him for it, and we should make very clear that that's the reason we are lynching him.

I disagree wholeheartedly on your suggestion that blackmail isn't something to get angry about. I, and many other players, consider the most important part of SE to be having fun, and ensuring as many players as possible have fun, rather than necessarily winning. Blackmail reduces or destroys the autonomy of the targeted player or players, and in so doing, reduces their enjoyment of the game, in order to further someone's chances of victory. I'm of the view that we, as a community, should make a collective decision to discourage or ignore blackmail in games. I'll happily work with the eliminators if it serves my interest, just as I'll work with the village, but I will refuse to cooperate with either side if they seek to blackmail me.

You raise some interesting points.

You believe that the meta of our community should be decided by players. You believe that in this case, our best tool for shaping the community is the lynch vote. Finally, you believe that blackmailing in all cases should be regarded as unacceptable.

While I suspect I agree entirely with you in general sentiment about our community, I regrettably find myself needing to disagree with a few of your points.

 

I would like to suggest that as a community, we should maybe have better ways to discourage a behavior then by policy lynching. I don't think that game mechanics are meant to be used to display our distaste with a certain behavior.

 

I would also like to assert that blackmailing might not be inherently bad behavior. In a broader sense, coercion-by-threat could actually be rather common in elimination games. If, right now, I claimed that I knew for 100% certainty that you were actually an eliminator... Rae might hypothetically tell me that she would coinshot me if it turned out that I was lying. Isn't that basically blackmailing me to tell the truth? By most definitions of the word "blackmail," yes, I think it is. But would that be wrong of Rae to make that threat? No, it wouldn't be wrong at all.

The dangerous kind of blackmailing is the sort that gives one player excessive leverage over another player. Forcing someone to role reveal on the first cycle, like STINK attempted, probably qualifies as excessive leverage. When such a situation exists, one has to wonder if the game is balanced. A well designed game should basically never give one player that kind of leverage over another. And... As it turns out... This game is well balanced. STINK simply never had the leverage he claimed to have.

And yet, I do not conclude that the degree of leverage is actually the distinguishing factor between "good blackmail" and "bad blackmail." What matters, I think, is a player's attitude. Are the tricks we pull on each other all in the spirit of fair play and a fun game? Or is it something else?

 

That all aside... I haven't personally seen STINK's communications, and therefore I haven't the slightest clue if what he was doing was actually serious or not.

[BrightnessRadiant she/her]

3 hours ago, The Flash said:

Ok. So are we going to say we got our message across to stink and lynch our potentially elim straw instead? I can get behind that. 

@BrightnessRadiant I don't know how strongly you feel, but if you want I'd be willing to change the meta if necessary.

No it's fine...

2 hours ago, Haelbarde said:

I'll add that the other green is more helpful mostly when the retraction is by itself. If it's a vote switch, the red tends to be more eye catching. And if it's too annoying to do on mobile, don't worry about it.

Oh ok thanks! 

[Elenion he/him]

I agree with Drake that Mafia, at its heart, is a game of leverage (post upvoted). In the past I have betrayed players and teams, but it's always been while following a win condition of mine. When a player disregards their win condition for the sole sake of frustrating the other players, that action must be discouraged, but using leverage is not inherently bad.

Take this example:

STINK

STINK, if you dump my role into the thread, my vote will return.

 

I've applied leverage to STINK, and he now has an incentive to keep my role secret, but I haven't forced him to make any decision.

[little wilson she/her]

To add my two cents to this, while changing the meta is not something that should be attempted purely through policy lynches, I do think that at times, policy lynches are not inherently a bad thing. Sometimes, you have to throw a game to make a point. If you doing something in a game that will likely make you lose, but is to make a point in the overall meta, I think that loss is just fine. It's well-earned. A game you lose that taught a lesson is much better than a game you won that emphasized a negative playstyle.

1 hour ago, Drake Marshall said:

 In a broader sense, coercion-by-threat could actually be rather common in elimination games.

Sure. But what makes you think that something like that should be done here? 17th Shard is not your typical internet forum. I'm sure you've noticed this. Most people do. Fewer people realize the reason for that. It's not the staff. Not completely, anyway. It's the members. The members are not only quick to report those who step out of line, but they're also quick to gently remind others that certain behaviors aren't tolerated here like they are virtually everywhere else online. The members care about each other. New members either learn fast what's accepted here (and they tend to like it), or they start to run into problems with the staff and eventually find themselves banned. Chulldung behavior isn't tolerated on these forums.

SE is part of 17th Shard and the same applies here too. You want to be a dick? Fine. Go somewhere else. There are literally hundreds of mafia forums on the internet. 95% of them love aggressive players who care nothing about their fellow members. Sanderson Elimination is not one of those forums, and we will not become one of those forums. If you want to threaten your fellow players, find another forum because that kind of play will never be welcome here so long as I am one of the moderators. It's toxic and opens the door for far more aggressive playstyles. And let me assure you: should these games get too aggressive and toxic, I'll be the first to go to the admins and advocate their removal. So sure, while that play is technically valid (hence why there's not a specific rule against it, because it's hard to delineate between good aggression and bad aggression), if everyone did it, the games wouldn't last the hour. So I suppose if you'd like to see mafia go bye-bye on the nicest forum on the internet, be my guest. Continue supporting these types of playstyles. If you'd like a nice sandbox to kill people in, however, you might want to be a little less aggressive. Capiche?