U-Pick Mafia Vol 1 - Game Over

[dunya]

Ok be wilfully blind to what I’m saying then, see if I care, it’s your skin in the game not mine.

I think it's yours too.

oooohhhh I see what you did there.

Not sure I did what you think you saw...

what do you think I saw?

[JaggedJimmyJay]

Yeah, the parabola thing means nothing to me. I can picture an object that curves on a grid, but I don't understand what the x and y axes represent.

I believe this is representative of Golden's perspective, or close to it.

I think he is right that the function of this is indeed parabolic (in the x=y-squared style). What I don't think is obvious is where the parabola rests on these axes. It can be moved.

[Epignosis]

3 is the absolute worst!!

It isn't. Four is. I'm not saying I like three. What I'm saying is I'd rather have three than two. I hear in the early days of this place, nobody could ever change votes. One phase of that isn't going to hurt. One phase where the proportion of bad guys to good guys could drop is not good.

I'd rather see the first option pass than any of the others if six is a no go.

[Golden]

Ok Golden explain why three lynches is a parabola. I understand what that means but I don't get why it is a parabola in the first place.

Parabola is probably overly simplistic, but the basic idea is that the benefit increases for a while after ‘1 lynch in a day’ while there is still good enough civ ratios to reliably split but then drops off dramatically the more lynches you add in a day. If we had to lynch 28, I think in practice the chances of us winning would approach 0, because there’s a very high chance each mafia could effectively protect one of their own with careful planning.

I’ve said I’d consider supporting a two lynch day or even a three lynch day later when we know more. Right now, we’re shooting in the dark and offering to spread our civ resources thin, opening the door to more easy manipulation.

What would that manipulation look like? HOW could they manipulate this more than any lynch?

If you have 18 town and 5 scum, vs 6 town and 5 scum, which is easier to manipulate?

And that’s just imagining a world where voting numbers are high. As I pointed out, yesterday third place got TWO votes.

[Long Con]

Yeah, the parabola thing means nothing to me. I can picture an object that curves on a grid, but I don't understand what the x and y axes represent.

X = Number of lynches in a day phase
Y = Chances of more of the lynches being scum where 0 = an equal chance between 1 lynch per day up to a total of x, and x lynches.

Does that help?

I'm sorry, no.

[Long Con]

Ok Golden explain why three lynches is a parabola. I understand what that means but I don't get why it is a parabola in the first place.

Parabola is probably overly simplistic, but the basic idea is that the benefit increases for a while after ‘1 lynch in a day’ while there is still good enough civ ratios to reliably split but then drops off dramatically the more lynches you add in a day. If we had to lynch 28, I think in practice the chances of us winning would approach 0, because there’s a very high chance each mafia could effectively protect one of their own with careful planning.

I’ve said I’d consider supporting a two lynch day or even a three lynch day later when we know more. Right now, we’re shooting in the dark and offering to spread our civ resources thin, opening the door to more easy manipulation.

What would that manipulation look like? HOW could they manipulate this more than any lynch?

If you have 18 town and 5 scum, vs 6 town and 5 scum, which is easier to manipulate?

And that’s just imagining a world where voting numbers are high. As I pointed out, yesterday third place got TWO votes.

But people won't be exhibiting the same voting behaviour because we know that it's a different situation!

The more scum there are in relation to town, the easier lynches are to manipulate.

[Epignosis]

Hey to that one guy. I found your boob.

[Golden]

Yeah, the parabola thing means nothing to me. I can picture an object that curves on a grid, but I don't understand what the x and y axes represent.

I believe this is representative of Golden's perspective, or close to it.

I think he is right that the function of this is indeed parabolic (in the x=y-squared style). What I don't think is obvious is where the parabola rests on these axes. It can be moved.

It depends on many factors; current ratios, level of consensus etc. what I’m saying is that at this specific moment in time all of those factors appear to be geared relatively negatively for the town.

[Sloonei]

3 is the absolute worst!!

It isn't. Four is. I'm not saying I like three. What I'm saying is I'd rather have three than two. I hear in the early days of this place, nobody could ever change votes. One phase of that isn't going to hurt. One phase where the proportion of bad guys to good guys could drop is not good.

I'd rather see the first option pass than any of the others if six is a no go.

3 is snooze-ville. 2 is also terrible. Neither of those should win.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

At this point I am fine with #2. #1 will work I guess -- it seems like a weenie safe pick because it benefits nobody, but whatever. Whatever happens with #6, I think this dialogue has been extremely revealing.

[Golden]

Ok Golden explain why three lynches is a parabola. I understand what that means but I don't get why it is a parabola in the first place.

Parabola is probably overly simplistic, but the basic idea is that the benefit increases for a while after ‘1 lynch in a day’ while there is still good enough civ ratios to reliably split but then drops off dramatically the more lynches you add in a day. If we had to lynch 28, I think in practice the chances of us winning would approach 0, because there’s a very high chance each mafia could effectively protect one of their own with careful planning.

I’ve said I’d consider supporting a two lynch day or even a three lynch day later when we know more. Right now, we’re shooting in the dark and offering to spread our civ resources thin, opening the door to more easy manipulation.

What would that manipulation look like? HOW could they manipulate this more than any lynch?

If you have 18 town and 5 scum, vs 6 town and 5 scum, which is easier to manipulate?

And that’s just imagining a world where voting numbers are high. As I pointed out, yesterday third place got TWO votes.

But people won't be exhibiting the same voting behaviour because we know that it's a different situation!

The more scum there are in relation to town, the easier lynches are to manipulate.

As I’ve pointed out, both ways you can look at how voting could play out is bad for the town - either we coalesce early (like unchangeable votes, this has some negative implications, such as relying on the loud early voices to be correct), vs allowing the flexibility to manipulate. Voting patterns may change but who says that’s for the better?

[JaggedJimmyJay]

We have just under three hours, so if there's going to be a motion -- it has to happen soon. Figure it out 1s and 2s.

[Golden]

At this point I am fine with #2. #1 will work I guess -- it seems like a weenie safe pick because it benefits nobody, but whatever. Whatever happens with #6, I think this dialogue has been extremely revealing.

I agree. In that sense, it’s been extremely worthwhile.

[Long Con]

How did you decide where to plot those points though? What is the "chance of lynching a baddie"... is that how likely a random dart is to get a baddie?

Who's to say it's for the worse? Is it really that binary to you? Coalesce early or flexibility to manipulate?

[Sloonei]

We have just under three hours, so if there's going to be a motion -- it has to happen soon. Figure it out 1s and 2s.

1 > 2

[Golden]

3 is the absolute worst!!

It isn't. Four is. I'm not saying I like three. What I'm saying is I'd rather have three than two. I hear in the early days of this place, nobody could ever change votes. One phase of that isn't going to hurt. One phase where the proportion of bad guys to good guys could drop is not good.

I'd rather see the first option pass than any of the others if six is a no go.

3 is snooze-ville. 2 is also terrible. Neither of those should win.

2 is like the inverse of 6 for me. Could be much worse later, is pretty decent right now.

[colonialbob]

As for Night 1, I pretty much only read the argument about the poll, and I have to say, I love Jay/Golden's argument. Looks like civ/civ to me. I am a little less happy about nutella's part in it. She is flip-flopping. Then again nutella is always flip-flopping.

I'm afraid I must strongly object to this characterization.

What are you so afraid of?

I'm not afraid of anything, but I was in that argument just as much as Golden was.

[Long Con]

I support #2 as an alternative, but I'm sticking with 6 right now.

[ColinIsCool]

I'll go whichever way the wind blows between 1 and 2. My preference is definitely 1 but 2 can work.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

How did you decide where to plot those points though? What is the "chance of lynching a baddie"... is that how likely a random dart is to get a baddie?

Who's to say it's for the worse? Is it really that binary to you? Coalesce early or flexibility to manipulate?

That's the question. I don't think this can properly modeled without contextual parameters. It depends.

Mathematical modelers in my field would be appalled.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

As for Night 1, I pretty much only read the argument about the poll, and I have to say, I love Jay/Golden's argument. Looks like civ/civ to me. I am a little less happy about nutella's part in it. She is flip-flopping. Then again nutella is always flip-flopping.

I'm afraid I must strongly object to this characterization.

What are you so afraid of?

I'm not afraid of anything, but I was in that argument just as much as Golden was.

I acknowledge you, colonialbob.

[Sloonei]

3 is the absolute worst!!

It isn't. Four is. I'm not saying I like three. What I'm saying is I'd rather have three than two. I hear in the early days of this place, nobody could ever change votes. One phase of that isn't going to hurt. One phase where the proportion of bad guys to good guys could drop is not good.

I'd rather see the first option pass than any of the others if six is a no go.

3 is snooze-ville. 2 is also terrible. Neither of those should win.

2 is like the inverse of 6 for me. Could be much worse later, is pretty decent right now.

[Golden]

See what I mean dunya? This is how hard I have to work to get people to listen to me. They never will.

On that note, if option 6 wins lynch me tomorrow. I’d be actively harmful to the town if they won’t listen to me.

I mean you came to a party with cocaine, guns and beer. you're the enabler here.

It’s not my fault. Society has expectations!

[Golden]

@Golden are there negative consequences for 6 beyond the textually obvious ones?

YES

[Long Con]

@Golden are there negative consequences for 6 beyond the textually obvious ones?

YES

Wait, is this poll even what it seems to be??

[dunya]

honestly, idgaf which one wins as long as it's not #4 or #3. and maybe not #5.

it's not the end of the game if #6 happens or #1 or #2. but 4 is disgusting and 3 is a pain in the ass.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

[VOTE: #1] aubergine

Let's go people. Make a decision.

[Golden]

@Golden are there negative consequences for 6 beyond the textually obvious ones?

YES

Wait, is this poll even what it seems to be??

I mean, yes and no

[Long Con]

Ok be wilfully blind to what I’m saying then, see if I care, it’s your skin in the game not mine.

I think it's yours too.

oooohhhh I see what you did there.

Not sure I did what you think you saw...

what do you think I saw?

I do not know.... I was just saying that Golden's skin not being in the game was a strange statement to make. Since he's, like, playing the same game of Mafia as us. I assume.

[colonialbob]

Richard and I both agree that option 6 is better than option 2.

Richard is a numpty

[Golden]

It’s also what it seems to be, at least as far as I’m aware.

I thought I could damage scum while I was at it. I’m less smart than I thought.

[Long Con]

@Golden are there negative consequences for 6 beyond the textually obvious ones?

YES

Wait, is this poll even what it seems to be??

I mean, yes and no

Tell me where to vote for greatest Civ advantage unrelated to tomorrow's poll.

[dunya]

Ok be wilfully blind to what I’m saying then, see if I care, it’s your skin in the game not mine.

I think it's yours too.

oooohhhh I see what you did there.

Not sure I did what you think you saw...

what do you think I saw?

I do not know.... I was just saying that Golden's skin not being in the game was a strange statement to make. Since he's, like, playing the same game of Mafia as us. I assume.

that wasn't what I saw. I see. ok. carry on.

[ColinIsCool]

The use of the term "constitutional law" is interesting. I am wondering now if our decision will affect more than just tomorrow's lynch.

[Sloonei]

Richard and I both agree that option 6 is better than option 2.

Richard is a numpty

YOU DON’T KNOW MY RICHARD SO PLEASE DON’T OFFER AN OPINION ON THINGS YOU KNOW NOTHING ABOUT

[ColinIsCool]

It’s also what it seems to be, at least as far as I’m aware.

I thought I could damage scum while I was at it. I’m less smart than I thought.

Oh, okay. Maybe not then ...?

[dunya]

The use of the term "constitutional law" is interesting. I am wondering now if our decision will affect more than just tomorrow's lynch.

Golden is an attorney so we should have realized he was behind it..

[Golden]

@Golden are there negative consequences for 6 beyond the textually obvious ones?

YES

Wait, is this poll even what it seems to be??

I mean, yes and no

Tell me where to vote for greatest Civ advantage unrelated to tomorrow's poll.

That’s subjective, but I don’t strenuously oppose any other option.

[Long Con]

The use of the term "constitutional law" is interesting. I am wondering now if our decision will affect more than just tomorrow's lynch.

Jesus, then #2 would be a hell of a permanent law.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

If you're a 2 and still won't budge to 1, why?

Time is short, and if y'all dilly dally then you guarantee a result you don't want.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

I take the poll title's "for tomorrow" to imply that it's temporary.

[dunya]

The use of the term "constitutional law" is interesting. I am wondering now if our decision will affect more than just tomorrow's lynch.

Jesus, then #2 would be a hell of a permanent law.

the poll specifies only for tomorrow.

[Sloonei]

The use of the term "constitutional law" is interesting. I am wondering now if our decision will affect more than just tomorrow's lynch.

I don’t think so...

[ColinIsCool]

Yeah, I think so too. Just wondering what Golden's unintended consequences could have meant.

[Long Con]

Ok. I fear option 6 now, and I'm not entirely sure that the presented logic against it is even grounded in any reality. I'll vote 2.

As long as it isn't permanent.

2 is fun like 6.

[Sloonei]

Ok. I fear option 6 now, and I'm not entirely sure that the presented logic against it is even grounded in any reality. I'll vote 2.

As long as it isn't permanent.

2 is fun like 6.

[Golden]

If you're a 2 and still won't budge to 1, why?

Time is short, and if y'all dilly dally then you guarantee a result you don't want.

Because of the options that aren’t booby trapped, I’m voting for the one I’ll find most fun

[JaggedJimmyJay]

There.

[VOTE: 2] aubergine

[speedchuck]

Alright [mention]Golden[/mention]

You wrote it? Fair enough. I'm moving.

It's a logic-less plea. I like it.

[Kylemii]

I trust golden when he says 6 is a bad idea for other reasons beyond the textually obvious ones. It seems like there's more to this than it seems.