Jedi Temple Mafia - Day One

[Flipz]

I fear the scum may use this to cover up inactivity

"Indeed, which is why I hope we can get a few hours' extention on our voting deadline. Master Yoda, would you be willing to agree to this?"

[Brickdoctor]

Thank you for the list C-3PO, but I think we should give everyone some more time before we do start questioning their absences. The temple was being cleaned for about 7 hours not too long ago, they may not have had a chance to speak yet.

Like I said, my list was for reference purposes. It is, of course, too early to draw conclusions warranting a lynch from it, but it's good to have a reminder of the status of each being.

"Of course not, I'm simply calling things out when I see them. You seem loyal to the Jedi and the Republic thus far, but it is my duty to point out any and all potentially scummy behavior when I see it. I am sure you would do the same thing for any suspicious behavior I exhibit. "

So you can point out anything you want that you think is suspicious, but I can't point out any arguments that I think are flawed?

[Dannylonglegs]

"Forgive my disrespectful tone, but: Well, duh! "

Tone forgiven, but keep in mind the context of my statement: this was said at a time when I felt that there was a growing movement of people seriously contemplating dodging the vote. Sure, my statement was not as eloquent as I was aiming for, but it served it's purpose: to remind the group that our primary weapon and greatest hope for survival and success remains, the Lynch vote. I did not want to see that vote wasted and I spoke up.

[MacK]

You said before that you wanted to not lynch, but here you're saying that voting is our best weapon against the scum, yet you don't want to use it? A lightsaber is also a very useful weapon, but you don't just stand there waiting for your opponent to fall on your blade when you're fighting, do you?

If you've read the archives, then you'd know that this 'to vote or not to vote' issue has been discussed to death. Why bring it up? You know it'll get shot down, and even if it doesn't, you know we'll end up lynching anyway. Nobody ever goes through with those plans of not lynching.

You misunderstood me I should have stated that informed voting is our best weapon against the scum. I brought up the possibility of non-voting simply because I thought it was an option that may be over looked by some of us due to the wording of master Yoda’s rules. Namely his rules stating that voting is mandatory, that we do get any un-votes, and that a tied vote will still result in a lynch. If we could not gather enough evidence to feel reasonably sure that we were lynching a scum then we could make a tactical decision not to lynch. As for nobody ever following through with no lynch on day one that’s simply not true.

[Flipz]

Like I said, my list was for reference purposes. It is, of course, too early to draw conclusions warranting a lynch from it, but it's good to have a reminder of the status of each being.

So you can point out anything you want that you think is suspicious, but I can't point out any arguments that I think are flawed?

"No, no, don't misunderstand me. You are pointing out flawed arguments and suspicious behavior, and I am doing the same. I was not attempting to aim a Finger of Suspicion at you, I was merely listing all possible suspects and sources of suspicion, as Anakin did just a few minutes before. You have just as much right to point out what you find suspicious or fallacious as I do. Feel free to dismiss my observation as metagaming paranoia; I only know that I am a loyal Jedi, and that the Sith know this. I automatically have a degree of suspicion towards anyone who would step forward to defend me, because of the events of those holovids. I felt you are loyal to the Jedi even when I made that statement, but based on that bedtime story I spoke of, I also know that characters like me are easily fooled by crafty Scum who appear to be good guys but, in fact, are not. Like I said, metagaming paranoia. "

You misunderstood me I should have stated that informed voting is our best weapon against the scum. I brought up the possibility of non-voting simply because I thought it was an option that may be over looked by some of us due to the wording of master Yoda’s rules. Namely his rules stating that voting is mandatory, that we do get any un-votes, and that a tied vote will still result in a lynch. If we could not gather enough evidence to feel reasonably sure that we were lynching a scum then we could make a tactical decision not to lynch. As for nobody ever following through with no lynch on day one that’s simply not true.

"Allow me to put this elegantly: if we lynch we have some probability of lynching a Sith. If we do not, we have a 0% chance of lynching a Sith. Given that (unlike certain situations) there are not specific members among us that the Sith need to eliminate, there is no reason for us NOT to take the chance and try to eliminate a Sith."

[MacK]

"Allow me to put this elegantly: if we lynch we have some probability of lynching a Sith. If we do not, we have a 0% chance of lynching a Sith. Given that (unlike certain situations) there are not specific members among us that the Sith need to eliminate, there is no reason for us NOT to take the chance and try to eliminate a Sith."

That is true although you ignore the possibility that we may end up voting one of our own more "powerful" members. Let me just restate that when the time comes to vote I WILL VOTE if I deem that somebody is scummy enough. I should also mention that there is a difference between advocating for something versus laying it out onto the table as an option.

[Peanuts]

Sorry for being absent so far, but it appears I was incapable of entering Eurobricks the Jedi Temple and then there's also been the maintanance...

In the event that someone stumbles across some important information mid-day, I'm not sure how you would have them bring it up, anyway, without immediately drawing attention to themselves. Additionally, let's assume that we sit at a tie of 12-12-1, and your supposed investigator decides to change their vote at the end, making it 11-13-1. That's a majority, and come tomorrow, if the investigator's judgment was not clouded, then we will have gotten a Sith lynched. If, however, someone were to switch that same vote, but tomorrow we find that we have lynched an innocent member of our Order, then we can start in on that person's reasoning for having switched their vote.

While daytime cops daytime actions in general are about as likely as a Rancor winning the Cloud City Sabacc Tournament, were you really suggesting that said hypothetical investigator upon finding scum would remain silent until the votes are tied between said scum and another candidate, even thought the investigator didn't do anything so far, and then should reveal the fact he has access to information publicly by breaking the tie, so that the scum can kill him?

And you sounded a lot like you advocated not lynching, even thought you were quick to assure us you weren't doing so after others pointed out that not lynching only helps the scum. Why do you even elaborate such a nonsensial plan when you aren't really in favor of avoiding a lynch?

May I also remind you guys that discussing tactics in public might not be the smartest move since everyone can hear what you say.

Discussing lynch candidates and such isn't discussing tactics. Tactics are things like how to use night actions. So, if we discussed who the doctor should protect and who the cop should investigate, that would be tactics. Not talking in public won't get us anywhere at all.

Bloop bip booooop bip dop doop. Doooooop dip dop.

Can't you put your translation in brackets, Droid? That makes it hard to follow, and with so many Jedi in this temple we don't need to make things harder to follow at all.

While I was resting, I had a stroke of genius - a way to get around the no-unvotes rule. Instead of voting like we normally would, we can simply put our votes in this format: FoS: ____ (____) much like Master Clickity-Chirp has done. Once the majority has agreed on a FoS, we can simply pile our votes on like we would if we could unvote. This lets potential PRs (power roles) claim before their fate is sealed. So, what does everyone think? Yes? No?

Sounds like a good idea to me.

Also, you seem to have a point about Ahsoka. She seems to contradict herself. I'd like to hear what she says about this, but I second your FoS.

[MacK]

Also, you seem to have a point about Ahsoka. She seems to contradict herself. I'd like to hear what she says about this, but I second your FoS.

Have I not already addressed this?

[Peanuts]

You misunderstood me I should have stated that informed voting is our best weapon against the scum. I brought up the possibility of non-voting simply because I thought it was an option that may be over looked by some of us due to the wording of master Yoda’s rules. Namely his rules stating that voting is mandatory, that we do get any un-votes, and that a tied vote will still result in a lynch. If we could not gather enough evidence to feel reasonably sure that we were lynching a scum then we could make a tactical decision not to lynch. As for nobody ever following through with no lynch on day one that’s simply not true.

Nobody ever refused to lynch in a situation where no majority vote was needed for a conviction. And even though Master Yoda said a majority vote indeed would be needed for a lynch, the force tells me he meant the one with the most votes gets lynched. And not lynching makes only sense in smaller groups, not in a group as large as ours, were, put bluntly, a single Jedi is expendable.

Have I not already addressed this?

Yes you have. But I propably didn't realize it or I had already started posting talking.

[swils]

While daytime cops daytime actions in general are about as likely as a Rancor winning the Cloud City Sabacc Tournament, were you really suggesting that said hypothetical investigator upon finding scum would remain silent until the votes are tied between said scum and another candidate, even thought the investigator didn't do anything so far, and then should reveal the fact he has access to information publicly by breaking the tie, so that the scum can kill him?

And you sounded a lot like you advocated not lynching, even thought you were quick to assure us you weren't doing so after others pointed out that not lynching only helps the scum. Why do you even elaborate such a nonsensial plan when you aren't really in favor of avoiding a lynch?

*sigh*

Also, your logic is faulty in that only a scum would try to break a tie. For example, what if an investigator got a result on one of the lynchees, but doesn't want to reveal themselves? If they don't break the tie, a Scum might not get lynched. If they do, as you say, "a target will be painted on their forehead the next day". It's a lose-lose situation.

It was Aayla's scenario that proposed the existence of an investigator. As the discussion at hand was pertaining to a route of action for the first day, this would, by extension, mean that Aayla was suggesting the existence of a day-time investigator, since, again, this was all pertaining to the first day (that is, before any night actions could have possibly been sent in). Of course, based on more recent comments made by Master Secura, it seems she was already thinking ahead to the second or third day when she jumped on me, and thus her entire accusation was based on a flawed interpretation. Should not a Jedi be more level headed, and seek to understand the situation at hand, including the reasoning behind one's actions, before jumping to conclusions? I feel that Aayla could take a lesson in such matters from our resident protocol droid.

As for the second part of your question, I feel I have already answered this and would encourage you to reread the transcripts of the day. If, afterwards, you still feel as though I haven't addressed that line of questioning sufficiently, then I will, yet again, explain myself.

[Masked Builder]

"Indeed, which is why I hope we can get a few hours' extention on our voting deadline. Master Yoda, would you be willing to agree to this?"

"Being discussed, this is. Have an answer, soon you will."

[MacK]

Nobody ever refused to lynch in a situation where no majority vote was needed for a conviction. And even though Master Yoda said a majority vote indeed would be needed for a lynch, the force tells me he meant the one with the most votes gets lynched. And not lynching makes only sense in smaller groups, not in a group as large as ours, were, put bluntly, a single Jedi is expendable.

That's an interesting point of view. I wonder... let's pretend that I hadn't mentioned the idea of not voting, and being that everybody else here seems dead set on voting we'll assume that no one else brings the idea up. If we also assume that the scum make no obvious slip ups by voting time so that we would have no idea regard what would everybody’s course of action be then? Would we just throw a chance cube to determine who we vote for?

Maybe I’m just being naïve, but I predict that after a bit of deliberation a couple people with some very loose reasons would step up and place their votes, followed by a tidal wave of “band wagoners”. With that a person is lynched, and if tomorrow we find out that that person is in fact a Jedi, everyone say “damn let’s hope for better luck next time”.

I’m intrigued as to why everyone so flat out decided that we would lynch. I’m still waiting for more of the day to pass before passing my final judgement regarding my vote here.

[Peanuts]

It was Aayla's scenario that proposed the existence of an investigator. As the discussion at hand was pertaining to a route of action for the first day, this would, by extension, mean that Aayla was suggesting the existence of a day-time investigator, since, again, this was all pertaining to the first day (that is, before any night actions could have possibly been sent in). Of course, based on more recent comments made by Master Secura, it seems she was already thinking ahead to the second or third day when she jumped on me, and thus her entire accusation was based on a flawed interpretation. Should not a Jedi be more level headed, and seek to understand the situation at hand, including the reasoning behind one's actions, before jumping to conclusions? I feel that Aayla could take a lesson in such matters from our resident protocol droid.

As for the second part of your question, I feel I have already answered this and would encourage you to reread the transcripts of the day. If, afterwards, you still feel as though I haven't addressed that line of questioning sufficiently, then I will, yet again, explain myself.

So Aayla's misunderstanding created the scenario of the existence of a daytime cop, but your extension of said scenario resulted in the suggestion that the daytime cop holds back his vote until the tie is reached, which makes no sence. If a cop has found someone to be a Sith, and that person is bandwagoned, he should vote early on. That's what I critizised your idea for, not for the existence of a day cop, but for being unlogical even if a day cop existed.

And I'm afraid, I couldn't find where you addressed my second point, even though I looked. Could you please quote it, or address it again? That'd make it much easier, thank you.

That's an interesting point of view. I wonder... let's pretend that I hadn't mentioned the idea of not voting, and being that everybody else here seems dead set on voting we'll assume that no one else brings the idea up. If we also assume that the scum make no obvious slip ups by voting time so that we would have no idea regard what would everybody’s course of action be then? Would we just throw a chance cube to determine who we vote for?

Maybe I’m just being naïve, but I predict that after a bit of deliberation a couple people with some very loose reasons would step up and place their votes, followed by a tidal wave of “band wagoners”. With that a person is lynched, and if tomorrow we find out that that person is in fact a Jedi, everyone say “damn let’s hope for better luck next time”.

I’m intrigued as to why everyone so flat out decided that we would lynch. I’m still waiting for more of the day to pass before passing my final judgement regarding my vote here.

You don't get the concept of the analysis of speech and voting patterns, do you? On the other hand, assuming we didn't lynch, and we just sat around and did nothing, and the scum killed one of us, then we'd be at the same point as today with just one of us less.

[MacK]

You don't get the concept of the analysis of speech and voting patterns, do you? On the other hand, assuming we didn't lynch, and we just sat around and did nothing, and the scum killed one of us, then we'd be at the same point as today with just one of us less.

You avoided my question what would we do in the event that we do not have any sort of suspect, yet we must vote? You're right in that I don't get how we could learn much infomation from a random band wagon lynch.

[swils]

Perhaps I am now misinterpreting what I have quoted from Aayla, but the way I read her scenario (the above quoted), the supposed investigator would already be in the position of breaking the hypothetical tie. Aayla's words were specifically 'break the tie', rather than anything that would imply voting earlier, before a tie could be established. I have already, several times, admitted my mistake in delving deeper into the whole scenario, but in this case, it was Aayla who set the parameters of the scenario upon which I elaborated.

I'm growing tired of quoting myself, as I've found myself having to do so fairly regularly because the same questions keep popping up, so check back through the records from the fourth page hour of the day, especially my reply to C-3PO's questions.

[Brickdoctor]

You avoided my question what would we do in the event that we do not have any sort of suspect, yet we must vote? You're right in that I don't get how we could learn much infomation from a random band wagon lynch.

Do you really think that everyone would behave so perfectly that there would be absolutely nothing to go on? When you first mentioned it, it was much too early to see how people would be behaving, let alone judge whether or not anyone could be a suspect. You were very quick to bring up the idea of not lynching anyone when no Townie could possibly have a solid read on anyone yet.

[Kadabra]

"Clickity chirp chirp clack. Screech tweet twit tick chirp chirp." (I apologize for not speaking up to defend myself earlier, as I was asleep and then locked out of the temple for an impromptu cleaning session. I have adressed my tacked-on filler post previously and I believe that the essentials were indeed helpful as I was stating my suspicions and allowing others to observe me so they may decide the best course of action regarding me. If, seeing as I am inexperienced in these kinds of situations, you feel the best choice is to lynch me out of lack of a better candidate, then I shall submit, as my inexperienced chirps may clutter and confuse the issue.

The reason we must vote and lynch tonight, Padawan, is because for us Jedi who do not have specialized Force techniques that would be particularly useful in this situation, voting and our discussion is our only weapon. By observing vote and FoS patterns, we can help to determine whom among us have been touched by the Dark Side. Now, to build discussion, I shall FoS: Anakin (Swills) for his defensiveness regarding his odd behavior and seeming to support a pro-Scum plan, and FoS: Ahsoka (MacK for bringing up the whole thing in the first place.)

"Click Click Chirp: Tweet chirpity chirp." (For those stalkers among us who wondered why I opened my mouth, then left abruptly and am now returning, my dinner was burning as I had neglected it to come assist in this situation. This is what I was attenpting to convey before I was alerted to the fiery doom of my evening meal."

[Tamamono]

Bleep bip screeeeuuw!!!!!

Bip bip!

Beeooooop bip boop.

Bing bip bip! Bip bip bip bop bip bip! BoooooooOOOOOooooop.

Um, what? This is definitely not pro-town behavior. FoS: R2-D2 (fhomess) Forget Windu, this is the droid we're looking for.

You misunderstood me I should have stated that informed voting is our best weapon against the scum. I brought up the possibility of non-voting simply because I thought it was an option that may be over looked by some of us due to the wording of master Yoda’s rules. Namely his rules stating that voting is mandatory, that we do get any un-votes, and that a tied vote will still result in a lynch. If we could not gather enough evidence to feel reasonably sure that we were lynching a scum then we could make a tactical decision not to lynch. As for nobody ever following through with no lynch on day one that’s simply not true.

Once again, the not-lynching "plan" has been discussed to death in the past. You should know this. And it is almost never followed through on. There's no reason to waste time and energy talking about it.

But, more to the point, what exactly does not lynching accomplish!? It delays our having to make a decision. Yeah, that's completely helpful. Let's give the Sith a free kill why don't we?!

If you're worried that we'll lynch a Jedi today, then look at it this way: there's just as great a chance that we'll lynch a Jedi tomorrow as there is of lynching one today. If we're going to be a person short, we might as well be a person short now. Plus, whoever we lynch will undoubtedly be scummy, and getting rid of someone who's going to mess up our reads later in the situation and draw unnecessary investigations isn't really that bad.

"Allow me to put this elegantly: if we lynch we have some probability of lynching a Sith. If we do not, we have a 0% chance of lynching a Sith. Given that (unlike certain situations) there are not specific members among us that the Sith need to eliminate, there is no reason for us NOT to take the chance and try to eliminate a Sith."

Master Corob puts it even better than I do. We can't go forward until we take a step. It's common sense.

That's an interesting point of view. I wonder... let's pretend that I hadn't mentioned the idea of not voting, and being that everybody else here seems dead set on voting we'll assume that no one else brings the idea up. If we also assume that the scum make no obvious slip ups by voting time so that we would have no idea regard what would everybody’s course of action be then? Would we just throw a chance cube to determine who we vote for?

It's not all-or-nothing in scumhunting. Obviously nobody's going to slip up, but that doesn't mean we can't lynch a Sith today. Have a little faith!

You avoided my question what would we do in the event that we do not have any sort of suspect, yet we must vote? You're right in that I don't get how we could learn much infomation from a random band wagon lynch.

Voting pattern, voting order, etc. If you look hard enough, the scum will be obvious on a bandwagon like that.

[Dannylonglegs]

You avoided my question what would we do in the event that we do not have any sort of suspect, yet we must vote? You're right in that I don't get how we could learn much infomation from a random band wagon lynch.

There's plenty to learn from a lynch. In order for us to locate the sith, we must analyze the actions and words of our fellows. Occasionally, a scum slips up and makes an easily identifiable blunder, giving away his or her alignment. Most frequently though, on can infer from voting habits of a player his or her alignment, especially latter in the game.

[MacK]

Do you really think that everyone would behave so perfectly that there would be absolutely nothing to go on? When you first mentioned it, it was much too early to see how people would be behaving, let alone judge whether or not anyone could be a suspect. You were very quick to bring up the idea of not lynching anyone when no Townie could possibly have a solid read on anyone yet.

I don't see how I could have brought it up "too early", there generally isn’t a whole lot to talk about on day 1. I honestly thought that it would be seen as at least somewhat useful to perhaps a few people that hadn't realized that we don’t have to vote.

My post certainly have gotten quite a bit of attention, I still think it is rather irrational to not even consider not voting. I can't help but think that some of my accusers don't have the Jedi order’s interests at heart.

[Dannylonglegs]

Bing bip bip! Bip bip bip bop bip bip! BoooooooOOOOOooooop.

Please, R2, communicate with us like a sentient robot! Not only is this annoying, It causes strain on us all, Especially C-3PO. He's been a very active participant so far, but how would we know what you're trying to say if he took a rest. What would you do if he died? What if he's a scum and he alters what you want to say? It causes strain on the other participants too, by making quoting you far more difficult than it should be, and generally causing confusion. I'm sure there are plenty more reasons to stop too. At the moment, I will cast my FoS: R2-D2(fhomess) upon you until you start to speak.

[Flipz]

"I'm going to FoS: Ahsoka Tanao (MacK) for her continuous refusal to abandon a blatantly pro-Scum plan despite discussions in MANY previous Mafia games the wisdom of the elders AND refutations from many Jedi (and droids) arguing against it. There is ALWAYS some sort of evidence that justifies a lynch. Even if the suspect turns up innocent, the lynch has produced voting patterns and arguments that can be used to sniff out Scum, plus, as Jedi Kellyns has pointed out, innocent people who are overly scummy are a liability to us on later Days when we are trying to identify new suspects. The bottom line is, those who are overly scummy are very likely to get themselves lynched, whether they are actually Scum or not. If they're lynched sooner rather than later, it is indeed regrettable, but at least those Jedi among us who use arcane Force powers in the night will not wast their actions on innocent but scummy Jedi."

[Brickdoctor]

I don't see how I could have brought it up "too early", there generally isn’t a whole lot to talk about on day 1. I honestly thought that it would be seen as at least somewhat useful to perhaps a few people that hadn't realized that we don’t have to vote.

My post certainly have gotten quite a bit of attention, I still think it is rather irrational to not even consider not voting. I can't help but think that some of my accusers don't have the Jedi order’s interests at heart.

Just because there isn't a lot to talk about doesn't mean that we should immediately start to discuss the idea of pretty much doing nothing today. I haven never encountered a situation where all of Day 1 was nothing but roleplaying, so I doubt that there will ever be a situation with no behavior to analyze, and where there is behavior to analyze, there is basis for suspicion. Even if there is no behavior to analyze, voting is one of the best ways to create some behavior that can be discussed later on.

[MacK]

"I'm going to FoS: Ahsoka Tanao (MacK) for her continuous refusal to abandon a blatantly pro-Scum plan despite discussions in MANY previous Mafia games the wisdom of the elders AND refutations from many Jedi (and droids) arguing against it. There is ALWAYS some sort of evidence that justifies a lynch. Even if the suspect turns up innocent, the lynch has produced voting patterns and arguments that can be used to sniff out Scum, plus, as Jedi Kellyns has pointed out, innocent people who are overly scummy are a liability to us on later Days when we are trying to identify new suspects. The bottom line is, those who are overly scummy are very likely to get themselves lynched, whether they are actually Scum or not. If they're lynched sooner rather than later, it is indeed regrettable, but at least those Jedi among us who use arcane Force powers in the night will not wast their actions on innocent but scummy Jedi."

For the last time I was never dedicated to the no lynch plan in the first place I only ever pointed out that it existed. All I've done afterwards is to defend myself. The only intention of my posts was to keep our options open. Can somebody show me point to where I explictly stated that we shouldn't vote?

[Brickdoctor]

For the last time I was never dedicated to the no lynch plan in the first place I only ever pointed out that it existed. All I've done afterwards is to defend myself. The only intention of my posts was to keep our options open. Can somebody show me point to where I explictly stated that we shouldn't vote?

So you suggested something but were never committed to it or sure about it. Mmkay, that's just what Scum like to do. Claim uncertainty regarding or lack of dedication to a theory or idea, so that if it goes wrong, they have an excuse.

FoS: Ahsoka (MacK)