The Instigator
F-16_Fighting_Falcon
Pro (for)
Losing
1 Points
The Contender
FourTrouble
Con (against)
Winning
6 Points

500 Character debate: Policy lynching in mafia games

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
FourTrouble
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/6/2015 Category: Games
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,629 times Debate No: 71259
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (31)
Votes (2)

 

F-16_Fighting_Falcon

Pro

Resolution: On balance, it is preferable to not policy lynch players in mafia games.

Con must show that on balance, it is preferable to policy-lynch some types of play in mafia games and that it must be preferred over not policy lynching.

BOP is shared. Whoever proves that their option is better wins.

The types of players that Con says it is preferable to policy lynch are those who intentionally play scummy when town to avoid detection when they are scum.

500 characters. 5 minutes.
FourTrouble

Con

Accepted.
Debate Round No. 1
F-16_Fighting_Falcon

Pro

In any game, town must persue strategies that will help them win that particular game. When people play on forums, they expect the opposing team to give their best.

Lynching for any reason outside of game-related content helps scum more than town. It minimizes scumhunting which is a powerful tool in catching scum that nets a significantly better rate of scum lynches than random lynches.

The possibility of a scum lynch when a player is lynched on policy is below 50%.

FourTrouble

Con

Intentionally playing scummy with no pro-town purpose is hurts Town because it"s indistinguishable from scum who actually are scummy. It makes it impossible to scumhunt, and it makes it more likely that you"ll be mislynched. These are serious sins.

I agree that scumhunting should be the main tool for lynching. But when someone is intentionally scummy without a pro-town purpose, they should be lynched. Otherwise, scum can just claim they're "intentionally scummy," and scumhunting goes out window
Debate Round No. 2
F-16_Fighting_Falcon

Pro

Connection problems. I pass.
FourTrouble

Con

F-16 said that policy lynches have a success rate below 50%, but there's no evidence of that. I think it's somewhat self-evident that lynching scummy players nets you have a higher chance of lynching scum than random. That's the point of scumhunting. To find scummy players. When someone's intentionally scummy without a pro-town purpose, they appear scummy. That means chance of hitting scum under this policy is equal to chance of hitting scum when scumhunting as usual.
Debate Round No. 3
F-16_Fighting_Falcon

Pro

If it is known that they appear scummy as town, the meta will shift towards not considering their surface level scummy behavior to be indicative of scum.

I also haven't argued that they should never be lynched but should be treated as any other player in the game and scumhunted based on the knowledge that they commit generalized scumtells as town.

Scumhunting will not be rendered impossible but will be refined to account for such behaviors. Nor will it go out the window.
FourTrouble

Con

First, F-16 assumes it's possible to "account for such behaviors." I disagree. When everyone someone does is intentionally pro-scum, it's impossible to account for that behavior. The only way to scumhunt is to assume they're always town, which isn't scumhunting at all.

The other problem is that "intentionally scummy" shifts with meta as well. So taking into account behaviors, if possible, won't change anything, because they'll just shift their behavior too.
Debate Round No. 4
F-16_Fighting_Falcon

Pro

The players in question do not know who the scum are and will betray and uninformed perspective of the game. They CANNOT play like scum because they don't know who the scum are. And if town is scumhunting right, they will indentify scummy town from scum.

If it is possible for them to be identified, I win the debate because I showed that lynching them is on average worse than scumhunting.
FourTrouble

Con

They can avoid betraying an uninformed perspective by fabricating reads on everyone. Or by not reading the game at all. That would make it impossible to determine whether their perspective is informed or uninformed.

When someone only does pro-scum things as both town and scum, you can't tell the difference between their town play and scum play. Scumhunting cannot function in those circumstances. If scum are allowed to do that, they'll never be lynched. Or their lynches will be random.
Debate Round No. 5
31 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by F-16_Fighting_Falcon 1 year ago
F-16_Fighting_Falcon
Actually, let's continue in a PM.
Posted by F-16_Fighting_Falcon 1 year ago
F-16_Fighting_Falcon
Dropping towntells?
Posted by FourTrouble 1 year ago
FourTrouble
btw Ceph is one of the best mafia I've seen -- completely tricked me in Tales. I think since then I've been able to read him quite well, but overall, I've learned a lot about how I'd like to play as scum from watching how he does it. As much as I say I don't like being scum, I'm actually looking forward to it, as I have some things I want to try out, some stuff I've picked up from seeing stuff on MS.
Posted by FourTrouble 1 year ago
FourTrouble
It's different as third-party though -- if you actually don't know who the mafia are. Then I can still scumhunt. I think the way third-party reveal themselves is the way they react to pressure. That's part of why I think hunting for third-party is SO DIFFERENT than hunting for mafia. They're very different in the kinds of scum-tells they drop.
Posted by FourTrouble 1 year ago
FourTrouble
I can't do 1 -- literally cannot -- so I mostly resort to 2 these days. I've tried sometimes to put myself in that "hunt for third-party" frame that some people do, but I just can't. Everthing I say and do as scum is 100% fake.
Posted by F-16_Fighting_Falcon 1 year ago
F-16_Fighting_Falcon
As far as I know, I think there are two schools of thought here:

1. Try your best to forget who your partners are and emulate that town mindset.

2. Actively try and manipulate your interactions so that people think your partner is town or that townies are your partners. More than just distancing/bussing, most people will see through that. Making it seem like you are manipulating your partners would be pretty cool if you flip.

I've seen both kinds of players on MS. Both tend to be successful when done well.
Posted by FourTrouble 1 year ago
FourTrouble
The problem is, once you're informed, you can't go back to being uninformed. Over time, when you see votes building on a partner, or votes building on a townie, you're gonna betray knowledge of that based on how you vote.
Posted by FourTrouble 1 year ago
FourTrouble
Yea, when I saw your informed/uninformed point, I got really worried, because I think that's ultimately a winner. I think if you had brought it up earlier in Round 2 or Round 3, or if we had another round, I would have been screwed. As it was, I was able to quickly give a counter-argument without your response, so I got lucky.
Posted by F-16_Fighting_Falcon 1 year ago
F-16_Fighting_Falcon
>> Con effectively rebuts this by saying scummy town can simply fabricate bad reads to skew how their behavior is perceived.

I've waited to comment on this as well. I think it is an accurate summary of what actually happened in this debate so I agree FT won but in reality my argument would have been that it is impossible to gain the knowledge that scum have if you aren't provided with that info. That becomes more apparent as scum get lynched or killed.
Posted by F-16_Fighting_Falcon 1 year ago
F-16_Fighting_Falcon
Haha, I really wanted to comment on that last round and say that the default is being uninformed. So, only scum can truly play like scum.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by The-Voice-of-Truth 1 year ago
The-Voice-of-Truth
F-16_Fighting_FalconFourTroubleTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:13 
Reasons for voting decision: Con raised the point that scummy town are indistinguishable from real scum. Pro does not effectively to refute Con's statement, and Con refutes Pro's ineffective "refute:, so Con has the superior argument vote. Con had a few punctuation errors, so the grammar and spelling vote went to Pro. No sources were used. Both maintained good conduct throughout the debate. I was neutral on this topic, but Con convinced me that policy lynching is good in some cases. Congratulations Con, you gave me an opinion on this topic.
Vote Placed by Raisor 1 year ago
Raisor
F-16_Fighting_FalconFourTroubleTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: RFD in comments