The Instigator
Pro (for)
7 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
0 Points

Mafia Theory Debate: The inactive Rule is better to follow than the noob rule

Do you like this debate?NoYes+5
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...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/19/2013 Category: Entertainment
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,210 times Debate No: 33896
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (24)
Votes (2)




I will be arguing the inactive rule is theoretically a better rule to follow when leading lynches, than the noob rule.
I will briefly define in my own words, what each is. Also for clarification, these aren’t exactly rules per say, as they are not required for players to follow. They are more just Standard Operating Procedures that have been created by players and been labeled rules.

Inactive Rule: This is a procedure that is thought to be an effective way of catching scum, as it pursues players who aren’t as active as other players, or who have a lower post count. Some players feel that there is a good chance to catch scum in inactive players, as they are not as caught up, and may miss details that a more active player might of picked up on. This therefore leads to a higher chance of the player “scum slipping”. This rule is also used commonly near the beginning of the game, to save the ache of pursuing a claim from the character later on, when the game get’s to the point where information is more pertinent.

Noob Rule: This rule was created along the assumption that a newer player who doesn’t have as strong of a grasp on the game, will have a higher chance of scum slipping, and accidentally giving themselves up as mafia. Inexperience is assumed to a higher potential in giving up information that could implicate the noob as mafia, where as if that noob had a better understanding of the game, the mistake would have been less likely.

Contention 1: Noob slips are less likely

There has been a few cases where the noob rule has worked, which has made it so popular over the last couple of years. There are two incidents I can think of off the top of my head. One would be Pokémon mafia DP1, modded by HCP where buddamoose admitted that he was third party, but could switch affiliation. After much debate around whether he was being truthful or not, he was eventually lynched due to the fact that there was no way to verify if he couldn't’t switch back or not to third party, or even mafia. This lynch turned out to be a good lynch, after it was revealed that buddamoose could in fact switch his affiliation twice. Had budda not been targeted that Day Phase, he may have survived another day phase or two, though whether he would have made the same decision in his claim or not, would be unknown. Given his in-experience with the game at that point, it is safe to assume he made the decision based off of his lack of knowledge on how 3rd parties were generally regarded. I did the same thing as a survivor, in BlackVoid’s Death note game, as a fairly nooby player. The other one off the top of my head would be lannan’s slip over a year ago in kyro’s naruto game. In this slip, he had actually not only given himself away, but also his entire team. There are plenty more examples of noob slips working in favor of the town, but the question for this debate, is if they are better to pursue than in-active lynches? So let’s identify the main differences between the two. Noob mistakes are based around bad, or un-informed decision making, while the in-active rule is based around length of game play, skipped details, and mis-interpretation of the situation. The versatile argument with the noob rule, is that not all noobs will make a mistake, in fact, in terms of how many noob mistakes actually happen as scum compared to as town, the numbers are slightly limited. So with that being said, a noob to mafia can also be an intelligent individual who picks up on facts, details, rules, and play very easily, making it harder to make a slip. However, if this same player is in-active, intelligence level doesn’t even get taken into effect, as not reading OP’s, or seeing all claims, can result in mistakes.

Contention 2: Noob slips can be mis-interpreted

Following the noob rule can have devastating effects for the town, based off of mis-interpretation. Many noobs will say things that seem pro-found to veteran players, because of their knowledge of things townies, should or shouldn't’t say. However someone new to mafia, is less likely to know which things are taboo or not to say as town, and will say them resulting in their own innocent demise through lynching. A very recent example of this would be cybertrons lynching in Left for dead mafia, modded by TDK. He was WIFOM’ed by veteran players, and confused by concepts he didn’t understand, and his actions were perceived to be scummy, which ultimately resulted in his mis-lynching. There are other cases in which this type of ordeal has happened, and these types of things do not cater to newer players.

Sub A: Noob rule can hurt the town

A newer player who is active, and pushed for claim is harmful, if there is no suspicious activity in his behavior. Mod’s may give newer players power roles to open them up to mafia, and help them achieve a better understanding of the game. So if a noob hasn’t displayed any suspicious behavior, yet is forced to claim anyway, than this has harmed the town more than it has helped.

Sub B: Subjectivity of being labeled as a noob

Generally mods will only allow newer players into a game if they have completed a beginners series. In cases where a noob has prior experience on another site, or has completed a beginners series, they will still be regarded as a noob as they are a new face to veterans. Pressuring a player who has already grasped the concept of the game, and has experienced the game to a certain degree, does no more good to the town than it does in random pressuring an experienced player.

Contention 3: In-active’s harm the game more

In-active’s are a lot more harmful to the game, because a decent flow in activity is crucial to the town succeeding and getting information. Mafia have been known to lurk, to both avoid pressuring, and allow town to tear themselves apart. Such has been known to work plenty of times in the past. Town will only accrue reads on active players in the game, as interactions are all the town has to go on. If a mafia member is lurking, or in-active, they can remain alive until late game, due to town responding to each others behavior, and worrying about deadlines set by the moderator. An in-active member has no incentive to claim, or get online if he sees that he/she has no pressure, or the pressure is limited, and can potentially skate through the game based on impatience. However in the few cases that the in-active member does come online, a copious amount of votes on them will act as a deterrent for them not to claim, at risk of being lynched, or mis-lynched. This entire argument of course, is in the assumption that the mod hasn’t expressed intention to replace said player.

Contention 4: In-active’s likelihood of slipping

There is an increased likelihood of an in-active player scum slipping. When a player is too busy to dedicate much time into a mafia game, they generally will only post a few times in the day phase, without actually reading everything. Despite how smart this player normally is, if they have not read OP’s, information outted by other players, or the mod, they may give information that is either contradictive of something that someone said. When an in-active player comes online to see they have compiled plenty of votes, and realized they may get lynched if they don’t make a statement or give information, they may end up giving making a slip due to not carefully analyzing all the information. These players are less likely to sift through hundreds of posts in order to verify that they aren’t making a scum slip also, where an active player who has kept up on the game can easily find a contradiction in their statement.
I thank my opponent for accepting this debate, Thankyou!


In this debate, I will be arguing the opposite of TUF's stance, in that the noob(new and or bad player) rule is theoretically superior to the inactive rule. For starters I'll start by saying that both rules have their place in games, and actually are quite complementary to each other when used in unison with each other. It is also important to note, that these rules, from my understanding of them, apply solely to beginning game pressure, when there is still yet a lack of posts to analyze, and pressure players based off of their behavior.

I'll start off with:

Contention One: New players are more likely than experienced players to slip and out themselves as mafia

This is obvious enough to players who have played mafia on this site long enough to see the trend. New players, being unaware of the finer points of mafia, indeed do slip more often then more experienced more skilled players. Some perfect examples of this were already supplied by TUF, but I'll supply one more examples of this. That being Lannan13's infamous outting of the entire mafia in Kyro's Mafia Game(Naruto Mafia I believe).

But it is important to note that the "noob rule" is not solely based upon the higher likelihood of new or less skilled players to scum slip. No, it also pertains to new or less players, being behaviorally unable to react town-like when faced with pressure early in the game as scum. In this sense they are not slipping, but rather simply acting scummy in the face of pressure, unable to grasp how to fake town-like behavior under said pressure.

Contention Two: New or bad players are simply in a majority of cases unable to think quickly and claim early in the game

Most of my contentions arent really, from what I see, going to require examples to prove. They are all rather common sense. Its a simple concept, that new or bad players will stall as long as they can if they at forced to fake-claim as scum. They simply dont understand what a good claim looks like, or how to come up with one quickly. So if they try not to stall, they come up with a bad one as scum, if they try to stall, it makes it obvious they are scum due to the stalling.

Thank you TUF, although my case is short, I feel that I have demonstrated why the noob rule is better to follow then the inactive rule. I look forward to hearing your responses, and throughly enjoyed reading your original argument.
Debate Round No. 1


Thankyou for the response buddamoose.


There isn't much to say, given that my opponent didn't take too much of a stance on these contentions. That is okay, I will let the voters decide what to make of that, however for rebuttals to his arguments, I will go ahead and use some of things I have already said in this case as examples.


Contention 1: Newer players are more likely to slip

Since I covered this argument already, I am going to expound on a few points in my Contention 2, and go ahead and quote budda on something he said.

"But it is important to note that the "noob rule" is not solely based upon the higher likelihood of new or less skilled players to scum slip. No, it also pertains to new or less players, being behaviorally unable to react town-like when faced with pressure early in the game as scum. In this sense they are not slipping, but rather simply acting scummy in the face of pressure, unable to grasp how to fake town-like behavior under said pressure."

This is exactly the point that I was trying to prove in contention 2, and I couldn't have said it better myself. But this statement is in fact a contradiction to his contention's header, which asserts that noobs are more likely to slip as scum. As provided in my example of Left 4 Dead mafia, and my opponent buddamoose, noobs are likely to both slip in town, and mafia. So this seems to be the main point that I am trying to prove. Is it worth it push for noob claims early on as town? If I was a mafia member, the first thing I would do would be to target noobs that aren't on my team, knowing full well that any and all statements they may make are likely to be seen as scummy.

The likelihood of a noob being placed on a mafia side are statistically lower than being placed on the town, give factional majorities. So right from the start, the noob rule favors the mafia. The noob rule already becomes less likely to work when operating under the assumption that the mafia are willing to help their noob and provide them with responses.

Contention 2: New/Bad players cannot think quickly

Again, it is true that new or bad players cannot think quickly. In terms of taking into account whether this actually helps the town or not, is a another story. As I mentioned briefly before, in a mafia team, you can easily have your team mates help you come up with a fake claim if you are having difficulties. In some cases, a good fake claim made by the mafia can be more damning to the town than not. Most people will deduce that as a noob/bad player, the player wouldn't know how to think of such a fake claim, and consider them town. There is a big difference with inactive members because at least in the situation with a caught up noob, they know the small details that the game possesses, have kept track of what's going on, and being a bad or new player won't effect them getting lynched if their team can walk them through things. But an inactive experienced will most likely come up with their own fake claim. In this situation ,it is very likely for them to claim a role or character that's already been claimed, or oversee a mechanic that the mod missed out. An example of this is Nouema's slip in Danielle's Philosopher mafia, where Nouema contradicted a rule the mod had laid out before hand.


I feel I have provided enough evidence, and arguments to prove that the inactive rule is over all a better rule to follow than the noob rule. The main thing to look at when viewing this, is that inactivity is the most harmful thing to a mafia team. It always has been, and always will be. An inactive townie can claim without worry of missing things, whereas an inactive mafia might not have time to read through hundreds of posts in order to acquire nessecary details to the game. Experienced players will often mis-claim and mess up majorly screwing their team over. As an experienced player, who is unlikely to take advice from a team, where as a noob is expected to. In addition to that, Both my opponent and I have shown that the noob rule not only hurts the mafia, but it actually hurts the town. I would have to argue that it hurts the town more, based on likelihood of the noob being placed in the town as opposed the mafia.

I thank buddamoose for accepting this debate and offering the idea, and pass the time over to his for final rebuttals.


Buddamoose forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
24 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Buddamoose 3 years ago
No :/
Posted by TUF 3 years ago
Were you guys drinking? lol
Posted by Buddamoose 3 years ago
Ah shoot, completely got distracted talking with Leo and forgot about this -_-
Posted by TUF 3 years ago
I am actually null on that topic.
Posted by F-16_Fighting_Falcon 3 years ago
TUF, RVS spawns discussion and usually leads to a higher likelihood of a DP1 lynch. Two claims from noobs/inactives and a no lynch is a perfect way to throw away a day phase and I have no idea why town would want to do that.
Posted by F-16_Fighting_Falcon 3 years ago
Noobs are usually inactive. I read this debate and you agree on too much. There is hardly room for debate.
Posted by F-16_Fighting_Falcon 3 years ago
Which side are you supporting FT?
Posted by TUF 3 years ago
I already know that FT is for Mafia scum style RVS. Want to know I how know this? Because he uses it in every game he plays in lol
Posted by Buddamoose 3 years ago
Posted by FourTrouble 3 years ago
I'd be willing to do a debate regarding Inactive Rule vs mafiascum-style RVS. Either of you interested?
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Ragnar 3 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:10 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeit.
Vote Placed by Logical-Master 3 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Reasons for voting decision: TUF wins via Contention 3. Inactivity is the mafia's greatest asset in a game that hinges on information. I find "the noob rule" both unpersuasive and unwise to follow. CON also forfeited and did not present any sources