Policy Lynching

[PMysterious]

Um, here's the thing. I forgot to mention that no one has claimed at that point. Anyway, I was Policy Lynch bait and still am.

The last two games I;ve seen you play, you were prod dodging the whole time and never actually contributing anything, one you were lynched as an unclaimed PR due to deadline and the other you fakeclaimed PR as VT (and were lucky I was a paranoid scum about how I was treating you differently due to my alignment between these two games and also that the doc wasn't active when we lynched my partner)

To be honest, that is true in a sense, but it doesn't stay on topic. Anyway, the point is Policy lynching is a stupid idea and should only be considered as a desperation move. It never helps and it makes newer players quit.

[Faraday]

-It forces other players to react, both to you for having suggested it, and gives you a ton of info on how they interact with the would-be-policy-lynched player. When you have a few flips, this will be INCREDIBLY useful.

Not really. It's not alignment relevant, it's not a promoter of useful discussion.

[mastin2]

-It forces other players to react, both to you for having suggested it, and gives you a ton of info on how they interact with the would-be-policy-lynched player. When you have a few flips, this will be INCREDIBLY useful.

Not really. It's not alignment relevant, it's not a promoter of useful discussion.

Policy lynches by definition aren't going to be alignment-driven, but that doesn't mean you can't get reads on alignment from how the players react. It's fully possible that as both town and scum, they'll take the same stance, and it could devolve into an MD theory debate, but MOST of the time, there's useful info from it.

If that makes sense. (Gotta leave.)

[Faraday]

It makes sense I just think the amount of useful info got from it isn't a particularly large amount compared to a more organic start. Or just by wagoning someone.

[pirate mollie]

Disagree with the link between policy and quicklynching - policy lynching is usually hugely controversial, and a great way to kick off a massive argument.

Building off of this, suggesting a policy lynch is a great way to kick off an RVS. It's very rarely going to actually go through (see also: site meta of being EXTREMELY reluctant to do so), but it'll give a bundle-load of information. It accomplishes quite a few things.

-It forces the player who would-be-policy-lynched to step up their game. They comply? Great, they're no longer policy-lynch-worthy. They refuse? The policy lynch might actually go through.
-It forces the player who would-be-policy-lynched onto the defensive, pressuring them. They may not get lynched (in fact, probably won't), but they'll have plenty of pressure on them. Enough to gain a good solid read on them and determine if they're scum or town.
-It forces other players to react, both to you for having suggested it, and gives you a ton of info on how they interact with the would-be-policy-lynched player. When you have a few flips, this will be INCREDIBLY useful.

Soyeah, I can actually see value in suggesting a policy-lynch early-on.

Butyeah. I still prefer WotC. If a single player would be the cause of a significant portion of your playerlist to out, request replacement, and other similar things...well, then, that player is best off not in the game. Players don't have to like each other, but they should never absolutely be at each other's throats off of their respective playstyles and actively despite one another--at that point, they're not playing as players; they're playing as people.

When a game has people playing as people, they're not playing with roles. They're playing purely from their emotions and viewpoints, not from their alignment and their game knowledge. So as a mod, it should be your duty to do everything possible to make sure that doesn't happen.

okay, so what you are saying here is that it is okay to policy lynch in order to elicit an emotional response (reaction) from people (I am assuming also the person you are policy lynching since you are basically telling that person they are a shit player and are not wanted in the game for reasons that have nothing to do with their role) but are later saying that when people's emotional buttons are pushed and they are playing as people, this should not be acceptable?

I don't want to put words in your mouth so could you plz clarify that this is what you are saying?

maybe I do not fully understand what you guys mean by policy lynching on this site. it is one thing to bottleneck scum's endgame options where they want to maximize keeping weaker players in the game by killing off stronger town but it is another to say, "I don't like them and I don't feel like giving a reason for it so can we just lynch them?". the former only works with tight town formation and it is not always a policy lynch. the latter comes from a different mindset and I don't always agree with it. most of the time I do not.

I have only come across one player that I wanted to policy lynch so yeah, I can see support for the argument that policy lynching in itself is a good argument for lynching right off the bat. but that person posted off of the scumboard into the greater fora, gave access to non players the scum board, posted porn in the game thread after he was dead, posted in the game thread after he was dead his opinions, contacted new members to the mafia group false allegations of other players cheating, outed their scummate on other forums cos they were pissed about getting bussed, withheld info that would clear a player cos they wanted that player lynched cos they didn't like them, omg, the list goes on. people talk about hellbanning him from mafia but no one likes the exclusionary precedent that it would set. so it is a rock between a hard place.

I have yet to come across a player like that here cos I think that they would be site banned especially for the zombie play. I think some players do the whole policy lynch as a form of lazy play so that they do not have to look at whether or not the person's motives might come from a town vs. scum POV. that takes work and thought. when you are being policy lynched for reasons cos of "I don't like their playstyle and you do not fit in" you are not given a road map to improve your play. the message sent is, "I do not like you, therefore you do not belong". I cannot speak for arc, but that is the what I gathered from what she was saying.

[The Fonz]

Disagree with the link between policy and quicklynching - policy lynching is usually hugely controversial, and a great way to kick off a massive argument.

Building off of this, suggesting a policy lynch is a great way to kick off an RVS. It's very rarely going to actually go through (see also: site meta of being EXTREMELY reluctant to do so), but it'll give a bundle-load of information. It accomplishes quite a few things.

-It forces the player who would-be-policy-lynched to step up their game. They comply? Great, they're no longer policy-lynch-worthy. They refuse? The policy lynch might actually go through.
-It forces the player who would-be-policy-lynched onto the defensive, pressuring them. They may not get lynched (in fact, probably won't), but they'll have plenty of pressure on them. Enough to gain a good solid read on them and determine if they're scum or town.
-It forces other players to react, both to you for having suggested it, and gives you a ton of info on how they interact with the would-be-policy-lynched player. When you have a few flips, this will be INCREDIBLY useful.

Soyeah, I can actually see value in suggesting a policy-lynch early-on.

Butyeah. I still prefer WotC. If a single player would be the cause of a significant portion of your playerlist to out, request replacement, and other similar things...well, then, that player is best off not in the game. Players don't have to like each other, but they should never absolutely be at each other's throats off of their respective playstyles and actively despite one another--at that point, they're not playing as players; they're playing as people.

When a game has people playing as people, they're not playing with roles. They're playing purely from their emotions and viewpoints, not from their alignment and their game knowledge. So as a mod, it should be your duty to do everything possible to make sure that doesn't happen.

okay, so what you are saying here is that it is okay to policy lynch in order to elicit an emotional response (reaction) from people (I am assuming also the person you are policy lynching since you are basically telling that person they are a shit player and are not wanted in the game for reasons that have nothing to do with their role) but are later saying that when people's emotional buttons are pushed and they are playing as people, this should not be acceptable?

No, you're conflating two things.

Mastin isn't pushing these people to 'get an emotional reaction.' He's pushing them to stop them playing like idiots.

I have yet to come across a player like that here cos I think that they would be site banned especially for the zombie play. I think some players do the whole policy lynch as a form of lazy play

so that they do not have to look at whether or not the person's motives might come from a town vs. scum POV.

that takes work and thought. when you are being policy lynched for reasons cos of "I don't like their playstyle and you do not fit in" you are not given a road map to improve your play. the message sent is, "I do not like you, therefore you do not belong". I cannot speak for arc, but that is the what I gathered from what she was saying.

Nope. If it's possible to do that kind of analysis AT ALL, then you don't policy lynch them.

If they play the exact same way in every game, and that's to derp around and do absolutely nothing that could be interpreted as game-relevant, THEN you policy lynch them.

[zoraster]

Policy lynches are often the best examples of the frequent conflict between winning the game at hand and winning games in general.

[Nero]

Policy lynching is what elitist nubs advocate when they're too shit to scumhunt and find the mafia.

[The Fonz]

Attacking policy lynching is what egomaniacs do when they think they have the ability to read players who are making absolutely no game-relevant contribution.

(Because let's face it, if they thought the target of the lynch was town, they'd say that, wouldn't they?)

Seriously, read kdowns in Purified mafia. If you think he's readable, then come back to me.

[ArcAngel9]

Policy lynch concept is unfriendly and very unwelcoming, nobody get to decide who plays and who don't,
if the one has issues with playing with someone, they can always choose not to play on that game or replace themselves out. that is the right way than forcing some to go out or just lynching for that reason.

If I'm already in the game and a VI replaces in, why is it I who should give up my right to play in the game because her behaviour is intolerable? Why should we even WANT to be welcoming to people who basically aren't playing at all, just trolling the site? You call it bullying. I put it to you VIs are the 'bullies -' the equivalent of the kid in a soccer game who just kicks the ball over the fence every time it comes near him. Of course you're going to want to stop that kid playing. And if the teacher (mod) won't stop him, of course you're going to want to beat him up.

ArcAngel, you talk about how force-replacing terrible players is better than lynching them. I totally agree, but mods just generally aren't doing this so long as the player stays within the letter of the law. Most of the players we're talking about are actively playing against their win condition if they're town, but that's a very subjective area that mods rightly don't want to step into.

Wise Stuff.

Basically agree with all of this.

This is going to be hard to accept and you may not like this..
No one knows for certain if anyone being whatever the way they are is intentional or unintentional, Imagine you try to fill a cup which is already full? if someone who knows all the rules and still plays as they usually plays which makes them a player with their own style of playing than a bad player.

I am not denying to fact that there are few players who does this intentionally, and i am excluding them from this discussion.

And such players to be kept at the right place becuz they do more damage than any good to this community.

But again, it shouldn't encourage anyone to be judgmental and not be open minded.

The whole point of the game is to be judgemental.

You have to make a judgement on whose lynch will make the town more likely to win

, and whose will make it more likely to lose. And btw, you can't turn around and say (as in the bolded) 'I'm going to exclude from this discussion of policy lynching anyone that people might actually want to policy lynch.' Intent only actually matters so far. If a player being alive reduces the town's chances of winning even if he is town, it is actually my DUTY as a town player to lynch him

Would you care to respond to the example of the 'I like cheese' guy?

Here is the problem with few people on this site.. Why did you think winning is mostly for “Town” even Mafia win is win. And my debate is simple. Policy lynch is loss for both the sides, it can even change fate of a game but not necessarily to the town but also to the mafia.

What is that you would like to talk about I like cheese guy?

[ArcAngel9]

Policy lynches are often the best examples of the frequent conflict between winning the game at hand and winning games in general.

Not really, that is what a winning team feels but it may differ to lost team if the policy lynch was one their team member.
Lets say you policy lynch someone on day 1, and they end up being a scum. Its unfair for Mafia team even if that scores to Town. You took out an oppurtunity for Mafia to fight with town. That wasn't fair becuz you think that player may play bad.

[zoraster]

Policy lynches are often the best examples of the frequent conflict between winning the game at hand and winning games in general.

Not really, that is what a winning team feels but it may differ to lost team if the policy lynch was one their team member.
Lets say you policy lynch someone on day 1, and they end up being a scum. Its unfair for Mafia team even if that scores to Town. You took out an oppurtunity for Mafia to fight with town. That wasn't fair becuz you think that player may play bad.

No. This is just so wrong. When evaluating the correctness of an action, you don't look at the result from the point of view of someone standing after. You do so at the point the decision was made.

For example, lets say I'm offered $50 if I can pick the number that will come up when rolling two balanced six-sided dice. I pick 2 (1/36 chance). It comes up 2. Even though it paid off, I was dumb for picking it.

[ArcAngel9]

Policy lynches are often the best examples of the frequent conflict between winning the game at hand and winning games in general.

Not really, that is what a winning team feels but it may differ to lost team if the policy lynch was one their team member.
Lets say you policy lynch someone on day 1, and they end up being a scum. Its unfair for Mafia team even if that scores to Town. You took out an oppurtunity for Mafia to fight with town. That wasn't fair becuz you think that player may play bad.

No. This is just so wrong. When evaluating the correctness of an action, you don't look at the result from the point of view of someone standing after. You do so at the point the decision was made.

For example, lets say I'm offered $50 if I can pick the number that will come up when rolling two balanced six-sided dice. I pick 2 (1/36 chance). It comes up 2. Even though it paid off, I was dumb for picking it.

That is good logic but i don't understand how it fits here...
Explain me once again...

If i am the member of Mafia and i am associated with 2 more people in a 11 player game. Before even i get to play, If i get quick lynched because of Policy lynch theory? Do you think that result is fair? Where is my chance of being part of game? And my team has just lost me before even i help them to win the game... Its a good side for town for that game but it was not a good thing for Mafia. and these type of policy lynches happens everywhere and it is worse if you're town.

[zoraster]

Well, if you personally are being policy lynched, then you should try not to be.

If your teammate is, that's just the luck of the draw. It was even more likely that the policy lynched person would have been on town, after all (since town makes up a greater portion of the player slots). Getting put on a team with a good or bad teammate has always been part of mafia.

[Nero]

Policy lynching is what elitist nubs advocate when they're too shit to scumhunt and find the mafia.

[Nero]

Zoraster, as a prestigious player myself, I'd be embarrassed to belong in the same species to someone who policy votes.

[Nero]

Just out of interest, what are your views on the One Child Policy adopted by China?

[zoraster]

Just out of interest, what are your views on the One Child Policy adopted by China?

Usually it's the US doing the adoption of one child from China.

Anyway, if you want to troll, kindly do it in GD/SE and leave MD alone.

[ArcAngel9]

Well, if you personally are being policy lynched, then you should try not to be.

If your teammate is, that's just the luck of the draw. It was even more likely that the policy lynched person would have been on town, after all (since town makes up a greater portion of the player slots). Getting put on a team with a good or bad teammate has always been part of mafia.

No body wishes to be policy lynched before even they begin to post.. If so, They woudn 't even sign up for the game. If i can explain that in one statement. "IT IS BARBARIC". How the hell one try not to be something if they don't even get to be the one.

I am sorry, but the change that you expect from a victim is never going to meet the expectation of a prestagious player even if the victim really manages to change themselves.

Mafia is a judgmental game, I agree but it should be part of that relavent game but not judge the person overall becuz nobody is the same on everyone neither thier roles or charcters. As long as the people thinking is not chaning, i don't hope “Try not to bE” idea ever works!!!!

[zoraster]

I'll admit I'm having a lot of trouble following what you're saying, so I apologize if I've misinterpreted anything you're saying when I respond here:

It's happened quite frequently, actually. People have gotten better, stopped doing what annoys people, etc.

The truth is that the number of true policy lynches that are actually carried out D1 each year can probably be counted on two hands. Policy lynching is mostly an unused but threatened tool. The bar for avoiding a policy lynch is not high, and it almost always has to be purposeful or negligent actions (e.g. self-hammering as a town power role).

[kuribo]

Seriously, read kdowns in Purified mafia. If you think he's readable, then come back to me.

I was scumbuddies with kdowns once, and part of our strategy was literally to "let him do his thing" and lurkaderp all game because everyone knows he doesn't post, and no one will lynch him for it because pushing a lurker lynch is seen as scummy.

(of course, he then got caught up in some bullshit role PM speculation and claimed Bomb... which, as I pointed out, is actually a role that would... you know... cause town to want to lynch you anyway)

[Nero]

I'm policy lynching zoraster if we ever play a game together. Let him taste his own medicine.

[pirate mollie]

No, you're conflating two things.

Mastin isn't pushing these people to 'get an emotional reaction.' He's pushing them to stop them playing like idiots.

I was not talking to you, I was talking to mastin.

Nope. If it's possible to do that kind of analysis AT ALL, then you don't policy lynch them.

If they play the exact same way in every game, and that's to derp around and do absolutely nothing that could be interpreted as game-relevant, THEN you policy lynch them.

nope. not necessarily.

why? cos very few people can determine what "doing absolutely nothing" really means. and those who do, know how to work around those people.

I maintain the only reason to policy lynch is when someone consistently breaks rules or is actively trying to sabotage the game.

[The Fonz]

No, you're conflating two things.

Mastin isn't pushing these people to 'get an emotional reaction.' He's pushing them to stop them playing like idiots.

I was not talking to you, I was talking to mastin.

You're talking in a thread. You didn't even start it. You can't try to claim it's a private conversation, that's super-assholish.

Nope. If it's possible to do that kind of analysis AT ALL, then you don't policy lynch them.

If they play the exact same way in every game, and that's to derp around and do absolutely nothing that could be interpreted as game-relevant, THEN you policy lynch them.

why? cos very few people can determine what "doing absolutely nothing" really means. and those who do, know how to work around those people.

I maintain the only reason to policy lynch is when someone consistently breaks rules or is actively trying to sabotage the game.

Really? I think it's usually pretty obvious when someone's not engaging with the game.

@ArcAngel: The question is, how to do you propose to deal with the 'I like cheese' guy, assuming the mod won't force replace him?

The other thing, of course, is that if you allow people to lurk and derp, lurking and derping take a hold in the game, and the town as a whole ends up not really caring about the game - apathy sets in. Why try to make arguments when it's going to get you attacked and the lurkers/VIs are being ignored? You get fewer and fewer people trying, and those people just get more and more frustrated. Everyone's been in a game like that. Apathetic towns almost always lose unless PRs end up bailing them out (and hell, in very apathetic towns the PRs even sometimes start forgetting to submit night actions). Town's got a better chance of winning even if it 'wastes' a lynch or two on bad town players than if apathy takes hold.

[ArcAngel9]

@Fonz - Give me the I like Cheese Guy profile link... or are they any particular game that you want me to lookinto?