Do influential people always provide better arguments?

[F-16_Fighting_Falcon]

A couple of things I observed about well-known people on the site:

When someone that is well-known posts arguments for the lynch of a player, it almost always goes through whereas if a relatively unknown player does it, it takes a lot more time to push through the lynch. This usually doesn't even matter what their alignments are and whether or not they are leading mislynches.

To give a few examples of what I am talking about:

1) Consider this game Hunterxhunterx mafia where Nachomamma8 pushes a lynch on Amethyst Kitty. The lynch instantly goes through despite it being a mislynch while during the same game at the same time, there were a ton of people who wanted to lynch Magua (also town) but there is no headway.

2) In the same game, Vi pushes a lynch on Gammagooey without providing any reasoning whatsoever. I scanned Vi's ISO to see where he provided a reason for lynching but he never does. He just says that Gammagooey is scum, posts links to songs on youtube and it just

happens

.

3) A third example, this time Tierce starts pushing a lynch on TwoUpstandingGentlemen and despite the fact that everyone previously had different views on who the scum were and that TUG was town (ergo the reasoning used was flawed), the mislynch still goes through.

4) A fourth example is in Stratego mafia where a bunch of us were trying to lynch MagnaOfIllusion (scum) for a long time, yet not enough votes are gathered. However, RedCoyote makes one post saying that Charter (town) is scum and Charter is instantly lynched.

So, the common element in all 4 examples was an influential player who was on the site for a long time pushes through a lynch and it happens. So, my question is does influence cause people to believe that the arguments coming from the player are in fact better than standard arguments? Or are the arguments presented by influential players always better and it is not just the perception? Also, what about times when players present no arguments at all and lead the lynch almost by magic (see example 2)? Do any of you think "player X is making the argument therefore it must be accurate?"

For my part, I often tend to read the arguments of experienced players to follow their reasoning while following the arguments of newer players primarily for determining their affiliation as opposed to sheeping them so experience does matter. But what if you are not an experienced/influential player? How do you produce arguments that people will follow? Is it necessary to be very well known on the site before enough people will agree with your reasoning that a lynch would go through?

[Faraday]

When someone that is well-known posts arguments for the lynch of a player, it almost always goes through

Well, obviously this is a bit simplistic? Since there'll probably be greater than 1 player who's well known, so if they disagree both can't get their way.

Repetition + force of will can get through a lynch though. Having a repuation for being a good scumhunter/good player is of course likely to help.

[Faraday]

Also if you have a game of good players you can get a group think going, so once someone "good" points something out, you're more likely to read the player they're voting and try to re-evulate the player and maybe you'll see what they see and :wagons:.

And it's certainly not "necessary" to be well known, but it helps. But I would think that was kind of obvious to everyone -- that having a good repuation as a scumhunter is *more likely* to result in you being listened to. It doesn't mean they're arguments are better every time, and they may be wrong a lot but yeah.

[Katsuki]

It's a mix of the player and the playerbase. If you have an all-star lineup, blind sheeping of lynches (say, everyone who has a brain + faraday, those ones with brains aren't likely to just make faraday a kingmaker by lynching whoever he says), where as weaker players are more likely to follow those they perceive to be strong mafia players.

Of course being influential is more so about being charismatic and articulate (and sometimes logic but this is often times a trap). Players like faraday and DGB tend to be able to talk their way out of anything or make the things they want to happen easier than those who are bad at wording, regardless of how much BS is being spewn. Reputation plays a part but if you strip that away then it comes down to the posts themselves.

Another way is to scream your way into a lynch. Players enjoy listening to CAPS.

[Tamuz]

Isn't this just asking, "Do appeals from authority carry more weight?"

To which the answer is, "Duh".

[Rainbowdash]

It's a mix of the player and the playerbase.

This is all that really will be said here just in different ways.

Some players will get followed in certain games and either get ignored or have to play entirely different in other games.

[quadz08]

Isn't this just asking, "Do appeals from authority carry more weight?"

To which the answer is, "Duh".

[Tammy]

I think you also have to look at the people being lynched and what kind of impact they were having in the game. For instance your third example with tierce and tug, majiffy was doing everything in his power to make his mislynch look delectable at that point. In the red wedding game, there was a show down between generic (scum) and metal sonic (town) and even though ms made a case he was mislynched instead and I stand by that largely in part because people were just annoyed.

But yeah whoever said you're going to get variations of the first answer is probably right and goes along with mastin's charisma theory.

[Magua]

From the HunterxHunter perspective, it wasn't "X said lynch Y, and people did/did not sheep." Eg, while Vi did repeat over and over "Gamma is scum, lynch him," that wasn't what got Gamma lynched -- Gamma got lynched as a compromise and because scum jumped on the bus to hammer.

Amethyst Kitty wasn't lynched because of Nachomamma, but because many people in the thread were vocally calling them out (I was one of them), and with eight mislynches or whatever there was a general apathy.

---

Or to approach it from the other side, there are plenty of examples where a well known player tries to push a lynch through and it fails.

[Vi]

2) In the same game, Vi pushes a lynch on Gammagooey without providing any reasoning whatsoever. I scanned Vi's ISO to see where he provided a reason for lynching but he never does. He just says that Gammagooey is scum, posts links to songs on youtube and it just

happens

.

Although I think you're oversimplifying here.
1) I did have a solid reason for pushing the Gamma lynch here. I'm probably kidding myself by saying that many other people saw what it

was

, but etc.
2) That lynch took a

long

time to get through. It's not like Gammagooey was lynched on page 15. Not even close. Which means...
3) ...while I can take credit for getting the wagon off the ground, the actual lynch was brought on by other people who agreed for presumably different reasons. So my role in orchestrating that lynch was most likely a spotlight.

---

I'm out of time for the morning, but I'd like to add that good players are the ones who can get people to join wagons. So one label feeds into another, feeding back into the first one. So, a player who is noteworthy for (among other things) their ability to get people on wagons should be the type of person who can get people on wagons. :leadership:

There's also the factor of people subconsciously

wanting

to wagon someone without actually having the words to express it. If someone suggests a wagon on that person, people may jump because it

feels

right.

---

Or to approach it from the other side, there are plenty of examples where a well known player tries to push a lynch through and it fails.

This.

[mykonian]

Yes, mafia is a social game. We can pretend we are logical machines who read and make arguments, but that would be a first in history. Humans aren't perfect, there are people you like, people you like less, and people who you don't mind following. Those interactions between people beyond the game and it's role pm's influence how a game plays, and which lynches make it.

If you don't believe me, just look at it like this: if the above wasn't the case, the amount of times one would be lynched would be averaged out. With that perfectly logical scumhunting, people could easily correct for a certain person putting it's arguments more eloquently in general. Look around, is everybody getting lynched about as often?

[kuribo]

Hold the thread hostage until you get what you want

[FakeGod]

Hold the thread hostage until you get what you want

This only works if have a gun, in game or real life.

[kuribo]

Hold the thread hostage until you get what you want

This only works if have a gun, in game or real life.

i've done it as VT, you just have to get their attention

[F-16_Fighting_Falcon]

I'm out of time for the morning, but I'd like to add that good players are the ones who can get people to join wagons. So one label feeds into another, feeding back into the first one. So, a player who is noteworthy for (among other things) their ability to get people on wagons should be the type of person who can get people on wagons. :leadership:

Do you think it is the sort of skill that can be learned or is it largely something that you either have or you don't?

[Faraday]

I think a lot of it comes down to charisma, which is hard to "learn", at least for certain people. It can certainly be something you improve upon, I feel i've gotten much better as it as I've gone on. I don't think I was ever terrible at getting who I wanted lynched, but I certainly think I've gotten better at it.

[F-16_Fighting_Falcon]

I think a lot of it comes down to charisma, which is hard to "learn", at least for certain people. It can certainly be something you improve upon, I feel i've gotten much better as it as I've gone on. I don't think I was ever terrible at getting who I wanted lynched, but I certainly think I've gotten better at it.

So, it ultimately comes down to the ability to write well? Because by "charisma" here, we're talking about written communication. So, the better writers end up being more persuasive players.

[Faraday]

I don't think I'ma particularly

good

writer. Maybe you don't mean "write well" in the technical sense, though. In which case yes, how you write things is obviously how you present yourself in a forum mafia setting so having good or at least interesting (see: Fate) ways of getting your message across helps.

[Faraday]

I feel like self confidence helps as well when it comes to getting people to follow you.

[LlamaFluff]

I think a lot of it comes down to charisma, which is hard to "learn", at least for certain people. It can certainly be something you improve upon, I feel i've gotten much better as it as I've gone on. I don't think I was ever terrible at getting who I wanted lynched, but I certainly think I've gotten better at it.

Actually I think charisma is easier to learn than reading the players to know what type of charisma will be the most effective. Most players have more of a problem figuring out what they need to do instead of how to actually do it, although it seems too often people refuse to even try and figure out what they need to do and just go full force what they want to do just hoping it works.

[Katsuki]

I don't think I'ma particularly

good

writer. Maybe you don't mean "write well" in the technical sense, though. In which case yes, how you write things is obviously how you present yourself in a forum mafia setting so having good or at least interesting (see: Fate) ways of getting your message across helps.

For you and Fate though, your posting don't really differ from your personalities.

Humor does seem to be the common point of getting messages across, at least in my observations (I don't read walls and maybe wall communication is what works for certain people, but for the love of god don't do this it's not charismatic in the slightest).

@Llama: Pray tell, how do you 'learn' charisma? Some people have it, some just don't.

[Faraday]

I think he means you need to learn that certain things work in certain environments. I.e. screaming will work better in some games than others. Which is fair, it's not something I've ever thought good players find hard to adapt to, being able to adapt is obviously a skill needed though.

[Vi]

I'm out of time for the morning, but I'd like to add that good players are the ones who can get people to join wagons. So one label feeds into another, feeding back into the first one. So, a player who is noteworthy for (among other things) their ability to get people on wagons should be the type of person who can get people on wagons. :leadership:

Do you think it is the sort of skill that can be learned or is it largely something that you either have or you don't?

Everything is a mix of talent and effort, but charisma is definitely something that can be learned with practice and experimentation. There are definitely things you can do to make your posts more readable, your points more effective, and your desires more convincing.

Also and to agree with Faraday, having a confident tone is

huge

. You don't actually have to be confident, and you can even say you're not confident, but you do need to look like you're going in some definite direction your message, even if it's "I don't know".

[F-16_Fighting_Falcon]

Out of curiosity, Faraday, Vi, do you ever get lynched as town? It seems to me that some players get lynched a disproportionate number of times whereas others almost never do no matter the circumstances - no doubt owing in part to charisma.

[Vi]

I've been mislynched before, but only in games that are pretty much thoroughly FUBAR; Town has gone on to lose by a significant margin every time it's happened in the last four years. I imagine Faraday gets mislynched even less often.