Effulgence Mafia Game Thread

[modrony]

This is a random message containing nothing.

TylOQxMHph/m8jCIGpn8aMuYXVXC3QuW20ityDEY7wrbBav4Hw0XSPTsbvJaD1mqysBRUEO1r/nTttoh/Wh4Sj0+3NJr4O2PnBROGVA8dSGOO9EoUWi/2FEj3iKAMKdUYtLbcmPyM3d+tklRsPU7ehlGcji5j0YuzunWJj/CTP8=

[DanielH]

I don’t believe you. I can’t decode it though so I can’t disprove the assertion.

[Tulip]

I second Daniel's precommitment, assuming it's legal, and I see no reason it wouldn't be.

[modrony]

I propose we lynch somebody at random.

I'll join if this gets support.

[Alphabeta]

The killers may well be unaware of who the other killers are at this point, and therefore unaware of who specifically they should advocate lynching.

[DanielH]

Although technically true, that’s not usually how these games work. Whether or not that’s how this particular game works, though, if it is in the best interests of the town to try to lynch somebody then we should do it randomly.

[Shoal]

If the random option is legal, I precommit to voting either that or no lynch depending on how i'm feeling about no lynch when the time comes, with the obvious caveat of not self-lynching, or if I have a feeling that the person is innocent (at this point i have null feelings about most people) then I will vote no lynch instead.


From what I've read, day 1 is supposed to be about feeling people out and doing theory of mind stuff that i don't fully understand, figuring out who is lying when we're all telling the truth (even the person/people who got a pm saying they're the killer(s) didn't actually in real life kill a cat they're just pretending to have done so), or rather pretending to not be pretending to have done so, which is a little too much recursion. anyway, from what i have read it seems that people often feel like they can do better than chance by relying on people reading skills, but I don't think this, or I think that i am not in the category of people who can do this, so random for day 1 seems as good as any to me.


if after midnight UTC we still don't have a majority maybe we can try the arguing and people-reading and attempted mindreading method.

[modrony]

I don’t believe you. I can’t decode it though so I can’t disprove the assertion.

That is the point.
Singular message isn't believable, but if several people post random nothings, true messages are more easily overlooked.
Still, let's not go overboard with that.

[Alicorn]

We will not implement for you anything that isn't a vote for a specific player name (or a vote for no lynch), in bold, such as any complex precommitment. You are, however, allowed to withdraw or change your vote as long as there is time left, and you may derive the player name by any means that does not involve private communication, including any sort of random number generation, consulting the I Ching, astrological divination, and trying to eliminate players who you do not personally like. A withdrawn vote counts as an abstention if it comes to that.

[Alphabeta]

I don’t believe you. I can’t decode it though so I can’t disprove the assertion.

That is the point.
Singular message isn't believable, but if several people post random nothings, true messages are more easily overlooked.
Still, let's not go overboard with that.

Private communication is banned, though, so practicing good crypto to hide private communication is probably also banned.