Self-Voting Thoughts

[Enter]

Do you think it's impossible for a townie to give "immediate and unaltered thoughts on other players" while self-voting?

Nope, but saying you think someone might be scum and voting for them are two different matters entirely.
The best justification I remember seeing for saying you think someone is scummy but not having your vote on them is that you think that someone else is scummier.
So, following this, if you think someone is scummy, but your vote is on yourself, what does that say?

[Shoshin]

How do you disagree that the two possible responses to anything in mafia are to vote or not to vote? Yes there is more nuance to it. There is more nuance to everything. But the general response is the same. And reading people in mafia is about WHY they do things. The "why" when you self-vote is already answered - that player does or does not have a stance against self-voting.

What is AI about your beliefs on optimal mafia play?

You described two possible actions & two possible responses. The two actions -- to vote or not to vote -- are indeed the only two. The two responses -- disgust at the self-vote or support for the self-vote -- aren't. I used the term "response" to describe the "why." I'm saying there's lots of other responses besides the two you describe, many that aren't predictable, and either way there's no reason these responses can't be AI. If a player has a stance against self-voting, fine. That player still has to evaluate whether you're town/scum & they have to weigh whether they want to push a policy lynch or defend you based on a bunch of other factors (e.g. how towny they view you outside the self-vote, how much they respect you as a player discounting the self-vote, etc.). There's an entire calculus of decisions a player makes that aren't limited to criticism or support of self-votes.

Beliefs about optimal mafia play are the basis of why anyone does anything in mafia and as such it's the basis of all attempts to sort town/scum. Someone's non-theoretical stance on self-voting, as discovered by actually self-voting, might help you read that player in light of something else they did, based on your read of whether their previous behavior squares with the personality of someone who disapproves of self-voting.

I can't go into detail about every possible variation because there's too many to even speculate about. My point is that there's a lot of nuance to scumhunting & getting someone's stances about optimal play absolutely has a role in that, especially in terms of figuring out their overall personality and tendencies in the game as well as figuring out whether their play squares with that.

[Enter]

Why doesn't your reasoning apply to normal votes? Why can't players have NAI responses to votes on other players?

People CAN have NAI responses to votes on other players. The difference is with a self-vote responses are very likely to be NAI, with votes on other players, it's very different. Pushing another player is very difficult as scum, especially making a serious push. Therefore, putting your vote on other players and pushing them can help other people read you, can help other people know what players you are and are not likely to be aligned with, and can help you read the player you're voting -> votes on other players are far superior to votes on yourself.

[Enter]

How do you disagree that the two possible responses to anything in mafia are to vote or not to vote? Yes there is more nuance to it. There is more nuance to everything. But the general response is the same. And reading people in mafia is about WHY they do things. The "why" when you self-vote is already answered - that player does or does not have a stance against self-voting.

What is AI about your beliefs on optimal mafia play?

You described two possible actions & two possible responses. The two actions -- to vote or not to vote -- are indeed the only two. The two responses -- disgust at the self-vote or support for the self-vote -- aren't. I used the term "response" to describe the "why." I'm saying there's lots of other responses besides the two you describe, many that aren't predictable, and either way there's no reason these responses can't be AI. If a player has a stance against self-voting, fine. That player still has to evaluate whether you're town/scum & they have to weigh whether they want to push a policy lynch or defend you based on a bunch of other factors (e.g. how towny they view you outside the self-vote, how much they respect you as a player discounting the self-vote, etc.). There's an entire calculus of decisions a player makes that aren't limited to criticism or support of self-votes.

Beliefs about optimal mafia play are the basis of why anyone does anything in mafia and as such it's the basis of all attempts to sort town/scum. Someone's non-theoretical stance on self-voting, as discovered by actually self-voting, might help you read that player in light of something else they did, based on your read of whether their previous behavior squares with the personality of someone who disapproves of self-voting.

I can't go into detail about every possible variation because there's too many to even speculate about. My point is that there's a lot of nuance to scumhunting & getting someone's stances about optimal play absolutely has a role in that, especially in terms of figuring out their overall personality and tendencies in the game as well as figuring out whether their play squares with that.

... This is a lot of speculation that I inherently disagree on and that would be significantly easier to discuss in detail when we're allowed to discuss it in detail. I am not interested in calling you wrong here until I can discuss this further, and until that point I think this part of the argument boils down to opinion.

[RadiantCowbells]

if you're scum you should always hammer at l-1 and if you're town you shouldn't, that way you can get confirmed town when you don't hammer at l-1

[Enter]

Is voting randomly somehow not as easily replicable as self-voting?

Unless you use an RNG, random voting is never random.

What's your evidentiary basis for saying that town/scum self-vote with similar likelihood?

Do you think the specific tendencies of each player & their personal likelihood to self-vote as either alignment in RVS or elsewhere is irrelevant to scumhunting?

This is a project we're currently working on and I'll get back to you once I've got more data on the matter.

[RadiantCowbells]

if you're scum you should always hammer at l-1 and if you're town you shouldn't, that way you can get confirmed town when you don't hammer at l-1

don't do this

[Shoshin]

The fact of the matter is this, self-votes don't cause harm by themselves. The impact of a self-vote turns on how other players respond to it. If I self-vote in RVS, no harm has been done until other players respond. If other players ignore it, no harm. If other players respond without AI information, no harm. If other players respond with AI information, benefit for town. If other players push a policy lynch on the self-vote, harm.

The impact turns on how other players respond.

I understand that you personally feel unable to develop AI information from self-votes, Enter. But that doesn't mean others can't use self-votes to scumhunt. You're not the only player in the game & I don't see any reason to prevent other players from using their toolbox just because you don't find it personally helpful. I also don't think it's fair to limit available actions in mafia when your knowledge of the game is incomplete and you never know when something you usually find useless might suddenly become a game-winning action.

You say that nothing is random in RVS. I agree. Nothing is random, including self-votes and responses to them. Everything is AI if you look at how to piece it together in the bigger picture, including self-votes and responses to them.

[Nancy Drew 39]

If you're the last scum you should always play until the whistle. :/

I believe that realising when you're done and just not wasting everyone's time is part of being good at mafia

+1

Someone, who speaks sense.

[Nancy Drew 39]

I self vote. I plan to continue doing it. It can help me accomplish my goal.

Instead of making an assertion and using it as evidence, I highly recommend providing an example or theoretical situation where this might be true, else it helps the discussion not at all.

Your mindset with this reply seems to be one of "I disagree and I hope everyone knows about it."

First of all, I don't think anyone knows who you are and therefore no one cares

, but second, if anyone did know or care, your attitude here is toxic because you're not furthering discussion, you're just being contrary.

Wrt the bolded, seriously dude? Is that really necessary? Can’t you disagree with her opinion without being nasty?

[Nancy Drew 39]

If you're the last scum you should always play until the whistle. :/

I believe that realising when you're done and just not wasting everyone's time is part of being good at mafia

How many times have you seen a wagon on scum get to L-1 but because it sits there long enough, the wagon ends up elsewhere? Even mechanics can be manipulated, CCs can be made, etc.

Well, sometimes town is competent

Right, but giving up on the assumption that town is competent isn't optimal play. :/ If town is competent, it shouldn't be hard for the last townie to get on and hammer, and the fact that town is not competent such a large portion of the time supports the idea that playing until the end is a good idea because it can result in a win.

I don't know, if you really don't understand or it's just bad attempt to troll. I don't tell you concede every game, I don't tell you concede on "assumption". I'm saying experienced people know, when town is competent and they just concede, which saves everyone's times

+1

Exactly. In the game I referenced, which was not only heavily townsided but town had pretty much had a clean sweep, with only one mislynch and that mislynch vengekilled scum, so it’s not like it was even close. And I have yet to play in any game where scum managed to survive a hard cop guilty of any kind, so to ignore this fact, is insane. It’s not like I had even an ounce of wiggle room and even if I had been somehow miraculously managed to get the counterwagon lynched over me, I knew I would have been insta powerlynched the day after no matter what, so in essence the OP and others who are agreeing with him here are whether they realize it or not, advocating mashochism.

[Enter]

Her response was not relevant to the conversation unless the bolder was not true, so I stated the bolded. There was no intent to be rude or nasty, some statements don't belong in certain places.

[Nancy Drew 39]

If you're the last scum you should always play until the whistle. :/

I believe that realising when you're done and just not wasting everyone's time is part of being good at mafia

How many times have you seen a wagon on scum get to L-1 but because it sits there long enough, the wagon ends up elsewhere? Even mechanics can be manipulated, CCs can be made, etc.

Well, sometimes town is competent

Right, but giving up on the assumption that town is competent isn't optimal play. :/ If town is competent, it shouldn't be hard for the last townie to get on and hammer, and the fact that town is not competent such a large portion of the time supports the idea that playing until the end is a good idea because it can result in a win.

I don't know, if you really don't understand or it's just bad attempt to troll. I don't tell you concede every game, I don't tell you concede on "assumption".

I'm saying experienced people know, when town is competent and they just concede, which saves everyone's times

Two scenarios:

1. Competent town, game is over for scum - all townies vote that scum player quickly because town is competent - In this scenario, it doesn't matter if the player votes themselves or doesn't

2. Incompetent town, game looks like it's over for scum but it isn't - scum can withhold self hammer and has a chance at winning the game or self hammer and lose the game - In this scenario, the player should not vote themselves.

You're fighting a losing battle here.

He’s obviously arguing when town is competent

, which they clearly were in that game I referenced.

[Nancy Drew 39]

i was in lylo as scum with a cop inno and a gunsmith inno and confirmed no godfathers and i won. never give up.

Well that’s the complete opposite situation that I was in. *confused*

[Enter]

The fact of the matter is this, self-votes don't cause harm by themselves. The impact of a self-vote turns on how other players respond to it. If I self-vote in RVS, no harm has been done until other players respond. If other players ignore it, no harm. If other players respond without AI information, no harm. If other players respond with AI information, benefit for town. If other players push a policy lynch on the self-vote, harm.

The impact turns on how other players respond.

I understand that you personally feel unable to develop AI information from self-votes, Enter. But that doesn't mean others can't use self-votes to scumhunt. You're not the only player in the game & I don't see any reason to prevent other players from using their toolbox just because you don't find it personally helpful. I also don't think it's fair to limit available actions in mafia when your knowledge of the game is incomplete and you never know when something you usually find useless might suddenly become a game-winning action.

You say that nothing is random in RVS. I agree. Nothing is random, including self-votes and responses to them. Everything is AI if you look at how to piece it together in the bigger picture, including self-votes and responses to them.

That mindset is wrong - why would you make a move in RVS without the intent of being provocative - I'd especially like a specific example of a good reason to self vote that isn't with the purpose of being provocative in RVS. So if no one responds, then you've failed to be provocative.

I disagree on the "no harm" players responding with no AI information, but I can discuss this more later.

The rest of this I'll think on. I think everything you can do with a self vote, you can do in another, more creative and less potentially harmful way, but if self voting helps you specifically...

I'll think on it more. You're right that it's not my place to dictate how others play, but there is an extent to which bad play should be discussed and the public made aware of it so it is minimized long run. If this is based on a failure on my part to interpret information, I'd rather fix myself than try and negatively impact the community, I just haven't seen a lot of examples of self votes tha positively influence town or even self votes that achieve something other, less harmful play could not.

Regardless, you make some good points, I think, and I don't want to respond immediately, so I'll concede for now.

[Nancy Drew 39]

Your point is to be petty and waste time, but you're right, I can't convince you

No, my point is that you don't know the minds of the other players and what's winnable and isn't until you try to win it.
If you want to build up my argument as something it's not so you can put your defeatist attitude on display, please make your own thread to do that.

He has the right to disagree with you. You wanted one thread for self-voting statistics and another for self-voting thoughts. Is this or is this not a discussion thread about the merits/lack there of of self-voting?

I personally think, as other than a lol RVS vote, town in general should not do it and especially never self-hammer but with scum, it’s a lot less clear, as scum also has a vested interest in anti-spew.

[Nancy Drew 39]

Tbf the competent players tend to die before lylo

Well in the game I referenced, scum - and I’m including myself here - played badly. 3P survivor/hider Elsa tricked most of the scum into wrongly targeting him with his fake town doctor claim and I mistakenly killed the other SK.

[Nancy Drew 39]

i will nightkill you mjl

i will nightkill you mjl

I would be so honored! <3

Highest form of flattery!

So romantic.
I ship this.

[Nancy Drew 39]

if you're scum you should always hammer at l-1 and if you're town you shouldn't, that way you can get confirmed town when you don't hammer at l-1

I have quickhammered numerous times as town. I have actually only done it as scum, when it gave me the win.

[Nancy Drew 39]

if you're scum you should always hammer at l-1 and if you're town you shouldn't, that way you can get confirmed town when you don't hammer at l-1

don't do this

[Nancy Drew 39]

Her response was not relevant to the conversation unless the bolder was not true, so I stated the bolded. There was no intent to be rude or nasty, some statements don't belong in certain places.

How is saying to someone, “no one knows or cares who you are”, not nasty? That’s the part I bolded. Why does her lack of being well-known have anything whatsoever to do with her opinion? It’s essentially dismissing her opinion, based on her not being well-known, which has no bearing on the validity of anything she’s saying. In this case, she’s a relative newb at mafia but not everyone new to this site is but even a relative newb has just as much right to have an opinion on this, as anyone else.

[RadiantCowbells]

i know and care who maryjolisa is

[Enter]

i know and care who maryjolisa is

Noted.

[Enter]

New to site - check
Female - check
Hmmmmmm. :p

[callforjudgement]

My thoughts on the matter: voting someone only advances the gamestate as either an opinion on who should be lynched, or as a read. Voting yourself is thus very similar to giving reads on yourself, something that's typically seen as NAI/pointless/not useful for town, unless it's a serious suggestion that you should be the day's lynch (something that, when it comes from town, is normally best done as a self-hammer to avoid WIFOM).

I've therefore only considered self-voting in setups where there was a mechanical reason to want myself lynched (e.g. I would never be upset with someone for self-hammering as a Jester, and would always do so myself if I was sure I was at L-1). As scum (and not the last remaining scum, obviously), a self-hammer can be powerful if it screws up a town breaking strategy by preventing them coordinating, but the situation hardly ever comes up (my main interaction with this was trying very hard to prevent the situation arising in a mechanically broken setup by ensuring nobody ever reached L-2; I probably needn't have tried that hard, past the start of day 1, as we'd agreed to No Lynch every day for the first several days, and never reached a point where it was right to deviate from that, so I succeeded pretty easily in practice).