Town should never quickhammer

[northsidegal]

I think the distinction BnL might be trying to get at there is that saying that it was pro-town just because the person ended up being scum is results-oriented thinking

If you make a (probabilistically speaking) poor choice but it turns out to have been correct, you still may not be justified in saying "oh, i made the right decision". For example, switching doors in the monty hall problem is the correct choice, but if you were to stay and win it anyways, that doesn't mean you made the correct decision.

I think people who make the argument that "it can be pro-town to quickhammer scum before they can fakeclaim and get out of a lynch" should really just get more comfortable with lynching people through PR claims. After all, if you were going to quickhammer someone, that would be without any regard to what they claimed anyways, so lynching them after a PR claim should be no different. Anecdotally, I've seen town lose games through the mentality of "we can't lynch this PR claim day one no matter how weak the PR is or how scummy the person is" and I've seen town win a game they otherwise might have lost by lynching through a fakeclaim. (This is all talking about normal games of course, things are obviously different in open games)

[northsidegal]

It's kind of weird, I can see the argument of how quickhammering could be playing to your wincon in certain scenarios, but I don't think I'd ever call it "pro-town".

[northsidegal]

Your example makes sense. But to continue the metaphor, I just think it's silly to say "any choice in the monty hall problem other than switching doors should be punishable by the mod". Not switching doors is the "wrong decision" only in 2/3 of scenarios.

Sure, I've never really agreed with the idea that it should be banned or anything. (Althogh not switching doors is

always

the wrong decision probabalistically speaking – unless you are psychic there is literally no reason to ever not switch doors.)

Obviously it's not exactly the same (the probabilities here are probably more extreme than 1/3 v 2/3), but in the example I linked to, I doubt tw gets killed D1 if he's not quickhammered there. He's pretty charismatic and does well earlygame as both alignments; the first wagon of a game day is usually not a target for the lynch by EOD; and therefore quickhammering, though risky and probabilistically poor play, was pro-town there, and also fun for the players involved.

You can point to any example of a quickhammer that might have hit scum and I can agree with you that

in that scenario

it helped town – the question is, in general, does it help town? I think the answer is probably not. Again, pointing to the instances where people may have gotten lucky seems to me like being results oriented rather than probability oriented.

pedit: lol that "playing to town wincon" and "pro-town" aren't synonyms.

Haha yeah, I think it's a bit strange but I think it's true. It can be anti-town in that people may have not expected the day to end and thus might be stopped from saying something they wanted / needed to say before the thread was locked, but coming from the perspective of having a very strong scumread, it could easily be argued that you were playing to your wincondition by trying to kill scum as quickly as possible.

Alright, let's do it this way: A Town Rolecop in a Mini Theme claims they got a result of "Mafia Dayvig" on another player. Is it pro-town to quickhammer?

Trick question, rolecops don't get alignment results.