Minimal Mafia: Day One

[Brice Marden]

Ok, this is all I'm gonna say on the topic since apparently to some people now a defense when voted for is a bad thing

I was playing the game, according to this in the rules

• The pictures may or may not contain clues. They most likely do not, but look all you want. Wildly speculate. It's fun.
  

So maybe it wasnt roleplaying per se, it was just having some fun. Normal day 1 stuff. Nothing more. Get over it and quit voting for townpeople without a good reason. And my fast reply (the first one and this one) is simply because I'm around at the moment. If you'd made the same comment another time of day, it might have been hours before I saw and responded. Again, get over it.

[Donald Judd]

You've got a red thing on your right side where such a clip would be.

You mean the round tile that's on the floor? It's called perspective, a concept I would expect fellow artists to understand.

[Anne Truitt]

Judging by what Donald said, maybe all of our clothes are modeled after the colorschemes of our respective artworks?

Oh, huh

Just checked the rules and we're all actual people. It also doesn't say we can't share our artwork so since this isn't a quote from the host. I'm the first picture on the page, the colored lights one. That's cool, didn't realize we were actual minimalist artists

I'm playing a lot of WIFOM

Talking about WIFOM:

Could Dan laughing off Brice's accusation be a little game of WIFOM as well?

I am seriously concerned that people have not bothered to read the rules ...

[Eva Hesse]

I would say the same (i don' even know what that means WI.?), rememember to read the guidelines

[Tony Smith]

I honestly don't know who to vote for. The day really just started and people are barely talking. I don't know what to do, realistically.

[Dan Flavin]

It means Wine in Front of Me, which is how we say mind games/circular reasoning

[Eva Hesse]

keep it minimal to get the maximal

but yes ich see your point, it has been awfuly quiet, die truth is we don' have much to go on yet

But Ich think some more conservation will apear soon

[Frank Stella]

I hope more information comes up soon, since like others have said, it is day one and we don't have anything solid to go on. I personally don't see any blatant scum yet, and I'm right now only looking at those people who have voted immediately. I know I'll be waiting to vote until later when we hear a bit more, even if we don't hear much more today.

[Dan Flavin]

I think John, Eva, Brice, and Robert are the ones standing out to me

John, Eva, and Rob for being so quick to accuse and Brice for being so defensive

I'd bet at least one of Eva or John is doing a mild D1 bus, but not Rob>Brice because of the knee-jerk reaction, a bus probably would've been better planned

I think a scum who was unexpectedly called out on D1 would've played it more cool so while Brice does stand out to me like I said it's standing out in a town-ish sort of way

[Brice Marden]

I think a scum who was unexpectedly called out on D1 would've played it more cool so while Brice does stand out to me like I said it's standing out in a town-ish sort of way

Thank you. And I think in this minimalist game we HAVE to be extra defensive - with so few people, it's like starting on day 4 of a normal game, where every single vote is critical. It's not that I'm scared of a single vote on me, it's that I don't want Robert to waste his vote on a townmember. We can't afford to make many mistakes in this hunt.

[Dan Flavin]

Thank you. And I think in this minimalist game we HAVE to be extra defensive - with so few people, it's like starting on day 4 of a normal game, where every single vote is critical. It's not that I'm scared of a single vote on me, it's that I don't want Robert to waste his vote on a townmember. We can't afford to make many mistakes in this hunt.

What, no

What kind of logic is that

There's fewer players but I'd bet there's also fewer scum, Host wouldn't screw up the ratio

[Brice Marden]

I didn't say the ratio would be different, just that we don't have 18-20 townies to spare. I'd guess we've got maybe 10 town and 3 scum, or perhaps 11-2. Either way, that's only 10 or 11 townies. So I guess I shoulda said it's like day 4 of a normal game, assuming you've caught a scum or two along with losing a bunch of townies. Except that we're at that point in numbers without any history / votes / info to base anything on. So if this goes like games often go with killing off 6-8 townies before we catch anyone, we'll be in trouble.

[Dan Flavin]

I didn't say the ratio would be different, just that we don't have 18-20 townies to spare. I'd guess we've got maybe 10 town and 3 scum, or perhaps 11-2. Either way, that's only 10 or 11 townies. So I guess I shoulda said it's like day 4 of a normal game, assuming you've caught a scum or two along with losing a bunch of townies. Except that we're at that point in numbers without any history / votes / info to base anything on. So if this goes like games often go with killing off 6-8 townies before we catch anyone, we'll be in trouble.

OK yeah

I thought you meant a game where the scum were already close in number to the town

[Jo Baer]

Also, I was reviewing everyone's contributions so far and Jo, Tony and Frank haven't really said anything substance today.

Enlighten me oh wise one, has there been much of substance to discuss? Because I have only seen typical day 1 accusations over nothing, and haven't seen anything of substance worth commenting yet. And frankly, I think you're throwing stones in a glass house here, when looking back at your "contributions" so far...

I hope more information comes up soon, since like others have said, it is day one and we don't have anything solid to go on. I personally don't see any blatant scum yet, and I'm right now only looking at those people who have voted immediately. I know I'll be waiting to vote until later when we hear a bit more, even if we don't hear much more today.

You think more information is just going to present itself magically? Yeah, good luck with that...

[Tony Smith]

I'm wondering, what is everyone's character known for? I am a famous sculptor. Could the works of art included in the introduction have anything to do with our loyalty?

I advise us to all go back and "google image" search famous things created by us and see if anything matches up. I remember someone mentioning that Dan Flavin is good with lights. One of the works of art included in the introduction shows up in the google image search. What does this mean?

[Ellsworth Kelly]

,

,? ,! That'll be the title of my next work. It's so...minimal.

Let me take a second to catch up.

Actually, let me take a wild guess. People are lynching eachother over saying stupid stuff and for voting for people who said stupid stuff.

Well, if it's between that and a no-lynch, I'll Vote: John McCracken. Not because you cast the first stone - someone has to do it - but Anne's argument against him...

I'm assuming you're referring to the first one and as such I will point out that you:

1) were the first one to talk abour roles and go fishing for information on roles and gambits which to me is pretty scummy

and

2) when I answered this question rethorically by asking you about your opinion you answered this:

Which to me reads like "hey! ho! don't look here, I have nothing to say"

...seems pretty reasonable to me.

[Robert Mangold]

Well, if it's between that and a no-lynch,

There's no no-lynch, except with no votes or a tie

The player with the most votes is lynched. In the case of a tie, there will be no lynch.

[Dan Flavin]

Not liking prospective bandwagon

Although talking about the art is fine I wouldn't really put much stock in it as a method of scum-catchery, but yeah I am famous for making art with light installations

That said inaction kills townies, and I've already mentioned four people who've stuck out to me

Time to put my vote where my mouth is and Vote: Ellsworth Kelly

Casting stones semi-randomly this early is risky, but seconding a vote before solid evidence is just begging to start a bandwagon

At this point bandwagons are lethal to the town

Also the logic that 'it's either lynching people for stupid reasons or a no-lynch' is so bad

There's always evidence, even on Day 1

Off the top of my head, Robert, Brice, John, and Anne have all contributed to the discussion in valid ways, even if I disapprove of some of some of their brashness

[Ellsworth Kelly]

Casting stones semi-randomly this early is risky, but seconding a vote before solid evidence is just begging to start a bandwagon

There's always evidence, even on Day 1

Enlighten me. What solid evidence are you expecting to come up? It's a behavioral game on Day One, and I'm voting for the most suspicious person based on their behavior. Perhaps stupid was too strong a word. In any case at least I'm facing the reality that fluff posts and the reactions to them is probably all we're going to get as far as basing votes on today.

[Dan Flavin]

Enlighten me. What solid evidence are you expecting to come up? It's a behavioral game on Day One, and I'm voting for the most suspicious person based on their behavior. Perhaps stupid was too strong a word. In any case at least I'm facing the reality that fluff posts and the reactions to them is probably all we're going to get as far as basing votes on today.

Not so much the solidity as the sheepiness

None of us (not even me) is casting votes based on solid evidence right now, just behaviors (like you said)

So why are you just voting based on someone else's intuition instead of your own

The fact that John even brought up that people would be projecting role info/gambiting on day 1 screams inexperience to me, but his train of thought is simple enough to follow even if it is kinda simplistic and not the best reasoning

Anne's response was also perfectly rational

But instead of asking yourself 'how can I contribute to this discussion and who stands out to me right now' you looked at the suspects other people brought up and chose one of them

The solid evidence I'm talking about is reactions, a D1 vote is basically a Corner of Suspicion because there is really nothing to go on yet

So you make something to go on by casting a vote and gauging reactions, and if the scum-tells start piling up other people will pick up on the vibes also, and not just for the reason 1 person brings up

So seconding a vote without adding a second reason at this point is scummy

Every townie scum tells once in a while so lynching someone over a single slip up on day 1 is basically throwing away a townie

By gauging responses we can establish relationships and draw conclusions based on our lynch

For example right now I am town reading Anne as town based on her response to the vote on her, Sol as scummy based on his calling out three people for lack of contributions while he... doesn't contribute, Brice and Robert as townie based on Brice's knee-jerk defense making a bus unlikely to have occurred, Jo as scummy for popping in to give a defense and criticize someone for just waiting for information and telling him to be proactive despite the fact that she's been pretty much 100% reactive so far, etc

Any of those things would have been fine to base a vote on at this point because there is no true solid evidence like you said, and then based on their reactions to that vote you could Unvote or push harder

But you literally just sheeped Anne and pushed John towards a lynch without adding anything of your own to the table

In fact you didn't even wait for John to respond, just blindly hopping on a bandwagon

That is either extreme apathy or mild scumminess

(All the guys who are waiting for information instead of trying to make information appear are also reading as apathetic/scummy to me

Come on you have nothing to lose, it's day 1

Who are your suspicions, Tony, Jo, Sol, Carl, etc?)

By suspicions I mean gut feelings, of course

Not expecting you to have evidence right now, but at least talk

If you don't open yourself up to analysis of your actions then you're depriving the town of information, which is scummy, so even if you have even a single idea that only makes a little bit of sense throw it out their so others can at least see what you're thinking

[Ellsworth Kelly]

I know it's fun to hide our identities and stuff, but all of us here knows how to use periods properly. Those are the neat little dots you can put at the end of sentences.

I can see how agreeing with someone and casting a vote with them can be seen as sheepy, even on Day One. And I'll admit I probably haven't been as attentive as I could've been. But when someone points something out that strikes me as suspicious, what else can I do but use my vote and act on it? I'll say right now I'm probably not going to the be the first person to see something off in someone else's posts. Not to excuse what could be percieved as 'laziness', but I'd rather toss my vote in towards the most suspicious person with the most suspicious reasoning than find a weaker one just to look like I'm being active by not going along with somebody else's opinion.

But since you've pushed me, I think John, if scum, may only be for voting Anne based on the short banter she quoted between the two of them. They each made cautious pokes about one another about the obviousness of several Day One strategies (I suspect John based partially on this, of his rolling the idea of some sort of gambit that would be undoubtedly disastrous for townies), and perhaps he simply wanted to strike the first blow to try and make it look like less of a retaliatory shot than if Anne accused him first (out of curiosity, Anne, would you have even if he hadn't voted you?)

As far as everyone else goes, I'm not sure. Rob's voting Brice based on his (pretty foolish, in my opinion) suggestion that this art might have something to do with alignment. His first post looked like a joke, then he floated the idea of sharing our pantings/sculptures or whatever. Then, I don't know, he got into weird speculation about the town/scum ratio (why would it be any different than normal) and looks like he's trying really hard to get that vote off of him and pass it off as a joke.

[Dan Flavin]

Thank you :)

Unvote: Ellsworth Kelly

Also, periods are for girls

To be honest the period thing is just thematic, it feels 'minimalist' to me. Same thing with the typed emoticons. If it bothers anyone let me know and I'll stop.

[Anne Truitt]

I advise us to all go back and "google image" search famous things created by us and see if anything matches up. I remember someone mentioning that Dan Flavin is good with lights. One of the works of art included in the introduction shows up in the google image search. What does this mean?

The black "double-U" thing on the left is actually yours!!!

But since you've pushed me, I think John, if scum, may only be for voting Anne based on the short banter she quoted between the two of them. They each made cautious pokes about one another about the obviousness of several Day One strategies (I suspect John based partially on this, of his rolling the idea of some sort of gambit that would be undoubtedly disastrous for townies), and perhaps he simply wanted to strike the first blow to try and make it look like less of a retaliatory shot than if Anne accused him first (out of curiosity, Anne, would you have even if he hadn't voted you?)

Yes; My vote was pretty much decided when John made his post about roles and gambits which, as I said before, appeared as he was fishing for info early on. When John voted for me I actually debated on whether or not it should cast my vote on him as I feared it may be perceived as a retaliatory vote but I felt my 'case' (used very loosely) was strong enough to justify my vote.

[Carl Andre]

Well, it looks like we have a variety of suspects out on the table here.

I guess I'll start us off then. I'm going to Vote: Anne Truitt. Am I sure? No. A little bit? Not really. The reason I chose Anne though is because I kinda feel her response to my question was something a scum would say to appear helpful, as well as her talk about real life bonds and the art our digs are based of. Got to start with someone.

Just for a reference, this is what you're referring to? I'd think it was something else due to the lack of this exchange actually meaning anything, but this is the only question you've asked Anne.

Don't you think if I had a prime method to find a good lynchee I wouldn't have had to ask?

Well I don't think we can/will find out a whole lot from the artwork but it does give us a topic to discuss and in my book, any opportunity for discussion is also an opportunity for scum to slip up.

I'm not sure what the problem with it is. This is the kind of discussion that goes on between people on Day 1; what makes it "something scum would say to appear helpful"? If anything, your initial "so guys, what do we do??" was the scummier comment.

However, if he was scum, would John really benefit from voting first? Logically, it is townie (as long as you have a fairly good case ), but many people *coughevacough* take a conservative stance in these games of life, and will find an eagerness to vote extremely scummy. Plus, even if everyone gave the case the thumbs up and lynched said Anne, if John is scum she's bound to be town, so we'd end up with a townflip in the morning. And, despite how often we experience Lynch 1 townflips, everyone still seems to look at the main accuser of the late townie. It'd be lose-lose for a scummy Johnny, he'd be drawing attention either way.

I don't like his play so far, but I find that it'd be not in his best interests to not act this way if he was scum.

hmm that sce setup still do not say nothing to mich. Is there some secret im the art block, may be not?

Whom mich gonna vote för, i don' know but nothing much to go on yet.

Gonna do like Johnny, go on voting for someone to get discussions.

And then you get Eva, who votes for John not for his weak case or his initial scummy comment... but for the fact that he's voting at all.

Why, Eva. Why.

I'm playing a lot of WIFOM I don't think scum would vote first, unless they want to be the ones out in front hoping they won't be investigated. But I doubt John is scum. But I think Anne wouldn't vote for him if she were scum, she'd play it off, cool like.

I agree with this - particularly the latter part, although the former has its merits as well (as I noted above). An accused scum is always the peacemaker.

Although actually investigation is a good point, one I'd neglected. Maybe John's the Godfather? I feel like it might be too early for this kind of self-defeating discussion, though.

Well, if it's between that and a no-lynch, I'll Vote: John McCracken. Not because you cast the first stone - someone has to do it - but Anne's argument against him...

Let's find that argument real quickly:

1) were the first one to talk abour roles and go fishing for information on roles and gambits which to me is pretty scummy

and

2) when I answered this question rethorically by asking you about your opinion you answered this:

Which to me reads like "hey! ho! don't look here, I have nothing to say"

This is roughly what makes John scummy in my eyes as well (or, at least, what would make him scummy in my eyes if it weren't for the fact that scum wouldn't want to vote so early. Perfectly acceptable for Ellsworth to not agree with my analysis of that, though.

What stands out to me about this statement he made was "it's between this or a no-lynch". The rules clearly state that whoever has the most votes is lynched, so El's "Well, nuts. Better lynch" is less than convincing.

Dan also brings up some good points about him.

But since you've pushed me, I think John, if scum, may only be for voting Anne based on the short banter she quoted between the two of them. They each made cautious pokes about one another about the obviousness of several Day One strategies (I suspect John based partially on this, of his rolling the idea of some sort of gambit that would be undoubtedly disastrous for townies), and perhaps he simply wanted to strike the first blow to try and make it look like less of a retaliatory shot than if Anne accused him first (out of curiosity, Anne, would you have even if he hadn't voted you?)

This is a possibility. Thanks for sharing your thoughts. However, that doesn't explain why you said "It's better than a no-lynch". That's something someone says when they're fifth on a bandwagon and only halfway convinced that the victim is scum. You're acting like you were forced into voting for him, but you just stated why it was definitely of your own accord, and why you were really taking the initiative there.

I also want to hear from Tony, who I don't think has given the discussion a lot of content other than "Help I don't know what to do". Although, then again, neither have I.

[Hinckley]

vote tally

John McCracken: 3 votes (Eva Hesse, Anne Truitt, Ellsworth Kelly)

Brice Marden: 1 vote (Robert Mangold)

Approximately 22 hours are left in the day.