whiteflame's avatar

whiteflame

Global Moderator

Member since

whiteflame


Originally Posted by Wryly on 7/19/2026 at 11:10 AM (post #69)

Originally Posted by Thoth on 7/19/2026 at 3:32 AM (post #59)
The schizoposter in me wonders if the Candace Owens' left tit claim was a 5head play to bait Candace into character-claiming and then retract.

Copy-pasting a fake role PM that isn't an obvious joke should be just as serious of an offense as copy-pasting a real role PM. Wryly apparently thought it was an obvious joke, but some of us may not have caught it as a joke. Not that all of my jokes in Mafia games on here have landed.

I continue to be baffled that anyone thought of taking it seriously

Y'all are no fun


I figured it was a pretty obvious joke, though I couldn't put it past Rex to include something absurd just for shits and giggles.

whiteflame
Originally Posted by Mikal on 7/19/2026 at 10:26 AM (post #62)
I think we have to kill pie. Its unfortunate but having a hated around is just a free kill. Daughter is moving to Texas this weekend so wont be around much. Played cus rex asked. But votes going on pie cus hated is a liability
Also never saw a hated that ends dp3 most dont even deactivate on mylo. Its diff than popular.


I hadn't flagged the DP3 deactivation, which is strange, though I'm hesitant to VTL him chiefly on the basis that being Hated is a liability.

whiteflame
Originally Posted by Wryly on 7/18/2026 at 11:21 PM (post #50)

Originally Posted by Kohai on 7/18/2026 at 11:13 PM (post #49)

If you can character claim that'll help us go somewhere

Yeah and it could also help scum come up with safe fake claims lol. I'm weighing it. We don't know what scum were given in the way of fake claims; could be they weren't given character claims, in which case the best thing to do is not give away which characters in the Candaceverse are already taken until we have more data and know who to press for a claim. We almost never do that though. Seems like there's always an unnecessary claim before DP2.

If it looks like I'll be too busy to contribute at all tomorrow how bout I just character claim then.


I'd advise more caution in claims, particularly given how many we already have. A character claim may be warranted, but like you said, only if you believe you'll be absent for a long stretch. Long as you're contributing, I'm less concerned about the claim.

whiteflame


Originally Posted by Kohai on 7/18/2026 at 10:04 PM (post #41)

Originally Posted by whiteflame on 7/18/2026 at 8:35 PM (post #39)
Originally Posted by ILikePie5 on 7/18/2026 at 4:54 PM (post #30)

Originally Posted by Kohai on 7/18/2026 at 3:41 PM (post #29)
Pie town

Is it cause I’m a Jew?

@Kohai Why?

@Pie Yes.

Quick SOP claim. Mod psych: I really don't think that skep gives wolves a hated modifier.


The quick SOP claim I can understand. As for the "Hated" modifier, he's either telling the truth and he's town or he's lying and he's scum. Wouldn't say I can dismiss the latter possibility entirely.

whiteflame
Originally Posted by Mikal on 7/18/2026 at 1:25 PM (post #11)
Im also a jew and a portion of my role is scummy as shit. Semi sop claim cus it will look bad if I dont say it upfront


So is there a reason you're choosing not to claim that portion of your role? Given the number of claims we have so far, I get being somewhat hesitant, but saying your role is "semi sop" and then not claiming is an odd choice.


I get not wanting to claim your character, though. We've already outed one Jew, keep the rest hidden. Stay in the annex, Anne Frank.

whiteflame


Originally Posted by Wryly on 7/18/2026 at 3:37 PM (post #23)
You caught me. Here's my copied and pasted role PM.

You are Candace Owens' left tit. In a fit of madness and Chardonnay one night, you stood in front of a mirror as flashes of lightning back-lit your empty apartment, and drew AOC's face over your left breast with a permanent marker. AOC's laughing open mouth encompassed your entire areola.

By day, you only hear AOC's muffled taunts and whispers through your bra and blouse, undermining your talking points mid-debate and giving a constant stream of leftist propaganda that steadily erodes your sanity. By night, you stand shirtless in front of your bathroom mirror and have full-blown schizophrenic screaming arguments with Titty AOC. Secretly you yearn to know if the real AOC has a Candace Owens drawn on her right titty -- if you live in her head rent-free as she does in yours -- but deep down you know there's only a perfect pair of B-cup Latina breasts under there. Therefore, you are the Vulnerable Double Voter! By day you may double vote because you are motivated to raise your voice to speak over AOC's menacing whispers in your bra, but if anyone visits you at night and catches you arguing shirtless with your own titty in the mirror, you will have a nervous breakdown and lose your double voting powers. You win with -- well, you really win once you're put on some industrial-grade antipsychotics.


This is too good. When we find AOC's right tit, you will have found your equal and opposite and it will be glorious joining yin and yang.

whiteflame
Originally Posted by wylted on 7/18/2026 at 11:27 AM (post #5)
You would like Candace nick fuentes, ben Shapiro and Glenn beck hate her, which automatically makes her somebody you would like
The only reason I like trump is because the people I hate, hate him so he's cool in my book. I assume we all think the same


Not really how that works for me, but I'm sure she's an improvement over Fuentes at least.

whiteflame

Alright, so we've got an full SOP claim (Pie), a soft SOP claim (Mikal), and a pretty hilarious claim (Wryly). Whether that last one is Rex's or Wryly's fabrication, respect.

whiteflame


Originally Posted by Kohai on 7/11/2026 at 1:17 PM (post #17)

Originally Posted by whiteflame on 7/10/2026 at 10:33 PM (post #16)
Originally Posted by Kohai on 7/10/2026 at 6:47 PM (post #14)

Originally Posted by Wryly on 7/10/2026 at 2:27 PM (post #13)
I supported the draw when I believed you that your role was unstoppable. It's unusual, but so is two Vigs. Now? Yeah that was definitely MYLO by either definition up for debate here, not that it doesn't pain me to say so.

The vig was only 1 shot. They used it n2 otherwise it would no doubt be MyLo

This is part of the problem I have with your position on this: you're selecting two roles (Doc and Vig) that could have affected the outcome of the game, and ignoring another role (Redirector) that could have (and in this case, would have) affected that very same outcome. I get why Doc and Vig matter when it comes to your view of how MYLO should be defined, I just don't get why manipulative roles don't.

It really boils down to MyLo: Mislynch and lose. If it is possible for town to mislynch and not lose then it isn't MyLo. I think that's where I'm coming from.


But that’s my point: with the Redirector in play, it wasn’t possible. Is your point that, since it was theoretically possible that we didn’t know there was a Doc or who the Doc was at that point in the game, that there was still a chance Mag1c could’ve successfully prevented the NK? I guess in that purely theoretical sense, sure, but again, that just seems to be excluding relevant information. And I recognize that including that info in evaluating when MYLO happens requires the mod to take a lot more into account, but that’s part of the problem with your perspective from where I’m sitting. You can’t just stop considering that info at some arbitrary point without inviting a lot of questions as to why you’re stopping there.

whiteflame
Originally Posted by Thoth on 7/11/2026 at 12:02 AM (post #49)
Originally Posted by whiteflame on 7/10/2026 at 10:40 PM (post #48)
That being said, if the goal is to allow for deviation, then every host would have to be as clear as possible about what their definitions are and likely have to announce when they start just to ensure everyone is on the same page. That should be the bare minimum expectation.
That’s what I was saying. I thought you were suggesting that we enforce a definition.


There's no way to enforce one without having mods monitoring and intervening in games directly, and unless they're breaking more fundamental site rules, I'd rather not have that.

whiteflame
Originally Posted by Thoth on 7/10/2026 at 11:31 PM (post #47)
Originally Posted by whiteflame on 7/10/2026 at 10:09 PM (post #46)
I'm advocating treating it as a foundational definition applied to every game of Mafia for the site, yes. For a related example, games might be able to mess with how parity is established, but the fundamentals of what parity is remain the same across games. I don't think hosts lack for ways to change up the game just because we clearly define certain terms as a community and hold to them - I think there's value in clarifying what these terms mean and using that continuously across games to prevent confusion.
If this community agreed upon standards for how to treat MYLO/LYLO, how do you think we should handle hosts who wanted to define or announce them differently?


I think agreeing on the definition for how to treat MYLO/LYLO and then having all hosts adhere to that definition is the best way to handle it. A standard doesn't matter terribly much other than functioning as a reference point if hosts are good to deviate from it however they wish. I'm not arguing that it's enforceable, it's not like we're going to force hosts to change their games if they choose to go a different direction with it, but it should be clear that that's the site standard and that hosts should follow it.


That being said, if the goal is to allow for deviation, then every host would have to be as clear as possible about what their definitions are and likely have to announce when they start just to ensure everyone is on the same page. That should be the bare minimum expectation.

whiteflame


Originally Posted by Thoth on 7/10/2026 at 10:47 PM (post #45)
Originally Posted by whiteflame on 7/10/2026 at 9:39 PM (post #44)
I think adding another variable like this is bound to create more misunderstandings and issues of clarity, particularly since some mods are pretty far apart on this, but I can respect your view.
What do you mean by adding a variable? If I understand you correctly, not adding a variable would mean forcing all hosts to define and announce MYLO and LYLO in the same way, which contradicts the spirit of host’s freedom that I have always felt on here. Sounds like something from MafiaScum.


I'm advocating treating it as a foundational definition applied to every game of Mafia for the site, yes. For a related example, games might be able to mess with how parity is established, but the fundamentals of what parity is remain the same across games. I don't think hosts lack for ways to change up the game just because we clearly define certain terms as a community and hold to them - I think there's value in clarifying what these terms mean and using that continuously across games to prevent confusion.

whiteflame
Originally Posted by Thoth on 7/10/2026 at 6:18 PM (post #43)
Originally Posted by whiteflame on 7/9/2026 at 7:28 PM (post #36)
Should mods have discretion to make the call on whether a game has reached MYLO/LYLO?
Yes, but it should be announced by the start of day 1 whether or not it will be announced.
Should we establish a site standard for when games reach MYLO/LYLO?
Possibly, but hosts should be free to deviate from it, like with Mikal breaking the norm of revealing the lynch’s alignment at end-of-day. Hosts should be expected, but not formally required, to state their definition of MYLO/LYLO by the start of day 1, unless we all accept a standard definition of MYLO/LYLO, in which case they should only be expected to state it if they are using a different definition.


I think adding another variable like this is bound to create more misunderstandings and issues of clarity, particularly since some mods are pretty far apart on this, but I can respect your view.

whiteflame
Originally Posted by Kohai on 7/10/2026 at 6:47 PM (post #14)

Originally Posted by Wryly on 7/10/2026 at 2:27 PM (post #13)
I supported the draw when I believed you that your role was unstoppable. It's unusual, but so is two Vigs. Now? Yeah that was definitely MYLO by either definition up for debate here, not that it doesn't pain me to say so.

The vig was only 1 shot. They used it n2 otherwise it would no doubt be MyLo


This is part of the problem I have with your position on this: you're selecting two roles (Doc and Vig) that could have affected the outcome of the game, and ignoring another role (Redirector) that could have (and in this case, would have) affected that very same outcome. I get why Doc and Vig matter when it comes to your view of how MYLO should be defined, I just don't get why manipulative roles don't.

whiteflame

I'm just going to summarize the reasons why I don't think we should factor night actions into the question of whether we've reached MYLO. I invite people to engage with this who disagree.


  1. Mods would have to explain what night actions can affect the point at which MYLO would be achieved and almost certainly have to announce when MYLO occurs to provide full clarity. Doing so necessarily announces the existence of certain role types in the game. Looking at this past game, if Kohai had announced that it was not MYLO and had clarified what his standard for MYLO was, that would have verified that there was a protective role left in the game.
  2. Those decisions could (and likely would) be arbitrary. Again, looking at this past game, Kohai only considered the existence of a remaining protective role in his decision. He did not consider that the scum team - who knew the identity of the player who had that protective role, knew what that role was and had a Redirector shot - could act in a way that would prevent said protective role from being effective, so his decision to say it was not MYLO functioned off of the faulty premise that the protective role could feasibly have prevented the NK.
  3. Expanding on this, a fake claim was made by said protective role to indicate their action could not be affected by the Redirector shot. Kohai choosing to say that it is not MYLO lends credence to that fake claim expansion.
  4. This renders MYLO as conditional based on specific circumstances that are almost entirely separate from the events of the DP. If night actions that could prevent the game-winning NK can affect the status of the prior DP, then it's never MYLO and it's never LYLO either, since the mod cannot presume a lynch will even happen. In effect, so long as a protective role remains in the game that does not sacrifice another player, MYLO and LYLO don't exist. That lends too much power to the existence of a specific role, effectively places an additional burden on the scum team to eliminate them, and creates broad confusion over parity.
whiteflame


Originally Posted by Thoth on 7/10/2026 at 2:49 AM (post #7)
Would you count a day that starts with 2 scum versus 5 town as MYLO if scum had a second kill they could use that night?


No, I wouldn’t. It’s still factoring in some role that exists and could be used during the following NP, so it’s adding details that don’t affect the current status of parity in the DP.


And like you said, doing so would require the mod to effectively confirm (or at least strongly hint at) a possible extra kill during the NP.

whiteflame


Originally Posted by Wryly on 7/10/2026 at 2:30 AM (post #20)
Very understandable. Sorry I held onto that Popular so long and brought this headache on you lol. Hopefully the bad taste this has left fades quickly for you.


Sincerely, don’t beat yourself up over it. It was an error, but I get what you were going for, and the issue is something that would have come up at some point regardless.

whiteflame

Going to have to quibble on this because, while that was a difference of opinion on MYLO and when it occurs, that was not the sole disagreement. Aside from a separate opinion given by Mag1c after the fact that involved fake claims, Luna and I have also argued that, to put it in a similar format to what you’ve described here:


MYLO is the point in the game where if town mislynches during the day phase, then a successful night kill would result in the mafia team gaining parity and meeting their win condition during the subsequent night phase.


In other words, MYLO is a descriptor of the DP that does not factor in night actions, whether those actions could prevent a loss or not. This definition is the one I believe we should use.


As for which of these two I believe is more accurate absent the above as an option, it’s the second because it at least acknowledges that the DP must be MYLO and lets the NP resolve separately from that, unless I’m misunderstanding something. I can argue the case, but I’d like to get others opinions in here first as I’ve already given mine extensively in the endgame.

whiteflame


Originally Posted by Kohai on 7/9/2026 at 10:21 PM (post #37)

Originally Posted by whiteflame on 7/9/2026 at 8:28 PM (post #36)
Not seeing a whole lot of engagement with the issue at hand, at least so far, so we may have to break this out to a separate discussion.

We effectively have two questions:

  1. Should mods have discretion to make the call on whether a game has reached MYLO/LYLO?
  2. Should we establish a site standard for when games reach MYLO/LYLO?

Note that these aren't mutually exclusive. Mods could have limited discretion to make the call within a set of site standards that may be variably limiting.

i think the community needs to come to an agreement on a MyLo standard


That's what I'd prefer too. So are we doing a vote on an appropriate standard? Might be a good idea to settle this before the next game starts.

whiteflame

Not seeing a whole lot of engagement with the issue at hand, at least so far, so we may have to break this out to a separate discussion.


We effectively have two questions:


  1. Should mods have discretion to make the call on whether a game has reached MYLO/LYLO?
  2. Should we establish a site standard for when games reach MYLO/LYLO?


Note that these aren't mutually exclusive. Mods could have limited discretion to make the call within a set of site standards that may be variably limiting.

whiteflame
Originally Posted by Wryly on 7/9/2026 at 12:52 PM (post #30)
I definitely sympathize with Lunatic and whiteflame here, but I don't get the sense we've made real progress reaching an agreed-upon definition of MYLO. Is this something we're going to leave it for individual moderators to define?


Seems like we've got 3 options on the table:


  1. MYLO and LYLO are defined by the number of players and how close they are to parity. MYLO represents a 2 player difference and LYLO represents a 1 player difference.
  2. MYLO and LYLO are defined by how close the game is to ending considering existing roles. If the game is one lynch away from ending during the NP, but a no lynch would not end the game, it is MYLO. If the game is one lynch/no lynch away from ending during the NP, it is LYLO. If a role could prevent the game from ending during the NP, then MYLO and LYLO are only conditionally achievable.
  3. MYLO and LYLO are defined by the players' claims, both fake and real. If the game is one lynch away from ending during the NP, but a no lynch would not end the game, it is MYLO. If the game is one lynch/no lynch away from ending during the NP, it is LYLO. If a claimed role could prevent the game from ending during the NP, then MYLO and LYLO are only conditionally achievable.


That last one seems to be what Mag1c is suggesting, though I could be paraphrasing incorrectly. My perspective is that #1 should be the agreed upon definition for MYLO and LYLO, and I'm not fond of #3 in particular, since it would effectively require a mod to take all fake claims into account when establishing when a game reaches MYLO and LYLO. That being said, I also would not prefer a circumstance where the status of MYLO and LYLO change game to game. That's going to be more confusing and lead to more situations like this. If #2 or something akin to it ends up being the agreed upon definition, then I'd prefer that that be the one all mods use rather than having to redefine the terms every single game.

whiteflame
fyi I edited that comment above, realizing I had more to say
Kohai needed to make a ruling based on a policy, based on a definition of MYLO. The fact that my point stands in general, means that policy of not factoring in win-securing plays would be affirmed under the more complex definition, even in this game.


Yep, I see the addition. While I think this is a point worth considering, this seems to be retroactively throwing in more concerns than Kohai was considering when he was making this decision. We can and should talk about it, but I don't think this applies to the outcome of this specific game. At least in our conversation about it, the issue was the existence of a protective role (your Doc) and how that could have factored into the outcome of the game.


If you want to argue that the MYLO/LYLO definition should be purely based on numbers, and never include roles, because of the complexities of the definition that includes the game’s roles, then you have a point worth considering. But in my opinion (which is biased, yes), that should be resolved for future games.

I support the draw.


I mean, I have argued that. I do think we should have a standardized definition of MYLO and LYLO, otherwise this is almost certainly going to come up again or, at minimum, there's going to be substantial confusion between games modded by different people who have distinct conceptions of the terms.


I take issue with the draw, not because it isn't purely based on numbers, but because it arbitrarily only considers whether a protective role is still in the game, not whether any other roles could (and would) have prevented said protective role from being effective. If we want to involve roles in the assessment of whether we've reached MYLO, then I think effectively dismissing any existing manipulative roles from scum is putting a finger on the scale. I understand the draw solely from the perspective of "things got complicated at the end and Kohai doesn't want to punish anyone for not understanding what happened."


I don’t think there was a changing of the terms. It wasn’t clear to begin with because MYLO/LYLO wasn’t definitively defined.


Alright, I'll rephrase: a lack of clarity over the terms, and subsequent attempt to provide said clarity too late. To the extent that I agree with the draw, I recognize that having this argument in the middle of the game was never going to work. I get just wanting to set the game aside so that we could proceed to discuss it without considering how it affects the outcome of this specific game.

whiteflame


Originally Posted by Mag1cman on 7/9/2026 at 8:46 AM (post #24)
...except that wouldn't have changed our night actions at all. FYI, I didn't believe you, but even if we did, we still would have at least tried to Redirect you. Even if it would have failed, there was no point in just not using it and there was literally nothing else stopping us from performing a successful NK. Maybe Banana could have tried to claim that she had a hidden protective role that we also had to stop, but neither of us would have bought it and the outcome would have been the same.

Sure, but the host can’t be sure of that. Again, just the possibility of one of you two getting lazy because of the bluff, is enough for it to come down to the night phase. So from the host perspective, it can’t be MYLO under that more complex definition.


Having it come down to the night phase is fine, I don't care about that. If you want to argue that the NP should have been processed before a winner was declared, I'm cool with that. My issue is with changing the terms under which Wryly's role ceased to function by considering your role as a plausible way to extend the game. Especially if we're considering bluffs, I'll just start claiming a hidden protective role when we're at MYLO in any game where there's a role that ceases to function at MYLO. That way, I can ensure it never becomes MYLO because there will always be some doubt.