Lurkers

[Snaq ◢ ◤]

I think most of this acknowledge this as a problem: Lurkers. However, sometimes when I argue for lynching a lurker, people argue against me by saying that lurkers aren't good lynches, because they haven't shown to be scummy, and are easy lynches for Mafia to focus on.

What do you do with lurkers?

Personally, I completely support lynching them, especially early in the game. It is true that you may not always be able to read a lurker well, but lurking is only pro-mafia, because it hinders discussion. Whether a lurker is Town or Mafia, you do not want to keep them in the game, as you can't read them well and they hinder town. I'd rather have the coinflip Day 1 than LyLo (although I'd argue non-AFK players are more likely to be Mafia most of the time).

While it is true that they may be easy for the real Mafia to focus on, you can also read people from this. You should not only focus on lynches and not do anything else. You should try to scumhunt in general, but lynch the lurkers because they hinder town and the other reasons I posted in the previous paragraph. If someone only looks at lurkers and doesn't seem interested in trying to read other people past "not lurking", then you can scumread them for doing this! Simple.

I feel the issue with lurking is rooted in meta. It is very hard to moderate, at a lot of people don't hard lurk, but just say something useless every few minutes, which results in the same thing. I feel like people should be less hesitant to lynch these early game. In LyLo, you of course have to watch out more, but if people don't stop lurking in LyLo (which allows you to read them better), then I don't know anymore...

If you feel like lurking as town, please don't.

Do you agree with what I said? Why (not)? I'd love to start a discussion.

[qtball]

can we implement a specific rule on lurking (I.e sub after one day of lurking)

[qtball]

I know everything is relative and some people may pop in a comment here or there but if someone is silent for a solid day and they're here they need to be subbed

[Snaq ◢ ◤]

If they're here and confirmed to be here, town also has no excuse letting them survive, honestly.

[cuddleszz]

if your lurking and you know itl get you killed then its your fault imo depends on the game whenever fish/not fish and how big it is I push a lurker but people think its bad that I'm pushing a lurker but why would you want the lurker further into the game unless you know the lurker example darnell he lurks most times as its his playstyle so p-meta but when new players play they tend to lurk cause they simply don't know wtf is going on and learning the game same applies with fish and sometimes people are afraid to write because they don't want to be read also explains why they are lurking

[Snaq ◢ ◤]

Regarding Darnell lurking, I think people allow it to be his playstyle and should probably pressure him more. I feel like people are afraid to pressure him because of his status.

[MechaMew2]

There's 2 types of lurkers really. People who are afk or not paying attention or people who are there but just aren't talking. Type 1 lurkers should probably be subbed, and regarding type 2 it really depends on how they play and if they are helping town or not.

[Snaq ◢ ◤]

Apr 19, 2018 15:32:35 GMT MechaMew2 said:

There's 2 types of lurkers really. People who are afk or not paying attention or people who are there but just aren't talking. Type 1 lurkers should probably be subbed, and regarding type 2 it really depends on how they play and if they are helping town or not.

You're right about type 1. For what it's worth, I'm talking about the type who aren't subbed out, due to actually being there. Whether they hard lurk or barely say anything, but say something sometimes.

When do you feel these are useful for town, unless they are like conftown?

[MechaMew2]

Apr 19, 2018 15:43:21 GMT Snaq ◢ ◤ said:

You're right about type 1. For what it's worth, I'm talking about the type who aren't subbed out, due to actually being there. Whether they hard lurk or barely say anything, but say something sometimes.

When do you feel these are useful for town, unless they are like conftown?

If someone's purposely not talking it's probably a good idea to lynch them because they are either non-town or not going to help town. Sometimes I guess town can lurk to watch other players talk, or try to avoid getting killed by looking slightly scummy if they have a good role. I guess it really depends on the situation.

[Snaq ◢ ◤]

Apr 19, 2018 15:56:21 GMT MechaMew2 said:

Apr 19, 2018 15:43:21 GMT Snaq ◢ ◤ said:

You're right about type 1. For what it's worth, I'm talking about the type who aren't subbed out, due to actually being there. Whether they hard lurk or barely say anything, but say something sometimes.

When do you feel these are useful for town, unless they are like conftown?

If someone's purposely not talking it's probably a good idea to lynch them because they are either non-town or not going to help town. Sometimes I guess town can lurk to watch other players talk, or try to avoid getting killed by looking slightly scummy if they have a good role. I guess it really depends on the situation.

They'll generally have an explanation for this then. I do agree if this is the case. I do still think that in general it's important to not let certain slots get far into the game.

[cuddleszz]

yeah darnell should get pressured more for his lurking playstyle but people really should stop being afraid of people status cause ive seen some people not push because of anothers status and the type 1 lurking is also pretty much anti-town if they have no way to defend their reason for lurking

[ForgotToFlush]

Okay so if I'm ever lurking it's because I'm either reading or deep in thought. 
I support lynching lurkers early on but later in the game I don't think it should be something you should focus on. 
At least you shouldn't focus on the explicit fact that someone is lurking, more so emphasis should be on if they're lurking and refuse to contribute.
A lot of games where I consider myself to have played well, usually by definition involves me hard lurking, town or scum.

[®➕➕]

lynching lurkers is a catch 22 because its an easy push for scum to make so im hesitant to lynch them for this(lurking) but since they haven't shown that their playing for town ( or any faction) your essentially lynching them and hoping they flip more on just the policy side of things and more of the scumhunting part BUT the exception to this for me is that if town has 1 more mislynch until lylo the lurker 100% doesn't make it to the next day

TLDR ; i'll leave lurkers until game gets to a certain point in time

(ideas all over the place but im sure you got the general idea of what im going for)

[Bomb Moss]

I'd lynch lurkers if they are lurking just for lurking, I'd give them some leeway if they show they're here and have some form of contribution and potential contribution

[BoredGames]

If they say like brb or tell u they r gonna lurk for a bit then lynches on them should be considered going for the easy option (unless they have been really scummy)

Scummy players should be prioritised over lurkers no matter what, but early game if they have had no activity just put plur on them and see what happens

Lunching lurkers can also get them to talk which is the main aim of it, so u can read reactions and then decide whether to jump off or stay on. If they still won’t talk then just put them at l1 and use the day to continue discussion

Anyone who hammers on this should be treated as scum

Basically tldr lurkers should never be hammered but early game lynching them is good for town

[Snaq ◢ ◤]

Apr 21, 2018 11:25:34 GMT BoredGames said:

If they say like brb or tell u they r gonna lurk for a bit then lynches on them should be considered going for the easy option (unless they have been really scummy)

Scummy players should be prioritised over lurkers no matter what, but early game if they have had no activity just put plur on them and see what happens

Lunching lurkers can also get them to talk which is the main aim of it, so u can read reactions and then decide whether to jump off or stay on. If they still won’t talk then just put them at l1 and use the day to continue discussion

Anyone who hammers on this should be treated as scum

Basically tldr lurkers should never be hammered but early game lynching them is good for town

For what it's worth, if someone is actually not there, then yeah, that should be for the host to sub out. This is not what I imagine as a lurker though.

I completely think that if someone completely refuses to contribute, they should be lynched over someone scummy early game. You can't read this person, while you can always lynch the scummy person later on in the game if they're still scummy.

If someone makes the choice to lurk, that IS something very scummy in my opinion. You all seem to think that it's fine. Hammering them seems alright, though... If someone keeps not contributing, at all, whether they give filler messages or not (I'm here, yeah, random lynches even) it is very scummy and deserves a hammer as much as anything else.

Not that people hammer much here, though.

[RADicate]

Posting here to get notifications. Will eventually go own my on ramble about my thoughts/opinions on the topic at hand ITT.

[❗]

never push the lurkers as mafia bcuz u keep all the lurkers alive till lylo then u 1 man plur win game

keep the lurkers alive as town bcuz the lurkers will not lynch u

save the lurkers as survivor because say that if they lynch u u will push them and they do not want to be pushed

therefore, become a lurker and you become master of all factions.

[Rocky Tactician]

Apr 19, 2018 15:15:40 GMT Snaq ◢ ◤ said:

Regarding Darnell lurking, I think people allow it to be his playstyle and should probably pressure him more. I feel like people are afraid to pressure him because of his status.

This is a pretty common problem I've seen. I've been lynched before day 1 for trying to push Darnell and I don't think pushing a lurker should get you lynched based off of mere meta.