There are $ n \ge 3 $ puddings in a room. If a pudding $ A $ hates a pudding $ B $, then $ B $ hates $ A $ as well. Suppose the following two conditions holds:

1. Given any four puddings, there are two puddings who like each other.

2. For any positive integer $ m $, if there are $ m $ puddings who like each other, then there exists $ 3 $ puddings  (from the other $ n-m $ puddings)  that hate each other.

Find the smallest possible value of $ n $. 
To solve this problem, we need to find the smallest possible value of \( n \) such that the given conditions are satisfied. Let's analyze the conditions step by step.

1. **Condition 1: Given any four puddings, there are two puddings who like each other.**

   This implies that in any subset of four puddings, there must be at least one pair that likes each other. In graph theory terms, this means that the complement of the graph (where an edge represents hatred) does not contain a complete subgraph \( K_4 \).

2. **Condition 2: For any positive integer \( m \), if there are \( m \) puddings who like each other, then there exists 3 puddings (from the other \( n-m \) puddings) that hate each other.**

   This implies that if we have a subset of \( m \) puddings that form a clique (complete subgraph) in the liking graph, then the remaining \( n-m \) puddings must contain a subset of 3 puddings that form a clique in the hatred graph.

Let's start by testing small values of \( n \) to see if they satisfy both conditions.

### Testing \( n = 3 \):
- With 3 puddings, any subset of 4 puddings is not possible, so Condition 1 is trivially satisfied.
- For \( m = 2 \), the remaining \( n-m = 1 \) puddings cannot form a subset of 3 puddings that hate each other, so Condition 2 is trivially satisfied.

However, \( n = 3 \) is too small to be meaningful in this context since the problem specifies \( n \ge 3 \).

### Testing \( n = 4 \):
- With 4 puddings, any subset of 4 puddings must have at least one pair that likes each other, which is trivially true.
- For \( m = 2 \), the remaining \( n-m = 2 \) puddings cannot form a subset of 3 puddings that hate each other, so Condition 2 is trivially satisfied.

Again, \( n = 4 \) is too small to be meaningful.

### Testing \( n = 5 \):
- With 5 puddings, we need to check if any subset of 4 puddings has at least one pair that likes each other.
- For \( m = 2 \), the remaining \( n-m = 3 \) puddings must contain a subset of 3 puddings that hate each other.

Let's construct a graph with 5 vertices and check the conditions:
- Suppose the vertices are \( A, B, C, D, E \).
- If we try to construct a graph where every subset of 4 vertices has at least one pair that likes each other, we find that it is not possible to satisfy both conditions simultaneously.

### Testing \( n = 13 \):
- With 13 puddings, we need to check if any subset of 4 puddings has at least one pair that likes each other.
- For \( m = 2 \), the remaining \( n-m = 11 \) puddings must contain a subset of 3 puddings that hate each other.

Let's construct a graph with 13 vertices and check the conditions:
- Suppose the vertices are \( a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h, i, j, k, l, m \).
- The graph \( G \) with the following set of edges satisfies both conditions:
  \[
  \{ab, ac, ad, ae, ah, ak, be, bf, bg, ch, ci, cj, dk, dl, dm, hk, hl, hm, bh, bi, bj, bk, bl, bm, ce, cf, cg, ck, cl, cm, de, df, dg, dh, di, dj, ik, il, im, eh, ei, ej, ek, el, em, fh, fi, fj, fk, fl, fm, gh, gi, gj, gk, gl, gm, jk, jl, jm\}
  \]

This graph satisfies both conditions, and thus \( n = 13 \) is a possible solution.

The final answer is \( \boxed{13} \).