Newbie 920: Mafia in Newbietown (Game over! Town wins!)

[Netopalis]

Hello, everybody, welcome to the game! I'm Netopalis, your IC for this game. As your IC, my primary role is to teach you all how to play the game and answer any questions. As per the site rules, as an IC, I cannot lie about my position on basic game theory issues, such as WIFOM, claiming or similar ideas. However, if I am in the mafia, I will be playing to win.

I should also warn you all that I have an extremely unusual playstyle as compared to most of my fellow members of this site - My play is based strongly on solid, logical arguments as opposed to gut feelings and emotions. If you want to persuade me, give me good reasons to follow you, not just that you have a "bad feeling" about someone.

I'll be posting some questions for everybody within a few hours, as well as a quick "How to play Mafia" guide that I'm working on. I'm looking forward to playing with each of you!

[Netopalis]

Alright. Questions to all players:

1) What experience, if any, do you have in playing the game of Mafia?
2) Please describe your playstyle. Do you feel that you are more biased towards logic or gut? How would you describe your reasoning process?
3) Why do you play Mafia?
4) Is it an African Swallow or a European Swallow?
5) Would you prefer playing as town or as scum? Why?
6) Would you agree with the statement, "Lynch all Liars"? Why? How about the statement "You appear to be too townie, therefore you must be scum" or "Never lynch a claimed power role on the same day that the player claims"?

I will be giving my answers after everybody else has answered, as to avoid biasing the answers of everybody else.

[Netopalis]

How to Play Mafia: A Beginner's Guide
by Netopalis

Welcome to the game of Mafia! Understanding advanced Mafia strategy can be difficult and daunting when first joining the site. Luckily, once you start to get the hang of it, it becomes much, much easier. Since not everyone may be familiar with the style of play and rules on this site, what follows is a basic overview of how the game works. If you've played Mafia before, feel free to skip it.

**********
At the beginning of the game, there are two factions: Mafia and The Town. Each has a different goal: The goal of the mafia is to eliminate all non-mafia players. The goal of the town is to eliminate all Mafia players. Each faction has a tool which it can use to achieve its goal. For the town, this tool is the lynch. At any time, a majority of players voting for another player to be lynched will eliminate that player and reveal whether or not they were in the Mafia. This also ends the "day" phase. The game is organized into "day" and "night" phases, and it is during the night that special actions are taken.
During this night phase, the Mafia will choose one person to eliminate. This is generally someone that the Mafia feels will be a threat to their continued existence, but there are many reasons that the Mafia can eliminate someone. Additionally, some players may have additional roles, such as the Cop, the Doctor and the Roleblocker. In Newbie games, the roleblocker is a mafia-aligned player who chooses another player at night. If the roleblocker chooses the doctor or the cop, that player's actions do not have effect during the night. The Cop has the ability to investigate one targeted player per night, identifying whether they are aligned with the town or the mafia. Finally, the doctor has the ability to protect one person per night. If the doctor chooses the person that the Mafia chooses to eliminate, no elimination happens that night. Regardless, once all night actions have resolved, the game reverts to the "day" phase.
The game continues until one of two situations happens. In the first scenario, the town lynches the final Mafia member. In this case, the town obviously wins. In the second scenario, the town lynches incorrectly at a point where, after the mafia kills, the mafia will have a majority and can openly direct the lynch. A doctor can prevent this scenario from occurring, but only if that doctor correctly targets the same person as the mafia.

**********

Ideal play is heavily dependant upon the faction with which you are playing. To understand how to correctly play as town, though, you need to understand how to play as the mafia. The mafia has three motivations during the game. The first and most important motivation is to avoid detection. This is paramount above all other needs and is the primary driving force of mafia play. The second motivation is protection of teammates. If a mafia member can help steer the town away from his teammate without drawing suspicion on himself, he gains a huge advantage. Finally, the mafia needs to eliminate players that are a threat to their play.
Avoiding detection is easier than it sounds. Most players that are lynched are lynched due to poor reactions to suspicion. To successfully play as a member of the mafia, you must ALWAYS keep your cool. Personal attacks are never warranted, nor is excessive aggression. You need to at least appear to be the voice of reason in the town. Played correctly, the lynch can be as useful of a tool as the night kill - successful pressure put towards the right votes and against the right votes will gain credibility and put a superior mafia player in a hugely advantageous position.
One common question that new mafia-aligned players have about their play is how to choose who to kill at night. As a fan of Sherlock Holmes, I believe strongly in the elimination strategy, both for finding scum and figuring out who to kill. Start by taking a list of players from the front page:

Player 1
Player 2
Player 3
Player 4
Player 5

In this case, assume that player 1 is in the mafia. Therefore, you can eliminate him as a potential kill. This leaves you with the following list:

Player 2
Player 3
Player 4
Player 5

Next, you need to look at who it would be disadvantageous to kill. Player 3 has been, in this hypothetical, largely suspected by the town on the previous day. It's likely that they will be lynched in the future. Therefore, it's at the mafia's disadvantage to kill this player.


Player 2
Player 4
Player 5

Player 4 has generally been actively lurking. It's obvious that he won't be contributing a great deal to the town's correctly lynching.

Player 2
Player 5

Given two players whose killing does not disadvantage the mafia, it's time to make a judgment call. Some factors to consider include the following:

Who suspected who at the end of the last day? On one hand, you want to keep players around who are on the wrong track. On the other hand, by killing someone that suspected you, you immediately open yourself up to suspicion from the remaining players.

Who is likely to be a power role? Is there anyone who has claimed? Is it likely that there is a doctor? If it is likely that there is a doctor, it's a bad idea to kill off a claimed power role, because they'll most likely be protected. Instead, if a roleblock is available, use that on the claimed player. Otherwise, kill off confirmed innocents as soon as possible.

Who is the town's leader? Successfully offing the top player for the town makes the town scramble to find new footing. This can be incredibly useful.

Of course, there are a number of other criteria, but this should get you started.

***********

When playing as town, you face a much more difficult task. Mafia members are, by nature, difficult to identify because they are trying to avoid just that. However, this very avoidance can be used against them. Some factors that might lead you to think that someone is scummy might include the following:

Very little content in posts - Mafia members often avoid trying to say anything seriously definite or productive because it is their goal to avoid detection. Publicly stating things which later turn out to be wrong can often lead to identification and lynching.

Waffling - Very similar to the above, but the mafia player likes to shield himself or herself with the majority. It's hard to attack someone for voting the same way that a majority of the town did. However, if someone seems to twist every time there's a shift in opinion, that player is either indecisive or mafia.

Generally trying to hide something - Often times, when reading someone's post, you get the feeling that they're trying to hide something from you. This can be indicative of either a power role or of mafia alignment.

Aggressiveness - Mafia members sometimes like to be aggressive because aggression often ends the day early with very little information going to the town. A player who is overly aggressive can sometimes be mafia, or they might just be an overzealous townie.

This is by no means an exhaustive list. Realistically, the game of Mafia comes down to a matter of opinion. You will probably get a gut reaction while reading player's posts. Your job after getting this reaction is figuring out why you suspect that person. There's usually a good reason. Reread the game and try to logically support your argument because, while you may be right, you need others to vote with you if you want a lynch.

************

Finally, I want to mention an important resource. There's a link at the top of the page to the MafiaScum Wiki. This is a wiki which contains information on various roles, (limited) player histories, strategy articles and a plethora of other important information. If you're unsure of the meaning of a particular word, role or phrase, consult the Wiki.

I hope this helps! Happy Scumhunting!

-Netopalis

[Netopalis]

A) If you're pro-town and someone else that is pro-town votes to lynch you, is someone playing badly? If so, who?

I'm afraid that this is too generic to really answer. There are times when pro-town wagons happen against pro-town players, and it's unfortunate, but it does happen and it's not necessarily indicative of bad play.

B) If you were pro-town and were almost certainly going to be lynched, what would you do?

Usually, if I'm pro-town and almost ready to be lynched, I claim if the case against me is pretty good. However, if I feel that the case against me is crap, I generally respond by saying so. It usually doesn't help much, but I do it anyway.

C) Under what circumstances is it okay to list or not list your suspects?

If asked, always list. The whole "hiding who everybody thinks is pro-town" thing is, in my opinion, bunk.

D) When someone votes a new suspect, should that person explain why they unvoted their old suspect too?

Sometimes, unless they have a much stronger reason for changing their vote than they had for their initial vote.

E) If someone doesn't answer a question, does that make them scum, scummy, or just annoying?

Depends. Inactivity is annoying, intentionally hiding things is scummy.

[Netopalis]

Yeah, I think that McGriddle gets to the heart of the last question here and leads us to a valuable point - it's just as, if not more important to look at the motivations of people as the actions that they take.

[Netopalis]

...are you sure you guys are newbies? These are some pretty good answers.

[Netopalis]

Random voting is unfortunately the norm on this site - I choose not to partake because I feel that its results are questionable. As I said earlier, I'll be answering my questions last, just so that my answers don't end up being everybody else's answers. I once played a game in which I answered first, and the other players basically potsed, "Yeah, what he said." Absolutely unhelpful.

[Netopalis]

Inexperience-Challenged is a roundabout way of saying that I'm an experienced player without making newbies feel inferior by calling then "inexperienced" vs. "experienced".

[Netopalis]

Unacceptable use of the IC status would include lying about what constitutes common tells, fabricating wiki articles, trying to convince you of theory concepts which are clearly wrong...that sort of thing.

However, if I am scum, I can lie about my role, persuade you that someone who is town is scum and do most other things.

[Netopalis]

Meh, they're not so intricate. The problem is that they are usually so well-known that nobody ever actually does them. Many players (myself included) have a list of "common tells" that they don't share for this very reason - once they're made public, they lose all of their value. One example of a "common tell" that's, well, commonly cited is WIFOM, or Wine in Front of Me - it's an attempt to engage the town in circular logic through a meaningless set of arguments. For an example of WIFOM (and, indeed, the scene that named it), please see the following YouTube clip:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TUee1WvtQZU

[Netopalis]

Random voting is unfortunately the norm on this site - I choose not to partake because I feel that its results are questionable. As I said earlier, I'll be answering my questions last, just so that my answers don't end up being everybody else's answers. I once played a game in which I answered first, and the other players basically potsed, "Yeah, what he said." Absolutely unhelpful.

My bad. Must have missed that final line in your original post.

No worries. I figured it was directed more to the others than to me anyway.

[Netopalis]

Heh, thanks. Just doing my job. Of course, several of you won't be thanking me in a few days, given that I *am* going to have to start attacking somebody...

[Netopalis]

Julano: Click on the "Watch this topic" link at the bottom of the thread - it will add it to your "Watched Topics" list. Then, whenever you log in, click on "Watched Topics" at the top of the screen - it will show you all of your game threads. Just click on the latest page to go to the newest ones.

[Netopalis]

I think you might be able to click the little orange page to the left of the numbers? I'm not sure, though. Try it and see. (Note: This would only work if the topic is unread).

[Netopalis]

Ah, sorry. We simulposted. In response to Unsight, I tend to go through a lot of suspects until I figure out exactly who I'm going to press heavily on D1. I wouldn't be surprised if I posted serious cases against at least 5 players in the game. Sure, logically they can't ALL be scum, but you have to put pressure on players to determine their alignment, and I find that well-reasoned pressure is far better than random pressure.

[Netopalis]

You back away from pressuring someone when they give good, logical answers to your questions. Also, OMGUS is a scumtell in and of itself. And sure, it might seem that it's just bandwagon fishing, but really, it's just an attempt to see where the cracks are in the scumteam. Of course, if you think that I am trying to just find a bandwagon which is gaining momentum, you should point that out. It may very well be that I *am* scum.

[Netopalis]

MISREP! MISREP!!!!

[Netopalis]

Well, I don't want to tip my hand on my opening moves too much yet, but Legions. Still, I want to wait and hear from Carl Sagan and FluffyGiggles before I continue.

[Netopalis]

Simulposted = We both posted at the same time, and I didn't see the replies after typing my response.

[Netopalis]

Do you always wait until you're accused to go on the aggressive?

[Netopalis]

Do you consider that to be a positive contribution to play?

[Netopalis]

So, why do it?

[Netopalis]

So, out of frustration and annoyance, you *don't* attack?

Very intervesting...Tell me, do joo have anzy other mental izuzes that ve should be concerned about?

[Netopalis]

Nice - somebody got the Clue avatar.

McGriddle - Ok, I think I get it now. Of course, this was really just a sideshow - the main event is yet to come.

[Netopalis]

Oh, don't worry, I'll give you plenty of time to respond. I might not even push for your lynch at all. Still waiting on the others before I explain anything, though, I don't want my opinions to infect theirs too much.

[Netopalis]

Good, good. Yeah, this does seem to be a very eager and active town. Just do your best, and that's all we can ask for. I would ask, though, that you get an avatar...You can do that in your "profile" page, linked from the top of the screen.

[Netopalis]

Yeah, waiting on Carl "A Glorious Dawn" Sagan and FluffyGiggles. And, that's quite impressive! I wish I could draw...anything .

[Netopalis]

Tunneling can be seen as scummy because if you tunnel hard enough against someone, they'll start looking like scum even if they're not. Note that this is different from continuing to press someone on an unclear or illogical point. I once ran a 24-page argument against a player as town, and ended up being right - that wasn't scummy tunneling because there were illogical inconsistencies and scummy actions there to begin with, and his responses were making things worse. So, in short, it can be scummy, but it's not always scummy. That's really the case with almost all of the tells that get thrown around, there are usually both pro-town reasons and scummy reasons to do them, which is why I advocate looking at the motive rather than looking at the action.

[Netopalis]

Fiyr: There were two questions presented by Unsight:


How do you back away from pressuring someone without creating an OMGUS vote back against you?

Also, it seems like if you pressure too many people then it might look like you're just trying to see what bandwagon gains momentum.



My answer is actually two separate answers:


You back away from pressuring someone when they give good, logical answers to your questions. Also, OMGUS is a scumtell in and of itself.

And sure, it might seem that it's just bandwagon fishing, but really, it's just an attempt to see where the cracks are in the scumteam. Of course, if you think that I am trying to just find a bandwagon which is gaining momentum, you should point that out. It may very well be that I *am* scum.


Sorry about that. The way that I wrote it was confusing...I had an inkling that I had probably made a mistake in the post, but I wasn't quite sure where. I have a tendency to be a bit unclear at times.

[Netopalis]

So. Cats?

[Netopalis]

Yep. Just wondering...

[Netopalis]

Welcome, FluffyGiggles! You have an extremely appropriate avatar! One more, then the fun can start....

[Netopalis]

Well done, Sagan. I'm glad to see that you're willing to challenge authority. In response, I would contend that I have explained everything that I have presented. Also, it should be noted that McGriddle technically cannot talk about another game in progress, and likewise, I cannot defend myself on that point. I would assure you, though, that I have a very good reason for pressing my case on him in that game.

I am saddened about the fact that you have not chosen to answer the questions presented. I will take that into account in my analysis, which will be posted after my Legal Research quiz. Expect a post about 6 or 7 PM EST.

[Netopalis]

Sagan. You answered.

[Netopalis]

Just as IC and as the guy who's been talking the most. In most Mafia games, there is generally someone who is seen as the more dominant player - at this point, I'd argue that it's me, although it may change as time goes on. Many times, these players who end up leading the town are actually scum and lead the town to their doom.

[Netopalis]

Sorry about that...I was taking an exam and didn't have time to post anything further. I am working on my analysis post now, and it will be posted along with my answers within the hour.

[Netopalis]

Alright...First of all, my questions and why I asked them:


1) What experience, if any, do you have in playing the game of Mafia?

I have played on this site since early September, completing about 20-ish games. I've played elsewhere before playing on here, so I have a fair amount of experience.

I asked this question to better get a read on the players in this game. Newbies often play differently than experienced players, and newbies to this site play differently depending on their experience elsewhere. At least in my experience.

2) Please describe your playstyle. Do you feel that you are more biased towards logic or gut? How would you describe your reasoning process?

As you may have guessed, I follow a strictly logical approach to Mafia. While I understand that many gut players do very well, I believe that a gut reaction has a logical explanation, and that the important thing to do if you want to advance in the game is explain why your gut is telling you that somebody is scummy - there's usually a very good reason.

I asked this because I wanted to find out how each of you view yourselves. I can note in the future any discrepancies between your answer to this and how you are playing, then look to see what advantage you would gain from that discrepancy as scum or town.



3) Why do you play Mafia?

I play it because it is a unique game which combines both logical thought and leadership/oratory ability. Plus, I do find it fun. I started really to hone my debate skills, and just kinda stuck around.

I asked this question to relax the players for the more substantive questions to follow. It is a common technique of people taking surveys to ask softball questions before the harder ones.



4) Is it an African Swallow or a European Swallow?
It depends. You see, the African swallows are non-migratory, but have a bigger wingspan....

(This is a Monty Python quote. See above.)


5) Would you prefer playing as town or as scum? Why?

Although I value both, I do prefer playing as scum. As scum, I know that my accusations will generally be wrong, which means that I have less pressure to be right, only to make the arguments. I know, that sounds weird, but it's how I play.


6) Would you agree with the statement, "Lynch all Liars"? Why? How about the statement "You appear to be too townie, therefore you must be scum" or "Never lynch a claimed power role on the same day that the player claims"?

In principle, I agree mostly with Lynch all Liars. Some players recently have claimed PRs as vanilla townies on D1, which I find to be abhorrent. The "Too Townie" thing is a common logical fallacy on this site and should be avoided. The final statement is a good general rule, but there are times when it should be broken - particularly in cases of counterclaims or when you have good reason to believe that the claim is fake.


Answers to Sagan's post:
1) Apologies. I should have defined WIFOM. I do define it a few pages after that post.
2) I was making an honest statement of my position as IC. I feel that it would be improper of me to introduce my position without also admitting that I may be scum and explaining that I will be playing to win in either case, although my primary goal is to teach.
3) I already responded to the thing about McGriddle.
4) As previously stated, in the past when I have asked questions, I've found that answering them to start with causes everybody to respond with the same answers. That's kinda pointless. I've done this in most games that I've used the questions in, regardless of my alignment.
5) I'm not entirely certain what you're referring to, as far as stealing energy. Can you be more specific? If you mean substituting questions for the RVS (random vote stage), I find it to generate extremely positive results and a much calmer, cool-headed game than is found elsewhere. I think that a loss in "energy" is well worth the gain in winnability.
6) 'Twas merely a joke. I'm not sure again what sort of energy you're referring to.
7) We agree that random voting is rather useless, but I'm not sure what you would prefer that players do to start the game rather than opening questions or random votes. If you have any suggestions, I'm all ears - this is one of the central theory problems that I've been trying to solve as of late.

In response to Unsight's 114: It's obviously not a confession, as I'm not scum. I'm simply saying that far too many towns will simply follow the leader to their doom, and that I do appreciate Sagan's attempt to buck that trend, even if his attacks were misguided.

The analysis of the responses to my question will follow this already long post.

[Netopalis]

McGriddle:
Very little information that I wasn't aware of. I do find his short responses to be a bit of a minor concern, but he doesn't appear to be hiding anything in this post, an analysis which is bolstered by his continued presence in this game and the posting of lots of content. I also really don't like his "I don't attack until attacked" thing. Null read.

Unsight:
Seems like a fairly honest characterization of his style. I also like how he jumped in with questions of his own. Pro-town read.

MarioMaster:
Although MarioMaster has been somewhat inactive, his posts show solid engagement with the game and a willingness to be open in discussions. Pro-town read.

Julano:
Julano is a bit of a minor concern. Her initial responses seem to be straddling the fence or show an attempt to restrict giving out information. Of particular note is this answer:

"Logic. Well, I guess it's gut actually, but that's pretty much based on logic anyway"

Note the attempt to have it both ways. It seems like she thought that I had a preconceived answer and that she was more concerned with finding that answer than giving an honest one. Minor scum read.

Legions:
Legion's post bothers me greatly. If you note, he just makes short statements that don't actually say anything. Most of them are just "yes/no" answers that don't really provide a lot of decent analysis. Also, notice his reaction when I mention that I have a scum read on him at the moment...Seems like blatant buddying and Appeal to Emotion (AtE). Scum read.

Fiyr:
Very engaged and active. Both her answers and later posts show a lot of reasoning behind them and attempts to explain that reasoning. Town read.

FluffyGiggles:
Based just on the questions, I'd have a scum read, especially from this answer:
"c) Absolutes are bad. But not always. You'd have to factor in how suspicious the player's been acting, etc."
However, her third page post between this post and my last one is very, very strongly pro-town. She takes Sagan's post seriously and turns an illogical argument into a cool-headed analysis of the situation at hand. I'd be interested in hearing her response to both of these posts. Solid town read.

Carl Sagan:
Sagan is an enigma. I don't like how he completely ignored answering the questions posed, but I do like that he was willing to attack me. I don't like, though, that the attack seemed to be wholly manufactured as an *excuse* to attack me rather than as solid reasoning behind it. Honestly, I'm going to need to hear a lot more from him before I can get a solid read. Minor scum read, for right now.


In summary:

Town reads:
FluffyGiggles
Unisght
Fiyr
MarioMaster

Null reads:
McGriddle

Scum reads:
Legions
Carl Sagan
Julano

[Netopalis]

Fiyr: I mean that I just can't get a read on him based on that post alone. I honestly think he may be playing a character, which always makes reads more difficult.

[Netopalis]

Fiyr: Something like that. Carl Sagan is the name of a famous British astronomer and physicist who presented the popular "Cosmos" science program. It sounds like Sagan's post is an attempt to model his speech pattern after the actual Carl Sagan. How much this will affect his play and in what direction, I'm not entirely sure yet. Needless to say, this isn't a very common occurrence on this site...

[Netopalis]

Unsight: Honestly, I think that may have had something to do with the other game that McGriddles and I are in - I didn't bring it up because I'm not sure whether he was trying to buddy or just relieved that I lessened the pressure on him over there.

[Netopalis]

To prevent flooders and spammers.

[Netopalis]

Some people swear by it. I don't personally put a huge amount of stock into it, but to each their own. It can be valuable in some instances.

[Netopalis]

The waffling part is the more important part. The goal isn't to find players who are aligned with my playstyle, the goal is to find players who aren't trying to hide anything. You can make statements that don't have a lot of explanation without trying to hide something; conversely, you can play in a very logical style and still hide things.

[Netopalis]

You'll get there. Don't be so hard on yourself. Just remember: Everything is analyzed in Mafia, for better or for worse. Who do you suspect right now? Your list can be based on gut or on reasoning. As for longer posts, you'll notice that they tend to lengthen over time...

[Netopalis]

Griddle: Read the start of our other game; I play like this at the beginning, and when I get a bit more certain of my targets, I become more aggressive.

[Netopalis]

Mario: It's just day 1 - days around here are usually about 2 weeks-ish.

Legions: Fair enough on the points about me - that's what I hinted at in my response to Sagan. However, I'm still concerned about the fact that you don't have any reads yourself. Try rereading the thread; look for someone who seems to be hiding something, someone not being entirely truthful or someone that you just don't feel quite right about. Then, post what you come up with.

[Netopalis]

Responding to a few points....

Waffling is the act of failing to take a strong stance. Scum often don't like to firmly state their opinion because later they get accused when it turns out that they were wrong.

Griddle: Obviously, I can't respond to such a vague case. Mind expanding it?

Julano: Very good. You're absolutely right - I AM reading far too much into these opening posts. That is, however, the point. Mafia games start in one of two ways: Random votes or random questions. In the random votes games, votes are thrown around randomly and players watch the reactions of everybody else as pressure is applied to different people. This is exactly the same idea - I'm applying pressure to people that I think are hiding something and watching their reactions. Would I be willing to lynch on those alone? Absolutely not. Would I be willing to lynch on those plus no response/poor responses? Of course. As for the "Absolutes are bad" thing, it's a perfect example of Waffling as defined above. At any rate, this is an excellent response to my points - consider yourself put into the town category in my reads.

[Netopalis]

*shrugs* It's how I play. Again, check my other games - you'll see that I have a similar style as IC, and it's a style that I'm trying to develop in my regular games.

[Netopalis]

As I said earlier, I'm not sure about any of my reads, but I must press them anyway if they're to have any effect.

[Netopalis]

You backed down awfully quickly there, didn't you, Griddle? Also, you didn't provide a lot of reasoning for that. You did the same thing earlier...That concerns me quite a bit.

Vote: McGriddle

[Netopalis]

Mario: Yeah, don't expect us to just walk into a lynch blindly. Rest assured that the only time that a quicklynch can happen is close to deadline or when the number of town and the number of scum are ridiculously close. As for lurking, the mafia's biggest concern is preventing themselves from being outed. One way of doing this is to post less than you normally would, since fewer posts = fewer content = fewer reasons to attack you. Does that make sense?

[Netopalis]

Unsight: My problem is this: Fiyr votes for Sagan almost immediately after his post (Not her first post after it, but no posts intervene between her first post after his and her vote for him). Griddle does so 3 pages after he votes, when he's made a lot of other posts, and only does it when pushed on why he suspects Sagan. Also, Griddle is showing a very disturbing trend of only committing to a position when pressured.

[Netopalis]

Sagan: Do you not agree, though, given the fact that I am in a teaching role, that it would be unethical of me to not discuss the possibility? I feel rather like I need to because in those games where I AM ICing and Mafia, I want to make sure that I am not accused of using my position to win more games.

[Netopalis]

@Netopalis & McGriddle - a thought experiment, you are called to board an airplane, you present your ticket and say, "I'm not saying I'm a terrorist, but honestly, if I were, I'd be the best terrorist I could be."

Do you agree that if all in-game text can be used, all in-game text must be given at least some weight? Do you agree that even such thin evidence trumps random voting? I can't disregard this early evidence anymore than I can disregard a vote on the basis of a "null tell" (you might add this term to the wiki?) when it is being counted and a rush of other votes would have frozen it as such. (note I unbolded you when I quoted you so as not to violate the "bold is a true vote" rule...even in spirit.)

Perhaps the best teaching is done once someone asks a question? or simply through explaining the mechanics of what you are normally doing in the course of play? I read the guidelines in their entirety and my objection was in the last few lines. Frankly, I had to question if you read it in it's entirety or if you didn't understand it. My conservation of energy addresses the vigilance needed to read everything posted. Bloating the text with in-game, in-line, opinions dressed as fact only gives a forest to hide the trees in.

How many townies could reasonably be expected to make the statement you did...during the course of play?

Sagan: Certainly, however that is not a statement that a person would have a reason to say in an airport. The game of Mafia is built around a system of loyalties. In Newbie games, this system of loyalties is complicated because, for ICs, there are two conflicting loyalties: That to ensure the proper teaching of newbies and that of playing to win. Therefore, any IC can and should disclaim the possibility of being scum, so as to avoid any later accusations of using one's position as IC to gain an advantage.

FluffyGiggles: My town read is based on two factors: 1) Fiyr's willingness to answer any questions in a thoughtful and meaningful manner and 2) The fact that I have many other, better suspects. Additionally, I notice Fiyr falling more into the standard psychological profile of the newbie town rather than the newbie scum.

[Netopalis]

Sagan: I did not take Griddle's post as a personal attack. Also, I always am upfront with that at the beginning of the game, as a precursor to any of my serious game posts, regardless of my alignment. If you are upset by my full disclosure...At this point, all I can say is tough cookies, since it doesn't seem like we're going to get anywhere by progressing this argument.

[Netopalis]

Sagan: Why do you feel that you need doc protection? Do you even know what the doctor does? And no, I didn't take it as a personal attack because 1) it was a joke and 2) as a law student, I've developed a rather thick skin. I'm also not sure what continued abuse you are referring to. Regardless, I do not need you to defend me - I am more than capable of handling myself in this game.

[Netopalis]

Griddle: Let's go ahead and put Sagan's fears to rest. Did you intend to insult me with your random vote? I didn't take it as such.

[Netopalis]

You are seeming to imply that my disclaimer is an indicator of my being in the mafia. Logically speaking, doesn't this seem foolish? There are two options:

1) I post it in every game I IC, in which case it should not be taken as a scumtell, or

2) I post it in every game I IC as mafia, in which case I would be an extremely stupid person

Tell me, which do you think is more likely?

[Netopalis]

Thanks

I wasn't going to say anything, since I'm used to people getting it wrong. I've had one game where people referred to me as "Neta" throughout the entire thing. At any rate, I appreciate it!

[Netopalis]

Meh, the attacks were crap. I've defended pro-town players as town and scum, and I've defended scum as town and scum. Until one of us flips, there is no evidence there.

[Netopalis]

I was able to defend myself and did so later ably - Fiyr didn't and doesn't need to defend me. If she chooses to, that's her business.

Honestly, the answer is simple: As town, if you feel that someone is being unfairly attacked, it's your duty to defend - I executed a 16 page defense of Doombunny in Hellsing Mafia, which prevented a mislynch and resulted in a day 2 win. Basically, he was being attacked for vague and flimsy reasons - I begged people to put forward a good case, and nobody did. If I hadn't, the scum would have succeeded in pushing for the mislynch and probably would have won.

[Netopalis]

They're really one and the same. I mean, sure, you can call a specific argument bad, but realistically, if there's a case against someone that's bad, you need to defend them from the whole case and not just a few specific arguments.

[Netopalis]

Mario: Thanks for the great post!

In response to your points about mine, the only reason that I've made it more than once is because Sagan keeps pounding me on the issue. Every time that I've said it, other than in the intro posts, was because I was called scummy for it. Rest assured, I would only say it once if I only needed to, regardless of alignment.

The key difference between Sagan and FluffyGiggles is that FluffyGiggles seems to be posting a lot of reasoning while Sagan just keeps hammering me for the same tired and non-issue point. Also, Fluffy doesn't attack me just because I'm an IC like Sagan, she has instead just said that we should treat me a null read until proven otherwise, which is a perfectly respectable position.

The concept that Sagan wouldn't ask for doc protection as scum because it would make people suspect him is essentially the definition of WIFOM. He could just be scum doing something scummy so that you would think that he was pro-town. Or, he could be a pro-town player who is doing something scummy...it goes on like this for infinity. Honestly, I suspect that Sagan's request for doc protection is not born of a role or alignment, but rather a puffed-up opinion of his own abilities. That's just my take, though.


Mind if I ask exactly what inconsistency you refer to between myself and Griddle?

[Netopalis]

Totals so far:

Confessed Mafia: 0
Confessed may be Mafia: Netopolis
Confessed Townies: everyone else

Please quote back any materials, anywhere that state the IC must make this confession during the game. Let us be specific, this was a statement after the start of game.
There are no rules for a random voting period or "just insulting one another" period. It is a matter of life and death of the town and every statement in-game is important.
If you have stated this is a requirement without finding that exact requirement outlined in the instructions given to ICs, you might be overreaching in your conclusions.

For the love of all that is good and holy....

No. It's not something that I'm necessarily required to do, it's something that I do because I try to hold myself to an ethical code above and beyond the norm.

In this game, at post 110, I make the same disclaimer as town:
http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=12735

If you want to find me scummy, fine, but at least answer to my arguments against you.

I'm not going to restate this again: This is something I generally do when I IC. It is a bloody stupid thing to suspect somebody over, and quite frankly, I'm getting tired of it. In short, Sagan, do some real scumhunting rather than waiting for someone to make some sort of a "slip up". Realistically, "slip ups" never happen.

[Netopalis]

Griddle: He's referring to this in my first post.

However, if I am in the mafia, I will be playing to win.

[Netopalis]

Yeah, that's my reaction. Not really getting why this is such a big deal. Still, I'm not convinced he's scum either.

[Netopalis]

For what it's worth, the stuff that I've cited my previous games on are as follows:

My usage of questions rather than random votes, which is an unusual position and

My usage of a disclaimer at the start of a game.

When I said that I don't put much stock in meta, I meant that I don't put much stock in the method by which people usually use meta. Usually, a player goes and reads another players' previous game and determines whether the current play is similar or dissimilar to the previous one, and then determines what that means to alignment. To me, that's kinda silly, given that it's ridiculously easy to change your playstyle or, more importantly, to not change your playstyle. However, there are certain things that previous game references can be used for - things that are done in every game regardless of alignment being one of the biggest ones. I hope that makes sense?

[Netopalis]

EBWODP: Note that I said that it can be valuable in some instances. This is the some instance.

[Netopalis]

EBWOTP: EBWODP means "Edit by way of double post".

[Netopalis]

Take your time, we're still early in the day, and you've been more useful than most.

[Netopalis]

You, Sagan and Legions are all possible scum.

Sagan is possibly scum for his ridiculously strange attack pattern and distracting style.

Legions is possibly scum for lurking and buddying.

You (Julano) are possibly scum for very convenient attacks. If you note, almost all of your posts are questions, and many of your statements are things that can be interpreted in multiple ways, at least one of which will be safe. Take, for example, the following quote:

2/5 of these are mafia.
Fiyr, mariomaster, Carl Sagan, Legions, McGriddle.

That's a fairly broad statement. Given the fact that we can only reasonably expect to have, at most, 4 lynches, you're fairly safe in that not all of those people can flip. Also, you seem to keep hammering the same point - lots of posts, but little content in them. While this is a valid scumtell, I'm curious as to why you keep using it to the exclusion of others.

[Netopalis]

Quite some time now. This qoute is from right after the questions.

Julano:
Julano is a bit of a minor concern. Her initial responses seem to be straddling the fence or show an attempt to restrict giving out information. Of particular note is this answer:

"Logic. Well, I guess it's gut actually, but that's pretty much based on logic anyway"

Note the attempt to have it both ways. It seems like she thought that I had a preconceived answer and that she was more concerned with finding that answer than giving an honest one. Minor scum read.

[...]

In summary:

Town reads:
FluffyGiggles
Unisght
Fiyr
MarioMaster

Null reads:
McGriddle

Scum reads:
Legions
Carl Sagan
Julano

[Netopalis]

Sorry, I forgot to answer the "what other scumtells" thing.


The following is not an exhaustive list, but it's a good place to start:

Lurking - Already described
Active lurking - Popping in occasionally to just say fluffy stuff
Overanxiousness - A person getting overly nervous over a few votes
Overeagerness - Trying too hard to be town. This isn't the "too townie" fallacy, it's someone who is obviously

trying

to look like town.
Buddying - Saying things to please the other people in the game, like Legion's "But I love you!" thing from earlier.
Rabid attacks - Tunneling against one player and making vicious attacks from nothing - scum often do this to try to get a pro-town player lynched.
Wishywashiness - Failing to take a solid stance on anything

[Netopalis]

Meh, I never really changed my mind. I did lessen my scum read on you significantly since there, but I still think that you are potentially scum, although far behind Legions and Sagan.

[Netopalis]

Oh, I see, the whole "Consider yourself put back in the town category" post. Yeah, I overstated my position. It did give you town points in my mind, but given the lack of strong suspects...

[Netopalis]

I wouldn't have had to defend myself so often if Sagan hadn't made so many stupid and ridiculous attacks.

As for "digging for what I want", the problem is that I'm still not entirely sure where to dig just yet. Pushing Sagan seems to keep getting the same crap about "energy", Legions isn't present and Julano is a light suspect at best. McGriddle...I'm having trouble reading. I suppose I probably should have pressed Griddle more - I didn't because I was pressing him somewhere else and I was worried about tunneling based on playstyle rather than alignment. I'll reread him in isolation, though, and put together a post.

[Netopalis]

McGriddle:

You seem eager to buddy in the early game and seem to post a lot of fluff. What's with this? Why did you feel the need to make so many posts that don't actually say anything? Also, your attacks on Sagan seem to be a bit hesitant. You don't provide a lot of justification aside from the obvious and don't elaborate on much. Could you please succinctly and explicitly describe your case on Sagan?

[Netopalis]

Woohoo! Welcome, Ythan. This should pump some much-needed life into this game.

[Netopalis]

???

[Netopalis]

I think that the difference between Legions and Fluffy is the simple fact that Legions did not post content while Fluffy's posts have generally been content-filled. Still, that is a very good point about her number of posts; she does need to post more.

[Netopalis]

I was wondering about that. I was pronouncing it mentally as eye-than.

As for the other game that Griddle references, it's an ongoing game in which I'm trying to lynch him. It gets referenced a few times...I prefer to keep them separate, but the situations are somewhat similar.

[Netopalis]

I wouldn't have had to defend myself so often if Sagan hadn't made so many stupid and ridiculous attacks.

As for "digging for what I want", the problem is that I'm still not entirely sure where to dig just yet. Pushing Sagan seems to keep getting the same crap about "energy", Legions isn't present and Julano is a light suspect at best. McGriddle...I'm having trouble reading. I suppose I probably should have pressed Griddle more - I didn't because I was pressing him somewhere else and I was worried about tunneling based on playstyle rather than alignment. I'll reread him in isolation, though, and put together a post.

This was my answer. Is there anything that you don't feel that I answered?

[Netopalis]

1) Because I really hate attacking people who are attacking me unless I feel absolutely sure of the attacks. When you do this, it can often look like you're attacking just to defend yourself, and generally it leads to poor choices because the attacks often end up being over disagreement than anything quantifiably scummy.

2) Because when I posted that, I wasn't getting much out of McGriddle, and I was hoping that he would respond to somebody else's stuff and say something noticable. Also, here' the number of times that each player references McGriddle outside of quotes:

Unsight - 21 (?!)
Netopalis - 10
MarioMaster - 8
Julano - 7
Fiyr - 6
Carl Sagan - 5
Ythan/Legions - 5
FluffyGiggles - 1

It should also be noted that Fiyr and Julano both say that McGriddle could be scum. So, yeah, I haven't referenced him the absolute most. I probably could have pushed him harder. But I certainly haven't just let him off the hook. I'm the only player voting for him and I'm the only player who's posted anything resembling a serious case against him.

Also, a note for later, I need to go back and re-analyze Unsight's posts in re: McGriddle - There may be an interesting pattern there.

[Netopalis]

1) Because I really hate attacking people who are attacking me unless I feel absolutely sure of the attacks. When you do this, it can often look like you're attacking just to defend yourself, and generally it leads to poor choices because the attacks often end up being over disagreement than anything quantifiably scummy.

2) Because when I posted that, I wasn't getting much out of McGriddle, and I was hoping that he would respond to somebody else's stuff and say something noticable. Also, here' the number of times that each player references McGriddle outside of quotes:

Unsight - 21 (?!)
Netopalis - 10
MarioMaster - 8
Julano - 7
Fiyr - 6
Carl Sagan - 5
Ythan/Legions - 5
FluffyGiggles - 1

It should also be noted that Fiyr and Julano both say that McGriddle could be scum. So, yeah, I haven't referenced him the absolute most. I probably could have pushed him harder. But I certainly haven't just let him off the hook. I'm the only player voting for him and I'm the only player who's posted anything resembling a serious case against him.

Also, a note for later, I need to go back and re-analyze Unsight's posts in re: McGriddle - There may be an interesting pattern there.

Ok. It's 3 AM. I have no idea what I'm doing awake or what that post was supposed to be in response to. I tend to do this sometimes, since I have a serious sleepwalking problem. I hope the post is good? I'll try to reevaluate it tomorrow morning. Sorry, folks!

[Netopalis]

Ok, yeah, you're right. Not going completely insane.

[Netopalis]

Unvote, vote: Carl Sagan

This is just inexcusable. You are trying to lynch me just because I am an experienced player. If you are scum, this is an incredibly beneficial tack to take, as you're eliminating one of your biggest threats. You have posted no case and you have failed to look at anybody else. You get my vote.

[Netopalis]

Hello, everybody, welcome to the game! I'm Netopalis, your IC for this game. As your IC, my primary role is to teach you all how to play the game and answer any questions. As per the site rules, as an IC, I cannot lie about my position on basic game theory issues, such as WIFOM, claiming or similar ideas.

However, if I am in the mafia, I will be playing to win.

I should also warn you all that I have an extremely unusual playstyle as compared to most of my fellow members of this site - My play is based strongly on solid, logical arguments as opposed to gut feelings and emotions. If you want to persuade me, give me good reasons to follow you, not just that you have a "bad feeling" about someone.

I'll be posting some questions for everybody within a few hours, as well as a quick "How to play Mafia" guide that I'm working on. I'm looking forward to playing with each of you!

The bolded portion of my first post is what Sagan seems to be rambling about.

[Netopalis]

I wouldn't have had to defend myself so often if Sagan hadn't made so many stupid and ridiculous attacks.

As for "digging for what I want", the problem is that I'm still not entirely sure where to dig just yet. Pushing Sagan seems to keep getting the same crap about "energy", Legions isn't present and Julano is a light suspect at best. McGriddle...I'm having trouble reading. I suppose I probably should have pressed Griddle more - I didn't because I was pressing him somewhere else and I was worried about tunneling based on playstyle rather than alignment. I'll reread him in isolation, though, and put together a post.

This was my answer. Is there anything that you don't feel that I answered?

[Netopalis]

Unisght: Sorry about that. Yeah, I missed it. At any rate....

There's no really good way to define exactly what constitutes a "strong suspect". Justice Potter Stewart, when asked to define pornography, famously said, "I can't define it, but I know it when I see it." That's kinda the way it is with lynch candidates. We can explain why they are good candidates, we can argue for the position, but defining exactly what makes a good lynch, aside from the obvious qualifier of alignment, is a bit hard.

Some factors that go into my decision are:
Attempts to conceal information
General scummy behavior
Bad play (Policy does play a factor, in my opinion)
The amount of information gained from a lynch
The level of scumminess of the people against the lynch


This is not an exhaustive list and there is no single factor which is controlling. Unfortunately, there's just not a good way to answer the question.

[Netopalis]

Sagan: Aside from me, who do you suspect?

[Netopalis]

Good post, Fluffy, although I think that Fiyr's first comment can be taken with a grain of salt given that it was so early in the game that yeah, she would probably feel uncomfortable calling you out on that low post count. McGriddle is indeed bothersome, but I need to think on it a bit more to put together a full case. I'll try to get it in today.

[Netopalis]

He's at L-2. But, since you asked...

Unvote

I still want some other suspicions, though, Sagan.

[Netopalis]

Well, there are some players who, by their tunneling, bad play, distraction or idiocy are a detriment to the town, even if they are town aligned. Their continued presence hurts the chances of the town continuing to win. These people, though, if town-aligned, are anti-town and not scum.

[Netopalis]

Oh, it's totally unfair. Completely moronic. But, it leads to the dilemma of whether or not it's better to policy lynch (that is, lynch the worst player) and risk the mislynch or lynch someone who's scummier. Most prefer the latter.

[Netopalis]

Griddle: Really? Honestly? You could be a decent player, but I think you need to just get your head into the game and keep it there; your games are plagued by an inability to take a stand and by a lack of knowledge of the game state. Ythan's just pointing out where you went wrong, which is

what he's supposed to do

. It's kinda how Mafia is played. If you can't understand that, then yeah, it's probably best to move on - it's impossible to play Mafia without disagreeing with people or pointing out flaws in peoples' arguments.

[Netopalis]

There are good reasons to vote for McGriddle. Several of them are in-game, but we now have a solid policy justification for it as well.

[Netopalis]

I thought I was voting for Sagan. No matter. I wasn't voting for Griddle yet because I didn't feel like I had a very good read on him. Based on what I now know of his meta, though, and his actions in game, I'd feel confident lynching him.

Vote: McGriddle

[Netopalis]

Oh, right, I unvoted. Forgot about that.

[Netopalis]

From evidence in this game, who do you suspect?

[Netopalis]

I haven't really done anything in this game

that is considerably scummy. Please show me and I will try to defend myself. The fact that I am such a terrible scum should be enough to prove my innocence at this point so the fact that I haven't done anything that stupid is reason enough to NOT vote me anymore.

The bolded portion is my problem with you in this game, McGriddle.

[Netopalis]

You haven't stated your case convincingly or strongly. Your case against Sagan is pretty much based on playstyle and your case against Ythan is essentially OMGUS.

[Netopalis]

Mod: Prod on Carl Sagan, please?

[Netopalis]

My vote is on McGriddle for a few reasons.

1) I don't yet have enough evidence to go after Sagan, and I think he'll be replaced at any rate.

2) McGriddle has failed to contribute much of substance aside from attacking Sagan and Ythan for questionable reasons.

3) Decent policy lynch

4) Excessive early buddying

5) It seems as if he's trying to hide something

[Netopalis]

The reason I'm doing that is because it's obvious he's playing a character. I think he'll change his tune once replaced.

[Netopalis]

One of the most important skills in mafia, especially in newbie games, is to determine whether someone is scum or is just a bad player. I suspect it's the latter. If Sagan shows back up, though, my vote will move back to him.

[Netopalis]

The problem is that, as usual on D1, we have very little information. Thus, any case will appear to be scanty. There is a stronger case on McGriddle's alignment than on Sagan's at this time, and it's better to present a weak case than no case at all.

[Netopalis]

Ythan: I'd argue that it's not gut. McGriddle shows a definite pattern of being worried and being careful about what he's trying to say in an attempt to appear pro-town and to conceal information. While this is not necessarily quantifiable, it's not gut either.

[Netopalis]

I'd argue that I don't always play it safe, but I'd rather not get into a pointless argument.

Why are his one-liners anti-town?

Why do you find Julano scummy?

[Netopalis]

By not wanting to waste the town's time on a pointless personal debate?

You just answered how they help. They force people to tip their hand. You do have control of what you put into the little reply box.

[Netopalis]

Why?

[Netopalis]

So, Ythan is too mean, but I'm too nice?

Nice playing with you, McGoldilocks.

[Netopalis]

I'm not mad at your explanations, I'm taking issue with your findings. I've made almost 1/4th of the posts in this game. That's not really just playing it safe. This discussion won't be fruitful, though, so I'm not going to discuss it further unless you bring something useful to the table in regards to it.

[Netopalis]

Hmm. This does change matters. Sagan is obviously just going to post enough to keep himself from getting replaced and he's obviously not going to contribute. Since we're so close to the deadline, and since we can look at McGriddle tomorrow, I'm going to go ahead and change my vote.

Unvote, vote: Carl Sagan

We need to lynch somebody before the deadline. A D1 no lynch is a death knell for the town.

[Netopalis]

The switch was made for several reasons:

1) I didn't believe I could organize a lynch against McGriddle fast enough. If the town no-lynches, we're all doomed.
2) Carl Sagan will most likely not be providing content in the future. If he is scum, we're going to be running into the same problem every single day. With McGriddle, though, we can accurately review his play on subsequent days.
3) Sagan has honestly exhibited most of the standard scumtells - tunneling, bad logic, lurking and buddying - we've just excused him due to his perceived playstyle.

4 was added after the fact) McGriddle's breadcrumbed a town PR. We shouldn't lynch him due to this.

[Netopalis]

It's bad play, but it's also bad play to lynch a claimed/crumbly PR.

[Netopalis]

Fiyr: The whole "setting up a lynch" thing is, in my book, an overblown scumtell that I've never actually seen used by scum. It also only applies to setting something up for a future day.

In particular, the exchange shown in iso posts 14-17 is rather telling. He seems to be extremely eager to give the "right" answer instead of giving an honest answer. The nervousness is present in a lot of his posts as well, particularly those after Ythan joins the game.

[Netopalis]

Uh...Every time you explain your reasoning you set up a vote. Not a scumtell.

And yeah, sorry, missed those....

1) I'm not sure what you're asking. IF you mean what point is it good to stop looking at other possible lynch candidates, usually it's when the consensus is that there are only 1 or 2 possible lynches and that a deadline is approaching.

2) Yeah, he should claim, if he's going to. If he claims PR...it'll depend on how close it is to the deadline.

[Netopalis]

Ah, but that's not what I said. I said that if Sagan wasn't replaced, my vote would move back to him. A replacement may have more to contribute and we may actually get a read on a replacement.

[Netopalis]

If Sagan shows back up, though, my vote will move back to him

This is what you said.

Yeah. Exactly. If Sagan didn't post again, he would be replaced. We could read a replacement and it would fix his posting deficiency. Sagan posted again, meaning he wouldn't get replaced. Therefore, the posting deficiency will not be cured and it's a reason to vote for him. Again, not sure how this is scummy.

[Netopalis]

Hammer, anyone? Please?

[Netopalis]

Well, blast. Good luck, everybody!

[Netopalis]

Wow. I was honestly shaking my head at that last lynch, I was convinced that Ythan/Kyiv was town. Well done, folks! I'll post my analysis of individual players in a bit.

[Netopalis]

Julano - Pretty good play. I think you had the right analysis and reasons, but I also think that your biggest problem is that the way in which you state your points doesn't tend to make others want to follow you. You need to be both right AND convincing - luckily, that's an easy problem to fix. Just post more of your thought process.

Fiyr - Excellent play. You have good analysis. However, you need to be extremely careful, as your personality opens you up to attacks of buddying. Be friendly, but be friendly to everybody and try not to gravitate towards one particular person over another.

mariomaster777 - You need to be very careful. Your thought process is on the right track, but the way you say it looks very scummy. When you offered to lynch before the replacement, I would have been all over that. Work on trying to get your opinion out a bit more clearly - however, like Julano, you have the right mental process.

FluffyGiggles - You're a very impressive player, and you'll definitely become much better. You do need to post more often, though - I feel that's your biggest hurdle.

Kyiv Ythan Legions - Kyiv was stuck in a rough situation, and I feel he did the best that he could. Ythan is a good friend of mine, but he really does need to cool it in the future - once the mod warns you, back off. Legions...What can you say? He never was really here.

Unsight (SE) - Brilliant. Keep up the good work. I see your play as something of a facilitator, which is an extremely useful role for the town. I think that your biggest hurdle is the fact that it seems that you don't like to confront people that much. Try being a bit more aggressive in the future and see how it works for you.

McGriddle (SE) - You were on the right track, but you really do need to learn from this game. I understand where you were coming from with Ythan being out of line, and you're right, but it's true that you also come across as *extremely* scummy due to your ill-explained logic. Try starting from the beginning, explaining your thought process and being a bit more open. Also, don't take offense when someone attacks your ideas - you are not your ideas, and you need to separate yourself from those ideas. You're far too emotional. However, I do think that you have potential, if you can overcome your own reactionary way of thinking.

[Netopalis]

Incidentally, to echo what Zach was saying, personal attacks shouldn't be seen that often in Mafia. Yes, it has some merit in how it tends to get reactions from people, but they really should be avoided. When you do engage in them, keep them to an extreme minimum. It hurts the game, everybody's enjoyment of the game and the site as a whole.

[Netopalis]

I saved McGriddle. I figured that, if he wasn't scum, it's possible that the scum could have tried to NK him given his softclaim as cop.

[Netopalis]

At the time, Ythan and I were in another game with McGriddle. He kinda fell apart there, and he had acted in a similar fashion in that game, where he was scum. Policy lynching isn't particularly common, but it is somewhat valid. The more normal approach is to try to lynch someone who is hurting the town, regardless of their alignment which, I'd contend, McGriddle was doing.

[Netopalis]

The "Plan" wasn't that great of an idea...I can explain why if I need to, but I think it's been fairly well discussed.

McGriddle: You still desperately need to improve how you talk to others - even if you're right, you're not that convincing.

[Netopalis]

Fiyr: What I meant was that your playstyle makes it look like you're buddying up to people when that's not really your goal. Not something to necessarily change, just something to consider.

[Netopalis]

Mario: I want to encourage you to stick with it. I really think you have some potential on here, and your problems are easily fixable. Just because this game didn't turn out as well for you doesn't mean that you should give up so easily.