Mini 745 - Moving Day Mafia (GAME OVER!)

[Plonky]

/confirm

[Plonky]

Vote: ZEEnon

His avatar is almost as cute as mine!

[Plonky]

Wagons are the path to victory for scum. Especially when you're on that wagon just because you can be.

Interesting statement, this. Kindly explain.

Oh, and:

unvote, vote: dejkha

[Plonky]

Scum already know who town is and it's not uncommon for them to just get on a bandwagon. They just want town to lynch themselves, so hopping on a bandwagon because "[they] are the path to victory" is a little scummy.

Uh, well, that's all well and good, but how else does the game of mafia start? I'm very open to your ideas, but frankly the prospect of sitting around and singing 'kum-bay-ya' for 10 pages is

not

my idea of beneficial.

You do understand the benefits of bandwagonning, yes?

unvote
FOS: Plonky

I have no issue with him asking to explain himself, but voting him? I know we're still early on, but you unvoted just to vote for him on one thing he said in response to what I would consider pretty scummy behavior, regardless of when it happens.

I have a number of issues with this post:

1.) Your action: instead of placing a vote, you place a FoS, which doesn't really make sense. Your vote at the time was random on Jazzmyn, with the reasoning being that she was the first to confirm. Honestly, is that random reason more suspicious than what you saw me doing? Really, that makes no sense whatsoever in my eyes.

2.) Your words: you seem to agree with the bandwagonning ideas of dejkha. I have already made my opinion to this above, please respond to why you agree with him.

3.) Why are you critical of me moving my vote. It is, in my view, far preferential to using a FoS at this time.

Let me just draw you to my reason for voting ZEEnon:

His avatar is almost as cute as mine!

So you honestly think it is better for me to keep my vote on someone

for a random reason

than to use it in a way to express suspicion?

I would also like Zeenon to respond to what I said about dejkha.

[Plonky]

Uh, quote tag errorz.

Fixed

[Plonky]

I wasn't defending anyone, I was simply stating that I thought plonky's question was foolish. He took one bit of evidence, and decided to make a vote on it. I know it's only page 3, but it's still bad form.

I don't think it's bad form at all. I had one bit of evidence against dejkha. I had no evidence against my random vote. For me, one bit of evidence is enough to swap votes on page 2.

I really don't understand what you find suspicious about that.

[Plonky]

hola. i am around, yet a bit busy. please excuse and allow me to post tomorrow.

[Plonky]

Um, I just did a huge post and my computer crashed while I was previewing it. I am quite upset about having done all this work and things, so I am here, but I can't post this evening.

[Plonky]

I am sure that there is scum on the killa seven bandwagon. Let's look at the (almost categorically flawed) reasoning for votes against him.

My viewpoint: being anti-town does not (always) equate to being scummy. It is in this case insufficient as a reason for lynching someone.

Therefore, my view is that killa seven is an unsatisfactory lynch at this point. Sure, he's not contributing much, but we simply don't have the time to lynch him. We need to catch

scum

, not lynch useless townies.


---


Please note that my post does not follow the votes and their order, and apologies for this lack of clarity. If anyone has any questions, please let me know.

@Q:
I hope you understand that I wasn't quoting you to imply that you were obligated to agree.

I think Killer's decision is willfully anti-town. But if he will commit to being more active on day 2 and later if he survives that long, that would help reduce my desire to lynch him. That's why I asked the question at the end of my last post. If he is going to actively lurk throughout the game, we will eventually have to lynch him. It seems it would be better to do that on an earlier day rather than a later day when we will have enough information to improve our odds of hitting mafia. But if he will start playing tomorrow, he could make up for today.

This is an overwhelmingly problematic and troublesome argument. Notice my point about being anti-town and being scummy not being the same thing. I point-blank refuse to lynch non-contributors for the simple reason that I am here to scum-hunt, not lynch unhelpful people. Policy lynching of this kind is far worse than what killa seven is doing.

Killa7, if you do not post something remotely constructive within the next 24 hours, I will definitely vote for you. I don't really give a crap if this is your playstyle, it is not helpful to the town.

I would like to know why being "helpful to the town" is sufficient for voting. I understand your point, but disagree completely. For me, voting on bandwagons such as this one should be done

solely

if someone is scummy. Not being pro-town is not the same thing.

If you don't care, than ask to be replaced in this game.

Exactly. Although it is clear that killa seven is reverting to idiotic play, he should not be lynched for it. Replacement is the way to go.

killa seven, you are now at L-1, and I see little reason not to hammer you since you've done nothing but demonstrate that you are being egregiously selfish, deliberately useless and anti-town. But I do not want to hammer without giving you an opportunity to claim.

I understand your view of him, but I repeat - we simply don't have the time to lynch him. Lynching an anti-town player doesn't make sense when trying to catch scum. It is possible to ignore him and focus on the

real

targets.

Because I don't tolerate lurking.

This, frankly, is a hugely disappointing attitude to have, and represents a huge flaw in thinking. Lynch all lurkers/non-contributors = one belief of playing mafia that I will never adhere to.

Dejkha's reasoning is only slightly better.

Killa seven is doing nothing to help the town, and actions that do not help the town are scummy by definition. If not helping the town is helping the scum, as I believe then it only stands to reason that killa seven is helping the scum and thus- scummy.

From a theoretical stand-point,

you are completely and utterly wrong.

---

Clearly, I agree with q21 and don_johnson that lynches of this kind are silly. I also like herodotus' posts in the period since k7 went to L-1.

I find killa seven supremely boring and will be shifting focus immediately onto better targets (most likely those who jumped opportunistically onto his wagon).

[Plonky]

EBWOP: My sentence:

"Let's look at the (almost categorically flawed) reasoning for votes against him."

It should read as follows:

"Let's look at the reasoning, almost all of which is categorically flawed, for the votes against him. "

[Plonky]

Zero - why are you voting for killa7?

[Plonky]

So basically, I want to lynch Killaseven because he thinks day 1's are unimportant and refuses to contribute much to them. I feel everybody should contribute as much as they can on every day. Also, he was lurking for quite a while, and came back with an "I'm here" post, which actually hurts the game.
And to reiterate, I knew that 24 hours hadn't past, but killa seven had posted, completely ignoring my post directed towards him as well as several questions directed towards him. So therefore, he made it clear that he wasn't going to post anything remotely constructive within my deadline.

I understand your point, but this isn't a perfect world and some people have unorthodox ways of playing mafia. Therefore, using the notion that "everyone should contribute as much as they can on every day" is not an accurate assumption to make.

Essentially, I believe that you and some others (Jazzmyn is definitely one, not sure at this point of who the others are) are looking at this the wrong way.

(I do agree, however, that his ignoring of your questions was inappropriate and anti-town.)

[Plonky]

Who said anything about lynching a constructive townie?

Nobody did, I'm just saying lynching an unconstructive one is better than lynching a constructive one.

Personally, I'd rather lynch scum. I find your moves towards this to be notable.

Consider, also, that killer has posted a lot more since the wagon on him built up. It's not a lot, but it could help to determine his alignment if someone will analyze what he said and look at his "meta." Pressure works. And it's only pressure if it might lead to a lynch. So I think that willingness to consider lynching a non-contributor is useful to prevent non-contribution, even if you only follow through occasionally.

That's a valid argument, although personally I'd say that "willingness" isn't the right word in the context of what has happened. While I see your approach as 'willingness', there are some who seem far more committed to such a development.

[Plonky]

Um, major question:

Why is everyone considering lynching right NOW?

I have seen Day 1 last for 30 pages, and to me that's perfectly acceptable.

I see few benefits to lynching killa7 at the moment. For the town, it is sub-optimal to even consider lynching someone who is probably town. The ONLY people who gain tremendously from this move are the scum.

I am quite saddened that only q21 and erratus seem behind me.

Vote: ac1983fan

. I agree with all the comments said about him.

Now this is a far more interesting wagon. For those still voting for killa7, I'd like to know why you

honestly

cannot find anyone more scummy than him, because that's either scummy or suggests somewhat under-par scum-hunting abilities (which is, essentially, what killa7 is being accused of.)

[Plonky]

I also dislike don_johnson's recent vote for killa7, for the same reasons as ac983fan.

[Plonky]

I'm not dead-set on lynching a townie, it's just that, since I voted for him, there have been zero developments that could make me change my vote. He has not been replaced, he has not started contributing, and nobody else has said anything to make me want to vote for anyone else.

So you aren't swayed by anything q21 and I have been saying?

At this point in Day 1, I don't see many other options for today's lynch.

I'm puzzled, as mentioned before, as to why a lynch at the moment is best. Especially since we are targetting an annoyance rather than actual scum.

He is the player with, in my opinion, the

most anti-town behavior

. If something were to happen that would make him not be the person who has the most anti-town behavior, than guess what: I'd stop voting for him. However, since I voted for killa, very little has been said that is not about lynching him.

Okay, you clearly didn't read my post or are choosing to ignore it.

Being anti-town is not the same as being scummy. It is not a satisfactory reason for voting for somebody.


---


As I predicted in my post, so far no one has brought up convincing reasons for their killa7 votes. In fact, it's gotten worse as a result of don_johnson's u-turn of opinion that put killa7 briefly at L-1.

[Plonky]

Zero - why are

you

voting for killa7?

Don_johnson - please explain exactly what potential benefits you see as resulting from a killa7 lynch, and contrast that to the potential costs that oculd arise (essentially a simple cost-benefit analysis).