mini 958: Just Another Mafia Problem - GAME OVER!

[MrSandman]

Hey guys. I have some reading to do.

Unvote

[MrSandman]

Oops

Unvote

.

[MrSandman]

I read about half. I have to go out soon but I will be back later on today. I'll just answer SSBR's questions just for a start. Thanks to JDodge for getting another 48 hours of day.

1. What previous experience do you have with Mafia games?

I played a handful of games online a couple years ago. I've had the itch to start playing online again for awhile now.

2. How would you describe your playstyle?

Hard to say. I'll probably be careful starting out. My current mood affects my posting and play style.

3. What would you consider your best Mafia game and your worst?

Too long ago to give examples.

4. Do you prefer Random Question Stage or Random Voting Stage and why?

Voting. In my limited experience it has sparked more discussion. Both can be useful later on.

5. If we've gather no more information toDay and you were the deciding vote, who would you vote based off of what we have?

Will answer sooner rather than later.

6. What time zone are you and when do you post?

Atlantic Standard Time(-4). I could be on anytime. I have odd hours.

7. Do you get nervous before posting?

Not at all.

[MrSandman]

@MrSandman: Nice to see you. Hope you're a active, commited member.

I plan to be.

Of the people with current votes.

ConfidAnon: Very few posts with useful game related content. Numerous off topic posts and attacks on lurkers despite just getting by himself. Does bring up a few decent points on what is good for the town but he really isn't helping the town much ether. My first read through has this guy #1 on my scumdar.

MafiaSSK: Admitting to active lurking was a real turn off to me. Someone pointed out that means just posting enough to stay under the radar(I thought it meant being active on the site and reading, but not posting) but still, this guy has been lurking, some excused, some not. Requesting for summaries? I suppose that could just be considered laziness but it still stood out to me.

Super Smash Bros. Fan: Not seeing a viable day one lynch here.

TheButtonmen: Definatily some smoke there but I don't feel as strongly as some of you seem to be. I don't agree with his lynch all lurkers policy but I also don't mind him asking for a stop to the "bullshit arguments". Comes across as just angry over the game than scummy. Glad he chose not to claim, it's not at that level yet.

Overall, I'm going to

Vote ConfidAnon

for dodging and being the most obvious guy that's not contributing.

While I think lurking is a concern, I don't think it alone should be the reason for a lynch. MafiaSSK would be that vote though.

JDodge, are you happy with your vote on ConfidAnon? Is it still a vote because of his flaking history vote or has that changed?

[MrSandman]

Overall, I'm going to Vote ConfidAnon for dodging and being the most obvious guy that's not contributing.

What have I dodged, exactly?

Taking sides and making contributions. When you would be confronted numerous times about activity you would finally just jump on the bandwagon or target another lurker.

I only have one vote.

I don't know where I want it as of right now.

What can we do to help you decide? Or, alternately, can you be less useless and do some scumhunting?

I'm not going to let you lurk through this game. (Or anyone else, for that matter. [rover, I'm looking at you.])

@ConfidAnon: Who is your top suspect?

You waffle. You try to get someone to put a name out there for you.

Specifically, which players do you think I have strong points about? Who would you consider voting at this point? You seem to be avoiding naming anyone specific that you find scummy, and being noncommittal is very anti-town, if not just plain scummy.

The top three on your lists have good points upon them, but the one I think deserves the most attention is rover.

In fact,

Vote: rover.

Imo, going after a lurker isn't that big of a scumtell on it's own (unless its possibly an attempt to derail another wagon, which to my knowledge isn't happening here.) Your summary of rover's play is fairly accurate, and could easily be explained by rover bing scum.

Or, alternately, can you be less useless and do some scumhunting?

Imma try.

See above for an answer to your question.

You use Elias_the_thief's analysis as the reason for why you target rover and state going after a lurker is not a scum tell.

Everyone who hasn't thrown their hat in the ring

- What do all of you who haven't said anything about it think about the me/rover/has scenario? Not that many have commented on it.

All the more reason for you to vote roverscum!

Seems like you're pretty serious about this guy being scum. You lay low and keep him as your vote for quite some time.

All the more reason for you to vote roverscum!

doesn't look like you're going to get the support for this. Who else do you think is scum?

I need to take a look back at buttonmen to get a feel for why he's getting voted so I can make an informed decision on him.

At this point, I would be willing to switch over to MafiaSSK for his total lurkage.

You say you'd which over to MafiaSSK and admit it's for lurking alone. Going after lurkers still doesn't look scummy?

I did not say I did not support what you're saying. I'm not totally against a rover lynch, actually, it's just that you're the only vote on him, and deadline is saturday. You're probably not going to get enough votes to lynch him in time. That's what I'm saying, not that I don't agree with you.

I see your point.

Unvote, Vote: MafiaSSK

Completely drop your lurker for a bandwagoned lurker on a whim.

You have dodged making any sort of decision or commitment on who you think is scum.

[MrSandman]

I only have one vote.

I don't know where I want it as of right now.

What can we do to help you decide? Or, alternately, can you be less useless and do some scumhunting?

I'm not going to let you lurk through this game. (Or anyone else, for that matter. [rover, I'm looking at you.])

@ConfidAnon: Who is your top suspect?

You waffle. You try to get someone to put a name out there for you.

Is the waffling comment directed at me or ConfidAnon?

ConfidAnon.

[MrSandman]

@hasdgfas, Unsight, MrSandman, and JDodge:

Can you each give me reasons that ConfidAnon is scummier than TheButtonmen?


We have a deadline coming up Monday; weekends are famous for people not being around; there are no further extensions available, and this has been going on for almost a month.

One of them needs to die.

He just comes off as more of a anti-town guy than scum to me. I see him being difficult and unresponsive but he shows more consistency with the lynch all lurker policy than ConfidAnon. While TheButtonmen changed his vote from MafiaSSK, at least he gave SOMETHING as a reason and didn't just jump on the bandwagon.

SSK also isn't voting for any of the wagons.

TBM would be at L1 then if I voted him. I would love a lynch on him.

Why does L-1 worry you this late in day one?

[MrSandman]

This is the last thing we needed.

Deadline is in two days with no more extension time available and we get a rage quit.

[MrSandman]

My comment about going after a lurker was not in reference to rover, it was in reference to buttonmen (in elias's analysis).

Fair enough.

The way you wrote the first line of this quote makes it sound like I was voting rover for lurking. I was not. I originally voted him for the points in elias's analysis, and his play after I voted him furthered the fact that I thought he was scum.

Low activity level, low content level.

Rover seems to be trying very hard to not try very hard. He has been skimming by with very minimal participation and scumhunting. When he does make a post, its usually a good page or two behind relevant discussion, and it usually mimics previously expressed opinions on key points. It seems like this is a real good strategy for coasting through day one and into the night stage. I get a scummy vibe from Mr. Rover, for sure.

Elias's analysis basically just stated that rover was a lurker. That and his play after you voted him are your only reasons for voting rover?

I did not drop my rover vote "on a whim" as you say. That is misrepresentation - you even quoted the post that prompted me to do this in your 377. Hasdgfas pointed out that there was a deadline upcoming, and I was not gathering support for the rover case. Because the person I had the strongest read on wasn't going to get lynched, I switched to MafiaSSK, a lurker who has had some scumtells.

You had a vote on a guy that had little momentum for getting lynched. hasdgfas on request from you says you should change your vote. So you do and vote for another lurker with no momentum of getting lynched. Didn't take too much.

The second line is also blatant misrepresentation. You say I have dodged any sort of commitment or decision on who is scum. This is a

bold-faced lie.

I have said that I believe rover to be scum, and brought up new, original points against him. I have explained why I think MafiaSSK is the second most likely to be scum. I have mentioned my gut read against SSBF. But you've ignored all of this.

Active lurking seems like avoiding responsibility to me. Something you admit to.

Do you even think TheButtonmen is scummy ConfidAnon? You say you are forced to vote for him. Does that mean you think he is town but you just want to get someone besides you lynched?

[MrSandman]

I completely failed with that. I had no idea MafiaSSK voted for Button.

Anyways, I will

Vote: MrSandman

because of the things I brought up yesterday.

Fine, as long as you acknowledge that I responded to them. I have no problem putting my vote right back on you for the reasons stated back in day one.

Vote ConfidAnon

[MrSandman]

Vote SSBF

[MrSandman]

Maemuki only posted 4 times .

It's tough when all three mafia replace near the end of day one. I can't believe how fast the two accidental hammerers got lynched.