Mini 1009 ÔÇô Popularity mafia (Game over - Mafia wins)

[Tazaro]

Check-in post. Need time to read and will post eventually.

[Tazaro]

Thank you for giving some type of synopsis of players, nopoint. But I see this:

Ironman

: This guy has a measured playstyle that is typical of scum. And he's been lurking recently. Ironman is likely scum.

Unvote.Vote:Ironman

If he was scum, he's unlikely partner with Mothrax.

The Ironman slot has been filled by me. I plan to be more reserved in this game because when I'm overly aggressive I'm just setting myself for headaches. But I dislike the fact that you are suspicious of Mothrax. I've seen Mothrax. He has his own style and it had gotten heat on him, kind of like the heat that a player like drmyshotty (whom you have replaced) gets. I suggest that their playstyles are in view right now, not their alignment. Alignment has a chance to be more in view later.

[Tazaro]

Alrighty, I'm keeping my vote on Ecto/dtsblerghwhatever/nopoint because currently he is the person I'm reading as most likely Mafia.

My next highest would be Thief.

You all should know that my reads don't come from analyzing text excessively. I read what you write and make decisions based off of the "vibe" I get from reading it. This is DP1. It's hard to do much of anything useful on DP1.

I don't think that all of this analyzing of each other's posts is helping anymore. It is quite useful at the beginning, but it's just gone to a back and forth between specific people.

Also, why are we not attempting to work as a team instead of acting as independent agents and doing all the "legwork" yourselves. Where I normally play mafia everyone bands together to grill members one at a time. Once enough grilling of a member has been done we proceed to move on to someone else OR lynch that person if we think they're mafia.

So I think we should all discus who the majority thinks is scummy and lynch that person.

The thing I strongly agree with you on is that I don't like back and forth. It could put things in a holding pattern where people aren't organizing their thoughts around a common scum-hunting strategy or a common thing that must be debated so that they become empowered to vote with conviction.

[Tazaro]

I mean, if someone says something seemingly indefensible that could be a scum slip, then I would urge all the people to stop what they are doing and give their judgment on that person's alignment.

[Tazaro]

I willing to believe the intellectual honesty of the drunken mind displayed there.

[Tazaro]

I wonder if there's a theory that says that booze speak is null...

[Tazaro]

Though, some alcohol can be truth serum. Confessin' to hating your mother-in-law, etc.

[Tazaro]

Well, I'm waiting for his sober re-examination. Sobermination.

[Tazaro]

if we don't get a revised post, then he's a lucid drunk.

[Tazaro]

And that's an overdefensive vote in response to Cuet's "Also BB, are you invalidating your earlier reads because you were "drunk?" If not, you need to at least elaborate on the scum reads," Blackberry.

[Tazaro]

Notice: in the interests of having fun while playing mafia, I'm adopting a loosely-defined policy of not reading wall-of-text posts.

Anyway, some thoughts on what's been going on:

Blackberry's 1/#4 - "if you find me being anti-random voting unusual, please discuss" looks like poorly executed but well intentioned attempt to start early discussion to me

mothrax 1/#5 - scummy post. town should have finished that post with a random vote

mothrax 1/#14 - explanation "RVS generally necessary but I didn't feel like making first vote" doesn't make any sense from town perspective

Blackberry 2/#37 - "My post does not say "if I weren't town, those posts would be scummy" it says, if I weren't ME and I didn't know my own alignment, that post would be summy." agree with Simenon, this still doesn't make any sense to bring up as town
Thief 2/#45 - sticks out as passing no real comment on the two pages before it
Thief 2/#48 - next is to unvote, vote iron man "i don't believe in accidents" I am not impressed.
Iron Man 3/#66 - "And you're starting to look more and more worthy of my vote unless you can properly and promptly explain yourself." re:Thief, looks like scum not wanting to vote for his buddy
tumescence 4/#77 - strong townread on mothrax for saying "if by some weird chance he flips scum" ...needs explanation, because that quote suggests null-newb or possibly slight-scum read to me

Vote: mothrax

-

I didn't like some of his earlier posts and he seems to have withdrawn a bit since others started to receive more of the pressure

.

I think your reasons are a sad attempt at tunnelling on mothrax, who you can't possibly say is more suspicious than others based on these points you've made:

VOTE: Channeldelibird

[Tazaro]

EBWOP:

VOTE: ChannelDelibird

[Tazaro]

i hope i didn't misuse "tunneling," but I meant that he was focusing on one player for some reason that doesn't jive with other information about people around that player.

[Tazaro]

And, Blackberry, no more drunk posts, if I may make that request.
In other news, ChannelDelibird surpasses mothrax in votes against him; sweet irony.

[Tazaro]

^ it's ironic because ChannelDelibird has become a bigger target of voting than his own target. I guess I shouldn't write "irony" if it's not clear what I'm referring to.

[Tazaro]

@MOD: ChannelDelibird hasn't posted in this thread for over a week, is a replacement necessary for him?

[Tazaro]

Simenon, where does anything about this game suggest that it is mountainous setup?

The mod gave the game info in post #2710 on page 109 of the mini normal queue thread in the queue section.

[Tazaro]

Hmm... my previous post made me sound like a librarian.

[Tazaro]

Welcome, ZONEACE.

[Tazaro]

zoneface

per zoneface's caption below his name, there is no F in zoneface.

[Tazaro]

^I meant "zoneace's caption" and "in zoneace"

[Tazaro]

@MOD: Is a replacement for ChannelDelibird going to be sought after?

[Tazaro]

I consider the vote count for channeldelibird to be a good pressure for channeldelibird's defending himself in front of our eyes.

[Tazaro]

^I hope I can get a better read from what he says. And I like his name lol, especially the deli part.

[Tazaro]

I know about Korashk's game play. I would think his game play would make him vote for ChannelDelibird to put pressure on him.

[Tazaro]

About 75 minutes before the deadline.

[Tazaro]

lynching the lurker CDB is making me draw a blank right now. I'd like to hear from Cuet in particular about his thoughts for day two.

[Tazaro]

cuet, I wanted to hear from you cuz urr good on content.

Vote: mothrax

[Tazaro]

I looked at the suspicions of other people on you, mothrax. You are rightfully suspicious.

[Tazaro]

Double post: I have learned to hate certain aspects of Saturdays.

[Tazaro]

I'm v/la on Tuesday and/or Wednesday/Thursday. Probably not so much on Thursday, and maybe I'll be fine Wed afternoon sometime

[Tazaro]

I don't think I've created any illusions with my posts.

[Tazaro]

I like to defend people when I think there's arguments to defend them against. My statement about alignment IS true, and yes alcohol can be a truth serum. It depends on what kind of affect it personally has on you. The post from cuet was because I thought he was the one who got the nightkill immunity; i'm interested in his input.

[Tazaro]

Mothrax, I'm paying more attention to you than I had before. Why not vote for who is suspicious? That vote wouldn't stifle discussion in my mind.

[Tazaro]

I AM VLA ON TUESDAY FOR SURE, BUT VERY POSSIBLY WEDNESDAY/THURSDAY, TOO.

[Tazaro]

@tumesence:

I don't think cuet is scum nopoint. I don't agree with a lot of what he says, but I get a very town vibe from his posts.

I agree with scotmany12; I also have a town vibe from cuet; that is why I think he got the immunity.

[Tazaro]

i see that the mothrax wagon is full of horsepower.

[Tazaro]

I looked at the suspicions of other people on you, mothrax. You are rightfully suspicious.

This post is a null tell for me. I have seen scummies and townies vote to lynch players based off other people's arguments before.

Here is an example of Cuet seeming town in my opinion. Scum do not say that posts are null tells; they are willing to comment at least a little negatively on things that other people have pointed out as potentially suspicious in their eyes.

[Tazaro]

I was thinking that saying something is null get rid of that something as a tool that can be used to cast suspicion on a person that a mafia member wants to cast suspicion on.

[Tazaro]

This post showed that Cuet wasn't trying to do subpar logic that scum may use to attack someone:

*roll eyes*I hate to argue with you if it's emotional or not because obviously you will just argue on and on. But to me, the repition and wordings do look like an emotional outburst.( as it looks for anybody else besides you)
And as for your scum reads. Did you even notice I'm not accusing you of it?! I even said the fact that you have no town read implies that you are town. You are freaking over your head being paranoid if you are town and are digging your own grave if you are scum.

More logical fallacies and back pedaling.

---

There is a reason that no one can prove that the post in question was an emotional outburst. The reason is because it wasn't. Let me map it out logically for you:

Cuet has position X.
Ecto presents position Y (a distorted version of position X).
Ecto attacks position Y.
Therefore, position X is flawed/false/incorrect/scummy.

Cuet asks for prove of position Y.
Nopoint/Ecto isn't able to prove position Y, therefore position Y is false/flawed/incorrect.


Since you can't prove that the post in question was an emotional outburst (because it wasn't), you are now appealing to popularity with:

( as it looks for anybody else besides you)

Most people approve of position Y (have favorable emotions towards Y).
Therefore, Y is true.

The fact remains, position Y never occurred because there is no proof.

---

In respect to your ambiguous read on me, you are backpedaling hardcore. Allow me to show you the progression of the backpedaling:

Nopoint ISO 1

His #175

is basically calling everyone scum

,

which I do not think a scum would really do

.

However

, it could be a gambit and

Cuet stays 2nd on my suspect list.

Nopoint accuses Cuet of premise A (underlined), but premise B says that scum sometimes won't do premise A (Italicized).
However, Nopoint gives position Y (bold) that Cuet is scum because of premise A could be a gambit [premise C].

Cuet ISO 26

In response to your description of #175, notably where you say "

basically calling everyone scum." Actually, I only called 5 out of the 12 players scum, explicitly. Half, as you know, is significantly less than all.

Cuet states premise A is wrong because it didn't occur in post #175.
Since premise A didn't occur, it is inferred that premise C is invalidated.
Therefore, position Y is false.

Nopoint ISO 6

+And #175, what I meant was that you don't seem to see anyone as a townread.

Nopoint adds premise D, a distorted version of premise A, to position Y.
Presumably, Nopoint still thinks Cuet is scum.

Cuet ISO 31

There is a big difference from what I actually did in post #175 (or Cuet ISO 14) and what you accused me of doing. In other words...

1. You accused me of this:

Calling every player scum.

2. On the other hand, this is what I actually did:

Call five players scum, and give null reads on the rest.

Now you are saying that post #175 was fishy because I didn't give any town reads?! Since when should a town player be required to give town reads? At the time of that post, half the players in the game had posted little to no content. I think my null reads were justified because of that.

Cuet refutes premise D.

Nopoint ISO 8

And as for your scum reads.

Did you even notice I'm not accusing you of it?!

I even said the fact that you have no town read implies that you are town

.

Nopoint gives position Z in bold (a distorted version of position Y).
Position Z includes premise B (italics), but lacks premises A, C, and D.
Position Z states that Nopoint never used Cuet's reads as evidence that Cuet is scum, which is contradictory to position Y.
Position Z makes Nopoint's stance on Cuet ambiguous.

---

unvote, vote: Nopoint

Charges:

1. Attempting to push lynch of Cuet using the straw man and appeal to popularity fallicies.

2. Backpedaling when pressured by Cuet.

[Tazaro]

I don't know if today will give me a real opportunity to post in this thread. So consider this my Thursday post.

[Tazaro]

EBWOP: Actually, FRIDAY post.

[Tazaro]

Why aren't more people voting for mothrax? Don't you see his posts?

[Tazaro]

Is that about lynching or hoping there's a vig?

[Tazaro]

Seven.

[Tazaro]

What is there in this thread to respond to? Are we in stagnation on the vote counts?

[Tazaro]

Whoa, strong language, buddy.

[Tazaro]

I mean, make your stomach curl? Mr. dramatic.

[Tazaro]

Are you saying you're switching from whom you think is scummy to whom you think is merely anti-town?

[Tazaro]

Are you saying you're switching from whom you think is scummy to whom you think is merely anti-town?

Follow-up on my own question: Zoneace, why do you feel the need to vote for someone of a rank below actual scumhood?

[Tazaro]

Are you more convinced he's scum or I'm scum? Why risk your vote on someone whom you're not as convinced about?

[Tazaro]

Are you more convinced he's scum or I'm scum? Why risk your vote on someone whom you're not as convinced about?

What makes you think that he doesn't believe both of you to be scum?

I think he believes us to both be scummy; the question is how sure he is in believing I'm scum versus believing mothrax is scum.

[Tazaro]

I certainly can't have my vote on a sucky case

Unvote

Vote count Day 2

(10 players alive = 6 to lynch before deadline)

(4) Tazaro – nopointinactingup, Simenon, mothrax, ZONEACE
(2) mothrax – scotmany12, Thief
(1) nopointinactingup – Cuethlachtli
(1) Simenon – tumescence
(1) ZONEACE – Blackberry

Not voting: Tazaro

Deadline Day 2 is September 3

[Tazaro]

Hello, are we all here or are we outside somewhere? anyone?

[Tazaro]

=3 to you, too!

[Tazaro]

:3 or =3 are my favorite smilies

[Tazaro]

Is Blackberry browsing. Is Blackberry going to vote for me, too?

[Tazaro]

I claim that I'm an average (or below average lol) town member, not a mob member.

[Tazaro]

Wow, you did your homework on me, Blackberry.

[Tazaro]

You're hitting good points about Zoneace.

VOTE: Zoneace

[Tazaro]

HE IS NOT HELPING THE TOWN WHICH IS ANTI-TOWN WHICH IS SCUMMY. QED.

Being a weak player is scummy? Do you know how wrong what you're saying is?

[Tazaro]

Yep, you lynched a mafia member. I did not make it hard.

[Tazaro]

I can stop the fluff now, and I will definitely stop the fluff once the death scene comes.

[Tazaro]

Bah, go scum.

[Tazaro]

This game teaches me not to replace. ;|