Hello!
433: Dry, bland, generic mafia: Game Over
-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
I'm a relative newbie to this site, not having played many games here recently - what is the "second vote debate" exactly (I know what the seven-player newbie setup is)?
My current feeling is that, actually, with Eletriar getting a little edgy when Southpaw went to two votes, and Dodgy doing similar when he went to four, there might be something in what was essentially a completely random bandwagon. Too early to say with any level of confidence, but worth noting.[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
1. Well, it's only "unsafe" in so far as the mafia could, technically, drop the hammerifthere are three mafiaandnone of them are already votingandthey synchronise enough to do itandthey all think it's worthwhile to get their day 1 lynch in such an obvious fashion. So although technically there's a risk, I don't rate it.
However, you asked if I thought it was harmless, which I don't - 4 votes is something Southpaw would have to respond to, whereas 3 votes might be shrugged off (and, in fact, was being shrugged off). I knew my vote wasn't trivial and would require a slightly more serious response, this was intentional.
2. I didn't think it was insufficient, nor that a fourth vote was "needed". That said, I did think four votes would stoke more discussion than three without being excessively dangerous, mostly due to the reasons in the paragraph above.[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
I'm not liking Dodgy's move to discredit The Fonz's provenance as a mafia player; I have no idea what the level of veterancy of everyone in this game is, but Fonz seems to be making reasoned arguments I can get behind, and calling him out on his inexperience seems to be a cop-out even if it could be backed up.
I have no idea how many sites on the internet run mafia games, but I'm pretty sure the one I've played the bulk of my games on isn't on Dodgy's list of 3 (though I'm certain I've played an order of magnitude fewer games than most scummers) either.
Anyway,unvote, vote: Dodgy. It was only mildly questionable when he objected to the L-3 vote, but now he just seems to have become more rattled by Fonz and SS's responses (which have seemed entirely rational and sensible to me) than I'd have expected.[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
I can empathise with the level of paranoia you're now exhibiting, and I would say that's actually a town-tell if anything, or a conscientious act.
If you're town, calm down, take a step back. The mafia arenotall going in for the kill, nor would it make much sense for us to do so if you were right about us, unless we were going for one of those "so obvious you have to discount it" mafia plays.
I'm voting you because you're the most scummyon page 3 of day 1. There are a lot of players who I've yet to get a read on and I'm not forgetting them![size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
I think Fonz is drawing a small amount of fire here because he's being more prolific than anyone in this game, and responding to every post means he's having about three separate arguments. For the record, I think his declarations of scum-tells are based in solid theory that is applicable to the cases in hand - but just citing Conventional Wisdom without joining enough of the dots diverts the discussion to being about the theory instead of the point being made.
In this case, I pretty much agree with both Fonz and pete d. Explicitly stating you're not scum is so trivial you have to wonder why they bothered, however it probablywasjust incidental as part of Dodgy's rebuff to seeing himself as being branded as mafia.
I do think that Fonz is now putting too much reliance in what he's seen. Particularly:
re: Dodgy implied a level of certainty on the Dodgy-wagon I'm not sharing, despite sharing the original reasons for the vote. And so, I have compounded the issue in my very first sentence by continuing the focus on The FonzThe Fonz wrote:You'd have to do summat VERY pro-town to change my opinion.
So, I think I'm going to start calling out people who are slipping my radar a bit - it's far too early to be throwing accusations of lurking about, but I think the current discussions are about to go off the boil a bit and it'd be good to hear from the quieter posters.
So, a big shout-out to my homeboys Eletriar, kilmenator, gorckat and thorgot. I know thorgot and kilmenator posted yesterday, but they didn't say much of consequence.[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
Unvote- not many mafia acts end with said scumquitting the game.
FFS though Dodgy, that was a ridiculous overreaction. And you can take your high horse and demands for respect for your help in setting up the site and do something creative with them *annoyed*. Anyway, let's close the book on this one.
Voting forthcoming on one of gorckat and thorgot, probably... whoever posts last, maybe[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
If Dodgy did anything but tell the truth about being the doctor, I would be extremely unimpressed by his metagame shenanigans. Faking a tactical strop is one thing, (ab)using mechanisms external to the game to win is seriously not cool; I am going to assume he wouldn't do that.
thorgot; do you think we should pressure The Fonz now? If not, what are your assorted thoughts on what's happened so far?[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
I agree that the pressure on gorckat doesn't mean much if he isn't here. I'd rather focus on the ones who are here but not adding anything useful.
Just so it didn't get missed in last page's Drama, thorgot - you seem to imply that we should be looking at pressuring The Fonz now, is that correct, and if so, why? Could you share your thoughts on how the game has gone so far?[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
Vote: thorgot
I've posted very clear direct questions to him (109, 129), and he's flat-out ignored them (138). Moreover, what he has posted all game has been of very little substance and I submit that he's lurking like a good'un.
In response to Sweenytodd; I was just noting that an entirely arbitrary bandwagon on Southpaw drew early defensiveness from both Eletriar, then Dodgy. It stuck out as me as worthy of note, so I noted it (as I said at the time: "Too early to say with any level of confidence, but worth noting"). I certainly wouldn't act on it as a link unless one of those guys showed up as scum.[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
I'm not sure this one is worth pushing. Dodgy claimed doc way earlier than he should've done if he were the doc, but he might have been scum doing something wacky, or a non-doc townie doing something wacky. Given the confusion surrounding the whole event, it's very possible that the mafia might make a bad call on him tonight.
If that's the case, we probably don't stand to benefit by trying to dissect the claim-and-retraction unless we think Dodgy/CES could be scum. Currently I'm leaning towards townie who lost the thread.
I'm happy with my vote on thorgot - it seemed a somewhat "minimum effort" contribution with a hint of OMGUS.[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
Because if the real doc understands what you're doing and you don't get lynched first, you can draw mafia fire and buy the townie power roles more time.
I don't think it's a great tactic, but what matters is what Dodgy thought. And as I say, I don't think it's in our interests discussing unless there's a serious motion to lynch CES.[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
Has CES actually lied, though? Or has he simply retracted Dodgy's claim which was made at a point where his motives as aplayer, let alone his role in the game, are dubious?
I agree that if CES is now explicitly claiming not-doc, then either he or Dodgy must have lied and that that needs to be talked about.[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
Or: CES replaces into a doctor role whose predecessor outed himself in the middle of a hissy-fit. The best thing for the town is for the doctornotto be outed, and, fortunately, Dodgy was being erratic enough for this to be believable - a quiet retraction of the claim leaves a question mark over the original claim.
If Dodgy lied, there's no guarantee he did so because he was anti-town - at that point, he seemed more anti-Fonzthan anything, and generally annoyed at the world in general. Who knows why he might claim a power role - he was claiming alotof stuff, I reckon he would've claimed to have invented electricity given another page or two. If Dodgy told the truth, however, there are valid pro-town reasons for CES to go back on Dodgy's word and turn the cricumstances of Dodgy's replacement to his, and the town's, advantage.
LynchAllLiars is a good rule of thumb, but it doesn't mean that townies can't manage the truth in beneficial ways. I agree that this does little for CES' credibility, though.
You can correctly assume from the above that I thought Dodgy was genuine when he claimed doc and CES was doing damage control. The fact I could very well be wrong is why I don't want to pry; let's make the mafia make that call, we can always come back to him tomorrow if he is still around.
Today, I reckon we're much better off looking at the lurkers. thorgot tops my list, but I'm also getting slightly scummy vibes from kilmenator and, less so in the last page, Eletriar. We will also need to properly consider gorckat at some point, depending on whether he becomes replaced or reappears, and when.[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
Hmm. I am going to have toFOS: The Fonzsimply because I don't think he's done good town play re: CES. That said, I think there is a very good chance hethinkshe has been doing good town play, and overall I would not say I get a major scummy vibe from him - if he is mafia, he's certainly going for lynch kill with no regards for subtlety (usual WIFOM disclaimers).
Because my gut tells me Fonzy is an aggressive townie, mild FOS on the people who voted him. I think he's wrong, not evil, but it's a great excuse to bandwagon him.
And I still want to hear more from thorgot Essentially, my belief on D1 is that with a veritable smorgasbord of potential lynchees, we should pick the ones who don't post as much over the ones who make themselves a target, unless we have some good degree of certainty. It gives us a stronger end-game situation and it's sound in the metagame too.[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
But, he hasn't lied, by your own admission he's not claiming anything. Your original stance was pursuing a contradiction between Dodgy and CES, but you seem to have backed down from that?The Fonz wrote:Untrue. If he's town, saving his own skin should take a back seat to giving the town accurate information, so getting lynched ought to be preferable to surviving by lying.
You haven't demonstrated that it's in the town's interests for him to claim at this point; sure, it's been a talking point, but we don't benefit from him claiming.
- If he's scum, he'll claim doctor anyway and we (presumably) won't lynch him.
- If he is the doctor, the mafia probably knew that as soon as Dodgy claimed.
- If he's not the doctor, the mafia probably assumed he was the doctor as soon as Dodgy claimed.
Why does it helpthe townfor CES to clarify which? The only benefit I can see to getting a definite answer is for the scum, who know whether or not to target him, and if heisn'tthe doctor, this discussion is putting stress on the real doctor, once again, making things easier for the scum.
Tomorrow, he'll either be dead and we'll be glad we didn't waste a lynch on him, or he'll be alive and we will be in no different a situation to if CES had not retracted the claim - as soon as anyone claims doctor, the mafia have the opportunity for WIFOM shenanigans, the claim retraction makes no odds to that.
gorckat - good to have you back, I'm happy to accept lack of access as an excuse if you leap headfirst into the discussion[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
DittoThe Fonz wrote:I'm not opposing you here to create discussion: I'm opposing you because what you're suggesting is bad for the town.
You are asserting that it's good for us to know what Dodgy/CES is, because confusion is bad. Well, confusion for us is confusion for the mafia too. Obviously mafia have the edge on the "mafia" and "not-mafia" front, but when it comes to confusion between "doc" and "not-doc", that's the best confusion we can hope to maintain.
Currently he's a good candidate for being the doctor. He may not be the doctor. This gives the mafia chance to screw up tonight. If CES claims, it will spell out, in nice big letters, what the mafia should do. It will not actually assist the town in any real sense apart from set our curious minds at rest. Answer me this:
- What will you/should we do if he claims doctor?
- What will you/should we do if he claims another power-role?
- What will you/should we do if he claims plain townie?
Now, I'm guessing for at least one of the latter two, you would push for a lynch on the "LynchAllLiars" mantra. If he's town, and tells the truth, this will be a mistake. If he's mafia, why would he claim anything but doctor? So we either end up confirming the doctor for the mafia, or confirming another role for the mafia and considering lynching them, or getting a false doctor claim we wouldn't act on anyway.[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
Mod edit:
Southpaw: 1 (thorgot)
The fonz: 3 (CES, string sweenytod.)
thorgot: 1 (dasq)
Sweenytod: 1(thefonz)
Ordinarily, I would agree. Dodgy is a special case though, since his motivesThe Fonz wrote:For the hudredth bloody time, Dodgy has already outed himself if Doc!as a player at that pointare in question. This, with CES' retraction, has put what could have been a doc claim back into question (I know you agree with me on this, because you are questioning it!).
I agree that WIFOM with Dodgy tomorrow is nasty. However, we're already in for that if the mafia so choose it - they simply have to not kill him. What this boils down to is:
a) You think it's better to not risk complicating tomorrow's potential WIFOM with the additional factor of the mafia's confusion.
b) I think it's better to confuse the mafia and potentially give the doctor another day, or even negate a night-kill.
They're both valid stances; however I feel very strongly that (b) is a lot better for the town than (a). CES can be investigated if necessary, another doc can counter-claim later if necessary, and so the WIFOM can be mitigated and doesn't guarantee failure. By that time, we'll also have some dead players, and any dead scum might help clear things up too.
To answer your questions:
a) A pro-town player who is not CES dies tonight -> depends who it is. If it's the doctor, vote CES If not, then yes, we should talk about it; I refuse to make any declarations of exactly how I'd handle it because I don't know until it happens, and it'd give the mafia an angle to direct me.
b) No one at all dies tonight. -> I'd probably feel vindicated. I doubt the mafia would skip their kill, so the lack of kill means either CES isn't the doc but the doc protected him, or CES is the doc but the mafia thought he wasn't and killed who CES protected. Neither of these things will happen if the mafia know if CES is the doc or not, though.[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
You know what? Neither do I. It's supposed to have been a trivial bit of flippancy, but I was wrong to assume that dead doctor == scum Dodgy/CES. As I've been saying, DodgyThe Fonz wrote:I don't like this, but I can't quite put my finger on why.couldhave been pro-town and lied about being the doctor. So I retract that. However, I would not like to be in CES' shoes tomorrow if someone else dies overnight and is the doctor.
I don't want to make any deals based on information we haven't got. By tomorrow, we will have other stuff to go on. Secondly, I don't want to tell the mafia exactly what happens if they do or don't kill CES. That said, it sounds like a reasonable plan.The Fonz wrote:To try to make some headway here- how would you feel about an agreement to push CES into claiming first thing in the morning, provided he survives the night?
I don't think I have much more to add on this one - The Fonz and I simply disagree, and I don't think him much scummier for it. Unless there's a move to press CES from several other people, I move that we find a different target. thorgot's my current favourite.[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
I really don't know how much of Dodgy's response to the (fairly minimal) pressure we can actually use. He was clearly overreacting and, as I've touched on already with the claim but extending to everything he said, he could well have been coming from an angle that was neither pro- nor anti-town - just irrational.
As such I'm inclined to base very little on his later posts, however my overall impression is of a townie bowing out rather than a scum doing so. This is mostly because I find the concept of qutting the game as a scum tactic abhorrent as it is nonsensical within the context of the game, and so that's a line I hope not very many people would cross.[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
Sounds fair.
Town (in no particular order):
The Fonz - with the exception of the last couple of pages, nearly everything he's posted I've gotten a good vibe from. Even the last couple of pages, I can see where he's coming from.
Dodgy/CES - As described above.
Lots of people occupy the mid-ground where I get a gut feeling of town, but with no great certainty - superstring, Southpaw, dom:inc, gorckat, pete d.
Suspect (in no particular order):
thorgot - He doesn't feel scummy, because he's lurking far too much to do anything scummy. Honestly, this is minimal effort right here.
Sweenytodd - Odd vibes. Early on he seemed to eager to point the finger at me and Fonz for bandwagonning Dodgy, recently he seemed eager to point the finger at Fonz for trying to get a role-claim. Seemed a little "obvious", but slightly OMGUS-by-proxy on my part since I get town vibes from the Fonz.
Eletriar - Slightly too non-committal about everything for my liking.
kilmenator - A few posts earlier on caught my eye for being wordy without actually putting down a firm opinion.[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
This game really seems to have slowed down (and yes, I know my last post was on tuesday). Hopefully various prods will rectify that, but I think the CES decision has really bucked the flow - not that it wasn't important and useful - so we need to get our act together and pressure someone.
I'm happy to move over to SweenyTodd or kilmenator's bandwagons to move the game forward if necessary. However, I'd still like to focus on thorgot and extract a role-claim since if we don't, I think he'll just slip back under the waves. His last post was much much better, but I want to see more like it
If anyone else is around and has nothing else to add, why not post a list of thoughts like SweenyTodd and I did on the last page? That would certainly be useful now and to look back on later.[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
I agree that it is fairly obvious that pete d was using "town" to mean the membership of the game (seeing as we are a town with bad seeds in it) rather than just the pro-town aspects of it. I doubt this was a calculated move by dom:inc, so I'm tempted to just ignore it for now.
Because in the course of this game, you've made about one decent attempt at sharing your suspicions and thoughts, and even that was under pressure from me for your short, infrequent, mostly contentless visits.thorgot wrote:Why do you want me to role-claim, Dasquian? Don't you think it is slightly scummy to be fishing around for a claim?
"Fishing around for a claim" can be scummy in the right circumstances, but the town will eventually need to push someone, probably a couple of people, to a claim before lynching someone. I think it is scummier to avoid getting your toes wet, personally.
Your last post just makes me happier with my suspicions - a half-hearted attempt to put suspicion on your voter with undercurrents of "why must you persecute me so".[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
I agree - but I was trying to draw a distinction between thorgot's accusation of "fishing for a claim" (as in, not pressuring someone but trying to get them to volunteer information), and straight-up bandwagonning someone. I think he's scummy and I think he will post as little as he can get away with unless he's right in the spotlight. I want him to claim because that's an inevitable point in his bandwagon when I can reassess my suspicions and either continue to push for a lynch or back down.
As I say, the town will need to lynch someone. Before they do, that person will almost certainly have claimed. That person may well not be the first person pushed to a claim. The fewer bandwagons the better, but that doesn't mean we just sit on our thumbs afraid to push people for claims. The flipside is that we don't want to force a claim from everyone and get a de facto mass-claim.[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
Fair point; it's only now I realise thorgot might have done what Dodgy did and claim under minimal pressure. That wasn't my intention at all, but it's said and done now.
Mentioning claiming was really just a statement of intent to see thorgot become the leading bandwagon. I think he's a much better choice than the now-replaced Sweenytodd and the until-recently active-poster Kilmenator. It does seem that this game is suffering with inertia, hence my repeating myself a fair bit[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
Unvote. I wanted to know why thorgot was posting so little, and now I guess I'll never know. But that's not anything his replacement can help with, so no reason to keep the vote there.
FOS: CES for doing a contentless vote - even though I encouraged it, I think all votes deserve some kind of explanation.
FOS: inHimshallibe for two things in his last post - conceding suspicion of The Fonz straight after Off the Mark staked his claim in the "aggressive townie" camp (seems like scummy back-peddling), and trying to hustle us towards a final lynch with "I think this Day has ran its course."
Vote: inHimshallibeactually, though I want to hear what the replacements have to say.[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
Jeeze, I posted last friday and didn't have access over the weekend, so sue me for not posting yesterday
I'll admit the large number of replacements have thrown me for six a little - what with the weird start to the game, and the lull while a number of people vanished and got replaced, it almost feels like I'm playing a different game.
I too am a bit confused as to where the Fonz went. He was one of the best contributors and I got a good town reading from him so I'm really hoping he reappears. gorckat recently has also been giving me a town vibe, and Off the Mark has done nothing I would carry over my suspicion of thorgot onto - I am inclined to think that, whatever his alignment, thorgot was simply very detached from the game.
CES really, really needs to get more involved in the game. As Pie pointed out, it makes more sense for him to lie low as scum than town, and in any case, being quiet isn't helpful. That said, Istilldon't think we should press him today and so I was suspicious of Nanook for reopening that debate, and Pie and IH for eagerly following it with a vote. Perhaps this is something the replacements are seeing for the first time as a good, fresh case, but in my view of things, it's been debated and is best left alone for today at least.
It feels like I need to hear more from pete d and superstring, who are dropping off my radar.
Seeing as kilmenator is already at lynch -2, I won't move my vote there but as someone I had vague scum-feelings from early that I never could quite place, and a bunch of people I have town vibes voting for her, I'm happy to see pressure there. She definitely needs to reappear or be replaced, but in either case I think she should acknowledge the fact sheistwo away from a lynch with at least my vote being held off ready to make it lynch -1, and defend herself accordingly.[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
Oh, comeinHimshallibe wrote:
Eh, maybe if I feel it's justified.@InHim: Please put in order of most-least likely to be scum and why:
Me
Pete
OTM
Kilmenatoron. It's nearly always helpful to share suspicions and I can't see why, as a townie, you wouldn't be able and willing to do this. You don't even have to be voting the person you think most likely to be scum, since there are other considerations in placing your vote (how likely you are to get support, how close they are to a lynch, whether there is a particular angle of inquiry that needs pressing, etc).
This is bad logic, and worse, bad logic attributing intent to pete d.Kilmenator wrote:If this is the case against me, you basically just called CES scum, because I am distancing from him... and you think I am scum... that doesnt make much sense at all...
There are reasons for scum distancing themselves from townie lynches too - the most obvious being to keep the pressure on but not be held culpable when the dust settles. And even if hewassaying you were both scum, you are wrong to say it makes no sense - by keeping yourself distanced, you keep yourself flexible to backpeddle out of the bandwagon without being too obvious about it, if circumstances change.[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
That's missing the point. We're all aware (I hope) of what Dodgy said and what CES hasn't. The point is that CES could claim afresh, and either contradict or confirm Dodgy's claim, or not, and that's something I think is much better left til tomorrow, WIFOM risks included.
I'd also like to say that although I strongly disagree with Kilmenator on this one, and think it somewhat suspicious of her to continue to try to get CES to claim, I haven't been getting continued scummy vibes from her over the last two pages and no longer particularly want to pressure her over anyone else.[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
By your own implication ("commonly"), it sometimes is not. IMO, this is one of those times where clearing up confusion is not in the town's interests.IH wrote:Wrong. The goal to win is to make things simpler, which is most commonly making it more straightforward.
Your logic leads us to conclude that we should always mass-claim Day 1, because then the town would be more informed! Is this what you believe to be good town play?
You're saying that the mafia hold all the cards and that townies claiming information cannot benefit them and will benefit us. Neither of these are safe assumptions, and in this particular case I would strongly challenge both.
FOS: IH
Huh? So you think The Fonz is consistent scum and you have him ranked as your fourth most likely suspect? How doesinHimshallibe wrote:The Fonz's consistency is why I've got you listed on the bottom, even if I think you're being consistent scum.thatmake sense?
I really did not like inHim's last post. He's once again trying to pair two people as being scum, and although I appreciate the value in looking for scum pairs, this time he's picked one person I get strong town vibes off of and another who is seeming less scummy with every post.[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
Bwah. I am finding it very hard to reply without reopening the whole debate over again, which can only lend itself to repetition. I still hold that neither of those assumptions are true in this case, and thus that CES claimingtodayhelps the mafia.
To reply to the point in question:
He did, but words are cheap; he's still trying to use his "don't withhold information" stance to extract a role-claim.The Fonz wrote:That's not what his logic suggests at all. He already said you should withhold information about your role.[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
Yep, herein lies the problem. I can'tnotact on that suspicion, but I have accept if people disagree with me on the CES-debate, they may not put any weight on anything I build on it with.
That said, I think IH's responses to OTM's 364 stand on their own merits as some dodgy logic worthy of note.[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
Go go action google: http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/
Otherwise just checking in, I have nothing much to add at this point since other people have said it, but I will ask/re-emphasise: inHim, you think OtM replaced into the game as scum and encouraged a bandwagon on scum-buddy Kilmenator as a first move - this seems to be unnecessary and quite dangerous as a scum tactic, why do you think he did it?[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
I am not moving my vote unless inHim claims, and even then, perhaps not. Fact is that inHim got to -1 votes without a claim, and if it seems possible that he might get lynched (it should), he should be claiming. The only circumstances under which he shouldn't claim are:
a) If he genuinely thinks he can diffuse the bandwagon without claiming, instead of tipping it over the edge.
b) If it's worse for the town for him to claim than it is for him to get lynched (and then, presumably, reveal his role as well as losing it). This is very unusual but I guess can happen, with the right setup.
Now, I think he's playing off of (a). The problem is, if anyone could pull this one off by citing the risks of outing town roles then actually everyone could and everyone would and guess what - everyone will refuse to claim Day 1. Magnifico! So there has to be something of a special reason for thinking you can do this - I wouldn't accept anything less than a compelling case that no one would or should put the last vote on. eg, if he can prove that only 6 people will ever vote him, he doesn't need to claim, and he's off the hook (pretty much where CES is). Or, if he can prove that some other issue needs addressing before the hammer vote will be dropped (eg, a compelling case to his innocence), then we should resolve that first.
- I do not think that of his non-voters, none of them will consider voting for him. Thus he should believe a hammer vote might be forthcoming and indeed encouraged before the bandwagon is diffused.
- I do not think there is enough public support to force a CES claim today (we've been through this already), so I think this is a dead-end.
- I don't see any other compelling issues/bandwagons that we should follow up.
As it stands I think inHim is our best lynch today, and I think his gambit smacks of desperation of someone who has no good answers to his bandwagon. Hopefully that's ascumwith no good answers, but either way, this feels like a smokescreen that's not helpful. Ultimately, if he's town, his sole job now is to not get lynched. If that requires a claim, so be it. If he can do it another way, even better - but unless we all get bored and do something else in the face of uncooperative play (mmm, imaginethatmetagame), his current strategy just isn't going to work.[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
Some bullet-point thoughts:
- MBL's explanation makes sense. It's what I'd have said replacing into the role, which doesn't necessarily make it pro-town, but I do think is logically pretty sound.
- Nanook seems far, far too keen to not let this one go. In particular, I do not like his use of labelling any attempt at justifying play as scummy wifom. At some level, everything is wifom, it's just that some are easier to judge than others.
- I think OtM was right to notice a potential "town but not doc" claim, but that needs some clarification. I'm not sure what I make of it if that is what MBL said, but I'm not sure it was so I'll hold off on that one for now.
I still think the right thing to do is to let Dodgy/CES/MBL see the night through and redress the issue from there. It's unfortunate that CES' complete lurking has basically forced him back into the spotlight, but now we have an active player I don't think much has changed. However, the numbers may well now be different enough now to reopen the issue - but I won't be one of the ones pressuring him today.
I do not want us to forget...
Nope. I just think you're the most scummy today, and would be happy to lynch you. However it's stupid to lynch someone without hearing out who they are and what they know. It may not save you, but there's no reason not to cooperate (although it looks like you may have a temporary pardon while the focus shifts to MBL). if youinHimshallibe wrote:I'm saying that they shouldn't, and if you're attacks on me are so flimsy that the hint of a claim will knock them over, I've got a problem with it.aretown, squirming in the face of a lynch mob wanting a claim doesn't help your case.[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
OK, back from an unexpected lack of internets.
I'm finding this page harder and harder to read because of the point-by-point analysis that's going on, however here are some things that stuck out:
Deadline - we have one. Like The Fonz, I have a number of people I just wouldn't lynch today under any circumstances. MBL is one of them, The Fonz is another. I haven't really thought about the list beyond that, but, eh.
MBL vs Pie - pie's tenacity is admirable but a waste of time. The numbers aren't there, he's not going to get lynched or forced to claim, move on, we have a deadline.
MBL vs Fonz - again, if MBL isn't going to get lynched, do we need to spend our time rehashing this? It'd be easy for me to now jump in with my Opinions again, but you know what they are and where the discussion would go (nowhere).
inHim - Istilldon't like the fact he hasn't claimed. I like the fact he appears to be getting away with it even less. If he's town, and he gets away with not having to claim, more power to him. If he'sscum, and he gets away with not having to claim, shame on us.
What worries me about inHim is that it is a bandwagon that has gone to -1 under a deadline, and it feels like we've simply been distracted away from it. Really, inHim should be the talking point and we should either lynch him for not claiming, lynch him for a crap claim, or accept a claim and move on. In addition, I don't see a good alternative lynch at this point - OtM said some odd things recently but for the most part stood out as making good logical contributions. Kilmenator or superstring I could be persuaded to, but the point stands - why are we backing off of inHim?[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
True, but they're logical contributions that I agreed with Yes, that's a form of reverse-OMGUS, which I'm well aware of, but it still means I don't see him as particularly scummy right now when he's mostly saying sensible stuff I agree with.
At what point will you consider claiming? If we don't lynch you, we will still need time to properly pressure someone else, so dragging it out longer than necessary would be anti-town.[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
But, we'vePie_is_good wrote:Any debate with MBL is, obviously, for the benefit of the observers - I'm not going to convince MBL that he's scum. If observers (read: you) are just going to ignore it all, frankly, you're the one wasting our time.hadthat debate. We've had it several times over many, many pages, and it's become clear that there is insufficient support to get a claim out of him today. You are wasting my time and everyone else's by attempting to convince me to join a bandwagon I've already written off today.
No one wants to claim until they're ready, that's a given. Unfortunately you still have 5/7 votes, we still have a deadline, and we're still short of a reasoninHimshallibe wrote:I really don't want to claim at all Today. I haven't thought about claiming in later Days. If this happens again Tomorrow, I'll probably claim so the Town can just get this issue out of their way; I'm sticking with my mission for Today, at least.notto lynch you. Yeah, it sucks for you, and maybe retrospectively I'll rue the decision to press you, but you've got to understand it's not good enough for me to back off.[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
OK, I see a few possibilities here:
1) You're a unremarkable pro-town role who is for some reason refusing to cooperate. This would just be poor play.
2) You can't claim for a pro-town reason.
3) You won't claim for a pro-town reason (it's even worse than getting lynched for not claiming).
4) You can't claim for a non-pro-town reason (you're a survivor, or some weird killer role).
5) You're scum hoping to confuse us and avoid a lynch by doing something that rarely makes sense.
Now, I don't know your playstyle very well but I am fairly happy discounting (1). (4) and (5) obviously mean we should hold the course and lynch you. So the question I have is whether you are in possession of an unusual role that means that you're pro-town and this is actually good pro-town play. You're playing it as though you are, but it just always come back to being more likely that this is your agenda as (5).
inHim, is thereanyway in which you can help us out here without claiming? If not, sorry, but I have to press for the lynch.[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
Do you think this will happen - honestly? I'm not going to say it couldn't, but realistically, I think that seems somewhat unlikely at this point.The Fonz wrote:and if somehow someone else does something very scummy between now and the deadline and he ends up not getting lynched
Can someone explain deadline rules to me please, or point me towards where they are?
Only if he doesn't get lynched - which is your core assumption, that he might yet get out of it. Everyone knows who he is if he does get lynched, unless he's something beyond a plain townie or doc anyway.The Fonz wrote:So it makes sense for him to not claim as townie, and also as doc. So by not claiming, he leaves the scum in the dark as to whether he's powerrole.
You're going to have to explain this for me. I thought he was scummy so I voted him. Other people agreed with him and he got to lynch -1. Then he's refusing to claim, and dragging it out limiting our options as the deadline draws closer. How is this "too townie"?The Fonz wrote:The antitown reasons you've suggested amount, basically, to 'too townie.'
I'm entertaining the possibility that I'm wrong (shocking, eh?) and he's pro-town with a good reason for being tight-lipped, but I don't see how I can act on it as it seems much less likely than the obvious conclusion: he's scum (or otherwise anti-town) and he's bluffing.
Here's another question: whoshouldclaim at lynch -1? Your logic suggests that everyone should hold on to that chance of surviving without a claim and fight to the bitter end. If you ask me, that sounds like a great way to get shit Day 1's where Every. Single. Person. refuses to play ball because, hey, they might get away without getting lynched, and then the town has to make blind lynches if they want a lynch at all.[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
Oh, and to clarify as I think The Fonz misunderstood, by "unremarkable pro-town role", I don't mean vanilla townie. I mean any of the core roles that don't confer any particular reason to withhold a claim. Townie, cop, doc, vig, blocker, etc.
An example for (2) would be a role with a posting restriction preventing claiming.
An example for (3) would be a role where getting lynched unlocks a power-role ability, or something equally contrived.[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
OK, I hadn't realised inHim's refusal to claim Day 1 was a meta tactic. I agree that means his refusal to claim alone is not a tell.
That said, it's also not helpful to the town so why should we tolerate it? Anti-town play is anti-town play. I wouldn't expect anyone to put up with me if I had a meta play of sticking a fat, immoveable OMGUS vote on the first person to look my way, and if we're going meta, I don't think the game would be fun if everyone employed inHim's tactic, because...
So what if the scummiest person is the cop, but is refusing to claim even though it's clear they're going down? Surely if they can claim and redirect the mob, they should - they have a responsiblity to as a town power-role; as ANY town role!The Fonz wrote:Well, no, the town doesn't have to make blind lynches. You lynch the scummiest person, same as you always would.
This meta just doesn't work - getting a claim out of someone is a great way to evaluate whether you want to continue to risk lynching someone, and gives the town more to go on in retrospect because scum are forced to react to all the true claims and be held accountable for whether they chicken out or seem over-eager when someone claims super-cop-doc, etc, or how keen they are to buy their since-deceased scum-buddy's poor fake claim.[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
I want inHim to claim so that if he claims something important, we have time to consider finding another lynch. At this point it's pretty academic, though. I don't think there's enough time left.
You're misrepresenting me here. I do not think that an individual should claim to directly flush out scum. I think that, as a site, the town benefits from forcing claims at lynch -1 and discussing them while the scum benefits from not opening up that avenue of discussion.The Fonz wrote:Also your 'getting a claim out of someone is a great way to blah blah blah...' is just untrue, and no reason at all to claim.
One very obvious application of this: if everyone claims, a mafia forced to claim on Day 1 will have to either claim VT or a fake power-role, which drastically increases the chances of them getting caught out there and then, or later in the game.[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
Not exactly a meta: I'm asserting that inHim's policy is poor town play because if everyone adopted it the town would make less-informed lynches with less useful discussion to look back on.
I can definitely see instances when a pro-town player shouldn't claim; however they are definitely not very numerous if getting lynched looks to be an otherwise certainty. You didn't answer my earlier question - what do you think the likelihood of us not lynching inHim at this point is?[size=84]QUACK[/size]-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK
-
-
Dasquian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1430
- Joined: November 3, 2003
- Location: Guildford, UK