Mature Mafia: Game Over
-
-
Glork Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Posts: 14106
- Joined: July 13, 2005
- Location: Dance into the fire
-
-
Glork Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Posts: 14106
- Joined: July 13, 2005
- Location: Dance into the fire
-
-
Glork Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Posts: 14106
- Joined: July 13, 2005
- Location: Dance into the fire
One plus two plus two plus one...mathcam wrote:For some reason, I feel like we're in the middle of the movieClue/. There's going to be a lot of running around between the kitchen and the attic.
I'd like to hear something stronger against DGB, and/or a response from her.
Cam-
-
Glork Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Posts: 14106
- Joined: July 13, 2005
- Location: Dance into the fire
Holy crap.
I just now realized that we can edit one anothers' posts.
I was operating under the assumption that one specific player had this abilty.
Unvote-
-
Glork Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Posts: 14106
- Joined: July 13, 2005
- Location: Dance into the fire
Yep. Trailless. See 52, logic.
This may go without saying, but I think we all need to agree that no protown player should edit any posts from here on out. That way, any reported/confirmed edits are known to come from scum.-
-
Glork Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Posts: 14106
- Joined: July 13, 2005
- Location: Dance into the fire
-
-
Glork Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Posts: 14106
- Joined: July 13, 2005
- Location: Dance into the fire
FYI, I'm really interested to see where this RAJ/Axel thing goes. My hunch was not what RAJ saw.
I would absolutely be interested in a binding agreement asforum members(as opposed to players/roles in this game) that would tie us to the same rules one typically sees in a conventional mafia game.
Also, Fun Fact:
Note especially "Do not edit/delete posts."Forum Rules and Guidelines wrote:Mafia Specific Rules- Do not talk outside the game thread about an ongoing game except where allowed to do so by your role. Likewise, do not use bbcode to hide secret messages - this equates to discussion outside the thread.
- Do not edit/delete posts.
- Do not quote communications with the moderator (in particular, your role PM). Paraphrasing is usually ok.
- Do not talk after you are dead or replaced. Some moderators do allow contentless "Bah!" posts, but you should never reveal information once you are dead.
We may bend (or waive altogether) the last rule, if it is up to a dead individual to reveal one's own role. If this is the case, I would strongly suggest we create a binding rule that players must reveal their alignments and roles truthfully. Failure to adhere to this rule really invalidates the game as a whole, and it creates a very empty victory for the eventual "winners."-
-
Glork Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Posts: 14106
- Joined: July 13, 2005
- Location: Dance into the fire
EBWOP: In fact, as somebody has already violated that rule, I strongly suggest that they fess up and allow us to modkill them. That was seriously not cool. At all.-
-
Glork Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Posts: 14106
- Joined: July 13, 2005
- Location: Dance into the fire
DISCLAIMER: The upcoming post does not necessarily reflect what my own role may or may not be/include. I am merely using it as the simplest example I can think of off the top of my head, so as to make a point to Axel.
Consider the case of a mountainous game (aside from "mod powers" such as VCing). At night, the Mafia could simply PM their target saying something along the lines of "We are killing you. Please open the thread and reveal your role to the other players" -- perhaps even from an alt/anonymous account. The deceased player (n this case, Zu_Faul) complies, and the rest of us move on with our lives.
In the absence of a "killer" alt for PMing purposes, a situation such as the above example would create an interesting scenario in which the scums would have to rely on victims' honesty to not reveal their identities while the town relies on the scums to reveal themselves truthfully and to adhere to conventional game rules.-
-
Glork Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Posts: 14106
- Joined: July 13, 2005
- Location: Dance into the fire
EBWOP:Axel wrote:A "pledge" that everyone is going to be honest is pointless though. Either you agree that the game just can't work at all without a certain amount of honesty, in which case no "pledge" is needed, or you don't, in which case your pledge would be worthless.
Rather than a pledge, simply have each player acknowledge that they need to be honest. That's what the point of the suggested "pledge" is, anyway. I think you're making a big deal out of nothing here.-
-
Glork Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Posts: 14106
- Joined: July 13, 2005
- Location: Dance into the fire
I want to completely, 100% avoid any possible scenario such as what happened witih Vollkan in the nightless, mod-abandoned game. So yes, I do think that it would have a difference. It's important to make impress upon everyone that we are speaking not as our roles, but outside of the game. Feh. Maybe I'm the one making a big deal out of nothing.Axelrod wrote:
I'm not making a "deal" out of anything. I just don't understand why you think this would make any difference at all. Do you actually think the scum (if they don't already agree with this position) are going to have any compunctionsGlork wrote:
Rather than a pledge, simply have each player acknowledge that they need to be honest. That's what the point of the suggested "pledge" is, anyway. I think you're making a big deal out of nothing here.sayingthat they agree with it?-
-
Glork Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Posts: 14106
- Joined: July 13, 2005
- Location: Dance into the fire
-
-
Glork Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Posts: 14106
- Joined: July 13, 2005
- Location: Dance into the fire
Dude, I'm so protown right now it isn't even funny.
FYI, I am definitely feeing a rajwagon right now.-
-
Glork Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Posts: 14106
- Joined: July 13, 2005
- Location: Dance into the fire
-
-
Glork Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Posts: 14106
- Joined: July 13, 2005
- Location: Dance into the fire
-
-
Glork Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Posts: 14106
- Joined: July 13, 2005
- Location: Dance into the fire
-
-
Glork Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Posts: 14106
- Joined: July 13, 2005
- Location: Dance into the fire
-
-
Glork Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Posts: 14106
- Joined: July 13, 2005
- Location: Dance into the fire
EBWOP: Some mods require that one unvotes before re-voting. Others do not. I'm curious to see what the next VC looks like, so that there will be no confusion going forward. (Incidentally, I am also curious to see how Adel's script reads a re-vote without an unvote.)-
-
Glork Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Posts: 14106
- Joined: July 13, 2005
- Location: Dance into the fire
FoS: Macros
The whole "well we can't enforce it aside from lynching, so what's the point in harping on about it" thing reads, to me, that he's trying to egg the scums on into breaking rules that appear to be unenforcable.-
-
Glork Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Posts: 14106
- Joined: July 13, 2005
- Location: Dance into the fire
Fair 'nuff.
I'm pretty pleased with my rajvote, bee tee dubs.-
-
Glork Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Posts: 14106
- Joined: July 13, 2005
- Location: Dance into the fire
I more or less agree with Logic. I don't see anything malicious out of Cam's posts, and I'm not particularly fond of the backing of votes behind him.
Over/Under for number of scum on Cam's wagon right now is 1.5... Let's place some bets.-
-
Glork Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Posts: 14106
- Joined: July 13, 2005
- Location: Dance into the fire
Macros: Over or Under on # of scums on Camwagon?
RAJ: Over or Under on # of scums on Camwagon?-
-
Glork Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Posts: 14106
- Joined: July 13, 2005
- Location: Dance into the fire
-
-
Glork Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Posts: 14106
- Joined: July 13, 2005
- Location: Dance into the fire
The point of the over/under is to get people to weigh in on the five people voting for Mathcam and make a gut-call on whether they think 2 or more of the people on that bandwagon are scum.
Anybody who does not provide an answer is either unwilling to try to analyze the first bandwagon of the game, or they are simply unwilling to provide an answer to my question.
Ofcoursethere could be zero or all scum on Cam right now, Macros. I'm not asking what you think ispossible. I am asking what you thinkis the case. Out of {Macros, phoebus, talitha, pooky, elvis_knits}, do you think there are more or less than 1.5 scums?-
-
Glork Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Posts: 14106
- Joined: July 13, 2005
- Location: Dance into the fire
EBWOP:FoS: Logic, Axel, EK, Macros, Camfor obvious reasons.-
-
Glork Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Posts: 14106
- Joined: July 13, 2005
- Location: Dance into the fire
I'm not squashing the wagon. I'm trying to get an understanding of what people think of the wagoners.
Why are you avoiding placing an Over/Under bet?-
-
Glork Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Posts: 14106
- Joined: July 13, 2005
- Location: Dance into the fire
The wagon has crested and is already beginning to fall. Why do you want attention back on Cam?-
-
Glork Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Posts: 14106
- Joined: July 13, 2005
- Location: Dance into the fire
Unvote, Vote: DGB
Putting faith in a lynch is one thing. Pushing wagons blindly or with no reasoning whatsoever, for its own sake, is another. DGB should perish immediately.-
-
Glork Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Posts: 14106
- Joined: July 13, 2005
- Location: Dance into the fire
DGB, give me five reasons, based on Mathcam's posts alone, that contribute to him being scum.-
-
Glork Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Posts: 14106
- Joined: July 13, 2005
- Location: Dance into the fire
Alternatively, give me five strategic reasons why shamelessly pushing wagons in which you don't believe makes for good protown play.-
-
Glork Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Posts: 14106
- Joined: July 13, 2005
- Location: Dance into the fire
-
-
Glork Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Posts: 14106
- Joined: July 13, 2005
- Location: Dance into the fire
-
-
Glork Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Posts: 14106
- Joined: July 13, 2005
- Location: Dance into the fire
To elaborate:
1) Is a stretch because Cam downplayed the possibilty of faking one's own death. DGB failed to quote Cam's full post, and doing so mitigates even Cam's own belief in his theory.
2) Isn't too much of a stretch; it is one of two points I consider legitimate.
3) Is a stretch. Players agree with one another ALL THE FUCKING TIME. That does not inherently make it buddying. You failed to includeANYof the context of Cam's post (another example of selective reading/quoting):
Are honestly you saying it's scummy to agree that:Cam wrote:I agree with Adel, at least as far as how unclear the rules are. If we're in the "It's up to us to follow the rules" mode, then editing a post is modkillable.
A) the rules are unclear (given that the rules post says "You know the rules" or something along those lines); or that
B) sabotaging gameposts in the thread is modkillable
I'd like to know your own personal thoughts on A and B. Do you agree with them?
4) Is a stretch. No player, Pooky or otherwise, should be excused for their behavior. I see no reason not to probe Pooky on why he's following Tally so unquestioningly.
5) Is mostly legit. Both town and scum complain about being run up for stupid reasons, but that kind of reaction is something I'd expect more from scum than from town.
6) Is a stretch. If Cam is indeed scum, then he is deflecting which makes him scummy. HOWEVER, if he is protown, then it is safe to assume that he genuinely suspects Pooky. Thus, his attempts to get people to vote for Pooky are nothing more than attempts to try to get a lynch on someone he believes is scummy. DGB's point here does not follow logically -- she just makes a flat assertion with no backup whatsoever.
7) Is a stretch, possibly moreso than any of the others. I asked EK why she suspected Cam, she made a statement, and Cam asked her to elaborate on why "resistance to self-modding" implied "scum." Asking somebody to elaborate on their thought process is perfectly reasonable.
I am 95% sure that you wagoned Cam first and then sought reasons to suspect him once I asked you if your "suspicion" was legitimate. This is almost always indicative of scum seeking a mislynch.-
-
Glork Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Posts: 14106
- Joined: July 13, 2005
- Location: Dance into the fire
I like that you call it Page 4.
I find it interesting that after making seven points, you agree with me that five of them are stretches.
I find it annoying that you actually use "do you think I would out myself as scum by going for a mislynch on the first real wagon" as a defense. I think that scum are just as likely to jump the first wagon of the game as town, so that does not play a factor into my read of you at all. You will not WIFOM me here, missy.-
-
Glork Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Posts: 14106
- Joined: July 13, 2005
- Location: Dance into the fire
-
-
Glork Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Posts: 14106
- Joined: July 13, 2005
- Location: Dance into the fire
Silly Pooky.
I wanted to see what out DGB would take... i.e., whether she'd actually make up reasons to "suspect" Cam or not. That was the whole point of my interrogation. So I guess that fits into "D" if you want to think of it as maliciously as possible. I see DGB being at least as likely to say that she doesn't have five actual reasons to suspect Cam. If she's town, I see this being more likely the case; if scum, less likely.
To "answer" your request, I'm going to respond probably exactly as you expect me to:
I don't have five made up reasons to suspect DGB. I have two good, solid, legitimate ones.
1) She wagoned Cam for the sake of trying to achieve a quick lynch based on her recent "FIRING SQUAD" notion, when I think this that her behavior in this instance is seriously detrimental to the town
2) As I explained earlier, she fired first and then went looking for reasons. If she'd named her two good reasons up front and settled on a Camwagon, I would have been absolutely fine with that. If she'd thrown down the two good reasons and one or two of the bad ones, I may or may not have given her leeway. She didn't do either of them.
Pooky, if I were the "so scum" that you claim, I imagine that I'd've crapped all over her admittance that most of her points weren't very strong. In reality, I'm just not sure what to make of it. It could be DGB actually playing off this Firing Squad shindig with little regard to the immediate consequences of her behavior; it could be her backing off to avoid getting torn to shreds.
Either way, I am reasonably content with my vote right now.
By the way, B) is utter crap. Having "a rep on the site" doesn't mean shit in this game, because none of the players here are players whom I would expect to wagon DGB for being DGB. If this game had MoS, JD, Quag, and Jath... yeah, you'd probably have a point. In this game, with this playerlist, B is moot.
C) is debatable. I'm not sure I have a firm opinion on it.
A) is more or less true, but I do think there's value to be gained from putting pressure on DGB. I feel that I can accurately read her based on interactions (including self-defense) at least 80% of the time. I like having 80% certainty on a player's alignment ASAP (which also explains C well enough).
As far as D goes, see above. Yes, I wanted to see if she'd put out five reasons or not. I will admit that I did not expect her to be able to put out five good reasons. The answer I would expect would be exactly what I said above: "I don't have five reasons, but here is what Idohave." The answer she gave indicates something I generally expect scum to do.
Also, Pooky, Jathan isn't in this game. He's not nearly mature enough.-
-
Glork Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Posts: 14106
- Joined: July 13, 2005
- Location: Dance into the fire
I noticed this, too. Macros is def on my bad list.PookyTheMagicalBear wrote:Btw I find it cute that Macros is voting DGB for "blatant bandwagoning"
when he is doing the same thing.-
-
Glork Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Posts: 14106
- Joined: July 13, 2005
- Location: Dance into the fire
-
-
Glork Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Posts: 14106
- Joined: July 13, 2005
- Location: Dance into the fire
I was trying to make a point. Here's how I expected the conversation to go:PookyTheMagicalBear wrote:@Glork
The tone of your post was not a questioning one,
"DGB, give me five reasons, based on Mathcam's posts alone, that contribute to him being scum. "
that's a command tone, considering your persona on this website is very much forceful, I don't find it surprising that you issued a command and she buckled under.
You also told her in the follow up upon her initially ignoring you
"DGB, answer one of my questions. Now."
I emphasize the Now part of that as being particularly forceful.
It wasn't so much of a "Do you have 5 reasons to suspect cam and if so what are they?" as much of a "Give me 5 reasons.. NOW"
I'm not quite sure why you imagine she would've been just as likely to deflect with fewer reasons. Also, how do you know she "made up" her reasons post=vote?
"5 good reasons now."
"I can't do that."
"Then how are you being condusive to helping the town or finding scum if you're just shamelessly wagoning?"
--response by DGB--
The point I was trying to make is that, even with this "Firing Squad" mentality that DGB has apparently adopted in the last day or two, she should still be using that mentality and her behavior to out scum. Since I did not expect that she really believed mathcam to be scum, I wanted to point out that her wagoning in this instance was :nothelpful:, or I wanted her to convince me that her behavior *was* helpful. When she actuallymade up reasons to 'suspect' Cam, I was surprised and suspicious. When she backed off and agreed that most of her own points were overblown, I was floored.
Furthermore, I'm surprised that you seem to think that being forceful ("abrasive," even, as Phoebus put it) is a big deal. Remember KM2, when I was browbeating PJ D1 because I wanted him under pressure, and he started cracking and appealing to emotion, then you (his scumbuddy) bailed him out by launching an extremely focused attack against me and my behavior towards PJ? I am very much reminded of that here and now. I would expect you to know that I throw my weight around, because that is very often how I like to operate. You yourself even noted that I have a rep for being forceful. What exactly makes this instance different from the dozens upon dozens of other times when I start throwing thebookentire library at someone?
Cam, you still need to claim, as you are still at Lynch-1.-
-
Glork Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Posts: 14106
- Joined: July 13, 2005
- Location: Dance into the fire
You mean valid reason #3, right?DGB wrote:Hey Glork I think that would make it flimflam reason that cam is scum #8.
So Glork, Cam, and Macros have gotten the most suspicion in general so far and now you believe we are a scumgroup. How unbelievably original and insightful.DGB wrote:So we have a Glork-mathcam-Macros scumgroup, wow, you guys must have thought "Dream Team, woo!" when you got your PMs.-
-
Glork Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Posts: 14106
- Joined: July 13, 2005
- Location: Dance into the fire
DGB, aren't you the same person who, not more than 24 hours ago, said "I wouldn't out myself so obviously this early in the game"?-
-
Glork Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Posts: 14106
- Joined: July 13, 2005
- Location: Dance into the fire
....uh-huh.DrippingGoofball wrote:I wouldn't, but you did, haha.
I can't honestly tell if you're
A) A complete idiot
B) Scum
C) Just getting wrapped up in this whole Firing Squad thing
D) A and C
E) A and B
F) A, B, and C-
-
Glork Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Posts: 14106
- Joined: July 13, 2005
- Location: Dance into the fire
1) I have a habit of attacking really bad reasoning. I wasn't going to sit around and let DGB's crap reasons seep, whether Cam was around or not.
2) Raj I've sortof skipped over. His vote on Axel intrigued me, because I was pretty certain he didn't see what I thought I had seen. But yes, he has wagon-hopped, and I've just missed him, probably because he's been less active/vocal overall.
3) As I stated, I believe that I can get an accurate read on DGB's alignment most of the time, once I see her get involved in an extensive debate. DGB and I butt heads in-game at least 50% of the time, often over something tangential or seemingly insignificant, but if it helps me read someone, I'm all for it. (Of course, this game happens to be one of the instances where I'm just baffled, rather than having a firm, strong read on her. I'm still working on it.)-
-
Glork Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Posts: 14106
- Joined: July 13, 2005
- Location: Dance into the fire
I know this is going to be called OMGUS by at least one or two people, but this is ridiculous.rajrhcpfreak wrote:i buy the cam-glork-macros scum team.
Unvote, Vote: RAJ-
-
Glork Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Posts: 14106
- Joined: July 13, 2005
- Location: Dance into the fire
EBWOP: Yes, Adel. That's exactly why I think there's some kind of self-balancing "honor system" both ways.-
-
Glork Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Posts: 14106
- Joined: July 13, 2005
- Location: Dance into the fire
I don't think you honestly believe that the three of us are scum together either.PookyTheMagicalBear wrote:WIFOM much?-
-
Glork Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Posts: 14106
- Joined: July 13, 2005
- Location: Dance into the fire
Oh, I'm sorry. Apparently where you're from,mathcam wrote:On a related note, I'm very suspicious of Glork, raj, and DGB for pushing for a claim.people don't claim when they get run up to Lynch-1.
And yes, we know that everyone has separate quotes for alignment and role. How does that make your claiming any less useful than in a traditional game, where there can be both protown and scum variants of pretty much every common role? Do you refuse to claim in regular games when you're about to be lynched?
ShadowLurker (aka Jathan) is not anyone's alt, and as far as I know, he's not in the game. I'm pretty sure he's posting in the thread just to fuck around with us. He never posted in the sign-up thread, and his name is not listed in the playerlist in the signup thread. (Note that none of us have mod powers in there -- except Tally, I guess, as she's a List Mod, but that's beside the point.) I've PMed the mod to ask if he is in the game. I suspect I'll ether get a non-answer, or confirmation that he's not. But seriously, I would ignore SL's posts.-
-
Glork Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Posts: 14106
- Joined: July 13, 2005
- Location: Dance into the fire
That's currently what I'm thinking, but I'm going to ask a few other not-in-the-game people if they have mod powers or not. If so, I'm going to ask for replacement, as I feel the game would be compromised (because I could see SL screwing around with posts). If not, SL continues to be an annoying-but-harmless little boy.Axelrod wrote:1. Shadowlurker posts in games he is not playing. He's rude like that. That is my current assumption here as well.
Bzzt. Seriously, guys. Use the signup thread. I think it's the most guidance we're going to get in this game.Axel wrote:2. I have not been assuming that everyone has Mod. powers (or rather, Mod. duties). Completely vanilla townies seem very possible.-
-
Glork Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Posts: 14106
- Joined: July 13, 2005
- Location: Dance into the fire
Okay, I just spoke to Mizzy, and here's what she gets:Mizzy wrote: You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot moderate your topics in this forum
I just logged in as Gaspar, and here's what I see:Gaspar wrote:You can post new topics in this forum
You can reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You can vote in polls in this forum
You cannot moderate your topics in this forum
I am going to ask Mizzy to try to post here. I am also going to make a test post with Gaspar, and then I will try to edit it.-
-
Glork Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Posts: 14106
- Joined: July 13, 2005
- Location: Dance into the fire
EBWOP: Fixing tags
Okay, I just spoke to Mizzy, and here's what she gets:Mizzy wrote: You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot moderate your topics in this forum
I just logged in as Gaspar, and here's what I see:Gaspar wrote:You can post new topics in this forum
You can reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You can vote in polls in this forum
You cannot moderate your topics in this forum
I am going to ask Mizzy to try to post here. I am also going to make a test post with Gaspar, and then I will try to edit it.-
-
Glork Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Posts: 14106
- Joined: July 13, 2005
- Location: Dance into the fire
I'm reasonably certain that ShadowLurker can't moderate anything. I would suggest that, for archiving purposes, we leave the posts he has made thus far and simply delete all future posts of his on sight.-
-
Glork Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Posts: 14106
- Joined: July 13, 2005
- Location: Dance into the fire
Oh, I see. Sorry, I misunderstood. In that case, yes; I agree with you.-
-
Glork Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Posts: 14106
- Joined: July 13, 2005
- Location: Dance into the fire
Also, Gaspar can't edit anything. 99% sure that SL is harmless. Let's get back to playing the game now.-
-
Glork Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Posts: 14106
- Joined: July 13, 2005
- Location: Dance into the fire
Yeah, that's going to be hard for me. I tend to read back an awful lot. I just plan on playing as though nobody is going to cheat; if somebody does, I will consider the game a draw, or cancelled.EK wrote:I suggest we don't reread anything in this game as it can be easily tainted.
I would feel okay about going forward off memory. I don't like rereading anyway (and prefer not to do it).
Phoebus seems quite protown to me.
I understand where Adel is coming from regarding DGB's misrepresntation of votecounts, but I don't see that as being out-of-the-ordinary for DGB. I am also still trying to evaluate DGB's behavior, although I will say that she's reverted to her typical stubborn self. She seems content to build and stick with factions, which is not unlike her behavior was in Famous Cats. Naturally, the difference here is that in Famous Cats, she and Pooky were dead in the water after I'd gotten a guilty result on Pooks and had debunked her fake claim. I don't find it all that likely that she'd draw battle lines so distinctly this early as scum, which is a point in her favor.
On a pseudo-related note, I find Cam's stance on not-claiming to be ridiculous. Whether alignment and role/ability are distinguished in different quote tags, different lines (such as here), or not at all hasbeen a deterring factor in claiming one's role in my ~4 years of playing mafia. At this point, I do feel that Cam's defense is an excuse not to claim, as opposed to a reason. Naturally, I suppose that it comes down to the nature of "abilities" that we're talking about here. Supposing Coron were to bite the dust: Would we never have an official vote count again? Would we be unable to lynch? Hardly. I'd give 95% certainty that if a player with a "mod responsibility" dies, one of three things happens:NEVER
A) The responsibility is transitioned to a living player;
B) The deceased player continues to fulfill their responsibility;
C) We carry on without the "official" responsibility
Cam, do you honestly believe that this game is set up so that if players with mod responsibilities die, the game would become crippled or nonfunctional?
Do you expect that having a mod responsibility will make a player less likely to be lynched? More likely to be nightkilled (if town)?-
-
Glork Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Posts: 14106
- Joined: July 13, 2005
- Location: Dance into the fire
-
-
Glork Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Posts: 14106
- Joined: July 13, 2005
- Location: Dance into the fire
EBWOP:
p sure I meant everything I said. I really don't know what you're getting at as far as me "making a mistake" goes.Axel wrote:I am also not a fan of Glork's #277 above. Glork, please look back closely over what you just wrote, go re-read your role PM, and tell me if you made a mistake of any kind.
I will never acknowledge ti as an excuse either, but I am willing to take meta into account when reading people. I do not, for example, play PJ the same way I play DGB.Adel wrote:I refuse to acknowledge "typical for DGB" as an excuse for anti-town behavior.
The crucial detail in reading something like DGB's "misrepresentation" of the vote count is in examining context of the alleged offense. It is true that Cam was at Lynch-1 for a short time. It is true that I pointed this out, and --even though I have consistently maintained that Cam is likely protown, I asked for a claim from him. It is true that DGB can, at times, get wrapped up so tightly in her own arguments that she fails to realize how the game has changed around her. Given those three factors, I do not find her behavior out of the ordinary. To insinuate that I simply gave her a free pass for "being DGB" is ridiculous. But given the context of the game, the comments you questioned do not particularly bother me.-
-
Glork Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Posts: 14106
- Joined: July 13, 2005
- Location: Dance into the fire
Misattributed quote. Axel said it in Post 258.elvis_knits wrote:
I DID NOT WRITE THIS.mathcam wrote:
I think it's too early to say I want him to be lynched. I want him to convince me why he shouldn't be lynched, or fail miserably in doing so, so that I can tell whether or not he is the right lynch. His role claim seems pretty irrelevant, and if he ends up not being lynched, I'd rather it remained secret, so no, I don't want him to claim.Elvis wrote: So wait, you are voting for Raj., but you don't want him to claim?
You just want him to be lynched?
Cam-
-
Glork Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Posts: 14106
- Joined: July 13, 2005
- Location: Dance into the fire
Yeah, I nearly flipped a shit until I looked back to see where it had been written.elvis_knits wrote:Ok, good. I thought I was being screwed with.-
-
Glork Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Posts: 14106
- Joined: July 13, 2005
- Location: Dance into the fire
Protown:
EK, Cam, Adel, Phoebus, Glork, probably Axel
Scum:
Raj
So our other two scums are among:
DGB, Macros, Pooky, Coron, Logic, Tally
Good deal. I think we've had a very productive first day. Can we proceed with lynching RAJ now?-
-
Glork Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Burdened by Proficiency
- Posts: 14106
- Joined: July 13, 2005
- Location: Dance into the fire
I'm pretty sure I have a very relevant response to this, but I'll wait for Cam to answer first.Axel wrote:Are you taking the position that these things are also useless and pointless to claim? That we cannot learn anything?