Mafia 82: International (Game Over)

[hasdgfas]

@Netlava, I remember that game, though it was my first I didnt see you acting very scummy more you just backed yourself in a corner either way just because someone uses that phrase doesn't make them automatically scum.

Heh, I actually quite agree with this statement.

[Snaps_the_Pirate]

From what I've picked up, MafiaMann is town, I'm pretty sure I know his role too.

That's all I know right now.

Stranger Coug- I'm not on all that much, that's why It looks like that.

I'm trying, all right, it's just going wayy to fast for me, so I'm going to ask to be replaced.

Well that looks dodgy. Ani can't possibly know anyone's role. He is obviously not paying close enough attention to the game to even keep up, let alone deduce anyones role.

Now, as a fellow maker of this type of post, I can say a number of things about it. The sentence "Who's misrepresenting who?" suffers some of the same types of problems I was pointing out with earthworm's earlier posts, though to a lesser extent, in that it does not take a side, but implies guilt of one side. Saying "who's misrepresenting who" was my way of interjecting into an argument between two people, and sort of taking a side, but still keeping options flexible. I do not like the sound of that post.

The context of the two posts you are comparing is completely different. BTW it should be "Who is misrepresenting

whom

"

[armlx]

Well that looks dodgy. Ani can't possibly know anyone's role. He is obviously not paying close enough attention to the game to even keep up, let alone deduce anyones role.

He's being replaced too, which makes the situation 10x more awkward.

[Cyberbob]

I do like Animorphperv for possible scum; partly for the inconsistency Snaps just outlined but also for his arguable rolefishing WRT MafiaMann. Highlighting someone as possibly having a power role is pretty damn anti-town as all it accomplishes is painting a nice big target on their backs for scum.

FOS: Animorphperv1

That would've been a vote were it not for my still not having seen anything from Netlava to inspire me to unvote.

You didnt call it 'excellent' now, did you? I can concede that some people are so blinded by their own arrogance and self-righteousness that they believe whatever they say is always right. But when somebody else buys into it? I'm not standing for it.

This is the single most ironic thing in the history of stuff. Just thought I'd throw that out there.

[Battle Mage]

I do like Animorphperv for possible scum; partly for the inconsistency Snaps just outlined but also for his arguable rolefishing WRT MafiaMann. Highlighting someone as possibly having a power role is pretty damn anti-town as all it accomplishes is painting a nice big target on their backs for scum.

FOS: Animorphperv1

That would've been a vote were it not for my still not having seen anything from Netlava to inspire me to unvote.

You didnt call it 'excellent' now, did you? I can concede that some people are so blinded by their own arrogance and self-righteousness that they believe whatever they say is always right. But when somebody else buys into it? I'm not standing for it.

This is the single most ironic thing in the history of stuff. Just thought I'd throw that out there.

You probably wouldn't realise it was intentional if you hadn't been reading.

BM

[skitzer]

Vote Count Nine of Day One

(3) Erratus Apathos: nhat, DynamoXI, Cephrir
(3) Cass: Netlava, Veronica13, OpposedForce
(3) DynamoXI: armlx, Battle Mage, hasdgfas
(2) nhat: animorpherv1, Cass
(2) hasdgfas: Korts, Lowell
(1) StrangerCoug: Snaps_The_Pirate
(1) Battle Mage: Untitled
(1) Untitled: cerebus3
(1) Netlava: Cyberbob
(1) armlx: Erratus Apathos
(1) animorpherv1: StrangerCoug

(7) Not Voting: raider8169, cris150, Mr. T, maxwellhouse, Citizen Karne, MafiaMann, earthworm

With 26 alive, it takes 14 votes to lynch!

Last Post Count Nine of Day One

Key:
Green - posted in last 24 hours
Yellow - posted in last 48 hours
Olive - Posted in last 72 hours
Red - Posted more than 72 hours ago, prodded
Dark Red - Requiring Replacement
Dark Blue - Vacation/Limited Access

Battle Mage

Netlava

hasdgfas

Cass

Citizen Karne

raider8169

Veronica13

Snaps_The_Pirate

armlx

Cyberbob

DynamoXI

MafiaMann

Erratus Apathos

StrangerCoug

earthworm

maxwellhouse

nhat

Lowell

Cephrir

Untitled

Korts

OpposedForce

cris150

animorpherv1

cerebus3

Mr. T

[Lowell]

unvote, vote cass

. Why is cass still talking about "the pact"? It's a totally meaningless diversion.

[Korts]

Earthworm's defense of me is much appreciated, but I'm a bit wary. The problem is that typically, with some exceptions e.g. lynch situations, I won't be comfortable defending other players without knowing their alignment. I usually see scum defend other players more than townies defending other players. This situation, in particular, may be a bit premature, which makes me suspect a possible buddy-up attempt.

This post implies to me an Earthworm-Netlava connection more than the initial defense from Earthworm. Netlava seems to be trying to communicate to EW that the defending should stop, and also nipping any attacks based on this in the bud.

You just lost the 'Convince the BM' Battle. And we both know what comes next.

Not the Comfy Chair!

On a different note, BM, why is Skimmy Scummy? It's anti-game, but I'd dismiss that as a valid scumtell. BTW, you're overly antagonizing SC, I feel, which I'm suspicious of you for.

oh and btw...

Oh My God, U Suck.

Heh, yay for subtlety!

If I'm slandering you as you say I am, then you're slandering me back, and this is a lose-lose proposition unless we can settle our differences.

SC's answer seems very pro-town, and he's reacting pretty level-headedly to BM's provocation. He gets a plus point for style.

On the topic of vote-hopping, what do you guys think of this?

Its a minor scum tell but right now as no one as a solid case anything is possible.

What's this supposed to mean? The existence of solid cases does in no way relate to the strength of a scumtell. This is a very vague sentence; I smell active lurking.

I'm liking EA's post 454 in and of itself, but he is getting very tunnel vision, I feel.

I'll have to continue later, seems I didn't get very far. At this pace, I'll catch up by the time the game ends...

[skitzer]

markfg replaces Mr. T.

[markfg]

Howdy everyone, going to need some time to read 25 pages.

[Battle Mage]

Earthworm's defense of me is much appreciated, but I'm a bit wary. The problem is that typically, with some exceptions e.g. lynch situations, I won't be comfortable defending other players without knowing their alignment. I usually see scum defend other players more than townies defending other players. This situation, in particular, may be a bit premature, which makes me suspect a possible buddy-up attempt.

This post implies to me an Earthworm-Netlava connection more than the initial defense from Earthworm. Netlava seems to be trying to communicate to EW that the defending should stop, and also nipping any attacks based on this in the bud.

You just lost the 'Convince the BM' Battle. And we both know what comes next.

Not the Comfy Chair!

On a different note, BM, why is Skimmy Scummy? It's anti-game, but I'd dismiss that as a valid scumtell. BTW, you're overly antagonizing SC, I feel, which I'm suspicious of you for.

Got sick of the splinters eh? Unfortunately, i think you chose the wrong side to come down on.
Skimming is scummy because protown players are more likely to read stuff in order to understand it and properly comment on it. Scum dont need to hunt scum, and can afford to be lazy. This does not necessarily apply in tl;dr type posts, but in general, i feel it's a pretty sound scumtell.

If I'm slandering you as you say I am, then you're slandering me back, and this is a lose-lose proposition unless we can settle our differences.

SC's answer seems very pro-town, and he's reacting pretty level-headedly to BM's provocation. He gets a plus point for style.

really? Somebody else commented that his comment seemed like wimping out from a confrontation, and my view was that it emphasised the conflict was personal, rather than based on the game, which implied he didn't find me scummy. Which is inconsistent given his previous and subsequent comments.

BM

[StrangerCoug]

I do like Animorphperv for possible scum; partly for the inconsistency Snaps just outlined but also for his arguable rolefishing WRT MafiaMann.

"WRT"?

unvote, vote cass

. Why is cass still talking about "the pact"? It's a totally meaningless diversion.

This looks like awfully weak reasoning. Explain please.

[Battle Mage]

Why was Mr.T replaced here, when he is active elsewhere on site?

BM

[Erratus Apathos]

Post 555-EA: Mind going more in-depth on armlx pushing your wagon w/o getting on it? Quotes or something?

Right.

Unvote
Vote - Erratus Apathos

His first case against Netlava:

Netlava wrote:
Also, earthworm and petergriffin are way too interested in arguing about the pact.

Yes, let's discourage argument, that'll help the town. Rolling Eyes
ItV: Netlava

Then hops off to vote Cephrir for this:

Cephrir wrote:
Votes generally indicate a willingness to lynch someone.

Unvote, Vote: Cephrir. You know that statement doesn't apply to the beginning of day 1.

Then changes his vote yet again on me based on this:

"I attacked you during the pregame, so you're not allowed to attack me ever again." Rolling Eyes
Unvote, Vote: nhat

All of your reasons are flimsy. I'd look past it if it was once, seeing it was the start of the day, but twice more looks suspicious.

You make a good point about the Cephrir vote swap, especially after he had already made a serious vote.

On the other hand, EA implied that his votes do not mean an intention to lynch (yet). So his vote-swapping is comparable to a load of FoSes for different people, which does not seem scummy to me. I sounds like Nhat has built another very weak case, this time to distract attention.

Unvote
Vote: Nhat

It is a good bandwagon.

So...because I'm under the spotlight it's scummy for me to scumhunt? Also, I'm not feeling how you are comparing my case on Untitled and the one on EA since one is more substantial than the other.

I'm with nhat here.

Unvote

armlx encourages nhat to stay on my wagon. His unvote (he was voting nhat) isn't making any sense... nhat makes one attack he agrees with, so he lets nhat off the hook? Yet he doesn't agree with the attack enough to put his vote on me? And then he starts calling my voting pattern flimsy.

@Nhat: of course you're allowed to scum-hunt, but this case is papery-thin. It really feels like an attempt at distraction to me. (And I thought your first case was nonsensical, so I agreed with the votes already on you.)

Cass, his first vote was weak, the second weaker even, and finally the third strong. Whats weak about that case?

Cass, his first vote was weak, the second weaker even, and finally the third strong. Whats weak about that case?

Well, he basically votes EA because EA changed his vote around. On day one. When EA has said literally that vote =/= intention to lynch. I disagree that voting different people at this stage of the game is a scumtell at all.

And Nhat voting based on that is an excellent reason to put a little more pressure on him. (It's not as if he's anywhere near a risk of getting lynched.)

Cass, he votes EA because he is vote flopping after 10 pages of relevant discussion based on weak premises. And vote should = intent to lynch here. Not necessarily end with lynch right there, but want to see a line of action that could lead to that.

Cass disagrees that my vote-switching is scummy. armlx tries to change her mind.

Oh shit, I forgot that townies have rock-solid unchanging reads on everyone at this stage in the game. You sure caught me, champ.

Never rock solid, but not hoppy as that.

Because changing your mind more than once is something only scum would do, right?

Based on those reasons, pretty much.

Nobody's attacking the reasons, they're just saying "2 vote hops? SCUM!!!!!"

I'm pretty sure EVERYONE is attacking the reasons.

In this exchange he seems reasonably confident I'm scum.

I'm pretty sure EVERYONE is attacking the reasons.

Totally calling this bluff.

Although Korts later pointed out where armlx could have got this point of view from, armlx flat out ignored my challenge, which makes me believe he never really had that point of view to begin with.

If i had to vote right now id vote untitled but i dont need to vote now

Yeah, but if you don't vote you don't give info. Not voting is just as anti-town as vote hopping everywhere.

Did you notice the (not-so-)subtle push for my wagon here?

I don't like armlx generalizing things like that. Who's to tell what standard town behaviour should look like?

Thats what the average town player on MS looks like. You miss the point that EA's reasoning behind each hop was loose at best.

First of all, Korts

obviously

didn't miss that point, seeing how he explained it himself in the very same post:

Because changing your mind more than once is something only scum would do, right?

Based on those reasons, pretty much.

Nobody's attacking the reasons, they're just saying "2 vote hops? SCUM!!!!!"

This, however, makes me rethink my position on EA. He had some reasons, yes, but people did comment on them being too weak. I'd say that counts as an attack.

Secondly, as he did with Cass, once again armlx is trying to push someone else onto my wagon.

All of this is without him ever once being on my wagon. Also while looking through his posts I noticed that he's been voting Dynamo for most of the day, but otherwise has completely ignored Dynamo. This is another solid scumtell and I'd be happy with an armlx lynch today.

[Cass]

unvote, vote cass

. Why is cass still talking about "the pact"? It's a totally meaningless diversion.

I just wanted BM to answer a question, mostly because I was curious, and because of a possible contradiction. I admit it wasn't very relevant to scumhunting.

On my scum-list right now, in random order:
- nhat (reasons have been discussed, not much has changed)
- animorpherv (I agree with Snaps & Cyberbob, plus I'm quite annoyed he ran away before answering our questions)
- armlx (seems to be lurking in plain sight, gives me a bad vibe)
- Dynamo (his hesitation to vote, his touchy response to my commenting on that, possible role-fishing)

On another note, I really hope the slow readers / lurkers can pick up the pace, I find it very hard to keep track of replacements and such in a game as large as this one.

[Battle Mage]

If i had to vote right now id vote untitled but i dont need to vote now

Yeah, but if you don't vote you don't give info. Not voting is just as anti-town as vote hopping everywhere.

Did you notice the (not-so-)subtle push for my wagon here?

Erm, no. Not unless your name is 'Untitled' anyway.

BM

[Cass]

Hm, I had not even noticed that armlx was pushing wagons without putting his vote on them... explains my bad feeling I guess.
I'm curious if he has an explanation.

FoS Armlx

[armlx]

Skimming is scummy because protown players are more likely to read stuff in order to understand it and properly comment on it. Scum dont need to hunt scum, and can afford to be lazy. This does not necessarily apply in tl;dr type posts, but in general, i feel it's a pretty sound scumtell.

Depends on the level of reading the person has to do, and whether the skimming leads to misreps IMO.

nhat makes one attack he agrees with, so he lets nhat off the hook? Yet he doesn't agree with the attack enough to put his vote on me? And then he starts calling my voting pattern flimsy.

nhat was being voted for being unreasonable. He became reasonable, my vote had no backing.

Although Korts later pointed out where armlx could have got this point of view from, armlx flat out ignored my challenge, which makes me believe he never really had that point of view to begin with.

I felt people would add their own responses if they felt slighted by either of our statements. If your votes had legit reasons behind them, they wouldn't be attacked. That was my point.

Also while looking through his posts I noticed that he's been voting Dynamo for most of the day, but otherwise has completely ignored Dynamo. This is another solid scumtell and I'd be happy with an armlx lynch today.

How is this a scum tell?

[Netlava]

The context of the two posts you are comparing is completely different. BTW it should be "Who is misrepresenting whom"

How are the two contexts different? Does this mean you find the context in which I used it scummy?

@ Cyberbob: My "discussion" of the pact does not contradict my reasons for suspecting people. I gave about 2 lines on why I thought the pact's validity was a non-issue, and that peter's & earthworm's long back and forth made it an issue. Note that "too interested" was my reason.

[armlx]

Hm, I had not even noticed that armlx was pushing wagons without putting his vote on them... explains my bad feeling I guess.
I'm curious if he has an explanation.
FoS Armlx

After unvoting nhat, I figuredmy first intuitions about the pact were most likely the most accurate and that Dynamo's action was the scummiest thing so far.

[Citizen Karne]

Erm, can I sign the treaty?

[armlx]

No, the treaty has been shot down.

[DynamoXI]

Erm, can I sign the treaty?

Welcome to page 25 ;P

[StrangerCoug]

Unvote: animorpherv1

since the vote is accomplishing nothing.

[Cyberbob]

"WRT"?

With Regard To.

@ Cyberbob: My "discussion" of the pact does not contradict my reasons for suspecting people. I gave about 2 lines on why I thought the pact's validity was a non-issue, and that peter's & earthworm's long back and forth made it an issue. Note that "too interested" was my reason.

Ah, I see. You were looking at the amount of time spent on the discussion, not the discussion per se.

Unvote, Vote: Animorphperv1