Read Your Role Mafia - Game Over

[wolframnhart]

unvote, vote ooba

First you say you don't want to random vote, then you vote Nat on page three. When i ask you about it, you say it isn't a random vote, but never explain why you voted for him. Next you unvote Nat, again with no explanation, and now 2 pages later you jump on the Charter wagon with, once again, no explanation of why.

[petroleumjelly]

Day One Vote Count #5

4 charter (Yaw, forbiddanlight, Caboose, ooba)
2 Natirasha (Natirasha, SensFan)
1 Caboose (Seraphim)
1 ooba (wolframnhart)
1 SensFan (Electra)
1 ShadowGirl (charter)
1 SocioPath (ShadowGirl)
1 wolframnhart (MafiaSSK)
1 Yaw (RandomGem)

With

14

alive, it takes

8

to lynch, and

7

to No-Lynch. Deadline October 22, 9:59 pm CDT.

Not Voting – 1 – SocioPath

Mod Note: Unvotes are not required in this game; I can tell that you mean to unvote when you vote another player. If any prods seem necessary, please feel free to point that out.

[ooba]

unvote, vote ooba

First you say you don't want to random vote, then you vote Nat on page three. When i ask you about it, you say it isn't a random vote, but never explain why you voted for him. Next you unvote Nat, again with no explanation, and now 2 pages later you jump on the Charter wagon with, once again, no explanation of why.

I thought it was quite obvious - I voted nat cause he hadn't posted in the thread till then, unvoted after he had posted and hopped on to the charter wagon for pressure ..

[wolframnhart]

1)no it was not obvious, and I don't see the point of voting someone if you aren't stating why, because then it could be for any reason you come up with, much like your reason for the Nat vote.

2)Why do you feel charter needs pressure? because that is where three other votes where before yours? or do you have any other reason aside from following a few people on this one?

[SocioPath]

Awesome, I am now the only person not voting.

Lets change that shall we?

wolframnhart stated it already, but at this point, I think that ooba's indecisive wagon hopping is only matched by his statement of refusing to random vote. Both alone are harmless, but matched together, rubs the wrong way.

Vote: ooba

[charter]

Oh boy, I seem to be picking up votes like it's my job. The reason why I think Sens is town is the way he's arguing about completely pointless things (in my opinion) which he did against scum in another game I was in with him.

I will also join the ooba wagon since the SG one never materialized (which probably means a loss for the town).

unvote, vote ooba

I only agree with his being too wagon hopping happy.

[Yaw]

The reason why I think Sens is town is the way he's arguing about completely pointless things (in my opinion) which he did against scum in another game I was in with him.

1 -- Arguing about completely pointless things for too long is what was stopping us from getting a good bandwagon going, and actually heading into the scumhunting phase. It isn't necessarily a good thing.

2 -- How many games have you played with Sens? Enough to determine that this is a consistent town meta from him? Have you played games in which he was scum, in which he established a consistent scum meta of the opposite? Why is Sens having done something once in the past sufficient evidence to strongly believe he's town on page 5 of a game in which nothing had happened?

[ooba]

A Sens wagon would be dumb, he is town I am fairly sure.

This is why carter needs pressure..

1)no it was not obvious, and I don't see the point of voting someone if you aren't stating why, because then it could be for any reason you come up with, much like your reason for the Nat vote.

And I do not see the point of stating a reason as to why i voted when it was quite obvious - Nat hadn't posted so it was a pressure/prod vote

wolframnhart stated it already, but at this point, I think that

ooba's indecisive wagon hopping

is only matched by his statement of refusing to random vote. Both alone are harmless, but matched together, rubs the wrong way.

Where have i been indecisive?

[charter]

@SG, we need to lynch you before you can pull your alignment changing wizardry

1- Agreed. Also, there are plenty of others doing this (to a greater degree) as well.
2- I've only played in one game with him, but I've read several other games he's been in, so I do feel confident in my read (for page 5). That's the best I had to go on when I posted it. Is it set in stone? Of course not.

Going back and rereading a little and some questions,
forbidden, why wait so long to vote me?
Caboose, why only vote after Yaw tells you to? Not even going to wait for my answer? Already decided you don't like it, eh?
ooba, going to vote me for pressure, but what are you even pressuring me for? Or was I just randomly picked?

Wish there had been something else to question upon since my last post. I'm actually amazed that I'm catching flack for that one statement, when most of my posts are saying 'wagon her' or 'don't wagon him'.

[ShadowGirl]

Aw, charter, you know I wouldn't do that to you again. <3

Unvote.

Hm, not knowing Sens playstyle I'll take that meta with a grain of salt. Bah, I'll post more once I get back from school.

[forbiddanlight]

forbidden, why wait so long to vote me?

Wasn't that long. I was still torn between Sens Fan and you at the time. And also distracted while I was posting. Also, last time someone asserted someone else was town, they were masons. But, I disregarded that for the fact that you could still use pressure.

[SensFan]

1 -- Arguing about completely pointless things for too long is what was stopping us from getting a good bandwagon going, and actually heading into the scumhunting phase. It isn't necessarily a good thing.

I'd disagree with that, actually. I think it led to some discussion, at least, which was not occuring before I pressured Nat. Obviously I'm not willing to lynch Nat based on a self-vote, but its an early wagon, like any other.

[Caboose]

@charter

Caboose, why only vote after Yaw tells you to?

Because I agree with him in the fact that your wagon deserves merit after you say that you are "fairly sure" that Sens is town on pg. 5.

Already decided you don't like it, eh?

No, I never said that. My vote isn't set in stone and it can be changed (and with how ooba has been acting, it very well might).

To my understanding, the purpose of bandwagons is to see how people act under pressure. Without enough people on the bandwagon, it kind of losses that purpose. No need to get defensive about it. My purpose of playing MafiaScum isn't to get you lynched on D1 of every game that I play with you.

@ooba:

I thought it was quite obvious - I voted nat cause he hadn't posted in the thread till then, unvoted after he had posted and hopped on to the charter wagon for pressure ..

As much as I want to be one, I'm not a mindreader. I don't have some psychic force that can reach through my computer, poke out of your computer, and read your mind for the reason of your vote. I like to have reasons.

[Caboose]

Wow, I really bungled that one.

@charter

Caboose, why only vote after Yaw tells you to?

Because I agree with him in the fact that your wagon deserves merit after you say that you are "fairly sure" that Sens is town on pg. 5.

Already decided you don't like it, eh?

No, I never said that. My vote isn't set in stone and it can be changed (and with how ooba has been acting, it very well might).

To my understanding, the purpose of bandwagons is to see how people act under pressure. Without enough people on the bandwagon, it kind of losses that purpose. No need to get defensive about it. My purpose of playing MafiaScum isn't to get you lynched on D1 of every game that I play with you.

[Natirasha]

So...are we done discussing my meta?

[Yaw]

Pretty much.

I really don't see the ooba-wagon. I mean, I figured out what ooba was doing without needing to be drawn a road map. I don't get why others had issues. I also find it rather suspicious that the ooba-wagon formed right after the first bandwagon of the game was starting to get going, and seems to have sucked off any momentum.

FOS: wolframnhart

for that.

[wolframnhart]

So you are upset that I had a problem with ooba's voting methods and took away from a wagon that you wanted to happen? And how was it the first band wagon? Wouldn't you call the first band wagon Nat's, then charter, then ooba?

[charter]

@Caboose, I took this to mean that you wanted me to explain why I was so confident Sens is town on page 5.

Nope. But it was sure fun. Thinking on it, the way charter is pushing pro town sens is unsettling.

Unvote, vote charter

I would like to know why charter is so confident that Sens is town on page 4. Please.

Then you go to voting me without giving me a chance to explain. It seemed, to me, that you'd already decided that my declaration was enough to warrent a vote, regardless of my explanation. The only thing in between your first request and your vote was Yaw telling you to vote me.

[SensFan]

So you are upset that I had a problem with ooba's voting methods and took away from a wagon that you wanted to happen?

Sounds like it. For the record, that's a genuine reason for him to be upset.

[Yaw]

So you are upset that I had a problem with ooba's voting methods and took away from a wagon that you wanted to happen? And how was it the first band wagon? Wouldn't you call the first band wagon Nat's, then charter, then ooba?

Two votes do not make a bandwagon, and there were only ever two votes on Natirasha at one time. Concurrently, there were also two votes on Sens, and a variety of others (including myself) had two votes on them due to random voting. So no, Natirasha was certainly not the first bandwagon, and given Natirasha's consistency in voting for himself, a bandwagon on him at that time had little merit. The charter-wagon is the first bandwagon of the game that is based on anything approaching evidence.

My actual concern isn't that another bandwagon happened. It's that it occurred right after the fourth vote, at the point when the charter-wagon could actually be called a bandwagon, and was directed at ooba for...well, voting. (What did you really expect him to say? Two people had already explained why what charter said was suspicious, and it was based on one sentence. Do you really expect everyone voting on a bandwagon to repeat the same evidence over and over?) Given the timing and lack of justification for the ooba-wagon, I could see it as an attempt to deliberately derail the charter-wagon. If so, that is definitely suspicious.

[wolframnhart]

So you are upset that I had a problem with ooba's voting methods and took away from a wagon that you wanted to happen? And how was it the first band wagon? Wouldn't you call the first band wagon Nat's, then charter, then ooba?

Two votes do not make a bandwagon, and there were only ever two votes on Natirasha at one time. Concurrently, there were also two votes on Sens, and a variety of others (including myself) had two votes on them due to random voting. So no, Natirasha was certainly not the first bandwagon, and given Natirasha's consistency in voting for himself, a bandwagon on him at that time had little merit. The charter-wagon is the first bandwagon of the game that is based on anything approaching evidence.

My actual concern isn't that another bandwagon happened. It's that it occurred right after the fourth vote, at the point when the charter-wagon could actually be called a bandwagon, and was directed at ooba for...well, voting. (What did you really expect him to say? Two people had already explained why what charter said was suspicious, and it was based on one sentence. Do you really expect everyone voting on a bandwagon to repeat the same evidence over and over?) Given the timing and lack of justification for the ooba-wagon, I could see it as an attempt to deliberately derail the charter-wagon. If so, that is definitely suspicious.

1)If you count Nat's vote on himself, which i do a vote is a vote, there were three votes on him at any given time before people voted charter.
2)I don't care if he regurgitates his reason is the same as another persons, it is a reason, and that is the point. I am not going to guess why someone votes another person if they don't say why, they just vote and expect us to know why.
3)If you want to go on his voting partern, forbiddenlight voted nat first for not posting, then he second vote was ooba's. then ooba unvotes because nat posts (if you want to take ooba's reasoning as to why he voted in the first place) then he just goes ahead and votes charter because everyone else was. Even if he agreed with their reasoning he could have at least said so, because all i see right now is him voting where ever anyone else is at the time he reads the post.

[MafiaSSK]

My meta on Charter says that he is scum.

Vote charter

[ShadowGirl]

My meta on Charter says that he is scum.

Vote charter

What's your meta on him?

[SensFan]

2)I don't care if he regurgitates his reason is the same as another persons, it is a reason, and that is the point. I am not going to guess why someone votes another person if they don't say why, they just vote and expect us to know why.

You're on your own on that one, then. Don't expect people to parrot other's reasoning, when its pretty clear why they're voting, like in this case.

[MafiaSSK]

My meta on Charter says that he is scum.

Vote charter

What's your meta on him?

Mini 530 and 614