Read Your Role Mafia - Game Over

[RandomGem]

Okay. First things first.

Unvote

So charter is at L-2 for his SensFan looks town statement. It might be day 1, but I don't get how this a strong case.
I too would like an explanation of MafiaSSK's meta. And I think Electra looks like she is trying to sneak her vote on the bandwagon... I dunno.

[Yaw]

This is why I want SSK to get here and answer the questions asked of him already. I can't answer how this is a case against charter until he does, because it risks tainting SSK's responses. (That is, his responses may indicate scumminess/town-ness, and if I let him piggyback on my responses that's less likely to happen.) I do promise I'll explain why I consider this to be a case for scum as soon as I'm able to.

For reference, the major question asked of SSK is:

Let me get this straight. So my meta read on Sens is that he is town, and using that is scummy. MafiaSSK's meta read on me is that I am scum, and using that is the best course of action? How is the situation any different?

Otherwise, several people have requested that he be more specific about his meta on charter.

[ShadowGirl]

I think we might need a prod or something on SSK, because he's posting in other places on MS except here. :/

[petroleumjelly]

Day One Vote Count #9

6 charter (Yaw, forbiddanlight, Caboose, ooba, MafiaSSK, Electra)
3 ooba (wolframnhart, SocioPath, charter)
2 Natirasha (Natirasha, SensFan)

With

14

alive, it takes

8

to lynch, and

7

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

Not Voting – 3 – RandomGem, Seraphim, ShadowGirl

MafiaSSK has been prodded. If any other prods are needed, let me know, and preferably with a bolded

Mod

to draw my eye.

[MafiaSSK]

/prodded will catch up in a bit

[SensFan]

Here, sorry for absense, but Thanksgiving+birthday+transpo home from school=busy times.

Read what I missed, and I really don't like Nat's attitude. Then again, I find him to be anti-Town in every game we've played. Although he has been anti-Town in both those games...

Anyways, SSK needs to explain, but I also want charter to expand on why he considers me Town because I am debating simple stuff.

[SensFan]

because

he thinks

I am debating simple stuff.

[Electra]

I also find it interesting that the charter bandwagon lost steam very quickly - while I'd like MafiaSSK to be more specific, I think there's some value to whatever meta he's seen. I also think that charter's posts, especially the one of being sure that SensFan is town, is scummy.

So

unvote, vote: charter

Let me get this straight. So my meta read on Sens is that he is town, and using that is scummy. MafiaSSK's meta read on me is that I am scum, and using that is the best course of action? How is the situation any different?

Same thing for the others who hold this belief.

There's a difference between meta read of town vs meta read of scum. You can play the same way as town and scum, but if you're playing in a different way, then you're more likely to be opposite.

So it's something like...

If A (plays differently), then B (opposite alignments).
But it's not necessarily if B, then A. So you can have opposite alignments but play the same.

That said, SSK, there's nothing for you to catch up on. Mainly we're waiting for more specifics.

[charter]

I don't agree with that, but I understand how someone else would think it works.

@Sens, it goes to that newbie game where you were arguing with Romanus. A lot of what you were posting was (in my opinion) dumb. I saw the 'why would a pro-town role vote themselves' arguing to be identical in nature as your 'scum trying to appear helpful one' in NG 638.

[Yaw]

All day with no posting makes Yaw something something...

[SensFan]

I don't agree with that, but I understand how someone else would think it works.

@Sens, it goes to that newbie game where you were arguing with Romanus. A lot of what you were posting was (in my opinion) dumb. I saw the 'why would a pro-town role vote themselves' arguing to be identical in nature as your 'scum trying to appear helpful one' in NG 638.

Completely unrelated. And I still think "Scum try to look helpful, so the fact you are really helpful means you might be Scum" is very dumb.

[charter]

Ok, well I saw them as both being very obvious answers that you can generate an argument out of thin air for.

Yaw, basically everyone in the game is waiting on SSK or ooba, until they post, or people try and look elsewhere, it's probably not going to get better.

[Yaw]

Oh, I know we're waiting on SSK. I just don't like it when it's up to one person to give answers, and that person decides to dick off for a few days. It's inconsiderate. (Especially when I took the trouble to copy the questions for him onto this page, so he wouldn't have to go back and catch up on things. And

especially

when he's still around the board posting in other areas.)

[ooba]

Yaw, basically everyone in the game is waiting on SSK or

ooba

, until they post, or people try and look elsewhere, it's probably not going to get better.

Who is waiting for me exactly?

[Caboose]

/prodded will catch up in a bit

I'm waiting....

[charter]

Yaw, basically everyone in the game is waiting on SSK or

ooba

, until they post, or people try and look elsewhere, it's probably not going to get better.

Who is waiting for me exactly?

Sorry, I thought I'd asked you a question, I went back and realized I didn't. Here is one though.
Why did you hold off giving reasons for your votes, and then changing the reasons after you had gave them the first time? SP had a good post explaining it,

You have made two serious votes this game in a short amount of time.
You weren't the first for either of them and just hopped from one to the other.
Your statement that you weren't going to random vote means that yes, both of your votes were serious.

The reason you stated voting for Natirasha: ______
Later reason: Not random.
Even later reason: "Obvious" because he hadn't posted.


The reason you stated voting for charter: ______
Later reason: Pressure
Even later reason: Him saying he thinks Sens is town.


Generally it is best to at least have a reason first before voting, especially if you imply that everyone of your votes has reason, as opposed to voting first and covering yourself with reasons later as more develops. Especially when stating that everyone of your votes has reason with the statement of you not random voting.

But I'm not saying you were indecisive, because you weren't, I want to know why you didn't give your reasons when you initially voted, and then later changed them. Twice.

[SocioPath]

My thoughts on the charter wagon are this:

So charter is at L-2 for his SensFan looks town statement. It might be day 1, but I don't get how this a strong case.

I still like my vote on ooba.

[ooba]

Yaw, basically everyone in the game is waiting on SSK or

ooba

, until they post, or people try and look elsewhere, it's probably not going to get better.

Who is waiting for me exactly?

Sorry, I thought I'd asked you a question, I went back and realized I didn't. Here is one though.
Why did you hold off giving reasons for your votes, and then

changing the reasons

after you had gave them the first time? SP had a good post explaining it,

You have made two serious votes this game in a short amount of time.
You weren't the first for either of them and just hopped from one to the other.
Your statement that you weren't going to random vote means that yes, both of your votes were serious.

The reason you stated voting for Natirasha: ______
Later reason: Not random.
Even later reason: "Obvious" because he hadn't posted.


The reason you stated voting for charter: ______
Later reason: Pressure
Even later reason: Him saying he thinks Sens is town.


Generally it is best to at least have a reason first before voting, especially if you imply that everyone of your votes has reason, as opposed to voting first and covering yourself with reasons later as more develops. Especially when stating that everyone of your votes has reason with the statement of you not random voting.

But I'm not saying you were indecisive, because you weren't, I want to know why you didn't give your reasons when you initially voted, and then later

changed

them. Twice.

a) Not Random is not a reason
b) Pressure for what - for him saying he feels fairly sure that sens is town. Both are not different reasons.

I never changed any reasons. The only 'case' you have against me is that I did not provide my reasons when i initially voted for Nat and you.

[charter]

Alright,

unvote

Why did we have to pry to get your reasons from you?

[Caboose]

Alright,

unvote

Why did we have to pry to get your reasons from you?

Why do we have to pry to get the "meta" out of SSK? I feel like we're trying to pull teeth here. I see that you're posting elsewhere, but not here.

Unvote
Vote: MafiaSSK

Maybe this will catch your attention.

[wolframnhart]

I agree with Caboose here. MafiaSSK has had plenty of time to post up on elaborating on his Meta against charter, was prodded and says he will catch up but three days later still has not done so and posts else where, and i still don't like the "Charter is scum i know cuz of meta" then drops off the game.

vote MafiaSSK

[forbiddanlight]

Yeah...even if it's his meta, his active lurking is a GREAT way to push a mislynch. for now,

Unvote, Vote MafiaSSK

,

FoS charter

[charter]

Perhaps I can save you all some time. I didn't even bother checking the games that he listed until now. One of them I wasn't even in (530). No idea where that's coming from.

[MafiaSSK]

Still reading.

[Yaw]

You don't have to read. You just have to answer two things:

1 -- Provide specifics on what you meant by charter's meta.

2 -- Explain how your use of meta on charter is different from his use of meta on Sensfan, if you believe these uses are different.

You can read for other stuff afterwards.