Newbie 688 - Game Over, Mafia Wins!

[Scheherazade]

@mrfixij: You want to lynch me because I didn't say "don't lynch Mastin" when I said "let's not hastily lynch him?" The point wasn't "don't lynch Mastin" it was "don't lynch Mastin until you have some idea of who his scum-buddy might be." You're asking me to provide incentive to take a course of action I wasn't advocating to begin with. Again, I find myself at a loss as to how to be more explicitly clear to you, mrfixij. All the "cred" I would need if Mastin were lynched and found to be town is the fact that I didn't vote for him.

You're repeating what I said when you talk about cops, mrfixij.

That material never came, mrfixij. The closest was this:

Well, you said it: I have little to lose. Looking at my planned strategies (all of them), I realize that not a single one of them was a good idea and all would make things worse. One of the main ones would've been role claiming, if allowed (since not all games allow it). Whatever the strategy, I'd use my character-limit-breaking rambles (I've reached character limits on four forums.) to try and see to it that I do not get lynched, since no matter my alignment, getting lynched = bad.

In short, his strategy might have been role-claiming, if that's allowed. If you find that an acceptable answer, fine. I don't. He wrote as if he had something in mind. I'd like to know what it was.

I don't like this line, by the way:

Regardless, I don't like your play at all.

First, saying "none of my stated reasons matter, I just don't like you" is not a good attitude in mafia. At best, it's simply unproductive.

Second, you've made random accusations against me a couple times, now. If you simply don't like my play style, that's fine. But don't grasp at straws to try to turn your unease into a lynch.

Third, you're establishing a curious pattern. When springlullaby votes or posts against me, you immediately jump and vote against me, too. Why is that?

=======================================

Page 7 Votecount

WeatheredClown: (0/5)
Crysnia: (0/5)
mrfixij: (0/5)
Mastin: (1/5) QuestionMark,
Moses le fou: (0/5)
Scheherazade: (2/5) springlullaby, mrfixij,
QuestionMark: (3/5) Scheherazade, Crysnia, Moses le fou,
springlullaby: (0/5)
orangepenguin: (0/5)

Not Voting: (3/9) Mastin, orangepenguin, WeatheredClown

With 9 alive, it's 5 to lynch!
=======================================

[mrfixij]

Alright, let's go through this piece by piece.

@mrfixij: You want to lynch me because I didn't say "don't lynch Mastin" when I said "let's not hastily lynch him?" The point wasn't "don't lynch Mastin" it was "don't lynch Mastin until you have some idea of who his scum-buddy might be.[/b]

As of now, I think you've got me wrong. I'm voting for you because I find your posts scummy. In post 57, you set up advice for Mastin's scumbuddy, under the assumption that mastin is scum. If he is indeed scum, by being so straightforward, you effectively cut off any more information we can find about the other scum. You say what you expect the other scum to do, which sets us in an WIFOM situation, which doesn't help us at all.

I think Mastin is a village idiot. He doesn't realize the implications that his "strategies" have on the game as a whole. The only thing that he's right about so far is that getting lynched as town is bad, but what's more important is lynching scum. As such, from the very start mastin gave up hope on his play. It's setting up a WIFOM situation, where we don't know if he's using reverse psychology, or if he's really that pessimistic about the situation. He's enough under the spotlight that I'd rather lynch someone else and wait for the night action to see what we can deduce from the NK.

You're asking me to provide incentive to take a course of action I wasn't advocating to begin with.

Alright, that was my bad. I read that post as "let's not lynch him today."

Again, I find myself at a loss as to how to be more explicitly clear to you, mrfixij. All the "cred" I would need if Mastin were lynched and found to be town is the fact that I didn't vote for him.

Along with 3 other people. Not to mention that it really doesn't mean a thing if you didn't vote for him. I've been in a game where I was the most pro-town player but was on every town lynch. I put WHERE you vote and your reasoning for voting or not voting at a higher priority than a vote itself.

You're repeating what I said when you talk about cops, mrfixij.

Again, I misread and I apologize. However, I still would prefer a non-mention of cop. If we have one, mentioning it could affect cop's play and give him/her away to scum.

came, mrfixij. The closest was this:

Well, you said it: I have little to lose. Looking at my planned strategies (all of them), I realize that not a single one of them was a good idea and all would make things worse. One of the main ones would've been role claiming, if allowed (since not all games allow it). Whatever the strategy, I'd use my character-limit-breaking rambles (I've reached character limits on four forums.) to try and see to it that I do not get lynched, since no matter my alignment, getting lynched = bad.

In short, his strategy might have been role-claiming, if that's allowed. If you find that an acceptable answer, fine. I don't. He wrote as if he had something in mind. I'd like to know what it was.

Apparantly you missed his entire section on not defending himself, and not drawing attention to himself. I don't like it either, but all signs point to lynchalicious or village idiot

I don't like this line, by the way:

Regardless, I don't like your play at all.

First, saying "none of my stated reasons matter, I just don't like you" is not a good attitude in mafia. At best, it's simply unproductive.

Second, you've made random accusations against me a couple times, now. If you simply don't like my play style, that's fine. But don't grasp at straws to try to turn your unease into a lynch.

It's in town's best interests for any suspicion to come to the surface. I'm trying to do that. At the very least we can get a better read that way on people because they'll respond. But all we've been doing all game is sitting with our thumbs up our butts saying "no u!" And frankly, I'm not a fan of your playstyle, but I don't have to be. If you're town, you can be as terrible of a player as you like, so long as you're helping in some way. If you're scum, I'm going to want to lynch you. Right now I'm getting a light scumread.

Third, you're establishing a curious pattern. When springlullaby votes or posts against me, you immediately jump and vote against me, too. Why is that?

It's in town's best interests for any suspicion to come to the surface. Is there something you'd like to share with the class?[/url]

[mrfixij]

I REALLY hate when I mess up quote tags >_>. My above post is fraught with bad HTTP.

[Scheherazade]

@mrfixij:

In post 57, you set up advice for Mastin's scumbuddy, under the assumption that mastin is scum. If he is indeed scum, by being so straightforward, you effectively cut off any more information we can find about the other scum. You say what you expect the other scum to do, which sets us in an WIFOM situation, which doesn't help us at all.

Not so. I said:

Having written the above, his partner might lurk, but I think that any lurking is suspect anyway.

I anticipated that a mafia player might take a "look for Mastin's scum-buddy" as incentive not to post, and pointed out that not posting is itself suspicious to prevent "OMG you warned his partner!" accusation posts.

Along with 3 other people.

I dunno what that refers to.

Not to mention that it really doesn't mean a thing if you didn't vote for him. I've been in a game where I was the most pro-town player but was on every town lynch. I put WHERE you vote and your reasoning for voting or not voting at a higher priority than a vote itself.

My point was this:

You accuse me of trying to establish credibility by "defending Mastin." It's a moot point, because I wasn't, but my response was to point to the fact that I hadn't voted for him. If I were trying to establish day two credibility as scum, I had a better way of doing it, no?

Apparantly you missed his entire section on not defending himself, and not drawing attention to himself.

Nope. But he made it clear that his policy of not defending himself wasn't the new strategy he had planned.

If you simply don't like my play style, that's fine.

And frankly, I'm not a fan of your playstyle, but I don't have to be.

I had that covered. I took issue with the "regardless" part of your statement. Airing suspicions is generally productive, I'll agree. Saying that they should be allowed to exist independent of rational cause is odd. I was worried that you were confusing "dislikeable play" for "scummy play."

Not really. I don't generally make accusations until I feel there's information to gain or a scum-lynch to be made. I asked you a question, though, the answer to which will probably influence how I read you for the rest of the game. Would you like to answer it?

[mrfixij]

Not really. I don't generally make accusations until I feel there's information to gain or a scum-lynch to be made. I asked you a question, though, the answer to which will probably influence how I read you for the rest of the game. Would you like to answer it?

I'd like to consider it circumstance, but more likely it's the power of suggestion. Someone else suspecting you is giving me reason to go back and look for suspicious text.

[Scheherazade]

Edit: The last paragraph is in response to

Is there something you'd like to share with the class?

[Moses le fou]

Is anybody else bothered by how much fixij has buddied up with springlullaby? Their little gangbang against Scheherazade is troublesome.

[mrfixij]

Is anybody else bothered by how much fixij has buddied up with springlullaby? Their little gangbang against Scheherazade is troublesome.

Schez seems to share your opinion.

[WeatheredClown]

Alright, let's go through this piece by piece.
*snip* I don't like it either, but all signs point to lynchalicious or village idiot

Ok.. either your very confused, or you are maliciously trying to confuse the situation..
to quote the original post:

This Newbie game is "semi-open" and will be using the F11 set-up.

That means no village idiot in this game, no matter what the setup is.

[WeatheredClown]

I'm getting a bit more of a scum vibe from Orangepenguin than I did earlier in the game.. and mastin had scum written all over him from the beginning..
And they haven't voted.. perhaps keeping their options open to drop a hammer?

Of course that'd be rediciously obvious, so I suppose it's unlikely (occham's razor and what-not)...

Anyway.. can't bust somebody for not voting without casting a vote myself..

vote: mastin

although mrfixitj (who I had put my very first vote on) is still on my shady-list. (saved by the fact that he is a prodigious poster which is a very ballsy move when you're scum)

[mrfixij]

Alright, let's go through this piece by piece.
*snip* I don't like it either, but all signs point to lynchalicious or village idiot

Ok.. either your very confused, or you are maliciously trying to confuse the situation..
to quote the original post:

This Newbie game is "semi-open" and will be using the F11 set-up.

That means no village idiot in this game, no matter what the setup is.

Follow the link next time. I don't mean VI the role, I mean VI the personality type.

[mrfixij]

I'm getting a bit more of a scum vibe from Orangepenguin than I did earlier in the game.. and mastin had scum written all over him from the beginning..
And they haven't voted.. perhaps keeping their options open to drop a hammer?

Of course that'd be rediciously obvious, so I suppose it's unlikely (occham's razor and what-not)...

Anyway.. can't bust somebody for not voting without casting a vote myself..

vote: mastin

although mrfixitj (who I had put my very first vote on) is still on my shady-list. (saved by the fact that he is a prodigious poster which is a very ballsy move when you're scum)

Reading back through Mastin's post, if we assume him to be a poor mafia player, then he checks out for the most part. Not to let him off the hook, but my gut right now says that he's not scum.

Also, what reads scummy about Orange? The only possible reads on him are relative inactivity and low contribution for being an IC, both of which are basically metagame.

So Orange, what is your opinion on the transfer between myself and Schehera?

[WeatheredClown]

Follow the link next time. I don't mean VI the role, I mean VI the personality type.

apologies.. I assumed the links was to this: http://www.mafiascum.net/wiki/index.php?title=Jester


As for orange, going back to panamon as the standby seems too convinient.. even if panamon is scum, there's another scum also, so waiting for the replacement to pipe up feels like stalling...
I was tempted to do this too since panamon is also my lead suspect, but decided instead to see what happens if we continue to discuss mastin as a suspect (hence my vote), but orange seems be defending him... Although I suppose that as an IC, he'd know that if Mastin comes up scum that'll be really fishy.

[Mastin]

You offer a lot of text with very little content. [...]For starters, I want to know your thoughts on Schehera and Panamon/mark. Also, do you have any other suspects right now?

Sorry. I do ridiculously long posts without even being aware of it. 'Tis in my nature.

As for opinions:

I really can't give any evidence, other than a 'gut feeling' from the posts, or lack there of. While, personally, I believe that just my gut instinct is meaningless, if it helps, then it, well, helps.

Schehera--seems just a tad bit scummy, yes, from looking at posts, especially if I were to be mafia, since Schehera's posts COULD easily be interpreted as defending me. However, I think it is just more likely that Schehera is a little hesitant to lynch, nothing more. While a tad bit suspicious and one of my lead suspects, Scehera seems more pro-villager.

QuestionMark--we know nothing of QM, other than QM has replaced Panamon and neither actively posts. Panamon's posts with...for lack of a better term, lack of logic supporting vote...make him seem a little scummy, but could just be an example of village idiot in the making. However, QuestionMark has replaced Panamon and I have yet to see any posts from QM. This seems a little scummy to me, but could just be QM's reading style, or lack of activity.

mrfixij--Very active debater; this is very helpful to the town...or so it would seem. All evidence, except for Moses le fou's point, seems to suggest that fixij is pro-villager. That evidence against fixij would only make sense if springlullaby were scum as well, though, which I do not believe is the case. All in all, a person who appears to be pro-villager, but who just as easily could be a good scum player.

I can't find an opinion for WeatheredClown right now, since with a current vote against me, even something as simple as an opinion would be influenced by the OMGUS factor.

Everyone else: Disturbingly silent, with the occasional post. This is suspicious, but is not any evidence alone that a person is scum.


Again, these are just 'gut feelings' from reading the posts. I don't have any evidence to support these claims. If I really believe someone's scum that badly, I'll present evidence supporting it and then cast my vote.

[orangepenguin]

Hmm..I could go ahead and place my vote on someone, but I have mixed feelings regardling several players (Sche, mrfix, Pana), but I think Pan is the most scummy of the three. Holding off voting isn't scummy. I don't normally wait to put my vote down, but I'd rather take in some things before committing to a person, rather then voting someone I think is mildly scummy. True, voting applies pressure, which can be useful. Panamon isn't really the reason I haven't voted. I could just as well vote him, but considering he has a replacement who hasn't posted recently, that's not really fair. Then there's Mastin- he could be a really obvious scum, but more likely, he's just a bad player. I don't like how he isn't committed to playing. If you only post 1 day a week, then you should probably find something other than Mafia to do, considering games can last several months. =/ I'm not really one to post a lot of content day-to-day- true, I am a IC, but IC doesn't = always right nor does it = good player. I am an okay player. I need improvement still, we all do.

To dispell WC's theory, no, I am not waiting to "drop the hammer". And if I did, I would only if I was sure that person was scum and everything, and if that were to happen (me hammering), I'd probably have voted someone by then.

Placing your votes around (vote hopping) is technically more scummy than not voting. It's not like I am advocating a no lynch.

[mrfixij]

@Orange, I'd still like your opinion on the exchange between Schehera and I. Often times the best way to get a valid response or information is by commenting on an accusation/defense.

[mrfixij]

Also Mastin, I'd prefer you taking a slightly more aggressive approach. I made this mistake too, but posting a long list of opinions on a slew of players only serves to make it seem like you're posting content without actually contributing. I understand that you may not have a solid read on anybody yet, but if

anything

in a post look scummy, call it out. It's the only way that town is going to get anywhere right now.

[orangepenguin]

You offer a lot of text with very little content. [...]For starters, I want to know your thoughts on Schehera and Panamon/mark. Also, do you have any other suspects right now?

Sorry. I do ridiculously long posts without even being aware of it. 'Tis in my nature.

As for opinions:

I really can't give any evidence, other than a 'gut feeling' from the posts, or lack there of. While, personally, I believe that just my gut instinct is meaningless, if it helps, then it, well, helps.

Schehera--seems just a tad bit scummy, yes, from looking at posts, especially if I were to be mafia, since Schehera's posts COULD easily be interpreted as defending me. However, I think it is just more likely that Schehera is a little hesitant to lynch, nothing more. While a tad bit suspicious and one of my lead suspects, Scehera seems more pro-villager.

QuestionMark--we know nothing of QM, other than QM has replaced Panamon and neither actively posts. Panamon's posts with...for lack of a better term, lack of logic supporting vote...make him seem a little scummy, but could just be an example of village idiot in the making. However, QuestionMark has replaced Panamon and I have yet to see any posts from QM. This seems a little scummy to me, but could just be QM's reading style, or lack of activity.

mrfixij--Very active debater; this is very helpful to the town...or so it would seem. All evidence, except for Moses le fou's point, seems to suggest that fixij is pro-villager. That evidence against fixij would only make sense if springlullaby were scum as well, though, which I do not believe is the case. All in all, a person who appears to be pro-villager, but who just as easily could be a good scum player.

I can't find an opinion for WeatheredClown right now, since with a current vote against me, even something as simple as an opinion would be influenced by the OMGUS factor.

Everyone else: Disturbingly silent, with the occasional post. This is suspicious, but is not any evidence alone that a person is scum.


Again, these are just 'gut feelings' from reading the posts. I don't have any evidence to support these claims. If I really believe someone's scum that badly, I'll present evidence supporting it and then cast my vote.

Mastin, future advice: Never go on gut feelings alone. Sometimes gut feelings can be correct, but generally, you should at least go by actual in-thread evidence, if you expect people to agree with you. Also, scum tend to go by gut, as an excuse to justify their votes, so just food for thought.

In a newbie game though, a lot of people go by gut, so it's kind of a null tell, but just saying. Good thing to know.

[orangepenguin]

@Orange, I'd still like your opinion on the exchange between Schehera and I. Often times the best way to get a valid response or information is by commenting on an accusation/defense.

From what I see, both of you have valid arguments. I agree with Moses, that you and sl have been kind of attacking Schez, but I do think you have good motives in doing so. Schez has appeared scummy under the circumstances, although I don't personally think he is scum, at this point.

[vollkan]

Vollkan: is there any chance that when you votal, you can include a history? In another game I play, it's customary to include unvotes in the format (name). It makes it easier to run votals and easier to see history.

I'm happy to include a "history", but I don't understand the description of the format you have given.

In your next post, could you just include a hypothetical example of such a votecount, or something - because I am not sure what you mean exactly.

[mrfixij]

For instance, assume I vote myself and unvote myself, then vote for vollkan. Then orange votes for me. on the votal transaction it would read.

Mrfixij 1 (mrfixij), orange
Vollkan 1 mrfixij

[orangepenguin]

I think in this kind of format, and also considering the length, that it would just get complicated.

[vollkan]

Stretching how far back? As in, were it anything other than the immediately preceding unvote, I imagine the bracketed names would come to take up a lot of space

[mrfixij]

Perhaps you're right. I'll abandon the thought.

[Scheherazade]

@mrjixij: I appreciate that you don't like to clutter the game with pointless asides, but I do feel that you owe me a bit more from that last post.

@orangepenguin: I'd be happy to hear those mixed feelings aired. Do you think that you have the second mafia player in that group? I'd like to hear your suspicions of me in particular. mrfixij has twice dropped his accusations against me before completely conceding his case; having another chance to deal with suspicions would be nice. Do you have something to add to his?

@QuetionMark: We do need to hear from you. I know this isn't the nicest position to replace into, but if you are a town player, please speak up.