Crackers! Mafia -- Game Over. See page 50

[Guardian]

Kison, why go along with the joke that you are busing me?

BM, why change your vote every other post?

vote: Kison

[Guardian]

Clearly I need to get rid of the cat.

What does this mean?

[Guardian]

Clearly I need to get rid of the cat.

What does this mean?

avatar change

rofl, your questions don't have much point to them. Why are you interested in hearing who DGB/vollkan think are

town

, when it's scum you're supposed to be looking for?

OMGUS

unvote vote: Korts

[Guardian]

What? I didn't even vote you.

You implied I was suspicious, saying that questions I asked didn't make sense.

[Guardian]

Oh. damn, I thought you were just throwing around suspicion blindly, and thought that was scummy .

unvote:; vote: Kison

[Guardian]

Zazier -- answering questions posed at others is not a reliable scum tell. It is unhelpful, but not scummy, because lots of people naturally do this. I used to think it was a scum tell because most unhelpful things are scummy and vice versa, but this one seems to not be.. Defending others surreptitiously by answering tough questions posed to them is scummy however, if you think any of the instances you brought up fall into that let me know.

I am very unconvinced by the case on CKD, and mention this because I think it is mostly wasting our time :(. Is the case anything more than him having a strong gut read early in the game, and saying so? If it is please enlighten me. If not, please move on.

BM, why do you think DGB will be unreadable? Why are you continuing to promote this meta of vote hopping if it is a scummy meta? Scummy things are generally scummy because they are unhelpful to town -- if you acknowledge that constantly moving your votes is scummy, e.g. unhelpful, why continue to do so?

Self voting is scummy -- it robs town of information. I am disappointed in vollkan especially for this -- I've always looked at his play as logical and very helpful to town. I find his choice to self vote and rob the town of information suspicious and out of character, especially considering I think that others self-voting probably impacted his decision to do so.

DGB, you seem to have said that at least half the players are either obviously town or obviously scum. Please list all the players with your current thoughts on them, and a short explanation of why you think this way.

This is supposed to be such a stellar cast -- we seem to have largely spam'd/noise'd our way to page 8 in two days. Short page lengths are better for towns -- in reality, people are not going to re-read 40 page day ones as well as they read 15 page day ones.

Please cut out the garbage -- it is unhelpful and suspcious. Posting a lot of nothing can make you look like you are scum hunting, being active, thinking about the game, etc. when you aren't.

I am especially annoyed with BM and rofl for this, off the top of my head. BM you need to re-read the thread and come up with something logical, and stop the knee-jerk voting reactions that seem to come three times a page.

rofl, when asked a question that you see that you are being asked, either refuse to answer it and move on (worse option), or answer it immediately (better option). Don't draw it out over a dozen posts where you get into a debate with others where you explain why you are refusing when you could just answer (worst option, one that you chose).

[Guardian]

Ok yeah off the top of my head you think that he doesn't like people clearing other players, and you think that he "knows" you are "buddying up" to des... I still think both those points are weak. Was there more?

[Guardian]

Reading over the thread again, there are two quick things I'd like to say.

If, after considering whether you truly think the case on CKD is good, you still think it is, keep going for it. I do not want us to waste time, but I just remembered the plethora of reasons I refuse to defend people -- I am not going to defend him by saying why I think the points against him are weak, that is up to him.

I think destructor is townish, but I have been wrong and been burned too many times to say "obviously town." I already decided I am going to keep my eyes on him today, and not let my initial read blind me. I suggest everyone does the same with all players.

[Guardian]

Guardian is more scum now than he was last time I declared him to be scum.

Pretty much all of his post #195 is a scum agenda

Please explain why you think this is so, as per each paragraph in the post.

Also, please:

DGB, you seem to have said that at least half the players are either obviously town or obviously scum. Please list all the players with your current thoughts on them, and a short explanation of why you think this way.

[Guardian]

Self voting is scummy -- it robs town of information. I am disappointed in vollkan especially for this -- I've always looked at his play as logical and very helpful to town. I find his choice to self vote and rob the town of information suspicious and out of character, especially considering I think that others self-voting probably impacted his decision to do so.

I'm disappointed that you would think I had fallen into the trap of stupid play :sob:

I actually did some thinking a while back (and I acknowledge my debt to Adel and JDodge for opening my eyes on this: see Open 59) and decided self-voting can, logically, be protown in the early game.

Dammit. I hate it when good players get convinced to play badly :(. Adel & JDodge are generally very good, but self voting is bad for a couple of reasons :(.

Non-self random votes have two main benefits: discussion springboards and as later-game tools for scum linkages
The former need not necessarily arise only from a non-self vote
The latter has (speaking from my experiences) never been useful

So far so good.

Self-voting is a controversial action. That means that any self-vote will be likely to generate some degree, potentially a significant one, of debate.
Such debate will likely revolve around the scumminess or otherwise of self-voting. Thus, despite the debate being "manufactured", in a sense, there are good prospects of people making actual accusations against me - which, I believe and have seen in practice, that my argument is reasonable enough to overcome.

:(. This is why self voting is BAD. It can at best only generate debate about self-voting. It gets people sidetracked from discussing who is scummy into talking about whether something

that will never come up again in the game

is suspicious. It wastes time and space and thought and energy. Also, if the conclusion is that self voting is scummy, it guarantees that it brings the focus on to you! And that is never good if you are town -- you want the focus on the scum, not on you having to defend yourself because of your self-vote that sidetracked the town. Please stop this. It is making me cry.

Since early game self-voting carries little risk and can generate at least as much useful information as non-self random voting, I believe it is a justified course of action for town.

First of all, as I just explained, it carries huge risk. If you are the only self voter and towns determine that self voting is suspicious and anti-town (which it IS!) then it brings focus to you. Also, since when did low-risk mean good town play?

I also believe it can be acceptable at other points of time as a "stir the pot" sort of device, provided the risks are sufficiently minimal that a risk v reward analysis would hold it reasonable.

This conditional is true but the premises are always going to be false.

Never self vote ever again. This goes for all of you, and Adel.

[Guardian]

in my preceding post, 217 should be 215.

I think the polarised ckd-rofl thing is a distraction. A case on either rofl or ckd that revolves around each other is based on isolated scummy play. This is going to be less effective and informative than making cases based on interaction with at least one other suspicious player. I say this player is Korts.

I also note that a number of players have backed ckd up but only DGB and I have swayed on the side of rofl. So, ckd, Kison and anyone else who thinks rofl is scum - who's distancing from him?

I want to point out that, at least for me, the issue isn't polarizing. I think rofl (appeared to) was making a good effort, but ultimately I find it unconvincing.

I also want to point out that discussion on who and what is scummy is usually never a bad thing. I find the case on ckd unconvincing, and I find it a waste of space, but nevertheless it could lead to good things. I was wrong to say to stop it earlier.

[Guardian]

Zazier -- answering questions posed at others is not a reliable scum tell. It is unhelpful, but not scummy, because lots of people naturally do this. I used to think it was a scum tell because most unhelpful things are scummy and vice versa, but this one seems to not be.. Defending others surreptitiously by answering tough questions posed to them is scummy however, if you think any of the instances you brought up fall into that let me know.

here Guardian is opening the door for his buddies to answer questions posed at others with cheeky impunity.

Or pointing out that people naturally want to comment on what other players say. We should all try to not do this, but in the end it is not a reliable scum tell, unless someone keeps doing it when asked not to, or a pattern forms. Why do you think your explanation is better?

I am very unconvinced by the case on CKD, and mention this because I think it is mostly wasting our time :(. Is the case anything more than him having a strong gut read early in the game, and saying so? If it is please enlighten me. If not, please move on.

Only scum would be unmoved by CKD's screaming scumminess. My own scumdar, which is finely calibrated, first pinged, then sounded full alarm... another CKD post, and it started shooting sparks, caught fire and blew up in a mushroom cloud.

So you are trying to imply a tenuous causal link between CKD's alignment and mine, because I find the case on him unconvincing?

BM, why do you think DGB will be unreadable? Why are you continuing to promote this meta of vote hopping if it is a scummy meta? Scummy things are generally scummy because they are unhelpful to town -- if you acknowledge that constantly moving your votes is scummy, e.g. unhelpful, why continue to do so?

This is a weak prodding of your buddy to stop vote-hopping, which he is doing on purpose, alarmed by my presence in the player roster and fully aware of my keen eye for Day 1 bus'ing.

This assumes that mafia cannot daytalk, which I guess is possible but would be pretty odd since this game has no nights. And sorry DGB, but I don't think BM/anyone is particularly alarmed by your keen eye for scum-catching as opposed to, say, Yos2's or vollkan's...

Self voting is scummy -- it robs town of information. I am disappointed in vollkan especially for this -- I've always looked at his play as logical and very helpful to town. I find his choice to self vote and rob the town of information suspicious and out of character, especially considering I think that others self-voting probably impacted his decision to do so.

This is just silly. Self-voting is indicative of nothing at all, and vollkan did it to bus himself, as he is the SK

So does it indicate nothing or does it indicate that he is SK?

But more seriously, Day 1 self-voting is not even worthy of comment, unless you're looking for an easy point to make to fake scum hunting.

I disagree. Mafia has an implicit social contract where we all put our thoughts about other people to be analyzed. When you don't self vote, you don't do that. It is like lurking. It robs the town of discussion and moves the discussion in a bad direction. At worst it can bring suspicion to yourself -- because it IS unhelpful to the town.

DGB, you seem to have said that at least half the players are either obviously town or obviously scum. Please list all the players with your current thoughts on them, and a short explanation of why you think this way.

I've done it for you and for vollkan. For the players that I have declared to be town, I must decline to comment as it should remain a secret formula. Otherwise there is a strong risk of it being exploited by you and your buddies.

Why refuse to state who you are suspicious of and why? Why refuse to list the players and make comments? I want a firm stand from you on the players because right now you are my first (second if you count me misreading Korts) real suspect. I will explain further after you procure such a list or again explicitly refuse to.

unvote: vote: DrippingGoofball

This is supposed to be such a stellar cast -- we seem to have largely spam'd/noise'd our way to page 8 in two days. Short page lengths are better for towns -- in reality, people are not going to re-read 40 page day ones as well as they read 15 page day ones.

I disagree, these 15 pages are shockfull of information and I've already pegged half the players correctly. Especially vollkan.

Again, you presenting the information you claim to have gathered in a concise manner will help me and others to analyze the truth of this statement.

Please cut out the garbage -- it is unhelpful and suspcious. Posting a lot of nothing can make you look like you are scum hunting, being active, thinking about the game, etc. when you aren't.

HEY! That's what you just did.

I highly dispute that this is so, especially as compared to BM's vote-an-hour and rofl's back and forth with numerous people about why he refused to answer a question.

I am especially annoyed with BM and rofl for this, off the top of my head. BM you need to re-read the thread and come up with something logical, and stop the knee-jerk voting reactions that seem to come three times a page.

BM I understand, though I promise you will be disappointed if you expect logic from him, as you would if you expected sanity from me.

I expect a good faith effort at pro-town play from everyone. I think that BM's

spam

posting was lacking in that, was unhelpful/suspicious, and that he can amend his play to be more on that track if he is town.

But rolfcopter? Come on. Please do not try to silence the townies.

Do you think roflcopter going back and forth for a dozen posts about why he didn't want to answer a particular question at a particular time was at all useful? Do you think that was the most pro-town he could be?

rofl, when asked a question that you see that you are being asked, either refuse to answer it and move on (worse option), or answer it immediately (better option). Don't draw it out over a dozen posts where you get into a debate with others where you explain why you are refusing when you could just answer (worst option, one that you chose).

Stop trying to trip rolfcopter. It's scummy.

How is this trying to 'trip' him? This is me telling him that something he did was unhelpful, and yes, suspicious.

[Guardian]

Guys, I realized that I did something that was not pro-town, and admitted it and corrected my stance. I am a bit perplexed as to why this is being used as the basis for votes, and why it is being termed fence-sitting.

I am not fence sitting -- I have not yet wavered from saying that I find the case on CKD lacking. But if people want to continue discussing it I should not stop that, for many, many reasons. For example, CKD could react in a scummy way and the initially unconvincing case could lead to CKD-scum catching. Or I could become convinced. Or if someone keeps pressing a bad case they could look suspicious. Etc.

---

destructor, I don't think rofl's question-avoidance was very scummy, especially in the context of the whole thread, but it was unhelpful and something that I think should be avoided.

BM, I fundamentally disagree that your vote hopping is helpful. By over-voting your rob your votes of any meaning. They do not express who you are most suspicious of, they do not intimidate those who you are voting, etc. When you just voted me, I thought to myself "oh well, but he will probably change that in a few pages." It took exactly one post :\. Your votes are meaningless if you continue in this fashion.

As for "we cannot take anything DGB says seriously..." I fundamentally disagree with that as well. Contrary to popular opinion, I think DGB is always serious. She just uses apparent humor to get things done her way. I was converted to this line of thinking after playing with her in mith's California game #2 and mod-ing her in iPick. She's fun -- but we can look at her play and see motive, logic, etc. there.

[Guardian]

After trying to discredit CKD case, and a reply from rofl, he quickly retreats and basically allows rofl to follow the lead on CKD. I think he's trying too hard to stay uncommitted to any particular side.

Uncommitted? My stance on the CKD case has not wavered, why are you saying it has??

I also want to point out that discussion on who and what is scummy is usually never a bad thing. I find the case on ckd unconvincing, and I find it a waste of space, but nevertheless it could lead to good things. I was wrong to say to stop it earlier.

More on the fence.

How is this fence sitting -- I am doing the exact same thing DGB is doing -- refusing to explain why I find a player townish.

I don't know if Guardian genuinely doesn't realize that DGB is joking or he's really intent on refuting every single paragraph of DGB's post in a desperate attempt to defend himself.

I don't know whether you generally believe we cannot analyze DGB because she is "joking" or whether you are spewing a line of bullshit. "DESPERATE" attempt to defend myself? Because DGB is attacking me for not posting content when I have posted content, and I have one vote?? And this makes me DESPERATE? I was trying to illustrate how bad DGB's attack was -- and now I find you agreeing with it :|.

One way it is helpful is that it outs the opportunistic players who are all too eager to jump on an anti-town thell saying it's a scumtell. Remember, kids, anti-town=/=scummy. There may be overlaps, but it's a false conclusion to paint

every

anti-town action as scummy. And self-voting isn't scummy.

I fundamentally agree that self-voting is not scummy, as I spent a whole post explaining. Not

every

anti-town action is scummy, but it is pretty damn close. I made this pic to help you understand:

Whoa, misrep! DGB is refusing to list those players she sees as

town

. She made it pretty clear who she thinks is scum, with added comments.

That's exactly the thing -- she has

not

made it pretty clear who she thinks is scum; she's said at least 5 players I can recall are definitely scum. I want to hear her actual stance on everyone with reasons. If she doesn't want to give reasons for who is town, fine, but everyone she thinks is scummy I want reasons for.

Right. So you're saying DGB genuinely believes that the people she has named as scum are scum, and those she has named as town are town? I think not. She lies constantly, and unless she starts playing the game honestly, she is completely unreadable, because we cant use interactions or lies as scumtells, because they are all tongue in cheek. You cannot apply normal scumtells to DGB.

We can analyze her motivations for lying, if she is lying. If she refuses to play honestly I am up for lynching her. One of my greatest pet-peeves is saying players are unlynchable because they have a scummy meta. I personally do not know of anyone who has such a meta. But if you believe that someone does, I support policy lynching them in every single game I am in with them until the meta changes. If in this game, the town as a whole refuses to acknowledge that a player is readable AND then refuses to lynch them (whether this player is DGB, or anyone), then I am going to replace out. No one should get a free pass in mafia. Giving it is idiotic. Especially not DGB, she is perfectly readable.

I do not think she hasn't been playing honestly -- if she hasn't I would like her to explicitly state that this is the case, and explain what was honest and what wasn't.

[Guardian]

fyi:

Adel, are the mafia allowed to talk one on one via PM (or in some other generally unobserved area) regularly during the day? It is not clear from the front post (to me).

Also, can they (and other roles) prearrange events? Can they PM you ("kill Player 1 at 1:00 AM")? Can they PM you ("kill Player 1 right before the day ends")? Also, what happens if you have not resolved a mafia kill and someone is lynched in the meantime?

-mafia are allowed to talk via quicktopic -- see PM.
-no
-no
-no
- they don't kill anyone

I'm sad that Adel didn't answer my questions in the thread like she did with the last ones .

As much as I think I have something on DGB, I want to put this out for consideration -- she implied I was trying to lead BM away from being scummy, inasmuch as he could be my scum partner and I couldn't talk to him during the day. Mafia can talk via quicktopic. Does it make sense to take it as an indicator of DGB-townness that she was arguing that I had to communicate to BM in this thread? That could be faked, I dunno.. I just thought of it and am not sure what to think so I wanted to throw that out there.

PS: An interesting consequence of the rules as Adel responded to me is that if we quick-lynch someone before Adel has resolved a mafia kill, the mafia kill will not go through. So we might want to try that as a strategy at some point, and in fact we might want to be more liberal about hammering on a whim or some such if the mafia have not killed yet. Sure, mafia could get away with BS quick hammers, but then they would be killing scummy people instead of whomever they chose.

[Guardian]

Why refuse to state who you are suspicious of and why? Why refuse to list the players and make comments? I want a firm stand from you on the players because right now you are my first (second if you count me misreading Korts) real suspect. I will explain further after you procure such a list or again explicitly refuse to.

DGB, do this, promise to do it, or refuse to in your next three posts, or I will take it as you refusing to do so.

I got busy Saturday-Tuesday with a paper, I will read up and comment when I get free time.

[Guardian]

request prod on Yosarian2

if it hasn't been done.

[Guardian]

BM's appearance of continued spamming is saddening and suspicious . Again, more comments later.

[Guardian]

I was caught up in this game, so I moved to catching up in the other game I am in. Now I have a few things to catch up on in this game. I'll try and do so soon.

[Guardian]

ps: people unvote ckd, otherwise it seems that the scum could kill someone and change it from 8 to lynch to 7 to lynch. we don't want ckd lynched unless we want ckd lynched and have him hammered; if he is town and is at 7 votes, the scum can kill someone and get an instant lynch on ckd.

[Guardian]

if ckd is town, lynch -1 basically means lynch, because mafia can kill someone, then there are 13 people alive, then it is 7 to lynch when it is now 8 to lynch.

so, realize that if you vote CKD now, and put him at lynch -1, you are effectively hammering him.

if you all are comfortable with that... then I'll find you suspicious for it.

CKD is under such suspicion and likely lynch that I would like to say some things in his defense, and I have a hell of a lot more I want to say today before ckd gets hammered. I prefer short days, but I prefer that we end days when we choose to, not because we didn't realize scum could kill someone and reduce the requirements to lynch.

[Guardian]

I've been reading along...

Game was balanced, maf got unlucky and then made poor kill choices.

Yosarian2 was obviously, obviously scum. Yosarian2, I've got your number. I PM'd Adel this, and explained why you were scum. I wish I'd gotten the chance to explain why.

I was pretty obviously killed because of my comment that we shouldn't put people at lynch -1, imo... Korts, was that it, or did you really think that killing me would look like scum hunting??

If Korts was really a vig I'd have been very annoyed, I keep dying night 1 due to vigs who are the only ones who suspect me...

I think the town wasted a lot of time and lynches, just the mafia got so unlucky/unskillful that it didn't matter. Days 1 and 2 lynches made absolutely no sense to me. Waiting to lynch Korts made no sense either, to me. RagingRabit was notably good as town.

Cheers all, I look forward to playing with you again.

[Guardian]

As a town member who read the game I disagree, but hey what do I know.

[Guardian]

party at destructor's house night 1!

rofl you played well also, in addition to rabit. both bunnies played well.

[Guardian]

I chose to track you within the first two pages, because you said something interesting.

ckd... yeah he was just normal town most of the reasons for lynching him were crap.

[Guardian]

yeah elmo did a good job of being suspicious enough not to die.

when I made my post I was sure I would be killed for it, and was, but I figured it was worth saving ckd, since he was town. but the town lynched him anyway, so that sucked.

[Guardian]

I like the deep south type of role wherein you make a choice during the day and it happens as if there were a night one -- as long as you have some choice in you get some result -- and you can revise your choice any time during the day.

[Guardian]

dgb also played well.

it was fun to play with all y'all while it lasted.

[Guardian]

I'll send pm invite/reminders to any of you that are interested in playing again

*raises hand*

/in

[Guardian]

did i miss a link to the scum qt somewhere? i wanna see it.

no, you didn't miss it, I didn't post it. If the scum team wants to share it they may, but someone pointed out (before this game) that sharing a scum-qt thread may make it harder for those players to win as scum in the future.

reading a game thread someone has played in makes it harder for them to win in the future. people need to get over themselves. I don't give a crap about meta-ing them, I want to read it because it interests me... based on your logic, we should make all the games readable only by those in them, because meta-ing people makes it harder for them to win in the future.