Crackers! Mafia -- Game Over. See page 50

[Yosarian2]

What do you think about destructor's actions in regards to the CKD wagon after CKD put himself at lynch -1? Do they make sense to you?

Yes.

Ok, you need to explain it to me, then.

Under what circumstances would someone putting themself at lynch -1 convince you to unvote them and instead push a different bandwagon? Because, personally, I can not think of ANY situation when I would do that as a pro-town person.

[Yosarian2]

It's a wierd situation. On the one hand, the fact that Guardian was defending CKD and then died might be a good sign for CKD. But on the other hand; if the scum wanted CKD to be lynched, why not wait until he was at lynch -1 and THEN kill someone off the wagon, making him suddenly be instant lynched? Doing it at lynch -2 makes no sense, if that was their goal.

I donno...best guess is, it's probably something totally unrelated. Perhaps he dropped some kind of power-role tell or something.

Do you discount a vig kill as unlikely?

I don't think that's the a question people should be answering, Korts.

[destructor]

I was obviously suspicious of Korts long before I ever voted him. If I had two votes, one would have been on Korts. I'm pretty sure at one point I even said I'd like to see ckd or Korts dead today. The way Yos says I started pushing a "different" bandwagon, as opposed to one I was already supporting, frames my vote switch completely out of context with the sum of my play today. For him to frame my play as he has, he would have to have either ignored or not read most of my posts. Neither of these are particularly pro-town. That Yos is failing to acknowledge all the relevant information available in his case on me and isolating the bits that he feels he can attack me with is concerning.

[Yosarian2]

Destructor: Yeah, I understand that you had already said you were suspicious of both of them. It's just...

Ok. At one point, you were voting for CKD over Korts, which (I assume) means you thought CKD was scummer then Korts at that moment in time.

Then CKD voted himself; combined with the guardian kill, this put him at lynch -1.

After this point, you for some reason were happier voting Korts over CKD, which (I assume) means you now thought Korts scummier then CKD. You also did not continue to persue or attack CKD in any of your posts after this point.

This is the thing I can't understand, since I would normally consider someone self-voting would make them more scummy in my eyes, not less. Was there some other factor that made you decide after that point that Korts was scummier then CKD, or am I missing something, or what?

[DrippingGoofball]

Where were you last thursday?

BM

Why, I think I was home most of the day. You didn't see me betting at the races. did you?

[DrippingGoofball]

SCUM:

vollkan
curiouskarmadog
Battle Mage
Korts

TOWN:

DrippingGoofball
destructor
roflcopter
Yosarian2
populartajo ZazieR

AMBIGUOUS:

Raging Rabbit
SensFan
Elmo
Kison

[curiouskarmadog]

Gone from the 25th until the 30th for the holidays...replace me if you got to...have 3 games that need serious updating..will try to hit them up tomorrow (25th) before I leave..

[Adel]

Gone from the 25th until the 30th for the holidays...replace me if you got to...have 3 games that need serious updating..will try to hit them up tomorrow (25th) before I leave..

Considering your activity level compared to the rest of the players in this game (making 41 out of 482 posts in a 14 player game) I don't have a problem with you taking five days off for the holiday.
Thanks for notifying me in thread.

I will not send you a prod if you post on or before Dec 1.

[Kison]

And then we get to your reasons for suspecting CKD:
yos wrote:

Anyway, CKD's behavior this game has seemed really unusual; both in general, and compared to when I have played with him before. (I don't have much of a meta on him, having not played with him all that many times I think, but his behavior in this game really seems different).

This is entirely vague and doesn't even suggest he is scummy - unless changes in people's playstyle are inherently scummy.

I'm doing my best to explain my impressions here. Whatver the page count says, we're still pretty early in day 1 here. Besides, yes, a radical departure from someone's normal playstyle can be a scumtell.

'Can be' and 'is' do not hold the same meaning. Why did you assume that curiouskarmadog playing differently indicated he was scum as opposed town?

What you did instead (Drop your suspicion on him completly, move your vote to a different wagon, and begin to strongly defend him and attack everyone else on his wagon) is quite confusing if you really are a townie who previously thought he was suspicious looking, unless A. you thought there was new evidence pointing to him being town, or B. you never actually wanted to lynch him in the first place, you just wanted it to look like you did.

Hmm.

Unvote
Vote: Korts

ckd, I still want to see you responding to the posts I mentioned.

This post does not suggest to me that destructor dropped his suspicion of Curiouskarmadog. It seems very clear to me he did not want to rush into the lynch, and instead moved his vote.

I was pointing out that Volkan's actions were desturctive and anti-town, in that if you punish someone for trying to explain why he is suspicious of someone, then they're more likely to just say "gut", and that that is clearly less useful to the town.

This is ridiculous. By having you put your suspicions into words, you're pinpointing what caused you to cast your vote. The alternative would be giving you a free pass every time you wanted to vote someone without giving any specific reason where you use your 'gut' as a freebie card. So if the reasons you produce are faulty and you are attacked for it, those attackers are doing something counter productive? This does not make sense to me.

[destructor]

Ok. At one point, you were voting for CKD over Korts, which (I assume) means you thought CKD was scummer then Korts at that moment in time.

Then CKD voted himself; combined with the guardian kill, this put him at lynch -1.

After this point, you for some reason were happier voting Korts over CKD, which (I assume) means you now thought Korts scummier then CKD. You also did not continue to persue or attack CKD in any of your posts after this point.

ckd hadn't responded to my last questions to him before he went inactive. What else was I supposed to say besides asking him to respond to them? (which I did)

This is the thing I can't understand, since I would normally consider someone self-voting would make them more scummy in my eyes, not less. Was there some other factor that made you decide after that point that Korts was scummier then CKD, or am I missing something, or what?

I don't see self-voting as inherently scummy. ckd doesn't look more town for having done it or anything, though, and I

never

said or implied that it did. I've already explained why I switched my vote after

you

asked me. You seemed to have no problem with my answer then, so why did you suddenly start having problems with it now?


And I still don't see how you could say you understand that I was suspicious of Korts yet still frame your case as you have been. You've consistently been pushing that my vote switch was like some panicked and arbitrary jump off of ckd's wagon.


Also, Korts quotes will be coming soon. Probably tomorrow or possibly later tonight. I've been kind of lazy about going through the thread to collect them. =/

[Elmo]

Depends on what you are looking for. Would it be a fair characterisation to say that you seem to want to know what rofl's opinion is, whereas I want to know why he holds that opinion?

No, I think I have (i.e. had at the time I said that) a decent understanding of his stance on Sens, including why.

SCUM:

vollkan

?

curiouskarmadog ✔
Battle Mage

X!

Korts ✔

TOWN:

DrippingGoofball

~

destructor ✔
roflcopter

~

Yosarian2

??

populartajo ✔

AMBIGUOUS:

Raging Rabbit ✔
SensFan ✔
Elmo ✔
Kison ✔

I think maybe we are on the same wavelength, but you are townifying Yos too easily. Take a long look at that thingigummie next to his name, and tell me you want to file him under town at this point. (Most other people, yeah, maybe.)

I don't think CKD's self-vote would have made me unvote. That said, I wouldn't and indeed didn't get on his wagon in that position, because I didn't feel the case was strong enough to warrant it. "Gut" or no.. it seems obvious that stuff you do should be in proportion to the strength of your belief, right? And maybe I should go over it again, but to a small extent at the point of his vote, and (like Des points out) to a larger extent after, where Yos is effectively leaving him at 5/7, there seems to be a disparity there. Yos doesn't really strike me as the wagony type.

One thing is for sure: Yos2's interactions with Des creep me the fuck out. That is the clearest thing to come out of this thus far.

Still procrastinating on the reread. Yup. ⊂( ﾟヮﾟ)⊃

[Elmo]

Hm. Put it this way, Yos, are you fine with me voting you giving nothing more than "idk, gut" as a reason?

[Adel]

˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚

votecount as of post 486

_{with 13 alive, 7 will lynch before deadline}

˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚

¬curiouskarmadog:

4

:roflcopter, Yosarian2, DrippingGoofball, populartajo
Korts:

4

:Battle Mage, Elmo, destructor, Raging Rabbit
Yosarian2:

2

:Kison, vollkan
Battle Mage:

1

:SensFan
DrippingGoofball:

1

:curiouskarmadog
Raging Rabbit:

1

:Korts

No Lynch:

none

not voting:

none

˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚˚

Day 1's deadline is December 6th at 16:46(UTC)

Countdown timer to deadline

[DrippingGoofball]

One thing is for sure: Yos2's interactions with Des creep me the fuck out. That is the clearest thing to come out of this thus far.

Please elaborate, you have my full and undivided attention.

[Korts]

Do you really have a problem with me voting for someone and not explaining all the reason why I did so right away? Because that's a common tactic I use to get the most useful reactions. Usually, I wait for the person I voted for to respond to the initial vote, and then I go into more details. And as of the time of your attack on me, he had not yet responded to my initial vote. (Unless you count "voting for himself" as a response.)

If this was the case, you are being inconsistent. Previously, you said that your vote was basically based on gut, and you had a hard time explaining it; now you're implying that you did have a solid reason after all?

"Paving the way to disaster"? WTF? It's day 1. Town is supposed to just lynch someone who looks scummy then move on to day 2. If town is REALLY good, we might even have a 45%-50% chance of getting it right. Why are people so afraid to even come close to a lynch these days that a guy putting himself at lynch -1 makes everyone jump off of the bandwagon? Games don't HAVE to last a year and a half, you know.

What's the length of the game got to do with the fact that you cast an L-X vote (where X is either 1 or 2, I don't recall) without justification per se?

I don't think that's the a question people should be answering, Korts.

And I don't think people should speculate on Guardian being a scumkill when pro-town killing roles may be in the game too.

[Yosarian2]

Hm. Put it this way, Yos, are you fine with me voting you giving nothing more than "idk, gut" as a reason?

If you voted me and gave a vauge reason, I'd question you and try to pin down what your reasoning was for voting me. That kind of discussion is a worthwhile one, and again, I had been intending to go into more detail once CKD asked me why I was voting him. Having that discussion with Volkan and Desturinstead is, frankly, much less useful.

But to answer your question, no, I wouldn't necessarally think it was a scumtell if you voted me and didn't explain why right away, depending on the situation. Frankly, that darn

thingigummie next to his name

makes people get so paranoid, I'm almost used to getting voted like that these days, lol.

[Yosarian2]

If this was the case, you are being inconsistent. Previously, you said that your vote was basically based on gut, and you had a hard time explaining it; now you're implying that you did have a solid reason after all?

Huh? CKD's posts feel somewhat scummy and weird to me. I was willing to explain why they did as much as I could, and did so as soon as someone asked me to. What inconsistancy are you talking about?

What's the length of the game got to do with the fact that you cast an L-X vote (where X is either 1 or 2, I don't recall) without justification per se?

It was neither lynch -1 or lynch -2 when I voted for him, actually.

What destructor seemed to be arguing was that if you vote someone, and then they later end up at lynch -2 or lynch -1, you should unvote them just because of that. I find that an absurd argument, and I think that kind of thinking would tend to make games last forever.

[Korts]

Huh? CKD's posts feel somewhat scummy and weird to me. I was willing to explain why they did as much as I could, and did so as soon as someone asked me to. What inconsistancy are you talking about?

The tactic you described in the part I quoted requires undisclosed reasons and not just a difficult-to-explain gut feel, therefore the implication that you were using the tactic you described was also an implication that you do have such undisclosed reasons.

[Yosarian2]

Huh? CKD's posts feel somewhat scummy and weird to me. I was willing to explain why they did as much as I could, and did so as soon as someone asked me to. What inconsistancy are you talking about?

The tactic you described in the part I quoted requires undisclosed reasons and not just a difficult-to-explain gut feel, therefore the implication that you were using the tactic you described was also an implication that you do have such undisclosed reasons.

Well, yeah, and I did explain those reasons when asked.

[Korts]

Huh. I must have skimmed over that part. I'll do a reread of it tomorrow.

[destructor]

What destructor seemed to be arguing was that if you vote someone, and then they later end up at lynch -2 or lynch -1, you should unvote them just because of that. I find that an absurd argument, and I think that kind of thinking would tend to make games last forever.

I didn't say that. Yos' vote wasn't an L-2 vote. ckd only made it to L-2 when he self-voted. The Guardian kill put him at L-1 and that was when I unvoted because I didn't think a player being at L-1 at that point in the Day was a good thing. My unvote wasn't a comment on anyone else's vote.

Having thought about it more, my biggest issue with Yos is that his case is

bad

. It's not 'weak', in the sense that it's based on something mildly suspicious and nothing else. If what he said was true, I think it'd be a compelling case and I'd probably have to be scum. But it's

not

true, which makes it bad. And this makes me think that Yos had to actually

try

and make it up, as opposed to organically noticing things and seeing them fall into place.

Mod:

Can SensFan be prodded? I think everyone else is accounted for, but, just incase, BM might need one too.

[Yosarian2]

Wait...what's not true? The questions I have with your play?

By the way, is there a reason you still haven't actually answered my question? I've asked it like 3 times now, and you keep changing the subject.

[Adel]

Mod:

Can SensFan be prodded? I think everyone else is accounted for, but, just incase, BM might need one too.

BM has posted within the last 72 hours.
SensFan has been prodded.

[destructor]

Wait...what's not true? The questions I have with your play?

The way you describe my play. Your case falls apart if this is not true.

By the way, is there a reason you still haven't actually answered my question? I've asked it like 3 times now, and you keep changing the subject.

Why I changed my vote? I've already explained that.

[SensFan]

Sorry for my absense. I will catch up and post soon.