US Election 08 Mafia(Someone has won, has America lost?)

[ortolan]

so, Nikelaos has so far:

defended/unvoted Natirasha in Post 61

Post 123 votes Badguy for lurking, so he's not genuinely suggesting he's scum

Post 152 unjustified bandwagon attack on Vi

Alright, I may have jumped the gun a tad but really, it doesn't give away much information. A mass name claim would give us something to talk about and I can't see it being bad for the town unless people take their names to seriously. Some were for it, some where on the fence and some(you and Yosarian2) were against it.

Opinions on the name claim were hardly neutral; there was a definite leaning against it from my perspective, and there were very few supporters. But ignoring that, why would we want to talk about the name claim if we weren't supposed to take it seriously? It would be wasted discussion if the names are meaningless. Your argument is contradictory and a bit suspicious, truthfully.

It is not clear so far (at least to me) that names are indicative of alignment this game. They do seem related to roles though. So I disagree with this argument- I still see nameclaiming as potentially beneficial due to implying a role so that one cannot then make a role-fakeclaim, however there's a fair chance there's punisher roles for name-claiming in this game (or mafia/neutral players may be looking for a certain person, which serves the same purpose), which is an independent reason for not doing so.

Post 308 withdrawing your vote while "not being so sure on him" is definitely having your cake and eating it too, and is very scummy.

Post 343 is very neutral/pro-town read on everyone but mentions he "wouldn't mind a Max wagon building" and then would support it with his vote. Again, I don't like this. Make a case against Max and vote him if you find him scummy, the way you do that and his and others' responses to your case will give us more information about likely scum. But stating your readiness to join a wagon if it should pop up but not offering to justify or start one is scummy.

Vote: Nikelaos

[magnus_orion]

@kairyuu: if there is a way this game can be broken pro-town, fine then, please feel free.

@Emptyger: You were quick to attack nat and went after his lynch with full force, even when Kairyuu's idea seemed perfectly acceptable.


@ortolan: do you have an opinion on a max wagon, then?
Though I agree, it is suspicios on Nik's part.

[Max]

I don't really think anyone has a case on me, and magnus, he is against it I think because he hasn't attacked me... yet.

Just a question is it just me that feels that it's all the same people making proper discussion in this game

[Nikelaos]

Post 152 unjustified bandwagon attack on Vi

It was just a FOS, I wouldn't call it a "bandwagon attack"

Post 343 is very neutral/pro-town read on everyone but mentions he "wouldn't mind a Max wagon building" and then would support it with his vote. Again, I don't like this. Make a case against Max and vote him if you find him scummy, the way you do that and his and others' responses to your case will give us more information about likely scum. But stating your readiness to join a wagon if it should pop up but not offering to justify or start one is scummy.

I guess I should have clarified, when I said support, I didn't mean with my vote, I more meant I wouldn't oppose it sorry for the confusion.

[magnus_orion]

I don't really think anyone has a case on me, and magnus, he is against it I think because he hasn't attacked me... yet.

Just a question is it just me that feels that it's all the same people making proper discussion in this game

????
You may have missed it, but I'm attacking you.
You effectively stated a belief in multiple scum groups, which is scummy.
That's a case against you.

The same people are making discussion because they're the ones posting.

[charter]

charter:

charter:

unvote

Zwet would be a terrible lynch to actually go through with (at least right now). I see no information gained from his lynch, that said, you do need to stop acting like scum or I'll think we do need to lynch you. Unsure on the claim, gotta look up who that guy is, don't remember who he is.

Fos Emp for giving up on Nat so easy. It also looks like you switched to Zwet for the same reasons as you were voting Nat, unhelpfulness and anti-townness.

I really don’t know how to reply to this, because I am stumped how anything you FoSed me for is suspicious.

But, perhaps it’s appropriate that you FoS players for non-suspicious behavior, considering you think that suspicious players shouldn’t be lynched, because of some obsession about “gaining information”. Why isn’t your primary focus trying to lynch suspicious players? Because, again, the way you are defining it, the only way we “gain information” is by lynching someone who *isn’t* suspicious.

Cute. I'm saying that lynching someone off one statement is not going to get much information.

1) Why not? Once again you are completely confident about exactly how all the mafia will react to a given situation.

It won't be as good as everyone discussing someone's posts and agendas. Now we can discuss his reactions and everything as well. Now we have a lot more people giving more opinions on all things Zwet related. It's not just a slew of people saying Post x is scummy, vote. Most of his votes were for that one post, and lynching him for that would have not been good. A) he's the cop and it's bad, B) he's scum, now what? I saw nowhere to go after his lynch regardless of alignment.

2) It’s not just [160] (which itself contained multiple statements). zwet’s replies after has been atrocious.

Yes, I'm not talking about those. Way too many people (myself included) were voting Zwet for one post. That's unacceptable to lynch someone for one post (barring some scum knowledge slip, which isn't the case here).

3) Even if it were one statement, so what? You are prioritizing gathering information over lynching antitown players. Show me how your “gaining information” motivation doesn’t lead to you just seeking a worse lynch target.

First, gathering information is the point of day ones. I'd rather lynch the cop after 20 pages than the GF on page one. Pretty sure scenarios similar to the first one there have been proven to lead to an increased town win percentage over the second one. Second, I can't show you how gaining information will lead to a worse lynch target, that's asking me to tell the future. This is a pretty bad way of defending the Fos against you.

<snip>
Why did you drop your case against Nat so easily? Why did you switch over to Zwet with very similar reasons for voting Nat?

1) Once again, explain to me how either of those things are suspicious.

It shows you have a preference of Zwet over Nat. This change is fishy because no one was buying into Nat, and lots were biting on Zwet. I'd think scum would do this, hence I find it suspicious.

2) I dropped my case against Natirasha because he was actually starting to play the game. If he lapses, I’ll renew it

Nothing in your posts, or Nats, show this too me. In fact, your reason for unvoting Nat was Zwet was playing worse, nothing Nat did. You simply moved on to Zwet and dropped Nat.

3) If a majority didn’t think it was lynchable before Natirasha’s play improved, what’s the point of continuing the case when it got weaker?

I can't speak for the majority. I didn't see anyone buying into your case against Nat n the first place.

4) zwet was acting worse and more people thought so (or, perhaps, fewer people thought not). It can be assumed that the antitowns are more than 1 person, so why must I limit myself to only 1 suspect?

This is getting ridiculous. I don't know where you're getting these questions to ask me, they serve no purpose. I Fos'ed you because you were limiting yourself to one suspect, that you dropped your case against Nat and moved to Zwet.

5) Explain how my reasons were similar, because unless you take it out to something absurdly general, like “they were both acting antitown” I don’t see it.
I voted Natirasha because he was not helping the town, insisted on not helping the town, and promised to not be helping the town in the future.
I voted zwet for suggesting that the cop and vigilante target the same player, in addition to other points brought up by others (including and initially you, I might point out).

I saw both your reasons as acting antitown.

6) Even if my reasons were the same, so what? Why would different reasons be needed for every single potential mafia member?

I don't care if they're the same. What I do care about is that you were interested in pursuing Zwet over Nat (and forgetting about Nat) for basically the same reason.

If you stonewall again by just repeating yourself, it will take something confession-level to stop me from voting you.

How is what you FoSed me for in any way suspicious?

I found it suspicious that you dropped your line of attack against Nat and went after Zwet for similar reasons. You'd spent nearly every post of yours questioning him in some way, then poof. What is also suspicious is how worked up over my Fos you've gotten.

[charter]

Yes, we're currently pressuring Yaw.

Fos. This came out of nowhere, 319 explains well.

My Los
Max
Emptyger
Vi
Yaw/Zwet/Badguy
Idiotkind factors in there somewhere, but I'd have to reread him to find where. I'm content with Emp and Max right now.

I feel every post of Max's is scummy (I will elaborate later, but for now,

vote Max

)
Emptyger is now using horrible lines of questioning against players voicing suspicion of him. He also switched to Zwet over Nat, and I don't buy his reasoning.
The rest are just I think you're acting suspicious, not much more than that.

That all was the supercondensed catch up post. If anyone wants me to elaborate on something, ask.

[Yosarian2]

Yos:
Any *other* leads, or any *better* leads?

Uh...well, more or less both, I suppose. No one else looks especally scummy. In fact, looking back at Zwet's earlier posts in light of his claim, I have less of a problem with them; they can plausably be read as a newbie cop trying to get advice from the town.

[Fritzler]

Vote: Charter

[Jon Stewart]

Your attention please.
Sorry it took so long, but

some

people were trying to force

other

people to do too many things at once.
Anyway, new Exit Polls have been taken and it appears that someone is going to die today. Want to find out who? Stay tuned.

Pacman281292:

1 (Max)

Max:

4 (Vi, magnus_orion, Kairyuu, charter)

Yosarian2:

1 (Spambot)

Vi:

1 (zwetschenwasser)

zwetschenwasser:

3 (Lindisfarne, Yaw, Natirasha)

Nikelaos:

1 (ortolan)

charter:

1 (Fritzler)

Not Voting:

(Nikeloas, Badguy, zwetschenwasser, pacman281892, Boarder_Control, vollkan, Yosarian2, magnus_orion, EmpTyger, Idiotking)

With 20 alive, it takes 11 votes to lynch

[magnus_orion]

Vote: Charter

?

[Kairyuu]

@Emp:

Why are you assuming “not reading the thread” instead of “reading the thread and deliberate acting antitown”?

Are you saying that when you see something that clearly indicates that the highest likelyhood is a lack of reading, you automatically assume that said person is being deliberately scummy? I think you've played too many games with Nat.

To answer your question though, it's because not reading seems more logically plausible than purposefully trying to look anti-town.

@magnus:

if there is a way this game can be broken pro-town, fine then, please feel free.

That does not answer my questions. How is setup speculation scummy by nature? And how is town harmed by a possible game break? You flat out stated the first, and you implied the second, since the second logically follows the first if the town uses the information effectively.

Oh yeah, and I'll try. I'm 3/3 in games where I attempted it.

@Fritzler: Provide reasons. Voting without reasoning is not acceptable.

[charter]

Yos, do you think that Vi is scum?

Hasn't given his opinion on anyone so far, but is trying to find out where others stand. Also singles out Yos. Attempting to look like he's scumhunting (or even just participating?)?

Why? Do you think he's scum? Any specific reason you're asking me?

Not yet, but I've never seen him play before. I'm asking you because I think that you may be scum. So far no logic behind that last statement whatsoever. I don't think I've ever seen you play as scum before but I still have the slight feeling you are.

So who are your buddies?

More trying to look like he's scumhunting.

I find it interesting is that everyone is saying, oh the vig will do it. So the simple solution is to let the vig scum-hunt, they may be an awful scum hunter but the town should not try to order the vig what to do, if they treat it like a second lynch they will eventually ask them to kill themselves. Personally i don't thin nat is scum. Yos, is Nat your scum buddy? if not is there another scum group? and do you think it is plausible that an SK could be shot it a large game?

My presumption to the first three questions is No, Yes, No
Because there are probably the two major parties having their own election victory plans.
I doubt an SK would be NKable in a game like this
Therefore, I doubt Nat would claim SK and be lynched which would be inevitable, therefore he isn't scum

I've already gone over how I think his presuming there's multiple scum groups comes from insider scum knowledge.

12- Still fixated on Yos. I'm not sure why you suspect someone because they aren't proving their towniness early day one either.

17- Not what was happening at all.
20- Not thinking anyone has a case on you doesn't matter if the rest of the town thinks there is a case on you.

I see no attempt at scumhunting. Vote still on from random stage. Fixating on Yos. The reasons I listed above as well. Those are my reasons for suspecting Max.

[magnus_orion]

@kairyuu: Well, because setup speculation allows mafia to be able to predict probable safe claims, as well as to let them know what roles to expect the town to have, so they can be on the lookout for tells.

[Fritzler]

@Fritzler: Provide reasons. Voting without reasoning is not acceptable.

You and charter living is not acceptable.

[EmpTyger]

pacman, BC, and ortolan have also been lurking here while posting elsewhere. So has Natirasha, who required a bandwagon and a realistic threat of lynch to even be ever-so-slightly helpful. As soon as the town indicated that they won’t be lynching Natirasha, he goes straight back to being unhelpful.

---

MO:

<snip>
@Emptyger: You were quick to attack nat and went after his lynch with full force, even when Kairyuu's idea seemed perfectly acceptable.
<snip>

How didn’t I addressed this in [100]?
And “look particularly depseprate every time to get the fastest lynch” is quite a way to describe “advocated that one player be lynched instead of vigkilled”.

---

Kairyuu:

@Emp:

Why are you assuming “not reading the thread” instead of “reading the thread and deliberate acting antitown”?

Are you saying that when you see something that clearly indicates that the highest likelyhood is a lack of reading, you automatically assume that said person is being deliberately scummy? I think you've played too many games with Nat.

To answer your question though, it's because not reading seems more logically plausible than purposefully trying to look anti-town.
<snip>

Um, I wasn’t the one making automatic assumptions about motivations. Vi was. What was the “clear indication” that zwet was innocently not reading the thread, rather than trying to ignoring his attackers?

To answer your question, though: yes, I assume that mafia will take opportunities to act unhelpfully when they think they can get away with it.

<snip>
@Fritzler: Provide reasons. Voting without reasoning is not acceptable.

And what about not voting without reasoning?

---

charter:
I’m almost too incredulous to vote you.

Me: “A is acting antitown by doing <thing that A is doing>”
Me: “B is acting antitown by doing <thing that B is doing>”
You: “EmpTyger is suspicious for attacking A and B for the same reason.”

I’m *almost* too incredulous to vote you.

Vote: charter

, “for acting antitown”.
Specifically:
1) Being so certain exactly how the mafia will react to every bandwagon.
2) Wanting the town to lynch non-suspicious players instead of suspicious ones.
3) Arguing it’s suspicious for unvoting a player, when others are not going to lynch them and when there is nothing to add to the case.
4) Arguing it suspicious unless a player only attacks the first player who they think acts antitown- no matter how antitown anyone else might act, no matter how unlikely a bandwagon is to form and we don’t have forever.

(The “I would rather lynch a cop than a godfather” would almost be too dumb to respond to, except that you’re apparently serious.)

[ortolan]

pacman, BC, and ortolan have also been lurking here while posting elsewhere.

No buddy, my last post in this game was about 20 hours ago.

Additionally I am in 7 games including this one, the fact I am not spending every waking moment posting in this game means that I have a desire to participate equally in all my games.

Additionally large games take more attention/time anyway to make a post of sufficient quality.

[EmpTyger]

ortolan:

pacman, BC, and ortolan have also been lurking here while posting elsewhere.

No buddy, my last post in this game was about 20 hours ago.

Additionally I am in 7 games including this one, the fact I am not spending every waking moment posting in this game means that I have a desire to participate equally in all my games.
<snip>

I’m not talking about the past 20 hours, or the period since you got called out with a modprod. I’m talking about prior to then- how despite the sitecrashes, you were able to post quite actively this week, but ignored this game.

[ortolan]

are you saying I was substantially less active in this game than I was in all my other games? You'll need to give me evidence for this as I have no idea whether it is true or not. That said I will admit I might tend to avoid games where I know I have to do a lot of work in my next post (e.g. when I have promised a case on someone or am generally unsure about which bandwagon I want to follow). You also need to take into account the content of posts- perhaps my posts in other games were just one line replies to people or other. Either way I don't think calling us out for "lurking", especially when you haven't even proven it, is useful.

And if you're referring to the prod, 40% of the players in this game were prodded, and it's certainly not the first time I've been prodded. There are reasons for not posting in the minimum timeframe- not just that one hasn't had a chance but that one is not liking the gist of the existing bandwagons. I pride myself on actually providing content in my every post, so I don't make those crappy "I got prodded so I'll post soon" posts.

I'm not sure whether you were even attacking me or not in saying I was lurking, but calling out people for lurking in the manner you've done doesn't mean anything.

[ortolan]

EBWOP: when I say "avoid" above it would be better to say "procrastinate"

[charter]

@Fritzler: Provide reasons. Voting without reasoning is not acceptable.

You and charter living is not acceptable.

Good luck there.

Emp, I said I found your switching to Zwet and dropping Nat entirely to be suspicious. I thought you were going after them for similar reasons (anti-townness, which I don't even think is a good reason to go after someone) so I (still) don't see why the sudden drop in Nat.

1) I don't know where you got that from
2) Not what I said, I don't know why you won't listen to my clarifications either
3) Not what I'm arguing either. I said you switched to Zwet and then Nat went poof. The big difference between the two is that Zwet had a serious wagon
4) Also false, I'm saying your drop of Nat is suspicious, not that you can't move to different suspects. I already even clarified this for you.

[Max]

Yay fritzler!!! Are you a day vig?

unvote

(I didn't realise I was doing so.

[Fritzler]

Yay fritzler!!! Are you a day vig?

unvote

(I didn't realise I was doing so.

Sup? I wish. You want to vote charter?

[Max]

I would love to, but I think the majority of the town think I'm mafia... But it couldn't hurt my chances. Fritz, who would you vig if you got the chance?

Vote: Charter

[Yosarian2]

I would love to, but I think the majority of the town think I'm mafia.

Well, are you?

.. But it couldn't hurt my chances. Fritz, who would you vig if you got the chance?

Vote: Charter

Do you think Charter is likely to be scum, or are you just hoping to save yourself? If you do, why?