Mini 727 - Mafia in Standardville - Game Over

[LlamaFluff]

Vote Count

Artem (4) - Danchaofan, BSG, Lynx the Antithesis, Panzerjager
BSG (2) - Alvinz95, Xdaamno
Darox (1) - Artifex
Lowell (1) - Artem
Lynx the Antithesis (1) - Darox
Artifex (1) - Lowell

Not Voting (2) - Charter, Master Ruck

[Xdaamno]

You haven't been paying to much attention to this game have you?

I have, actually. I just find it difficult to get back into posting after having missed a few days. The slip-up was only due to me forgetting the votecount; nobody actually mentioned their votes put Artem at L-1.

[charter]

And AFTER that, can anyone who has ever considered using such a role or seen such a role know if the event action would be given in the role pm of a mini-normal, or could give a rough idea of how likely such a role is to appear in a mini-normal.

I've been in a mini normal with one before, she claimed after she replaced in day one too. Let me just say we had some WIERD roles in that game too...

Let's face it. I'm the scummiest player because I am the most active/vocal. The sad truth of a forum-based mafia game is that the player that provides the most content will always be picked apart the most. The down side is that it the "active=scummy" phenomenon only encourages lurking scum.

This isn't true.

Xdaamo, why did you say Artem would be a good lynch, then you were "saved" when her lynch didn't actually occur? Why the backpedal? And why did you say you reread when you voted, and then in your next post say you need to reread? And how did you miss it being L-1 with a votecount at the top of the page?

Panzer, can you explain why "one or both of [me and Artem] is scum"? (from 113-114)

[Xdaamno]

Xdaamo, why did you say Artem would be a good lynch, then you were "saved" when her lynch didn't actually occur? Why the backpedal? And why did you say you reread when you voted, and then in your next post say you need to reread? And how did you miss it being L-1 with a votecount at the top of the page?

That's unusual. Interrogating, when the answers to all of those questions should be obvious to anyone who's done a moment's thought. This is a real, general "trying to look helpful" scum vibe.

Unvote, Vote: charter

[charter]

So I can just assume all the answers to my questions are incriminating then?

[Lynx The Antithesis]

Second, you're completely misreading the entire charter vote business. I didn't like the vote

PURELY

for the WIFOM aspect. Simply because Panzer right before said it was scummy to do so. Charter's vote was a direct challenge to Panzer's statement. I didn't find scummy the vote itself because I believe it was used more for pressure purposes rather than any other means. But the way it was brought into WIFOM territory was my major grief.

So you didn't like charters vote, but you did like the vote, and you would do it yourself, but you don't like the WIFOM. It seems you're holding a very contrary position here and playing both sides of the field.
But answer this. If panzer hadn't said what he did, would charters vote still be in 'WIFOM territory'?

Onwards...

Also, with BSG, I did say first that BSG has nothing to worry about because most of the votes were random. I said this after Artem questioned why BSG wasn't focusing on the wagon on her.

I said it largely because the reaction that BSG could have given had already passed.

Upon rereading the incidence, BSG had already proven calm before I had stated the defense really. Despite what I earlier said about my defense nullifying her reaction, I see now that her reaction was gauged already. She proved a calm, scum hunting town. Which is what any townie should do when their is no basis for a wagon on themselves and they have nothing to defend.

Now this is pretty much a textbook turnaround. First comment on BSG, you defend her and explain her calm response. In the second comment, you denouce your actions and state her calm response was false because you muddied it with your defence. In this third comment, you go back to her being a calm townie completely unsullied by your defence and even counter your previous statement that it ruined reactions by stating 'the time for a reaction had already passed', which begs the question of why you ever issued the second comment. You've done so many 180's that I'm surprised you can still see straight. And it doesn't explain why you felt compelled to defend her in the first place.

I would only put someone at L-2 for the pressure aspect. And yes if Panzer had not said what he said it would not have been WIFOM whatsoever. The only scummy aspect of the vote was the WIFOM which I've stated numerous times already. The vote itself wasn't nearly as bad as the WIFOM that got mixed with it.

his one was a fault on my part all led by the second reponse on the issue "denouncing" the first. In the second comment I adressed the whole BSG thing because I felt people were giving her too much credit as a townie because of her reaction to the wagon.I misplaced the fact that her emotions had already been displayed before I gave the earlier defense. Upon reread, I saw that her status as a rational townie under the wagon had been established already before my statement. Therefore I corrected my stance in the second comment. The second response comes from wrongly placed chronology of what happened earlier. Once I looked over it again, the proper order of the events were more clear.

And regarding the entire defending in the first place. Anyone that I believe is being called out for something flawed, I'll point it out.

[Master Ruck]

The answer to him being "saved" is very clearly seen if you actually finished reading the

same sentence

that it turns up in.

Saved by a rule that I hate... I'm not going to complain.

Or do we need to start putting in [sarcasm] tags?

[Master Ruck]

his one was a fault on my part all led by the second reponse on the issue "denouncing" the first.

In the second comment I adressed the whole BSG thing because I felt people were giving her too much credit as a townie because of her reaction to the wagon.

I misplaced the fact that her emotions had already been displayed before I gave the earlier defense. Upon reread, I saw that her status as a rational townie under the wagon had been established already before my statement. Therefore I corrected my stance in the second comment. The second response comes from wrongly placed chronology of what happened earlier. Once I looked over it again, the proper order of the events were more clear.

Actually, I said that and it seems like you jumped on that idea to try and admit your fault to look more town. Now you're claiming it was your thought and you're trying to set it aside having reread and realised that jumping on that idea may not have been a good plan.

I do have to wonder, can you keep on the same train of thought for more than 10 seconds?

[charter]

The answer to him being "saved" is very clearly seen if you actually finished reading the

same sentence

that it turns up in.

Saved by a rule that I hate... I'm not going to complain.

Or do we need to start putting in [sarcasm] tags?

Are you answering my question for Xdaamo?

[Master Ruck]

Only the obvious one. The other I have no clue on as only he can answer it.

[charter]

How was that an obvious question?
Xdaamo wanted an Artem lynch. Why would he need to feel "saved" from that lynch happening if he (and a lot of the rest of the town) agreed with it?

[Master Ruck]

He's not saying he was saved, but that Artem was saved from a lynch by the rule that xda hates, that being the unvote rule.

[charter]

Oohhh. Well, I feel dumb now.

[Lynx The Antithesis]

his one was a fault on my part all led by the second reponse on the issue "denouncing" the first.

In the second comment I adressed the whole BSG thing because I felt people were giving her too much credit as a townie because of her reaction to the wagon.

I misplaced the fact that her emotions had already been displayed before I gave the earlier defense. Upon reread, I saw that her status as a rational townie under the wagon had been established already before my statement. Therefore I corrected my stance in the second comment. The second response comes from wrongly placed chronology of what happened earlier. Once I looked over it again, the proper order of the events were more clear.

Actually, I said that and it seems like you jumped on that idea to try and admit your fault to look more town. Now you're claiming it was your thought and you're trying to set it aside having reread and realised that jumping on that idea may not have been a good plan.

I do have to wonder, can you keep on the same train of thought for more than 10 seconds?

What exactly did you say? I can hardly understand your thoughts with the way you phrased this. Are you proposing that I intentionally made a fault
and admitted to it just to appear town?

[Master Ruck]

Right here.

But as BSG said (and lynx directly before him who may have given him the idea) he has nothing to worry about thus no need to claim as all the votes on him are random or "let's see what happens" votes.

And you even acknowledge it in your next post.

And just for everyone's info as Master Ruck has stated, I first said BSG has nothing to worry about because most of the votes on her were random. So don't jump to the conclusion that BSG is a calm townie because I may have instilled some sense of safety in her without hearing from her first. Fault on me cause it defeats any purpose of gauging her reaction from the wagon.

But when Darox points out a flaw in your reasoning behind my thoughts

The biggest problem I have here is BSG

did

speak up before you leapt to her aid, but you seem to be eager to state that there is no point in trying to read about her reactions because you 'ruined' them. It seems like a good way to absolve your previous actions as well as turn down any inquiring looks into BSG's play.

You suddenly flip again and ignore or alter your view to make it work.

Also, with BSG, I did say first that BSG has nothing to worry about because most of the votes were random. I said this after Artem questioned why BSG wasn't focusing on the wagon on her. I said it largely because the reaction that BSG could have given had already passed. Upon rereading the incidence, BSG had already proven calm before I had stated the defense really. Despite what I earlier said about my defense nullifying her reaction, I see now that her reaction was gauged already. She proved a calm, scum hunting town. Which is what any townie should do when their is no basis for a wagon on themselves and they have nothing to defend.

Which Darox points out

Now this is pretty much a textbook turnaround. First comment on BSG, you defend her and explain her calm response. In the second comment, you denouce your actions and state her calm response was false because you muddied it with your defence. In this third comment, you go back to her being a calm townie completely unsullied by your defence and even counter your previous statement that it ruined reactions by stating 'the time for a reaction had already passed', which begs the question of why you ever issued the second comment. You've done so many 180's that I'm surprised you can still see straight. And it doesn't explain why you felt compelled to defend her in the first place.

And puts you in a corner where, in your defense, you either forget or purposely ommit the fact that you jumped on the possibility I gave and you're now trying to pass it off as a mistake you made.

his one was a fault on my part all led by the second reponse on the issue "denouncing" the first. In the second comment I adressed the whole BSG thing because I felt people were giving her too much credit as a townie because of her reaction to the wagon.I misplaced the fact that her emotions had already been displayed before I gave the earlier defense. Upon reread, I saw that her status as a rational townie under the wagon had been established already before my statement. Therefore I corrected my stance in the second comment. The second response comes from wrongly placed chronology of what happened earlier. Once I looked over it again, the proper order of the events were more clear.

That

is what I meant.

[Artem]

This argument against Lynx seems overly convoluted.

[Master Ruck]

Maybe so, but whether it means that Lynx is unsure of what his view on the situation is or that he may just be easily influenced, he needs to start making up his mind and going with that. All this switching views is making him look scummish in my eyes.

[Artifex]

But not scummish enough to vote for him? That's a genuine question- you're expending a lot of energy battling Lynx over this, so why are you not voting for him if hes pinging your scumdar so hard?

[Master Ruck]

Because as I also said, it could be that he's just easily unfluenced or confused. I'm going to wait for some kind of defense from him first and decide based on that.

[Master Ruck]

EBWOP: easily influenced

[Artifex]

First, the claim. I'm not going to debate how likely the mod is to include a PGO because thats just playing with mod WIFOM and I already know the answer.

This is the type of thing that sounds reasonable on the surface, but when I break it down it doesnt play for me. Every time someone does a roleclaim, theres a chance they're lying, right? So you look for things that could help you figure out if the claim is false. One of those things is how likely the role existing would be. Im not seeing the WIFOM there. And you wont debate, because you 'already know the answer'? Well

I dont

- so I think I will keep discussing this roleclaim.

Even if there is only one other power role out there it still gives equal probability of being targeted by town or scum, and in the likely event there is more the chance of killing town powers increases. The small chance of taking a scum with me isn't worth that in my opinion.

I admit now: I've never been or played with this type of role before. But at the very least this seems to be a bad decision to me. What was making you think that you were likely to be targeted by a doc or investigator when you claimed? Your predecessor was barely on the radar when you switched in. This is why I worry that you have a separate win condition- because then I would completely understand why youd claim right away, so as to increase your chances of being untouched by any side or power role.

[Lynx The Antithesis]

Ok I understand your view now, but I think we're having a difference in defining "speaking up" on BSG's part. I consider BSG's speaking up when she specifically says in post 51 that she has nothing to worry about directly after my post 51 where I utter basically the same words. When I "jumped" on you about BSG all I recalled from the incidence that I was the first to say she had nothing to worry about. In reality, she had already proven herself under the pressure before I issued the defense. When I looked over it again I realized this after Darox brought it up again and I reread the event. So basically I retracted that statement due to an error on my part.

Also,

Unvote, Vote:Xdaamno

He hastily jumped on the Artem wagon with no analysis or evidence of his own(For the hammer vote nonetheless). He's contributed nothing to the active scumhunting and given no case for any of his votes. Just shown little activity, but is still obviously here.

[Master Ruck]

That's believable, but it still feels somewhat convenient.

FoS: Lynx

[Lynx The Antithesis]

EBWOP

Ok I understand your view now, but I think we're having a difference in defining "speaking up" on BSG's part. I consider BSG's speaking up when she specifically says in post 51 that she has nothing to worry about directly after my post

50

where I utter basically the same words. When I "jumped" on you about BSG all I recalled from the incidence that I was the first to say she had nothing to worry about. In reality, she had already proven herself under the pressure before I issued the defense. When I looked over it again I realized this after Darox brought it up again and I reread the event. So basically I retracted that statement due to an error on my part.

[PJ.]

I'm in agreement with Darox on lynx, and am gonna wait for Lynx to address the issues.

@Artem, You're not the most active or vocal and most of the game you actually seemed pretty lost. Also, I have stated reason, several times. You never addressed them.