Mini 727 - Mafia in Standardville - Game Over

[LlamaFluff]

Vote Count

Artem (3) - Danchaofan, BSG, Panzerjager
Darox (1) - Artifex
Lowell (1) - Artem
BSG (1) - Alvinz95
Lynx the Antithesis (1) - Darox
Charter (1) - Xdaamno
Artifex (1) - Lowell
Xdaamno (1) - Lynx the Antithesis

Not Voting (2) - Charter, Master Ruck

Deadline is still January 25th
With 12 alive 7 votes lynches

[Artem]

Also, I have stated reason, several times. You never addressed them.

The last time you stated them was in post 81, which I addressed in 112.

You other reasons are:
-I'm not voting Charter (already addressed)
-Charter is my scumbuddy who's trying to pull attention away from me (which is nonsense as charter is just as much interested in me as you are)
-I'm voting Lowell for baseless reasons;

I don't think my reasons for voting are all that baseless. You don't find the little case of amnesia strange?

[PJ.]

Not at all, It was a 3 day crassh. He then followed it up with a post with why, so no, I don't find it scummy.

[PJ.]

EBWOP: He could be bussing you.

[Danchaofan]

I'm less suspicious of artem now, he defended himself, against my points at least, rather nicely. I still have a problem with.

Sure, it's WIFOM if you think that I (as scum) would do something pointless, just for the whole sake of later claiming that it was pointless for scum to do that. I would still like to hear from Lowell why he thinks his reason (b) has good motivation for scum.

It's wifom because it's a distancing maneuver (scummy) yet your argument is it's so pointless that mafia would never do it.

Yet, I am asking Lowell to explain why his argument point has good motivation for scum. WIFOM was not his original point of attack. Buddying/distancing was and I'm asking him to explain why it makes sense for scum to play as I did.

His original attack is not wifom, it's your response that is wifom. His point is still valid, your response (because of wifom) is invalid.

So 1) you dodge the issue of acknowledging you wanted to vote for charter but didn't because it would come across as scummy

Because if I voted, I would be doing exactly what I voted Artifex for, making me a hypocrite.

Am I the only one who doesn't like this? When I read this, it gives me the impression that he wanted to vote Charter, but didn't do so as it would make him a hypocrite. Isn't he admitting here that he finds Charter scummy, while saying that what Charter did isn't scummy just a few posts ago?

So, basically, I'm still a hypocrite?

There's just no pleasing you BSG.

While I "dodged" the point here, I've addressed it in my post that followed. (See my post #8)

I'm sure that if I voted charter instead of FoSed him, we would having essentially the same conversation, but with me trying to show that my vote is not hypocritical because it's for different reasons. There's just no pleasing the penguin, so I think I'll stand my ground with the FoS.

(This isn't a retort but I think I should point out) Your reason for voting for artifex was part joking, thus you can see cases where doing what artifex was doing isn't scummy? If thats the case, voting charter would not have made you scummy as it is not hypocritical because you don't actually believe in your first statement?

What I

do

find interesting is that you're so concerned with whether I voted or FoSed somebody, while completely disregarding my given reasons. You said that you don't see the WIFOM. It was pointed out to you. Yet you seem adamant about your opinion of charter putting you at L-2.

2) You create a scum team of BSG and charter for really bad reasons.

The fact that you're pouncing on me, while disregarding my arguments against charter tells me that you're really not so worried about the bandwagon on yourself. Why would that be? (One scenario may be that charter (or somebody else on your wagon for that matter) is/are (one of) your buddy(-ies), so you know that they may unvote you at any point to prevent a lynch of you.)

3) BSG, scum? only if you like omgus

same quote as above.

This I've also addressed in my post #8:

And it's interesting that you name Charter as my buddy, while all the other players are put into the category of buddy. Are you implying something?

My imagination runs wild sometimes.

Notice how I didn't FoS/vote any players that I conjured up a scenario about. It was purely hypothetical situation that I didn't pursue seriously in the slightest.

Ok I read your tones wrong and I read the quote "My imagination runs wild sometimes." to mean something different. I think under current light it isn't scummy at all.

[Danchaofan]

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.

So it's becoming that xda didn't think artem was a good lynch and he didn't re-read? Why the lies???

[Danchaofan]

This argument against Lynx seems overly convoluted.

Lynx is being accused of making 180s in his opinions. Darrox is accusing of Lynx of saying the charter vote is suspicious to not suspicious to suspicious etc. He's also accusing Lynx of stepping up for BSG then downplaying his stepping up for BSG then going back to saying that stepping up for BSG was a good thing.

I'm of the opinion that the first argument is rather crappy because from my perspective, Lynx has maintained the same position all throughout. A vote is okay L-2 at random for pressure. It's bad because of the wifom induced by the pink kitty. The second argument is a bit more incriminating however, I don't think it's vote worthy. Darrox, do you have any opinions on other players?

[Danchaofan]

EBWOP: checking back I see you've given an opinion on xda. I'm still interested in your opinions on the artem wagon tho.

I think it's time for

unvote, vote xdaamno

[Xdaamno]

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.

It was a pressure vote, actually. I also call bullshit on "contributed nothing" and "given no case".

Grasping.

Danchao, I

dearly

hope you're not voting me for the same reasons. If it's just "vibes", please try and pinpoint the post you got them from.

[PJ.]

You HAVE contributed nothing. Most of your 14 game post have been less then 3 lines and most of those have been completely either exetremely defensivve post that don't add anything to the discussion or completely contentless all together.

Unvote, Vote Xdaamno

[PJ.]

EBWOP:Artem has defended sufficiently for now, but I still think Charter and him could be buddies.

[charter]

Panzer, are you bussing Xdaamo?

[PJ.]

Charter, did you attempt to bus Artem and distance yourself from Artem?

[Xdaamno]

You HAVE contributed nothing. Most of your 14 game post have been less then 3 lines and most of those have been completely either exetremely defensivve post that don't add anything to the discussion or completely contentless all together.

Unvote, Vote Xdaamno

Mafia makes me mad. I think this argument is fallacious enough for me to have to actually waste time rebutting it.

And yet I will anyway, since I'm aware people would call me out on that.

*glare*

First off, 14 not a low number

188 / 12 = 15.66
188 / 13 = 14.46...

Secondly, I have made it clear I find it difficult to get back into a discussion when I'm not already involved. When people attack me, I am

automatically involved

.

Thirdly, every single one of my posts outside the random voting stage has been entirely relevant. Can you give an example of what you mean by "completely contentless all together", Panzer?

[Xdaamno]

EBWOP:

Mafia makes me mad. I think this argument is fallacious enough for me to

not

have to actually waste time rebutting it.

[BSG]

Regarding the claimed PGO, I have only seen that role once:
Mafia 84
This was a large normal. The claim is made at the first page. And if you look at the end of this game, you can see that the claimed player survived till the end, and was eventually a PGO. This is the only example I could find with a PGO.
Charter, you also mentioned a game with a PGO in it. Could you give a link to that game?

@Lynx

The quick hammer by Xdaamno was extremely Scummy. FOS:Xdaamno Definitely want some answers on this vote. However, I am keeping in mind the fact that Xdaamno hasn't really been involved in the game. I think carelessness could be the major cause of his vote. He hasn't seemed to pay much attention to the game. Certainly doesn't excuse a vote of such magnitude though.

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.

The first quote can be found in post 126. The second in post 171. Can you explain why the sudden switch?

@post 127
The player has changed, but the allignment hasn't. If the first player was suspicious, then you should use those arguments against the replacement as well. So it's fair.
However, to me it's a null tell. I've seen players who asked for replacement after they got FoSes or votes against them, and some of them turned up town.

@post 140
We asked if Xdaamno knew that he was the hammerer. He's asking if anyone expected him to say yes.

Is it just me, or did nobody respond to post 142 (except Artem with his claim)?
And yeah, I also have some difficulties in believing Xdaamno that he didn't know. Especially as there was a VC count on the page where he voted. And now that he has explained his 'reason' for voting Artem, I really don't like it.

@Artem
As already explained, I voted you as you were doing the same thing you voted Artifex for. If you find that scummy, why do it yourself? And that you didn't vote Charter as it would make you a hypocrite. Those were my reasons for voting you.

I'm not going to debate how likely the mod is to include a PGO because thats just playing with mod WIFOM

This

@post 151
As already mentioned, there was a VC on top of the page where you 'voted' Artem. Strange that you didn't pay much attention towards the VC when you wanted to apply pressure, not?

@post 153
I also got the wrong impression like Charter about your 'saved' comment and I'm also wondering how you could miss the VC. Perhaps it's not that easy to understand, as we're not as great as you ( ), so can you please answer the questions from post 152?

MR, can you next time let Xdaamno respond first?

Posts 166 and 168. You are exactly doing of what you accuse Lynx off. Besides, in post 168, you already give Lynx a way out of your attacks.

I really want an explanation about post 172.

@post 183

I also call bullshit on "contributed nothing" and "given no case".

Where's the evidence for this? Especially, the second part.

Having seen all of this:

FoS Xdaamno

FoS Master Ruck

[Xdaamno]

Sarnath'd the evidence to you, BSG.

[Xdaamno]

I also got the wrong impression like Charter about your 'saved' comment and I'm also wondering how you could miss the VC. Perhaps it's not that easy to understand, as we're not as great as you ( ), so can you please answer the questions from post 152?

Am I really coming across that elitist?

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...

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?

I already answered these questions, BSG.

Thought I had made the answers clear, but I guess I never finished posting it for some reason.

I said I was "saved", because I was saved from having accidentally lynched Artem.

I first said I would re-read Artem's case, then said I would re-read something entirely different.

I didn't actually "miss" the votecount, of course - I just posted that post probably two days after "reading" it, and I wasn't looking at it at the time.

[Xdaamno]

As already mentioned, there was a VC on top of the page where you 'voted' Artem. Strange that you didn't pay much attention towards the VC when you wanted to apply pressure, not?

Uh, I don't think so, especially because my Artem vote was also for pressure.

[BSG]

I assume that you are saying that I have to give evidence that you aren't giving any cases.

Fos Artem. I think you could actually be scum. Bringing a RVS wagon to three votes is scummy? That's some imagination. I'd vote for you but Panzer has already been caught.

Are you actually defeating your own argument with a counterclaim of "but it's under Panzer's name"? Surely one oughtn't use ones fos so lightly, neh?

The only possible way I can conceive of a player not realising that was a joke would be if said player was looking for reasons to attack people.

IGMEOY.

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

Of your now 16 posts, these two were the only one which I could find in which you attack a player. As you didn't continue with the first attack, it means nothing to me. And the second is based upon a vibe. I don't really call those cases.
You're part right about your contribution. Some posts of yours have responded to discussion, but not all of them. This includes some posts after your 'vote'. But as said, I was more interested in the cases.
Can you show your evidence? Because I'm not a fan of reflecting questions before answering.

When I get irritated, I post sometimes sarcastic things. One example is what you just quoted, Xdn. I just got the feeling that you saw as 'weaker' as you said that those answers should be obvious. But I didn't know them, and apparently Charter didn't as well. I hate it when players act like everyone should know.
Also, did the quote went wrong in post 192?

I said I was "saved", because I was saved from having accidentally lynched Artem.

This quote bothers me. It's just strange to say that you were saved before the flip.

I still find it strange that you didn't check it before you voted. And can you also explain post 193. I don't get the 'also' in it.

[Xdaamno]

I assume that you are saying that I have to give evidence that you aren't giving any cases.

Fos Artem. I think you could actually be scum. Bringing a RVS wagon to three votes is scummy? That's some imagination. I'd vote for you but Panzer has already been caught.

Are you actually defeating your own argument with a counterclaim of "but it's under Panzer's name"? Surely one oughtn't use ones fos so lightly, neh?

The only possible way I can conceive of a player not realising that was a joke would be if said player was looking for reasons to attack people.

IGMEOY.

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

Of your now 16 posts, these two were the only one which I could find in which you attack a player. As you didn't continue with the first attack, it means nothing to me. And the second is based upon a vibe. I don't really call those cases.
You're part right about your contribution. Some posts of yours have responded to discussion, but not all of them. This includes some posts after your 'vote'. But as said, I was more interested in the cases.
Can you show your evidence? Because I'm not a fan of reflecting questions before answering.

I admit many of my posts have been speculation. Distancing myself from 'the main scum hunt' is something I do actively.

When I get irritated, I post sometimes sarcastic things. One example is what you just quoted, Xdn. I just got the feeling that you saw as 'weaker' as you said that those answers should be obvious. But I didn't know them, and apparently Charter didn't as well. I hate it when players act like everyone should know.
Also, did the quote went wrong in post 192?

Yeah, the quote went wrong. I'm also way too pissy when I imply things are 'obvious' :/

I said I was "saved", because I was saved from having accidentally lynched Artem.

This quote bothers me. It's just strange to say that you were saved before the flip.

I still find it strange that you didn't check it before you voted. And can you also explain post 193. I don't get the 'also' in it.

I assumed we would not be at L-1 at this stage of the game, and it's likely I was in a rush.

The "also" means that the vote was both for pressure, and an indication I was suspiscious of Artem. Only the latter would be justification for a hammer vote, and I certainly didn't believe it had got to that stage.

My suspiscions on Artem are suspisciously vibe-ish, I agree. I'm a huge proponent of trying to explain vibes rather than pass them off as gut, so my Artem vibes might well have been baseless (yes, I can't remember what they were about).

[Master Ruck]

Damn. If Xda is telling the truth, then I was wrong in my assumption of his being 'saved'. I'll not answer questions on another's behalf again.

Also, BSG, where's that FoS coming from? Any reason you'd like to point out or you just doing it cuz you can?

[Lynx The Antithesis]

@Lynx

The quick hammer by Xdaamno was extremely Scummy. FOS:Xdaamno Definitely want some answers on this vote. However, I am keeping in mind the fact that Xdaamno hasn't really been involved in the game. I think carelessness could be the major cause of his vote. He hasn't seemed to pay much attention to the game. Certainly doesn't excuse a vote of such magnitude though.

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.

The first quote can be found in post 126. The second in post 171. Can you explain why the sudden switch?

Because since my comments in post 126, Xdaamno has continued to offer little in the way of scumhunting. His vote on charter seemed to be reaching. His only reason for the vote was because Charter's "interrogating" questions try to come off as town. Which I think is not sufficient for a vote, but Xdaamno wanted to appear as offering something to the town. So after my first commetn on him, he's done relatively little to redeeem himself.

It's not even his hammer that makes him look suspicious to me. It's the fact that he's done very little for a large part of this game. The hammer only made me look into more closely. He's pciked up his posts a little more in content this page. However, he's still scummy with the way he's thrown his votes with little to back it up with.

Xdaamno, care to give a little more insight as to why you view charter as most scummy?

[Xdaamno]

Damn. If Xda is telling the truth, then I was wrong in my assumption of his being 'saved'. I'll not answer questions on another's behalf again.

Also, BSG, where's that FoS coming from? Any reason you'd like to point out or you just doing it cuz you can?

Ah, you thought I meant "grrr, Artem, foiled again"? I guess it kind of looked that way.

The "telling the truth" part is redundant. I'm in the business of making myself look town in either alignment. If I actually thought I wanted to lynch Artem but wanted to let you guys know I didn't want to lynch Artem, there's no reason I'd hide my personal message in my own post.

/waiting for someone to call WIFOM

[LlamaFluff]

Bumping votecount