Mini 793: Scrubs mafia- GAME OVER

[Debonair Danny DiPietro]

I assume since the thread is open I can...

Vote: Fishydelishy

[Debonair Danny DiPietro]

Yeah, but even if there's two scum groups with two people in each, they wouldn't likely know of each other's existance till one of the other group was lynched or killed. I don't have any idea what hp was driving at with his listing of four scum, maybe he was just trying to help his odds of being right?

[Debonair Danny DiPietro]

Unvote

Don't like inHim counting my vote amongst the seemingly serious votes against the Fish, trying to appear to have more support than he does?

[Debonair Danny DiPietro]

From what it looks like at the moment, InHim is all supportive of wagoning just to wagon, but is against his own wagon, and is being very defensive. He should be supporting it by his own logic.

You are attacking inHim for being defensive (which is a bad attack in itself), and linking it to his bad logic. What I infer from this paragraph is something along the lines of "inHim has less right to defend himself- he supports wagoning for the sake of it", which is not a good sentiment.

Then you're inferring wrong, it isn't that inHim has less of a right to defend himself, but that he supported bandwagoning on another player, claiming it to be a good thing, but when it was turned on him he became defensive and was opposed to it, making inHim a hypocrite.

[Debonair Danny DiPietro]

Don't like inHim counting my vote amongst the seemingly serious votes against the Fish, trying to appear to have more support than he does?

Fair enough. But why pose that as a question? I think you're asking approval of the rest of us before you lay down a vote, which happens to be scum-motivated protocol. veerus did do the same, but was not so egregious, as he is still a little more convincing of his intentions.

I like this from inH actually, and see exactly what he is getting at. DDD brought up reasons for voting inH, unvoted his previous vote, and then never voted inH. It was just a post calling him scummy. Seems like he should vote him with what was brought up here, not seemingly searching for approval to vote.

inHim cut my quote which has a way of distorting things in this case as it allows the actual order of things to be flipped. I unvoted as to note that I was not seriously voting for fishy, not to free up my vote to vote inHim. The question mark and tone of the post aren't a reflection of me searching for approval, but instead me presenting a potentially interesting point, but one I didn't have a strong opinion on. Besides, inHim's hypothesis that I was looking for approval to vote doesn't really stand up when you consider the fact that I haven't, ya know, voted.

[Debonair Danny DiPietro]

inHim cut my quote which has a way of distorting things in this case as it allows the actual order of things to be flipped. I unvoted as to note that I was not seriously voting for fishy, not to free up my vote to vote inHim. The question mark and tone of the post aren't a reflection of me searching for approval, but instead me presenting a potentially interesting point, but one I didn't have a strong opinion on.

Well one thing that I dont get is why anyone would never have a vote out once they even see a slight scum tell. There are just so many reasons to be voting as compared to not voting, if you really want me to list them I will go do that, but it should be fairly obvious. Point aside though.

It's not that I don't see the value of voting, but that you're downplaying the detriments of a trigger-happy voting style.

There is really only two tones, pro and anti-town. I dont really think there is such thing as completely neutral tone unless you basically say "I have no opinion whatsoever". Saying "I think he votes on too little reasoning" is still in a negative light given that voting with little reason is viewed much more widely as a scum telll then anything else. Even if you view it as a null tell, bringing up something that is likely to be viewed as a scumtell is scummy if its not accompanied by a vote.

Only two tones? Mafia must be so much easier in your binary world because from where I sit not only do you have to properly define words and actions along a full spectrum from completely anti-town to pro-town you also have to then take the analysis to another level and then determine the likely motivations and explanations for those behaviors.

Besides you said it yourself, "given that voting with little reason is viewed much more widely as a scum tell" and that's what you and inHim apparently expected of me; to vote based on a little reason I found. So, essentially you're faulting me for not behaving in a scummy fashion, peculiar behavior itself.

Besides, inHim's hypothesis that I was looking for approval to vote doesn't really stand up when you consider the fact that I haven't, ya know, voted.

When he is the only person you have seemed to lean to voting for, it kind of does. The phrasing of that statement really was made like you were looking to see if anyone would agree with the idea before you acted on it, even if that was not the intention

Mafia, the only game where ending your sentence in a question mark instead of a period somehow becomes a big issue.

[Debonair Danny DiPietro]

inHim cut my quote which has a way of distorting things in this case as it allows the actual order of things to be flipped. I unvoted as to note that I was not seriously voting for fishy, not to free up my vote to vote inHim. The question mark and tone of the post aren't a reflection of me searching for approval, but instead me presenting a potentially interesting point, but one I didn't have a strong opinion on.

Well one thing that I dont get is why anyone would never have a vote out once they even see a slight scum tell. There are just so many reasons to be voting as compared to not voting, if you really want me to list them I will go do that, but it should be fairly obvious. Point aside though.

It's not that I don't see the value of voting, but that you're downplaying the detriments of a trigger-happy voting style.

Show me where wagoning in the random stage is harmful. Seriously, its a different playstyle but it doesnt mean he is scum. Just try and learn to read it.

Let's see, as inHim has shown it's a good way to bring suspicion on yourself, which is generally counterproductive for a townie. If also done to the wrong player it can induce false positives which are bad and while I trust myself to properly interpret such a bandwagon that's not a trust I can extend to other players very easily in a game of mafia, now can I?

Furthermore, you're changing the argument from an original indictment of me for not shamelessly bandwagoning inHim to defending inHim despite the fact that I've never really attacked him. I've only disagreed with your assertion that an aggressive voting style is always good, I've never stated that it's always bad.

There is really only two tones, pro and anti-town. I dont really think there is such thing as completely neutral tone unless you basically say "I have no opinion whatsoever". Saying "I think he votes on too little reasoning" is still in a negative light given that voting with little reason is viewed much more widely as a scum telll then anything else. Even if you view it as a null tell, bringing up something that is likely to be viewed as a scumtell is scummy if its not accompanied by a vote.

Only two tones? Mafia must be so much easier in your binary world because from where I sit not only do you have to properly define words and actions along a full spectrum from completely anti-town to pro-town you also have to then take the analysis to another level and then determine the likely motivations and explanations for those behaviors.

Everything is either anti or pro town once you do all that. Hell if you really wanted me to I could of said "Everything starts out as something that is said. Now, you take the quote and apply your personal standards of if any tells that are in it are pro or anti town. From there you apply it to the situation at hand and draw conclusions. From there you are able to decide if it is a pro or anti town quote". In the end its still going to be a town or scum tell.

Yeah, I'm going to disagree with this, there's a huge amount of junk posted in any game of mafia. The ability to parse through it for valuable info is key. The tendency to over analyze every last word looking for a scumtell based on the spacing of the o's in looking is conversely not productive.

Besides you said it yourself, "given that voting with little reason is viewed much more widely as a scum tell" and that's what you and inHim apparently expected of me; to vote based on a little reason I found. So, essentially you're faulting me for not behaving in a scummy fashion, peculiar behavior itself.

I dont view it as a scum tell in the random stage first off. Also what are you saying here? Im missing it. If you see him as the scummiest, even if it is not a lynching tell, you still should vote. I usually am not happy with a lynch untill around page 15, but I vote before then.

And I'm happy for you that you've got a style of game you like, but don't try and dictate how I should play the game.

[Debonair Danny DiPietro]

DDD, your argument with Furry quickly derailed into theory instead of scumhunting... Who do you think is scummy right now?

Vote: Gorrad

He's running real low under the radar. He's not drawing attention to himself as part of the lurker contingent, but he's not particularly engaged with the main arguments and appears to be content to snipe with one liners into the fray.

I'm not sure if his first post and vote are random or serious because he offers up a tired textbook scumtell as his reason. If it's random I don't like him attaching a reason that could be perceived as real to it and if it's serious it's a bad reason. I don't like his vote on Brandi and I don't like the threat attached to his unvote. And in his latest he whirls from not liking either Brandi or inHim to complimenting Brandi and pressuring inHim.

[Debonair Danny DiPietro]

DDD, I understand your point about Gorrad but with the deadline looming and Gorrad's given reason for his behavior (finals), I think this is something we should look at tomorrow.

Deadline isn't looming, it's a full five days (and change) away.

[Debonair Danny DiPietro]

Of the top three vote getters inHim is highest on my list, with Slicey not far behind and Brandi pretty low down the list and while I won't have computer access for the rest of the night I will read anything inHim writes tomorrow before making any decision.

[Debonair Danny DiPietro]

Bah

[Debonair Danny DiPietro]

Interesting, why was I the NK on N1?