Newbie game 806: Game over (the scums win)

[Toledo25]

Hi all, this should be fun.

My thoughts on rvs: I'm a supporter of it. First off, it's a good way for discussion to get started. It doesn't just pop up out of a void-of-post game. Also, sometimes people come up with funny/witty random votes. Though people are entitled to their opinions, so I'm fine.

Vote: iPeanut

There can only be one SE!

Oh yeah, I also have a question: which alignment does everyone prefer (town or scum)? I'm not going to hold against you whatever anyone says. I'm for town, since I'd get too nervous being scum.

[Toledo25]

Wait a second, you "saw her first"... and yet you're voting for somerand0mguy instead of yourself...

What... exactly... did you see?

We're not technically lynching here, we're sending them to the hallway

So the people who killed our dear friend John get the terrible punishment of.... leaving? Quick, vote me off! I have better things to do!

Well, for no particular reason other than to be different, I vote:Sigma

How dry it would be if we all voted for different people!

[Toledo25]

Oh goodiez, a non-random vote.

My first post was not just a random vote. I answered sigma's question, and threw in a question of my own, trying to add to the discussion. He even acknowledged it:

I should probably clarify that I'm not opposed to random votes as long as the voter has something else interesting in their post to go along with it. Your post is a good example of this.

Yet you say I'm postponing discussion? Also, I doubt that a game will appear just out of a discussion on RVS. Look: my random vote has even spurred a real vote! Amazing!

In short, I think it's Pro-Town dangerous and Pro-Scum Heaven sent.

"Heaven" seems a little extreme for a word describing the RVS.

Also, welcome to the game

[Toledo25]

I don't think there is anything at all random about sigma's question. I wouldn't have taken issue if Toledo had stated his peace and followed up with his own question, while respecting sigma's wishes to nix the RVS. Either way, however,

we were able to get out of a pointless {IMO} phase at the bottom of page 1 and get into some serious discussion.

Let me know how that hurts the Town.

Hardly serious discussion. Bottom of page 1 includes jokes about John's mom, a vote count, you subbing in, and sigma asking his question again. This doesn't particularly help either side much.

As an example, all of this discussion is based off of the original post made by sigma, not off of any jokes about John Doe's mom

Yes, while it is pretty obvious that this didn't come from jokes about John's mom, like I said before, this discussion wouldn't have happened if I hadn't placed my random vote.

True. He did answer sigma's question. My bad for not acknowledging this. However, in going with a random vote immediately afterwards, it secured that the RVS qould take place regardless of sigma's request that we just skip it.

No offense to sigma, but he isn't god in this game. No one is forced to obey anyone else's request; if they feel like agreeing, they are more than welcome.

[Toledo25]

1. Welcome to the game HowardRoark!

@Zach, p59...

It still stands that in your original attack you did not acknowledge that Toledo was pursuing discussion while random voting.

But with my position that the RVS is counter-productive to discussion where discussion is a valid option, can you see where I'm coming from? Maybe this will help. Question- Why don't we have an RVS in the middle of Day 2? Answer- Because we have useful things to discuss. If we have things to discuss, then why is the RVS useful? Had everyone followed sigma's play and skipped the RVS in favor of asking and answering pertinent questions {ie- playing the game}, we would've gotten full and meaningful discussion going right from word one. Instead, the discussion was hampered and overshadowed by the RVS. And if you don't believe that is the case, then answer me this. Why is it that out of 8 players {not including Toledo himself} only 3 answered Toledo's question? Had the RVS not been started, Toledo's question would've gotten as much attention as sigma's, I'd bet. 2 discussion starting points in 2 posts makes for a strong game-start, IMO.?

OK, maybe this will help express my opinion. One: I like the RVS stage. I personally think it's useful. Two: I don't think just a discussion on our opinions on RVS would spawn anything worthwhile. I've yet to see RVS fail to generate real discussions within the first 2 or 3 pages.

4.Well, it's a chance that if we have 2 newb Scum, they might slip and quickvote on an L-2 Bandwagon. It's not the strongest play, I'll give you, but that doesn't mean it's not worth trying, IMO.

No.

I am 99.9% sure that scum would never do that, especially both of them. That would pretty much guarantee their lynch in the upcoming days.

2. Putting pressure on a player as early as possible so as to elicit a response and gauge said response.
3. To watch the reactions/lack thereof from the other players.

Good reasons for sure, but care to evaluate on the results on either yet?

[Toledo25]

Argh, I just typed a post, and then it didn't go through >.<

I'll re-make it tomorrow.

[Toledo25]

Stupid thunderstorms lasting for 8 hours!

My point was, you randomly voting ultimately started the RVS immediately after sigma asked to skip the RVS. Why?

I feel like I've answered this, but ok. I support the RVS stage, because it pretty much always generates discussion. While it is true that there are other methods, I think that random voting is most likely to generate discussion. Discussion wasn't guaranteed to appear from the other options (neither was it from RVS, but I felt it was more likely.) Also, I'm pretty sure I've discussed my reasons several times already aside from this.

This doesn't particularly help either side much.

And why are you concerned with the Scum side being helped?

Yeah, I read this before, but I forgot to answer it. The whole block is:

I don't think there is anything at all random about sigma's question. I wouldn't have taken issue if Toledo had stated his peace and followed up with his own question, while respecting sigma's wishes to nix the RVS. Either way, however, we were able to get out of a pointless {IMO} phase at the bottom of page 1 and get into some serious discussion. Let me know how that hurts the Town.

Hardly serious discussion. Bottom of page 1 includes jokes about John's mom, a vote count, you subbing in, and sigma asking his question again. This doesn't particularly help either side much.

In the same post, you were implying (correctly) that the jokes weren't helping town, then you say we got out of pointless discussion at the bottom of page 1. I said it helps neither side because scum would not have much of a reason to continue it.

I am willing to use a tactic that may work no matter what the percentage chance of success or fail.

With that logic, why aren't you saying "Hey scum, can you please come out and claim scum?" Will it work? Almost certainly not. Possible? Yes. It seems rather pointless to try something that has almost no chance of success.

Saying that something will fail 99.9% of the time without a full blown case study to backup that data is useless.

Let's look at what I said.

I am 99.9% sure that scum would never do that

NOT

scum would never do that 99.9% of the time

There's a difference between what I feel and the exact truth. I didn't say that this was reality, I was expressing my opinions.

Regarding the bold large text, it was to express how likely I felt that that situation would have occurred.

I'll respond to the first paragraph of post 64 later.

[Toledo25]

Sorry all for my sudden lack of activity, I hope on posting something worthwhile tomorrow. Also, welcome to the game Rashilul!
When you say mafiascum games, do you mean on this site (it's what it's called, after all)? Because it says you just joined. Or you might just mean mafia games in general, clarify please.

[Toledo25]

Sorry Rash, my mind read that as "played" rather than "read".

First, nope, I don't think iP is suspicious atm.

Unvote

why aren't you saying "Hey scum, can you please come out and claim scum?"

I forgot to right "seriously" in there. My bad.

Then my question boils down to this. Did you think sigma was asking {directly or indirectly} to skip the RVS?

I read his post again. He doesn't seem to.

You say you don't have a problem with me, but under the very logic you use to go after Toledo, you could have used the same reasoning to cast a vote on me.

I dunno . . . maybe because he felt that it would be easier to attack a less experienced player and it would be easier for him to keep building a case?

Although this isn't particularly scummy, it did stand out to me. I'm one of the 2 SE, so you can't really say he might have wanted to go after someone with less experience. Zach has been in longer than me, but still.

I hope you are not advocating "chaining lynches." Until we have a scum flip, I think that looking for linkage to partners is worthless.

Don't like that statement. It helps to make possible scum pairs before hand, to see who should be lynched, and who's lynching would reveal the most info.

My playstyle is that I wait until the second day to get evidence. And in the mean while I take notes and sit quietly in the back. Is that really scummy?

It's certainly more scummy than it is towny. Everyone else can only get a better read on you if you participate from Day 1. Also, it sounds like an excuse for lurking.

These are strategies that I'm making up as I go along... If something doesn't work, this is the place to find out, right?

That statement seems a little like a default fall back plan if something doesn't work or is messed up.

Ok I have two major suspects (but keep in mind that I am not completely sure,just kind of an educated hunch)

How can you not be sure about your own thoughts?

Also, Happy 4th of July to my fellow Americans!

[Toledo25]

No, I'm still alive. I got the PM when I was making this post

I'm wondering if you could give me your thoughts on a question I've asked you a few times now.

Again, I point to my example that we only had 3 people answer your question, does that not bother you?

Not really. I couldn't really predict that a series of jokes on John's mom would appear and take away from my question. sigma's rvs question also may have been more relevant to the rvs than my question (joking, it was more relevant.) Discussion also appeared regardlessly, so I'm not really bothered.

I'll get an avatar once I can find a decent one

Thunderstorm in my area. I'll vote or give suspects hopefully tomorrow.
[/url]

[Toledo25]

@HR-
I don't buy it. rand0m was actually being rather active, as opposed to you. You had just been prodded while he was chatting more than he had all game {not well, but more actively}. Also, you said just now it was to get him to be more active, yes? So does that mean there's merit in Dizzle's question of you're concern over his "lurking"? Because you definitely did say it wasn't a concern ATM. Why didn't you answer Dizzle's question about it not being an issue?

I'm not reading that as a scumtell. rand0m wasn't adding any sort of content whatsoever, while HR was at least posting something (albeit intermittently). Though the contradiction does concern me, it's not raising any flags. Well, not yet, anyways.

That was going to be the first thing I was going to mention after reading through the past few pages D: D3x said it himself pretty much:

You haven't given a good {let alone passable} reason to vote. You're not fully answering the questions that are put to you. You're not really adding actual content to the discussion.

I know you say he wasn't posting very well in your post, but posting without adding anything doesn't go far.

@rand0m-
I'm not saying you can't gain suspects, I'm very clearly asking why. If you don't share how you came to your conclusions, we have no way of proving you as a Townie {lurking doesn't provide us with information and that doesn't help the Town}.

Also, rand0m's getting angry and ditching the game seems more like a null tell than anything. Regardless of his role, some newbs get angry when they're about to get lynched, regardless of role (I nearly hammered myself the first out of frustration, but that's just me.)

At this point, I'm going to ask the town their thoughts on the HR case in it's entirity. I believe this needs more pressure.

I was about to start answering this, and then I realized it was 2:30 AM. Assuming I have time, I'll answer this tomorrow and put down my vote, which is probably going to be rand0m or Bonds, and not Howard.

[Toledo25]

Welcome to the game facebook!

At this point, I'm going to ask the town their thoughts on the HR case in it's entirity. I believe this needs more pressure.

To start by summing it up, for now, he's probably 3rd on my list. Tomorrow I might vote for him, but not today.

1. A case has been built against me for misrepresenting. If that's scummy, then your misrepresenting is also scummy.

Other people have claimed you were misrepresenting before (me and the rvs thing). Why just him?

2. You are misdirecting. Bringing up Chain Lynching, etc.

Ok

3. You're not reading my posts and questioning things I have already pointed out in other earlier posts.

He came a few pages in, so he might have had less memory on the early pages (though I have yet to sub in, so I can't say for certain).

4. Your initial vote was limited and based off of parrotted information.

He subbed in, so that's to be expected. Lack on new info after after a few real days is problematic.

5. Apparent contradiction with how you're handling rand0m's lurking. "LAL" in your first post to "don't worry about it" in your recent posts.

A nice reason/contradiction for me.

After calling somerand0mguy's "exit" a null tell

And I actually didn't call his exit a "Null Tell". Allow me to pull a quote...

I think it's frustrated Newb-Town.

Yep, seems like a point for d3x.

Shall continue later

Also, everyone keep in mind we have 5 days until deadline.

[Toledo25]

Ok, I'm going to go ahead and place my vote.

Vote: Bond

My reasons:
1. p. 194 by Dizzle. Seems like a pretty big contradiction. Also:

Right now you are my favourite lynch.

That was directed at rand0m, btw.

@Dx3. Didnt even think about that he could be replaced. How silly of me.

A bit too convenient to forget. You replaced in yourself.

2. p. 171 by Bond. As Zach said, it implies that Bond thinks rand0m is pro-town but thinks lynching him is peachy.

3. Your predecessors weren't too good. Rash's opening was vague and scummy, his vote didn't make much sense. Spirit also didn't give much input.

Bond, question: Who do you want to get lynched so far?

[Toledo25]

Toledo pretty much flew under the radar towards the end of the day. He made some points about my case against HR, but didn't respond when I clarified them.

Yeah, I didn't feel like I had anything else to say afterwards. "Ok, I'm on board with that then" really would have felt more empty than not posting. And I would have felt more comfortable with Bond.

In Iso, his case against Bond feels a bit weaker, IMO.

I doubt this is relevant, but what does Iso mean? I haven't heard that before.

I would have liked to see him contribute to the case against Bond in some way before his vote, whether through questions, or points made against him, or something.

I probably should have laid down some facts or questions before the vote, but I think I did sum up my reasons (although rather shortly) here.

With the new day dawning, do you have any top suspects?

Right now, no one. Facebook and howard seem to be starting today fine. Though I was looking at some finished newbie games, and all of them had at least 1 scum in the D1 innocent lynch. So currently, my preference is to lynch someone who was on yesterday's end bandwagon, since there is a pretty darn good chance at least one is scum. But none of them stand out so far. I'll take a look at them (Dizzle, d3x, and Zach) to see what interactions they have had so far with each other and Ip + Bond.

[Toledo25]

You know how to reference the player that you are quoting but are inconsistent in doing so, can you please be more consistent?

I'll try to do so

Please give me a complete list of games you've played before. Thank you.

Yeah. Newbie 769 (townie, lynched D2), Newbie 785 (Cop, subbed out D1), and Newbie 813 (ongoing).

Actually, the main reason I'm posting is to say that I'm going to be out all tomorrow. I'm going to NYC with family & friends to see Phantom of the Opera. I should be able to post Friday.

[Toledo25]

I'm back from NYC. Long car ride, and on the way back a tropical storm hit...

I'm working on a post now, but I need to go so I'll probably finish later tonight.

Also, check out my avi

[Toledo25]

So I just did a quick run through of Dizzle and Zach (like I said, I'm pretty sure at least 1 scum was on yesterday's bandwagon), and I noticed a huge lack of interaction between them. The only times I saw a mention of either of them in their posts were 2 short blips of Dizzle agreeing with Zach in D1. That's it. Not sure if I missed something bigger, but it's pretty large from what I read. Also, it's rather interesting that Zach didn't get NK'd last night. If I was scum, I'd probably go for the IC who is scumhunting and playing townie. So, a question for each:
Zach, do you have any thoughts/opinions on Dizzle?
Dizzle, do you have any thoughts/opinions on Zach? (if he gets to read this)

Perhaps I need to pose more of my writings in the form of a question. Can you please respond to the fact that I pointed out that facebook has not really had much content today?

Sorry, I read that but I wasn't intending on just saying I would be out (the other 2 things were quick and easy.) I was more of leaning towards they weren't doing bad/scummily rather than great.

Bleh, I'm losing focus. Probably cuz I'm tired.

Also, happy scumday facebook!