Webcomic Wars Mafia: D7- Be Thankful I'm Not The Author

[ZazieR]

Mod

- I''ll probably be V/LA this weekend. Some stuff came up...
Don''t really want to give more details.
I''ll try to post if I can put my thoughts towards it.

[Korlash]

So certain, are we? We know this wagon was started by town and jumped on by town, do we? FOS: Korlash

See now you contradicted yourself. I'm not certain of anything, YOU are. YOU think it's "designed" for a mislynch of Fish, thus YOU think it was started by a town. And we won't mislynchFish if Vino is scum, so YOU think Vino is town. And the mere fact it's up to 8+ people kinda helps suggest some town jumped on it at some point.

So you pretty much just FOSed yourself... Nice... Good job man...

I lean toward Fishy and Vino both being town, yes. That is implied in "1-2 mislynch": if I'm right and this is a scum setup, the people being set up are not scum. I have no idea what you're trying to say here in the "logically" clause; it appears to be sarcasm, but of nothing remotely resembling anything I wrote.

Ok so you did read it yet kept your contradictory FOS in play. Bad stuff on your part but whatever.

And the entire "logically" part is sarcasm. In fact most of it was sarcasm. Most of the last quote was sarcasm as well. I'm going to go out on a limb and assume you don't get out much do you.

[Lamont_Cranston]

This of course is completely senseless. Why are you wasting the pixel space with a point like this? How would you like somebody attacking you with a lame argument like this? Certainly you understand how voting people is part of the process of catching scum right?

I would usually let Tar answer this first but I don't think it matters in this case.

His point is valid. Supporting a wagon and scumhunting are not the same thing, they can be sure, but in your case they aren't. You supported a wagon without any real action, and thus without any real scum hunting. Also can you keep the discussion on the right topic. When talking about "supporting a wagon" don't suddenly change to "voting people" because they are not the same topic and eventually you'll slip up so bad you cant recover from it.

This is so sad. You both are stuck on semantics. Please drop this stupid issue and understand how one's vote is used to hunt scum. This is pitiful.

Surely you know that very early in the game there is less to go on than we would have once the game progresses right? Why is the famous Tar wasting time with bad arguments like this??

If you know there is less to go on why would you make a statement that someone is not a lynch candidate? Wouldn't at this point there be so little No one is a lynch candidate and thus such a statement applies to everyone and thus is moot? And why would you discount someone when you know that we have nothing to go on? How do you know he isn't a valid lynch candidate now? Do you have any evidence of that?

LOL this coming from a vino lynch supporter and more semantics. Try getting real instead of this crappy false insinuations. Try playing Mafia.

Says you. He needs to post now or be lynched -- the earlier the better.

What happened to the ability to replace useless players?

Well good point but of course we can prove he lurked deliberately. That is a little different.

The best way to get him to contribute is to ring him up. If a scummier player emerges, sure I'll buy it but right now he needs to get rung up.

Yes, lets pressure the guy who isn't here. I'm sure he will magically feel our votes on him and come rushing back. I mean the concept of wagoning a lurker to force him to talk seems... contradictory in and of itself. Although I admit I sometimes want to do it myself XD [color]

Standard lurker operational procedure[/color

The town will benefit greatly from forcing him to post. If a strong case elsewhere appears then fine the sooner lurkers are removed the better because as I am sure you know scum love having them around in the endgame and if we wait until mid-game when we have stronger cases that have to be dealt with, things just devolve from there.

How fast do you expect this game to go? Endgame? Already? On page 5? Of a 25 player game? Why the heck are we talking about endgame?

Then what is your point?? My vote for him would be at least as valid as yours would be for vino (only mine is better).

LOL. This is the best you have for a completely serious case? You really should be looking elsewhere.

Laughing at the guy and telling him he's wasting his time... that always works...

Ya and I'm laughing at you too.

[Lamont_Cranston]

Lamont, cool your jets man. I feel like I'm reading Newbie 774 again.

Yup. Looks like I've tilted.

Also, there are a couple people that have yet to post a word as opposed to just a '/confirm' like Empking.

Yes except THEY did it when the game was in confirm mode which is my point (quite valid thank you).

-----------------------
Random Outside Questions:

What was that acronym Tar used?
When does RVS end, typically?

[Percy]

Whoops, looked like a bell to me...

Uh huh. Sure.

Also, I have no idea why you're defending Vino, especially after expressing initial approval of Fishy's first post.

I have explained this. Please see my reply to him, it is quite clear.

Oh, I read your response. I just have no reason to believe you.

Kewl. Well you look super fun to play with and so I withdraw my support of your wagon.

Yeah, you 'clarified' this vague semi-scum statement later as well. I don't like it.

And walk to Perth? Don't you guys have transport infrastructure yet?

Heh, I'm from Sydney too. I was making fun at your lack of geographical knowledge.

[I'm currently in Canada, and I've had fun torturing Canadians with my Vegimite and telling them they should walk to Perth (after one remarked that we were a small little island), but to watch for the snakes and dropbears while they're at it.]

Deliberately lurking is not a proper "meta-playstyle".

Well, you've never played with Empking, so I suggest you check out his meta.

I do not like the look of the vino bandwagon, and I do not like the feel of the Lamont bandwagon; there is foul scum down there, or I am no guide. I will therefore take a path in the middle.

Some things about Lamont are worrying me, but I think they may possible be put down to over-enthusiasm.

I would also like to add my expression of concern over the way you phrased this. Please elaborate on what you don't like about the case against Lamont, and the case against Vino.

I suspect the vino wagon is designed to set Fishy up for a 1-2 mislynch.

Very interesting.

In what way? Please elaborate.

I hate posts like this. You can come back later and say "by interesting I meant I liked his point" if everyone thinks the silent speaker was on the money. You can also say "by interesting I meant I thought the silent speaker was wrong in what he said". It's anti-town at best.

2) Lurker hunting is a popular enough scum pastime that it's a weak scumtell (especially if the scum are active).

QFT. Hunting lurkers is the easiest thing for scum to do - whether they're town or scum, the scum love to go after lurkers. If they start posting, you can back off, and look pro-town for helping put pressure on another player to contribute. If they don't start posting, then when and if they get lynched, you either lose a non-contributing member from your team and look great (if the "lurker" was scum), or you have a great defense if they flip town. It really is a win-win for most scum.

Handling lurkers is hard, but what the fuck are we doing talking about lurkers before we hit page 20? Or Day 2 at the very least?

Lets see... the spock count is up to what, four? Five?

What?

Well it appears I have the

famous

Tar all pissed off at me.

...

Parts of your case are so astoundingly bad it makes me wonder why you would be reaching so hard...

Urgh. That first sentence was pretty terrible, but that weak quasi-OMGUS second sentence takes the cake.

I didn't know there were criteria that qualified potential lynch candidates other than "this player is likely to be scum". Elaborate, please.

Surely you know that very early in the game there is less to go on than we would have once the game progresses right? Why is the famous Tar wasting time with bad arguments like this??

Firstly, I hate it when players quote entire posts. It's really lazy. I hate it even more when they post their replies

inside

the quotation.

Still, your "famous" line is such bullshit. He asked for elaboration, which you didn't give. Your response was "Why are you even asking me this, oh glorious one?!", which is incredibly evasive.

Tar's point wasn't that bad, really. On the one hand, you're saying that the game is still young and there's nothing much to work from, but you're still trying to differentiate who should be lynched and why, and none of the reasons you stated were sufficiently linked to why you think they are scum.

1) Wrong: Correct answer is E: Wait a few days to make sure they're lurking, then investigate, vig, or deadline lynch them (preferably vig).

Says you. He needs to post now or be lynched -- the earlier the better.

What a terrible idea. You want to blow the entire first day to lynch Empking, because he hasn't posted anything of substance?

Let's look at some other players:

delathi - one random vote
Empking - one /confirm after the confirmation stage, one wagon-jumping post
Flameaxe - one random vote
hasdgfas - one semi-random vote
Head_Honcho - one random vote, one post with two (good) questions
Mufasa - Hadn't even posted when Empking "/confirm"ed (except to confirm), and has only posted a "wagon vote" on Lamont
qwints - one random vote
Santos - one post with questions, no votes.
SensFan - one serious votepost
Sironigous - Also hadn't even posted when Empking confirmed (except to confirm), and now one post opposing "policy lynches", no votes.
Timeater - one random vote
Tzeentch - one random vote
xRECKONERx -

no non-confirming posts

How, exactly, have you picked Empking out of this 13-player list? Enlighten me as to why you're willing to say Empking is definitely scum.

Ideally, everyone should be posting once per day with critical analysis of the game. That would be awesome. The point I'm making, though, is that there is no basis whatsoever for singling Empking out and calling for his blood. At all. Period.

Also, hunting lurkers

instead of scum

is becoming a pattern for you.

Thanks & /fixed.

Why thanks? How is that fixed?

Yes, lets pressure the guy who isn't here. I'm sure he will magically feel our votes on him and come rushing back. I mean the concept of wagoning a lurker to force him to talk seems... contradictory in and of itself. Although I admit I sometimes want to do it myself XD

The issue here is not only "how to deal with lurkers", but "do we have anyone who can be singled out as a lurker above others" as well.

The fact is, Empking has

not

generated the least content. He was tied for that before Emp's latest post, but now xRECKONERx is number one.

Also, lynching a lurker on Day 1 is retarded if there are other suspects around.

Finally, voting to put pressure on a lurker sometimes works. It's just not a good idea right now.

What was that acronym Tar used?

I've got my eye on you.

wagon vote

vote: L__C

FoS: Mufasa

If you're not going to contribute anything other than your vote to a wagon, it makes me think you're scum. Jumping on at the half-way mark is also a classic scum move.

@the silent speaker: mark who you're quoting.

Yeah a random bandwagon is designed for something. So exactly explain to me how this works? A town starts a wagon on another town and then a bunch of other town join it and somehow it's a setup for something?

So certain, are we? We know this wagon was started by town and jumped on by town, do we?

FOS: Korlash

Your initial statement implied that you thought both Vino and Fishy were town. How could you not see that?

However, Korlash did imply that the others "joining in" were town, which was not implied by you - in fact, the exact opposite. Hmmm.

SensFan's entire post is a lie.

FOS: SensFan

No, it's not. For the record, here is Sens' post:

Only thing scummier than Vino is L_C's blatant defense of Vino.

Vote: L_C

What exactly do you think is a 'lie'? Not just inaccurate, but somehow a scum attempt to manipulate the playerbase?

And the mere fact it's up to 8+ people kinda helps suggest some town jumped on it at some point.

Lamont is on 8 Votes. Vino is on 4. Your implication remains bizarre.

@Mod: I'm flying back to Australia (Canada is beautiful and awesome, by the way) tomorrow, so I will probably be unable to post until Monday. Apologies.

[Lamont_Cranston]

Only thing scummier than Vino is L_C's blatant defense of Vino.

LOL. Blatant BW-ing. Nice case there Set.

[Lamont_Cranston]

wagon vote

vote: L__C

QFT.

[Lamont_Cranston]

Vote: LC

LC seems to me, to be too quick to judge and his reaction gto Tar makes me think he'll attack anything.

AHA! Welcome back. I hope you plan to participate regularly.

My reaction towards tar was self-defense thank you.

I judged a lurking move by yourself, yes quickly. Just as quick as you made the move.

Here is another quick move:

Unvote

[Lamont_Cranston]

Lamont:

Surely you know that very early in the game there is less to go on than we would have once the game progresses right? Why is the famous Tar wasting time with bad arguments like this?

No, Tar is right. Evidence to lynch is thinner earlier on in the game, although there's plenty in this one now, but the criteria to lynch are the same: is the player scum, or is he not? You can argue that there is less evidence for Vino than for others and therefore those others should be lynched preferential to Vino, but it is silly to call him "not a proper lynch candidate" for any reason other than "I think he's town."

No my point is that based on the info we have & my investigations of Vino, he is not guilty of what he is being accused of and is being wagoned unjustly.

[Lamont_Cranston]

I suspect the vino wagon is designed to set Fishy up for a 1-2 mislynch.

Very interesting.

In what way? Please elaborate.

It is a theory that I have noted. He has posited a valid theory which could be true.

[Lamont_Cranston]

Well it appears I have the

famous

Tar all pissed off at me.

...

Parts of your case are so astoundingly bad it makes me wonder why you would be reaching so hard...

Urgh. That first sentence was pretty terrible, but that weak quasi-OMGUS second sentence takes the cake.

Sorry but that's my opinion and its quite valid. I would expect better arguments from an accomplished player with his reputation. The poor quality on some of them raises my suspicion.

I didn't know there were criteria that qualified potential lynch candidates other than "this player is likely to be scum". Elaborate, please.

Surely you know that very early in the game there is less to go on than we would have once the game progresses right? Why is the famous Tar wasting time with bad arguments like this??

Tar's point wasn't that bad, really. On the one hand, you're saying that the game is still young and there's nothing much to work from, but you're still trying to differentiate who should be lynched and why, and none of the reasons you stated were sufficiently linked to why you think they are scum.

I have explained this in another post. I have queried Vino and found the accused link between him and Rofl to be false and thus the motivations for lynching him to be false.

1) Wrong: Correct answer is E: Wait a few days to make sure they're lurking, then investigate, vig, or deadline lynch them (preferably vig).

Says you. He needs to post now or be lynched -- the earlier the better.

What a terrible idea. You want to blow the entire first day to lynch Empking, because he hasn't posted anything of substance?

How, exactly, have you picked Empking out of this 13-player list?

To state the issue once again, he posted a /confirm when the game was obviously in full-swing and left. This is deliberate lurking. This point is moot since he has returned. He made me happy. Btw on a side note I don't like your insinuation that I'm scum for hunting lurkers. You can see from my wiki that it is my policy.

[Lamont_Cranston]

Btw, my read on Percy is town & a very skilled player to boot.

[the silent speaker]

What exactly do you think is a 'lie'? Not just inaccurate, but somehow a scum attempt to manipulate the playerbase?

I think it was a scum attempt to manipulate the playerbase because it did manipulate the playerbase. Look what happened right after: a big spike in Lamont voting.

As far as I can tell, there is no case on Vino. Fishy came out with a vote on him for no reason given, which by itself is perfectly fine, and a whole bunch of people jumped right in line with "yep, uh-huh, Fishy is wise." For Sens to say even now that Vino is so terribly scummy that the only thing worse is Lamont's defense is just not true.

I'll try to remember about the quoting thing.

I'm not certain of anything, YOU are.

Suspicion=/=certainty.

And the mere fact it's up to 8+ people kinda helps suggest some town jumped on it at some point.

I never said everyone on the bandwagon was scum, only that they looked like bandwagons with scum a part of them. (This is true of the Lamont wagon and the Vino wagon both.)

You

said that everyone on the bandwagon was town.

[Korlash]

This is so sad. You both are stuck on semantics. Please drop this stupid issue and understand how one's vote is used to hunt scum. This is pitiful.

Did you vote me or Empking? No? Then why are you even talking about it? This is becoming tiresome.

LOL this coming from a vino lynch supporter and more semantics. Try getting real instead of this crappy false insinuations. Try playing Mafia.

Complete avoidance of the point with an insult thrown my way... Not too good on your part...

Then what is your point?? My vote for him would be at least as valid as yours would be for vino (only mine is better).

... My point was why are you talking about endgame one day 1? Again, avoidance... nice...

Finally, voting to put pressure on a lurker sometimes works. It's just not a good idea right now.

Yeah, sometimes asking a guy if he is scum works. Sometimes walking into the street gets you killed. Sometimes a guy gives you money. sometimes a lot of shit happens.

Sorry I got carried away. It works against active lurkers, and people who would have come back anyway. Anyone not following the thread doesn't even know they are being voted and thus its pointless. prove he's actively lurking and wagoning him is viable.

However, Korlash did imply that the others "joining in" were town, which was not implied by you - in fact, the exact opposite. Hmmm.

Actually no, in order to mislynch Fishy town are needed. In fact in order to mislynch Vino town are needed. In order for it to be a set-up, town must also join the bandwagon. If only scum vote, no one is mislynched. are you following me?

Lamont is on 8 Votes. Vino is on 4. Your implication remains bizarre.

Yeah I've always been inept at keeping track of votes. My bad on that one...

[Korlash]

I never said everyone on the bandwagon was scum, only that they looked like bandwagons with scum a part of them. (This is true of the Lamont wagon and the Vino wagon both.) You said that everyone on the bandwagon was town.

I never said "everyone" on the bandwagon was town. And I never claimed you claimed everyone was scum.

[Lamont_Cranston]

This is so sad. You both are stuck on semantics. Please drop this stupid issue and understand how one's vote is used to hunt scum. This is pitiful.

Did you vote me or Empking? No? Then why are you even talking about it? This is becoming tiresome.

Agreed.

LOL this coming from a vino lynch supporter and more semantics. Try getting real instead of this crappy false insinuations. Try playing Mafia.

Complete avoidance of the point with an insult thrown my way... Not too good on your part...

I'm only insulting your argument.

Then what is your point?? My vote for him would be at least as valid as yours would be for vino (only mine is better).

... My point was why are you talking about endgame one day 1? Again, avoidance... nice...

This is now a moot point but lurkers in the endgame are a huge liability to the town. But granted I did not understand your point. My apologies.

[delathi]

Hi, I'm lurking because I'm at my in-laws for a holiday weekend. Surely on Monday I'll be able to make some sense out of the first x number of pages if the random vote stage.. aka "argue about trivialities stage."

[delathi]

Oh, and good grief people.

[Santos]

Thanks for the replies.

[Fishythefish]

I find tss’s comment about a 1-2 mislynch decidedly off. The fact that I cast the first vote is hardly going to make me the automatic lynch on a 13-player wagon, even if I happen to leave my vote there throughout the day. Lamont’s agreement with the original statement looks bad also.

I said I also noted how he said "random vote" and so I agree with you in noting that. However, in my mind that only sets up a potential relationship between him and Rofl. I questioned him about it and like his repsonse and don't actually think his vote is random. Therefore no reason that is being used to advocate his lynch is working with me at all.

OK. This makes sense in context of your next post.

I dislike Lamont’s repeated usage of “the famous Tar” (114). He appears to be attempting to avoid attacks by saying that attacks from Tar need to be of a particularly good quality, even so early in the game.

Some other points against Lamont have been not all that good. He has espoused antitown positions- basically, lynching for reasons other than probability of being scum, and insulting arguments rather than replying to them. I don’t think these are very strongly correlated with scum rather than simply wrong town- I’ve always found the image of a scum who knows the right theory and argues the opposite to confound the town deeply unconvincing, at least for such simple points. Similarly, I can’t imagine the scum who sits down and decides the best way to evade arguments is to say they are nonsense. Such things are perhaps marginally scummy, but my limited experience suggests that the pretty well the same players would always get lynched off them, independent of alignment. Having said that,

unvote, vote: Lamont

Nevertheless, the scummiest player.

[Lamont_Cranston]

I dislike Lamont’s repeated usage of “the famous Tar” (114). He appears to be attempting to avoid attacks by saying that attacks from Tar need to be of a particularly good quality, even so early in the game.

I pointed out their poor quality, should I have congratulated him for scumhunting?

Some other points against Lamont have been not all that good. He has espoused antitown positions- basically, lynching for reasons other than probability of being scum

Sorry but I'm on the other valid side of this argument and its my policy.

and insulting arguments rather than replying to them.

I do insult bad arguments but I replied with substance to every argument made my way.

Well at least you're off that cruddy Vino bandwagon LOL.

[Vino]

My view of things: I made a random vote half joking about a previous game that has otherwise no relevance here, and four people jumped on it for no apparent reason. I shall name names: Fishy, korlash, roflcopter, and populartajo. Korlash called it "solid" for a reason I can't fathom. Fishy argues that I am trying to look nonchalant, which (not that I agree with it) is a reasonable argument, but not in light of the fact that he seemed to be at my teeth from the get-go. I don't like any of those. I'd like them to explain themselves. My vote on rofl was random but I'm willing to chalk it up to his play style. SensFan though should know better.

Unvote, Vote: SensFan

.

I also don't like Lamont defending me so much. I appreciate the gesture but please stick to defending your arguments, not my townliness. Even so you strike me at the moment as more of a loose cannon than a flailing scum.

PS: What is a "1-2 Mislynch" ?

PPS: Spock count?

[SerialClergyman]

Yes, lets pressure the guy who isn't here. I'm sure he will magically feel our votes on him and come rushing back. I mean the concept of wagoning a lurker to force him to talk seems... contradictory in and of itself. Although I admit I sometimes want to do it myself XD

I hate statements like this. You just berated him with sarcasm then completely undermined your own point. Scummy.

Sirigonius - you just turned up, said that they are all policy lynches then went away again. a) I don't think they are policy lynches/wagons, could you explain how they are and b) would you like to contribute anything of a scumhunting nature if you aren't getting involved in current discussions?

[Lamont_Cranston]

SensFan though should know better.

Unvote, Vote: SensFan

.

I also don't like Lamont defending me so much. I appreciate the gesture but please stick to defending your arguments, not my townliness. Even so you strike me at the moment as more of a loose cannon than a flailing scum.

I can't help it they keep bringing it up.

I've been trying to figure out which BW-er to clock for your wagon and I guess you made up my mind for me...

Vote Sens

[Lamont_Cranston]

Yes, lets pressure the guy who isn't here. I'm sure he will magically feel our votes on him and come rushing back. I mean the concept of wagoning a lurker to force him to talk seems... contradictory in and of itself. Although I admit I sometimes want to do it myself XD

I hate statements like this. You just berated him with sarcasm then completely undermined your own point. Scummy.

Sirigonius - you just turned up, said that they are all policy lynches then went away again. a) I don't think they are policy lynches/wagons, could you explain how they are and b) would you like to contribute anything of a scumhunting nature if you aren't getting involved in current discussions?

Nice point on Sironi.