Newbie 835: Game Over

[yabbaguy]

@YJ-124: WIFOM can be scummy because it's false logic. Basically, assuming it's scum doing it, they say

"If someone does this scumtell, they're scummy"
"I have not done said scumtell."
"Therefore I'm not scummy."

However, they could be deliberately contradicting this scumtell just so they can do that.

Please answer, why are you capping the RVS discussion?

[YamiJoey]

Oh I see. I thought that WIFOM was a different thing.

I just didn't see anything coming from it at all, and it was just an argument about whether or not we should randomly vote. I didn't see it helping the game and it was annoying.

If you'd like to, I urge you to go through all my posts during that stage so you can see for yourself I wasn't trying to cover anything up, which is what I think you're implying.

YJ

[yabbaguy]

@YJ-126: I don't think so. I believe Devotress, for one, is coming under fire because of this discussion, and if that's the case, I don't know why you're just saying "stop" to a (albeit minor) scum investigation for no reason without clear rationale or defending either side. That's not pro-town.

Your defensiveness is making you very hard to read, too.

[YamiJoey]

I didn't honestly see anyone being called out for it after the discussion about me suspecting op was over, sorry about that.

Sorry for being hard to read? o.O

I'll include a run-down of Devotress' posts when I get back online. (Alongside the analysis I already said I was going to do.)

YJ

[Thok]

Official Vote Count (deadline 9/23)

Double A (2): (Humble Poirot, orangepenguin)
Kirbyoshi (2): (Webz, Devotress)
YamiJoey (1): (Kirbyoshi)
Webz (0):
Humble Poirot (0):
Devotress (0):
fallen angel (0):
yabbaguy (0):
orangepenguin (0):

Not Voting (4): (YamiJoey, Double A, fallen angel, yabbaguy)

With 9 alive, it takes 5 to lynch. Please let me know if I've made a mistake. I think I've correct all of the mistakes in the last vote count (usually I'm not as bad as that.)

[Kirbyoshi]

YJ, even if you're right, and the discussion about RVS is exhausted pertaining to this game, I still don't want to cap it, simply because I think it's a good metagaming discussion, seeing that we seem to have a good balance of people who agree with RVS, and people who are against it.

Sorry for being hard to read? o.O

If this was meant as being unsure if you should be sorry for being hard to read, you should be. Being hard to read is anti-town, because if we can't "clear" you, we're not sure of your alignment.

[Double A]

Yeah I did mean the first unread post for a user. I know what the preview button does.

[yabbaguy]

In that case, I"d just use the iso read function (display all posts from previous function) and you'll probably recognize which posts are new simply from memory.

[Webz]

If we're ever going to stop taking what happened in the RVS as evidence, then you, YJ, being one of the four people under fire for what they posted there, should not initiate it. Neither should Kirb, AA or Devotress, naturally.

On the Devotress case, I think she's his behind people in more than one occasion. The other one being when she had more than enough evidence to vote for Kirb, but didn't until I made a detailed post about his actions and could probably be the one to cop the blame had he been mislynched, despite her actually starting the case. This seems like a little scummy, to me.

When will FalenAngel finally post something sufficient? This lurking is NOT helping town.

No, you're not quite getting it. I noted some tiny scumtells that generally hadn't been noted. op was as guilty as devotress for following trends, but devotress followed a more anti-town trend (actually random voting, rather than supporting a case.) I was just trying to pick up on things that hadn't been noted before.

Almost a 'lesser of two evils' approach? (Well; the other way around.)

Yes. Devotress was by far the lesser evil.

Also, what makes it NOT okay for op to call kirby and AA scummy for random votes, when it is okay for me and HP

The timing of your votes. It is just as scummy, I'm not saying that you should vote in a certain order or anything, it's just that the way op did it made me notice it more. If I were paying more attention, I'd've seen that you'd both put votes down on these people and made that connection; but I didn't and I feel that's due to inexperience. I think I'm right in assuming that I've come under suspicion on this game a fair bit because I'm not making connections, and that is causing people to assume I am trying to single people out. You've stated this yourself;

Yeah. My vote was in the RVS, and was as close to a random vote as possible while bringing in a little evidence. The reason I still have AA as my second most suspicious person (and kept my vote on him for a while) is because the rest of his posts didn't stop being scummy.

However, I disagree that my vote and HP's votes on AA were scummy. To have enough reason to vote, you need to have evidence which directly mirrors the amount of total evidence available on everyone (so early on, you don't need much evidence, while later on you need quite a lot) . My first vote had a weak backing, but there was nothing hardly to base anything on. HP's vote was considerably explained. Where me and you differ is that I think that OP's vote was also explained in enough detail. In fact, your case on op, to me, seems mush more spineless than his vote, especially when scaled to all the evidence we have now.

They both

[Kirbyoshi and YamiJoey]

suffer from an overwhelming lack of proof in their cases. Please guys, fix this up.

I don't think this is the actual quote I was looking for, but it is to the same effect. I have noticed this, and I am attempting to make myself more aware of what's going on in the game and post in a less laxidazical manner. In the same post;

You're doing it, too. . Though, there isn't much to go by as you only have a case on one person. Kirb has laid off his aggressive nature, as per:

Also, if Kirby is scum, I fully expect him to lay back and not make any groundbreaking claims or jests from now on or at least until the blame has cleared from around him.

Scumtell?

Because, despite the fact that he

[Kirbyoshi]

has a weakness (which I also see in YJ), he is the one who has acted as though he didn't and was, IMO, trying to punch above his weight

Kirbyoshi: I'm giving reasoning as to why I would think what I think. This was people might stop suspecting me, and start listening to what I'm saying. As I've said; I could be wrong, but if I don't follow up the small suspicions I have and just hope someone comes out and says "I AM MAFIA!" and everyone else misses it and I have to pick up on that; we'll get no-where. I'm just trying to pressure people into a situation where I can find the truth. OP's lower post habbit makes that difficult, but it is definitely working/has worked on you, and alongside that other people have become more involved because of how you responded.

You're giving reasoning for your thought processes generally. What you don't give enough on is evidence. There isn't enough evidence on the op case, so I would not FOS him, myself. (Or suspect him any more than I'm suspecting, say, Devotress, who is in no way my top scum contender) . There's plenty of time before the day ends.

Are you willing to lay off his case at least until he posts again

? Though I'd be careful to keep what evidence you have.

Also, you seem to be tunnel visioning (only focusing on one "pet" case, for an extended period of time). What do you think about the other people? (Yes, please post a player by player analysis)

All this treats you as one entity, all of your posts. You are getting better at reasoning and becoming more pro-town as you post more.

1) I'm defending myself too much here, and not getting enough analysis done.
2) Can we get off of the RVS discussion. It's over now.
3) What input did AA's most recent posts give? As far as I can tell it boils down to "I'm not that bad at this game"/"I've played before.", Unvoting and FoSing me, advertising a few sites, and making excuses for anything he might've done wrong. I am always suspicious of "I am tired."/"Don't feel too good" posts; as they're just what I'd expect for a Mafia member to say so that if someone catches them out they could possibly come back with "I did say I was tired. Sorry." I try to stray away from this, but when someone starts raving about how they 'are no newbie' as well, it makes me think they're not all that great at the game they're playing.

YJ

1) Yes and no. You're defending yourself too much from a scum perspective. And you aren't actually getting anything done, really.
2)No. I said that above. (in this post)
3)AA is not helping our town, is laying out an excuse, and is making us try our best not to look for scumtells in his posts. I don't like that one bit, either. But this is what happens at his other sites. There is barely any content in the posts. Check for yourself.

And:

Uh, from what I've seen, it is the norm. RVS starts discussion, which is always good, unlike what this post seems to indicate:

An actual random vote that says in the post that it has been randomized doesn't help town. A random vote that doesn't, may. Yes, the RVS starts discussion. But don't get too confused between (completely) random votes, and the RVS. There's a thread somewhere, in mafia discussion, about this. The answer is a resounding no for "dice voting", which is essentially the same thing.

Also, kirby has been very silent on being the person with the most votes (tied with AA, but I fully expect that to change when HP and op post again.) Kirby, what do you have to say for yourself? Or do you need more pressure? (Disclaimer: Don't claim unless you're very close to being lynched)

[Webz]

So you're saying that if you random-vote me I'm going to react to it? That's ridiculous. If that worked then so would "Are you Mafia?" to every player.

YJ

Yes. This is right. But it's kind of ironic that this, along with other conversation, got us out of the RVS. The RVS stage isn't completely pointless, but completely random posts are.

I have to agree that Webz does look a tad scummy for being almost

too

pro-Town, but TBH Double A's point is just the same, only it's using a method I don't like. You're almost saying he's Mafia, just because it's possible.

FoS: Webz
FoS: Double A

How were you agreeing with anyone when you were the first one to put it out there?

Come on, this is hypocritcal. You say that AAs post is scummy, because its using a method you don't like. Then you use a logical facally to back up your argument. This is what you have to hide.

I understand what the article is saying, (and thus; you) but there is the idea behind it. Trying to force themselves into being seen as Town rather than letting people simply assume it. Which is bad Mafia behaviour, if you ask me.

I understand that by keeping my position on this I'm looking scummy, but lets face it; this post can only reinforce anyone's suspicions unless I had other evidence as to why Webz would be Scum, which I don't as it is about the only thing that has happened so far.

I did also argue against my own point in that post, so it's clear that I did understand I had a flawed argument, but a pair of FoS' that had

]some

basis was better than random.org, isn't it?

YJ

Then this. You're DEFENDING your use of a logical fallacy. This is the flawed logic that you're maintaining:

Webz is acting very town.
Perfect scum act very town.
Webz is scum.

This is a different logical fallacy: Correlation Implies Causation (CIC)

Maybe read all of these: Logical Fallacies (everyone should)

I don't like your last argument. A scummy misleading post is worse than no post.

Whilst I feel that Kirbyoshi has been fairly aggressive, I don't feel him to be directly scummy. The deflection on top of that does seem a little off.

I'd like to take it upon myself to FOS: orangepenguin. Multiple people have made the "Random" vote, yet OP has decided to pick out Double A (almost bandwaggoning in that respect) and create a focus on Kirbyoshi, who, as far as I can tell, was already under a little suspicion from players. Granted, he could actually be scum, but I feel this post was a little too easy for a Mafia player to make. The use of 'Advice' which ended up being 'There is no advice' threw me a little, too. OP basically said "You find scum simply by looking at the thread and finding scum."

If I had a Cop role, I'd be flipping a coin between Kirbyoshi and orangepenguin right now.

Also; just read post 62 by Kirbyoshi: I think that what HP was trying to get across, was that some questions needed to be answered by the suspected people only. Anyone else answering would allow the question to be avoided.

The more I look at this post, the less I like it. You're practically clearing kirb in your book, and later saying that he is acting as scummy as op, who you make a case against. In the SAME POST, you cop direct.

And your case on op, as has been mentioned, is simply down to the post being "too easy for mafia to make." A red herring if I ever saw one.

"And why did they lack any substantial evidence?"

Misreading on my part, and because there's simply no evidence against the people I suggested. However, I am happy to see that people are still responding to these original accusitions, as it is giving a lot of insight into people's thought track. (Unless you're all doing what I'm doing and keeping a fair wack of it to yourself, just in case.)

You seem to be attacking people, then finding evidence, than the other way round. This is rarely helpful to town at all. Possibly, if someone is completely flying under the radar late, then you could do this. But not so early.

And please post everything you think in regards to cases (and hopefully, generally. Why should you have anything, at all, to hide?

The reason I FoS'd op was because of the very little input made by them, and the fact that he picked up on two people who I don't see as having much different from the rest of the Town at that point. There was very little that caused them to really stand out as Scum, so I got suspicious of this behaviour.

I'd also like to put to you, that the

best

Mafia strategy, is to make accusitions that make sense. Even if they're also other Scum. Although, in a game with two Mafia, that might not be true, so this might need to be ignored. However, op could easily get away with staying in the game for a while, simply because newer players would be inclined to keep experienced players in the game to help them out.

I will always retain suspicion of players who have that "Experienced" flag next to their name. If new players are scum, they'll make mistakes here and there. If experienced players are scum, they'll make mistakes and then won't do it again.

They displayed the only real scumtells up to that point (apart from yourself, possibly). I think that that's pretty clear.

The best

town

strategy is also to make accusations that make sense, and you've not done that yet. (Your only case is on op, and it is, IMO, very weak).

And yes, experienced people will show less scumtells. This is no reason to attack them for nothing, however. And they're not going to make no mistakes as scum. Because that's a mistake in itself.

That's what you "DON'T" have to hide. It is fairly substantial.

[YamiJoey]

Never thought of checking the listed sites to gain some info on AA's playstyle. I honestly didn't feel it was worth it, given that they can talk outside of the thread and how I've played Mafia a fair few times on another site, and the only help it's given me so far is that I can go "FOS: [Name]", "EBWOP:" and "Vote: [Name]" and know what I mean.

AA-28: Jokey post. Deflection tactic.

AA-30: Wants a shorter day, which is better for Sccum.

Webz-31: The "Semi-Random" comment is suspicious.

KY-33: Random vote is scummy.

DT-35: Random vote is scummy.

HP-42: The first substantial post. I get a very Townie vibe from this post in general, but the fact he voted for AA after he had a vote is something small to note.

DT-43: I don't like the reason behind the unvote. Unlikely that three players (even if both our Mafia weren't among them) would jump on someone. If they did; we'd have a pretty substantial list of who to get voting off. Could also have been misdirection and DT [i[knew[/i] that HP only had one vote, but hid behind this reasoning.

AA-54: Massive diversion here. I hated that.

KY-55: No reason given behind the FoS of me.

KY-56: Tried to stop someone having to post. (Not scummy, but definitely anti-Town.)

HP-57: A certainly rude nature in the answer, even if the answer itself was fine. Don't know what to get off this; other than an emotional tie to the game.

KY-58: Rhetorical questions made in order to bait out a negative response. Again, whilst not scummy, the reply can only be taken as Scum, even if they are Townie. I don't like that one bit, as it is forcing the Town to believe that someone is Scum either way.

op-59: Already commented on the voting/FoSing, but the inclusion of "RVS is not pointless" could be misleading the Town. I'm unsure as to whether the IC would do that, even as Scum, simply due to the fact that they're supposed to have a sort of tutoring role. Depends how much these people are supposed to teach.

KY-62: Deflective, but the line "It's not working" seems a little off. Why

should

it work if KY is Townie?

HP-68: Another post from HP I feel is very pro-Town, specifically the last paragraph. It probes KY, who is under suspicion. I like.

KY-70: Again, the last paragraph is standing out to me. I don't know what KY was trying to do, but it was an extremely aggressive post towards HP, which I feel is intended to alienate HP from other players and as such make him seem more scummy. At this point in the thread, HP looks more Townie every post, and so I feel this is a scum play that is a last resort.

Webz-71: I disagree that Mafia wouldn't vote for scum-buddies in the RVS, partially from what this post contains. If whoever scum votes for in the RVS gets auto-cleared, it'd be the best thing to do. After this post however; it's now a bad thing and we get stuck in a loop, but you get what I mean.

DT-72: I'm having trouble understanding where this post is going. It's almost as if she posted the joke and thought "Well I have to put something now". It is a fairly pro-Town post, but a little pointless which is what makes it more confusing.

Webz-73: I already refered to this previously, so don't think I'm skimming over the FoS on me.

DT-76: Pro-Town play in trying to get players active and trying to create more direct discussion, but the "Claim who you feel is most scummy" can often be of benefit to Mafia. Agrees that HP is not scummy and points out deflective behaviour in KY.

Webz-78: Vote switch was fair-do's, but I would like to know how far up or down your list AA is after this.

op-80: Extremely thin post after not a lot of activity, which is scummy IMO. I'm not going to push this, as I don't feel half as scummy as others, but I may come back to this.

Webz-81: I feel some of the points put forward were unfounded. 'Never self vote. This gives me bad vibes.' Made me wearey of this post. It was almost as if Webz was trying to ensure a lynch on KY, even if I so feel KY is suspicious, this is a little too forceful. Also; KY pointed out that the IC could be Mafia, and Webz shot him down. It is a perfectly viable point, which shouldn't be overlooked at all.

At this point there's 50 posts left and it's 2AM. This isn't an excuse for anything I might've said; this is so that I have a clear head when analysing. (I've sat here staring at the screen for about ten minutes totally gormless. No condition to post properly.) I'll continue from Post 82 when I'm in a better condition.

YJ

[yabbaguy]

I'm going to slam a vote down.

Vote: Double A

Your posts have been useless more often than not, and I'm getting the hunch that you don't care about scumhunting, which Mafia indeed don't care about since they know the answer to the our problem. I've seen nothing in terms of any suspicions, any votes, maybe one FoS, but other than that, hardly any weigh-in on other players.

What do you make of everyone in the game?

[Devotress]

On the Devotress case, I think she's his behind people in more than one occasion. The other one being when she had more than enough evidence to vote for Kirb, but didn't until I made a detailed post about his actions and could probably be the one to cop the blame had he been mislynched, despite her actually starting the case. This seems like a little scummy, to me.

I didn't think it was condusive to the "hey everyone just share your feelings don't worry about it" post I was making to post a big bolded vote text right after it all.
As for the being third to random vote, I completly see how that's scummy. Isn't there even a joke like "the third person is allways mafia" or something? I was really just being silly joke voting. It does look scummy though.

Also, this thread is pretty active today, which is cool. My thoughts on everyone thus far.

Double A:

Every single one of his posts seems to be in reference to himself. It's understandable to want to speak up and defend yourself, but the only content posts he has is when he's defending himself, that seems shady to me. Also as a minor request to you Double A, could you quote more often? When reading only your posts it's hard to tell what you were replying too and in what context because you often don't use quote tags. That's not a scum or townie accusation by the way, just me making a request.

Fallen Angel:

Impossible to read right now. Could be a good way to lurk through day 1, but, there's no way we can justify lynching someone like that untill they either start posting or a replacement starts posting and we have something to judge.

Humble Poirot:

(hey I spelt your name right!) All his posts seem Townie to me.

Kirbyoshi:

The only Townie post he has is telling YJ that being hard to read is anti-town, and he was right about that. The rest of his posts have either been in self defense, or what feels to me like misdirection. (The whole calling Humble scum and stuff like that)

Orange Penguin:

Has barely bosted too. I guess he's busy with other games, but, his only 4 posts so far have really been in his IC role, which is nice and helpfull, but, not anything that helps us read him one way or the other. He's in the same boat as Fallen Angel really. Not enough info.

Webz

Posts ALOT, and all his posts are Townie. He's the Towniest person in the thread right now.

Yabbaguyp

Glad he started posting. He doesn't have alot of posts yet, but since he started, all his posts have been good on content and seem pretty townie to me right now.

YammiJoey

Disagreed with the random voting early on, which apparently the thread thinks would be a townie action. He's making a good effort to make content posts, but alot of his posts seem kind of strange to me. Bad townie or bad scum? I've got the Finger of Suspicion on him, but there's scummier people to get first, I think.

[Webz]

Webz-81: I feel some of the points put forward were unfounded. 'Never self vote. This gives me bad vibes.' Made me wearey of this post. It was almost as if Webz was trying to ensure a lynch on KY, even if I so feel KY is suspicious, this is a little too forceful. Also; KY pointed out that the IC could be Mafia, and Webz shot him down. It is a perfectly viable point, which shouldn't be overlooked at all.

You're misunderstanding my point:

Never self-vote (as town). Even just saying this gives me mafia vibes.

The best way to get a bandwagon is to pressure people into it by seeing where the votes are

. A self-vote helps no one, at least if they're town.

The "bad vibes" were coming from him suggesting a bad idea, not justification as why it is a bad idea. If you need clarification:
Never self vote as town. If you're town, the last thing you want is your own lynch,because it hinders the town. Self voting makes it more likely that you'll get linched. It can also, if you self-hammer, take suspicion away from people who would otherwise hammer you for no good reason.

I am in no way in favour of a lynch on Kirb or tunnelling him until the end of the day for what he did. But what he did was scummy, and it deserves to be recognised as such. Sorry if you don't share my opinion, but I think that kirby's attitude back there was disastrously anti-town, and what I said was justified. He needs to seriously start to make some town posts.

Webz-78: Vote switch was fair-do's, but I would like to know how far up or down your list AA is after this.

He's a very, very close second. Probably pretty much tied. The only reason I'm not changing my vote is that it would put him on a dangerous L-1, prone to a hammer. And I have no reason to think he is scum over Kirby, who has had a massive personality change since the case on him.

However, if AA doesn't post seriously regarding the case on him and actually post something substantual, then I'm not afraid to put him on L-1. If he continues on and on, then I'm not afraid to hammer. However, I think we should keep up discussion and not rush to end the day (at the moment, I'd prefer to end this day naturally, as opposed to a hammer.)

Also, I've found out something very interesting:

I looked over 100 finished newbie mafia games. The likelihood of lynching scum on day one is 16%, as 16 of those 100 lynched mafia day 1. A random lynch is 22.2 % likely to lynch scum. Although I'm not up for a random lynch just yet, I'm just putting that forward. If we lynch the textbook scum then we're likely to hit a town.

And, @ Devotress: Yes. There is a third person scum rule. the idea behind it is that the third person cops none of the blame, at least compared to the first, second or last, when it comes to lynching. When it comes to random voting, its an anti-town thing that mafia probably want to happen. Being the third here often goes blameless, also. Though I don't think that this on its own is reason enough even to FOS you. I would rather have a case against everyone that has showed a scumtell than a case against a single person at one time though.

Also, for your thing on Kirby, I agree that it puts a more serious tone to actually vote for somebody than to say "who's most scummy? I think ____ is." However, you should take some initiative for yourself, and be sure of what you say, when its pro-town. The fact that you had a vote-worthy case against Kirby but didn't vote seems a tiny bit scummy as you didn't seem to see things from a town perspective. Simply because people can overlook posts, but votes are harder to overlook, and people will pay more attention to posts if they have a vote. This makes that post possibly a plug for "you're not posting much pro-town" "look here" "oh" kind of discussions.

And yeah, considering that I have got an English exam Monday, and I hate English and will have to try hard not to fail, I am posting quite a bit.

[yabbaguy]

I looked over 100 finished newbie mafia games. The likelihood of lynching scum on day one is 16%, as 16 of those 100 lynched mafia day 1. A random lynch is 22.2 % likely to lynch scum. Although I'm not up for a random lynch just yet, I'm just putting that forward. If we lynch the textbook scum then we're likely to hit a town.

This is flawed mathematics. You're taking an experimental data set (your Newb game research) and comparing it to actual mathematical data (the 22% oddswise). There are several factors that influence the former, such as newbie inexperience, setup variation, dependence on who is wagonned and claims or not, etc. etc. etc.

Even if I were to believe it true, I don't know how this would accomplish anything in terms of playstyle. This feels like a Too Scummy fallacy.

PS: Go study your English before you reply.

[Double A]

Oh fine go ahead and lynch me because I'm a bad player...

I'm also here to learn (because my play style obviously sucks).

Right I'm gonna take a shot at this...

I don't think Kirb is scum. The only thing that I can tell he did "bad" was a random vote, and I'm not about to check in the next 30 minuets. He doesn't send off a scum vibe, and my gut's usually right about this kind of thing.

[yabbaguy]

Oh fine go ahead and lynch me because I'm a bad player...

That's an Appeal to Emotion.

I was asking for a read on all the players. Usually when people are non-transparent, I often ask them for player-by-player analyses just so I know where their head's at and if they're still scumhunting. It's a check-in, if you will.

In terms of your playstyle, I'm sure you're still learning. The thing is though that you have been a bit unfocused, and to me, this is anti-town because I can't tell if you really are trying to obtain the pro-town objective of scum lynching or if it's you really don't care and know everything as the informed minority. I think just a tad bit more focus and more of an attempt to engage in discussion would help.

[Webz]

Oh fine go ahead and lynch me because I'm a bad player...

I'm also here to learn (because my play style obviously sucks).

Right I'm gonna take a shot at this...

I don't think Kirb is scum. The only thing that I can tell he did "bad" was a random vote, and I'm not about to check in the next 30 minuets. He doesn't send off a scum vibe, and my gut's usually right about this kind of thing.

I'll study some more english before I answer yabba's question, but for now.

Unvote: Kirbyoshi

Vote: Double A

This is not a townie reply. It is not a very serious reply to a very serious question.

Double A, why shouldn't we lynch you?

And yes, L-1. But I'll see to it personally that anyone who hammers will get lynched. Please do not, because if you're town, you're going down, and that won't help us at all.

[Webz]

I looked over 100 finished newbie mafia games. The likelihood of lynching scum on day one is 16%, as 16 of those 100 lynched mafia day 1. A random lynch is 22.2 % likely to lynch scum. Although I'm not up for a random lynch just yet, I'm just putting that forward. If we lynch the textbook scum then we're likely to hit a town.

This is flawed mathematics. You're taking an experimental data set (your Newb game research) and comparing it to actual mathematical data (the 22% oddswise). There are several factors that influence the former, such as newbie inexperience, setup variation, dependence on who is wagonned and claims or not, etc. etc. etc.

Even if I were to believe it true, I don't know how this would accomplish anything in terms of playstyle. This feels like a Too Scummy fallacy.

PS: Go study your English before you reply.

I've decided not to do it here. Whether it's a playstyle that can actually help scum catching (and spark relevant discussion for cases later) is a different debate completely to whether it should be used in a newbie game. To that, I'd most definitely say no. Probably a mini normal. Providing those games show the same trend, of course.

And I've managed to get quite a few quotes in the bag!

[YamiJoey]

Continuing from my previous post.

DT-86: Don't understand the vote here. Seems forced, as I've said before.

AA-106: I don't understand the FoS there. It seems like he's doing it because Webz has done and doesn't want to look like he isn't following the Town. There's no reason given.

107-110 were addressed previously.

AA-121: The fact that AA has tried to act like a newbie yet also claims that he is experienced is off. Here, he admits this. If it wasn't L-1 at this point, I'd be pretty quick to vote him here, but I'm unsure if it's worth making the killing vote over.

Webz-133: My "clearing kirb" did not exist. I simply said that Kirbyoshi could very well still be Townie. Something I'd do as Mafia is to try and force a vote through on someone who is already suspicious. Your votes get embedded with the rest of the Town, and it becomes everyone's mistake, not just yours.

You say that I am confusing the Town by going one-way then the other, then say I should post everything I think. I'm keeping things to myself, because pointing everything out means that scum can rectify theirr mistakes. If they don't realise they're making them, there's nothing they can do. A little unlikely, but seeing as the Cop is the only person (if they exist) who can actually go ahead and confirm someone I feel that these are the kinds of things that need to be done. You'll have to excuse me for this way of thinking, as I am used to everyone having some kind of power-role which they can abuse. Posting everything you know is something that only Ghosts can do leitimately. (Immune to night hit.)

YG-136: Who's this FoS of?

Will have to continue from 137 when I get back.

YJ

[Double A]

AA-106: I don't understand the FoS there. It seems like he's doing it because Webz has done and doesn't want to look like he isn't following the Town. There's no reason given.

Webz made a pretty clear case. That's why I quoted that particular part. But yeah I should have explained that there

AA-121: The fact that AA has tried to act like a newbie yet also claims that he is experienced is off. Here, he admits this. If it wasn't L-1 at this point, I'd be pretty quick to vote him here, but I'm unsure if it's worth making the killing vote over.

I'm a newbie to mafiascum. Now I can see that all of you are highly addicted and take it very seriously. On those sites I posted there's one or two people who act like you guys, but we rely on PM evidence and write up clues mostly. You all know where to look for scumtells. I know that if someone PMs me with something extremely weird that they're probably in a cult and I know what to look for in a write up.

[YamiJoey]

I didn't mean "Newbie to mafiascum", I meant that you are trying to use that fact in order to gain advantage. No-one needs to do that unless they are Scum. I don't particularly want to get someone killed off this early before the deadline, but if anyone wants to stop it I'm sure they'll unvote.

Vote: Double A

YJ

[Kirbyoshi]

@mod: if twilight talking is not allowed, please delete this post.

Wow, YJ. I personally think you're smarter than you make yourself out to be, because it seems like you're trying to act n00by. Your previous post is a perfect example of that. Once the hammer is dropped (which is what you just did), there is no more voting or unvoting. By now, the lynch is decided, and you're looking scummier than ever by hammering.

The reason I didn't vote AA is that, while every case against him is valid (I guess), my instincts tell me he isn't scum. It just doesn't feel right to me.

And also, my thing with HP was really a difference of strategy. I saw it as that he was leaning on the IC right out of the gate. I think HP is a smarter player than that, but now I don't think that's what he was doing. I never said HP was scum/scummy in any of my posts. The threat to vote him was a little extreme, and I'm sorry for that, but my intention was never to call him scummy.

[YamiJoey]

I did not know that. As far as I was aware the day is not called until the Mod dictated it.

I understand that it might be scummy to place the final vote, but someone has to die in the end. There is a good enough case against him and I feel that he is deserving of the lynch.

YJ

[YamiJoey]

EBWOP: Also; I know Mafia theory, and am not acting like a n00b. I'm new to not having any powers, so having to get information purely on posts is proving difficult to me.

YJ