Mini 876 - Tree Stump II [Day None] (Abandoned)

[Sudo_Nym]

I think Quagmire is intentionally trying to start an argument with Fonz; I can only assume he's targetting Fonz for being the most active player so far.

[Quagmire]

I think Quagmire is intentionally trying to start an argument with Fonz; I can only assume he's targetting Fonz for being the most active player so far.

No, I'm trying to start an argument with Fonz because he's being dumb, and I want him to stop being dumb.

[scotmany12]

I think Quagmire is intentionally trying to start an argument with Fonz; I can only assume he's targetting Fonz for being the most active player so far.

Arguments are an essential part of mafia. And more importantly, I don't see how quag disagreeing with Fonz is him intentionally trying to start an argument with him just because Fonz has been the most active. Not to mention that Fonz is really the one that started the argument.

[Sanjay]

I think Quagmire is intentionally trying to start an argument with Fonz; I can only assume he's targetting Fonz for being the most active player so far.

Did you get this same feeling when he started the same argument with you and Shanba over the same kind of thing? Is there a difference between the two situations?

[Sudo_Nym]

I think Quagmire is intentionally trying to start an argument with Fonz; I can only assume he's targetting Fonz for being the most active player so far.

Arguments are an essential part of mafia. And more importantly, I don't see how quag disagreeing with Fonz is him intentionally trying to start an argument with him just because Fonz has been the most active. Not to mention that Fonz is really the one that started the argument.

I understand that arguing is the heart of mafia. I just think that Quag is arguing with Fonz, over even semantical points for the sake of argument, then for any actual productive reason.

@Sanjay: Yes, I did get the feeling with his arguments with both Shanba and myself- I feel like Quag is just arguing with everyone over everything, just for the sake of argument, rather than "to find scum" or even "to move the game along."

[Sanjay]

So why the thing about "I can only assume he's targetting Fonz for being the most active player so far."

If he's doing it with everyone, why a special reason for targeting The Fonz?

[Tjoe Min Ja]

only Quagmire can answr that.

[Quagmire]

only Quagmire can answr that.

I already have.

[Quagmire]

OK, back to Shanba here, as I got sidetracked a little bit..

1

I do think my vote is justified, and I dispute the idea that picking on the easy target is a bad thing in context.

2

The basic idea behind what you're saying is that I'm (possibly) scum who was trying to build a bandwagon against Tjoe Min Ja.

3

Except that makes no sense, since there's little point in building a bandwagon as scum unless it's going to lead to a lynch or a claim.

4

How often have you actually seen this type of vote actually lead to a wagon or lynch?

The problem with your actions in their context was that the vote was completely unnecessary and unjustified... scummy, in other words.

The problem I have with this post is in 3 and 4... it's misleading to say that scum's goal is to create bandwagons that will actually lead to a lynch or claim. Instead, the scum's goal should be to look as townie as possible, in order to stay alive. That vote, while it won't lead to a lynch anytime soon, is an 'off-the-beaten-path' kind of move or logic, and I just don't think I buy it, even though those kinds of moves give me a town feeling more often than not.

In other words, 4 isn't a valid defense, because leading to a lynch isn't the ultimate goal of a scum-motivated player. Looking like a townsperson is.

Yes I could, but a vote by its very nature amplifies pressure. If you're voted, it focuses your attention on the player voting for you, and makes you more likely to respond to them. How often have you seen players just blatantly ignore quetions addressed to them? Far more often than they ignore votes, in my experience.

Now this is just a bullshit excuse. You know I'm not going to buy a 'preemptive strike' when he didn't do anything scummy to merit a vote in the first place.

Now, I agree with you that I don't have the requisite info to be able to work out Tjoe's alignment just through pressure; but then, the pressure in and of itself allows me to gain more information about him. I get at once a baseline idea of how he thinks and possible extra info which I can scan for generic scumtells (which while they may not be as accurate as meta-specific, are still perfectly legit).

Now take his response. He said that he voting people for pressure is necessary, he said that he doesn't believe there is a lot of information available day 1. That information in and of itself is useful; for example, it means we might expect him to scumhunt harder day 2 onwards, it means we can call him on it if he ever says anything about how he thinks voting for pressure is a scumtell. We also get a clarification of his thought processes about Cybele and chinaman.

It's interesting, as I'd normally be on quag's side here (particularly on thigns like "This is a sidetracking theory post, but no no no a thousand times no. People who think this are terrible at playing mafia."), but the basic idea I can't get my head round is that he doesn't want me to try and pressure a guy 4 pages into day 1.

I'm all for pressuring people... I believe I've said this already. The problem was that you pressured him in a scummy manner; i.e. placing a useless vote on him. It's much more likely this is an effort by you to look more towniesh as I don't see any town motives in your actions so far.

[Quagmire]

As per Shanba's overall arguments since I've started attacking him, his defenses are weak and filled with some little holes that make his action inconsistent and indefensible... it remains to be seen whether these inconsistencies are a result of scum weakly defending his vote or just a little slip up. I'm currently leaning towards the former.

[Empking]

only Quagmire can answr that.

Were you responding to the post above your's?

[Sanjay]

only Quagmire can answr that.

Nope. Only Sudo_Nym can.

[The Fonz]

No, I'm trying to start an argument with Fonz because he's being dumb, and I want him to stop being dumb.

Nope. You're being dumb. Mafia is a game of trying to work out who's scum and who's town. And the best way to start from that is thinking 'Who benefits more from that?' Clearly, someone who does something that makes a scum win more likely is more likely scum, assuming everyone is playing to their win con.

In fact, look on down and you make a similar argument:

It's much more likely this is an effort by you to look more towniesh as I don't see any town motives in your actions so far.

In other words, 4 isn't a valid defense, because leading to a lynch isn't the ultimate goal of a scum-motivated player. Looking like a townsperson is.

Scum have twin motives. Look town and lynch town. They have to pursue both to win.

Quag:

Are you saying that by admitting that he doesn't think the behaviour is scummy, he renders his own vote useless?

[Sanjay]

Wow, don't help him any, Fonzie.

[The Fonz]

I'm not 'helping' him. I'm trying to clarify what he's saying. Because I first read it as 'you are attacking someone over something not scummy, and that's scummy.' I'm now wondering if it could be 'You're 'pressuring' over something whilst admitting it not scummy, therefore rendering it pointless.'

[Tjoe Min Ja]

@mod : can you prod cobalt, jester and cybele?

and vote count please?

[Empking]

only Quagmire can answr that.

Were you responding to the post above your's?

[Quagmire]

No, I'm trying to start an argument with Fonz because he's being dumb, and I want him to stop being dumb.

Nope. You're being dumb. Mafia is a game of trying to work out who's scum and who's town. And the best way to start from that is thinking 'Who benefits more from that?' Clearly, someone who does something that makes a scum win more likely is more likely scum, assuming everyone is playing to their win con.

That's correct logic... however you don't practice what you preach, which is what makes you dumb. You're advocating mafia as essentially a mathematical formula when it's far from that, and your ways of determining scumtells is much different than it should be. At least, judging by your previous vote.

In fact, look on down and you make a similar argument:

It's much more likely this is an effort by you to look more towniesh as I don't see any town motives in your actions so far.

In other words, 4 isn't a valid defense, because leading to a lynch isn't the ultimate goal of a scum-motivated player. Looking like a townsperson is.

Scum have twin motives. Look town and lynch town. They have to pursue both to win.

Right, but my reasoning differs much from the way you utilize yours.

[Sudo_Nym]

only Quagmire can answr that.

Nope. Only Sudo_Nym can.

Because his arguments against me have been meaningless semantical debates, but dismissive rather than trying to prove scumminess. However, he's been trying to convert "meaningless semantics" into scumminess on the most pro-town player so far.

[scotmany12]

only Quagmire can answr that.

Nope. Only Sudo_Nym can.

Because his arguments against me have been meaningless semantical debates, but dismissive rather than trying to prove scumminess. However, he's been trying to convert "meaningless semantics" into scumminess on the most pro-town player so far.

Since when was the fonz the most pro-town player so far? 7 pages into day 1, and that is a huge stretch. Also, you didn't really answer the question posed to you by Sanjay.

[scotmany12]

Unless you mean shanba as the most protown player. Which even so, is still a huge stretch. Page 7 is not enough to really determine who has be the most protown or not. Also, calling quags arguments "meaningless semantics" is bullshit.

[The Fonz]

No, I'm trying to start an argument with Fonz because he's being dumb, and I want him to stop being dumb.

Nope. You're being dumb. Mafia is a game of trying to work out who's scum and who's town. And the best way to start from that is thinking 'Who benefits more from that?' Clearly, someone who does something that makes a scum win more likely is more likely scum, assuming everyone is playing to their win con.

That's correct logic... however you don't practice what you preach, which is what makes you dumb. You're advocating mafia as essentially a mathematical formula when it's far from that, and your ways of determining scumtells is much different than it should be. At least, judging by your previous vote.

And this is why you're dumb. You're repeatedly attributing to me a position there is simply no evidence of me holding. I don't think mafia is a 'mathematical formula' at all, and I have never said anything of the kind.

If you'd like to explain why my Cybele vote fits any of those accusations you're making, feel free. Or, you might want to actually answer my question about your case on Shanba.

[Tjoe Min Ja]

@Empyking : yes

[Quagmire]

proof, Fonz:

No, THAT's bullshit. Things that are antitown, by definition, hurt the town's chances of winning the game. If town people do scum-favouring things, scum players will be able to get away with advancing their win condition more blatantly. The only way you can stop people doing antitown things is to threaten them with lynch if they don't stop doing them.

Your analogy is bollocks, because throwing a fastball on a 2-2 count is a valid strategy for getting the batter out. It might not be the best choice, but the pitcher is still trying to get the hitter out and not give him the base. Town players acting antitown is the equivalent of intentionally walking the pitcher with the bases loaded.

[Quagmire]

To answer said question:

Are you saying that by admitting that he doesn't think the behaviour is scummy, he renders his own vote useless?

If he's town, the vote is stupid and useless. If he's scum, it's a vote designed to look aggressive. I think it's the latter, because Shanba's too smart and experienced a player to make that gaffe as town.