Newbie 871 - Game Over Town Win

[Annachie]

power role)

How would this possibly be a good idea?

Well, just off of the top of my head it's the perfect opertunity for a doctor to point the finger at someone and say "I think that person is a cop".

[boberz]

I am more encouraged by your last post herd, but you are not out of my sights yet.

I do not like the fact you did not tell us your reasons for voting. There are cases when this is advisable but they are unusual, and ether has already done it once. Ether may I now ask for clarification on that vote in full, unless I have missed it.

I want to know what you are thinking basically herd, I am not convinced I have this properly.

Annachie, I believe Patrick said it is a neutral tell but it used to be a town one. As for the rule I do not really know why small text is banned, you can always make it bigger in notepad; but as it is against he rules it should be obeyed, disobeying of that kind of rule is not a scum tell I dont think.

[boberz]

power role)

How would this possibly be a good idea?

Well, just off of the top of my head it's the perfect opertunity for a doctor to point the finger at someone and say "I think that person is a cop".

How on earth would a doctor know whether there is a cop, let alone who it is. Or have i missed some of this conversation, is that about a hypo situation later.

[Ether]

power role)

How would this possibly be a good idea?

Well, just off of the top of my head it's the perfect opertunity for a doctor to point the finger at someone and say "I think that person is a cop".

This conversation stops right now.

[Ether]

Boberz, the paragraph I held off on earlier was:

I see the no lynch argument as Ksen's way of getting out of having arguments about things that actually matter--like who's scum. I think town would be more likely to drop it, or at least put it on a back burner. I'm also not amused by the part where he disappeared as soon as Patrick called him out--even when he was explicitly told that he wasn't scumhunting enough, he didn't start putting effort in.

Herd's last post bugs me again. I want both Herd and Annachie to elaborate on each other. (I don't see hypocrisy as a scumtell, incidentally, and I think Herd is understating Annachie's content in contrast to Ksen's.)

The small text rule generally prevents stuff you have to copy and paste to read--size 8 is perfectly legible at a glance. If Starkmoon asked me to stop, I would, but I've never played under a mod who cared. She certainly didn't last time.

How does that have anything to do with anything? Seriously.

Already did that here:

I mean games in which you were scum.

[boberz]

Thanks ether, I saw that I was just checking I had our complete accusation.

[boberz]

that was meant to be your btw not our, typo.

[Incognito]

Simpor from Cops and Robbers, and JamesThePeach from our last newbie game. Simpor pretty much asked someone to speculate on whether or not someone else had a powerole, whereas James was more speculating about someone's role himself.

Ah, yeah, I had forgotten about Peachy's role-stuff. I was thinking more of Snailman.

-~-~

Even though I do feel Annachie misrepped herd456 in his #106, I'm not crazy about herd456's most recent post; it seems like he's asking for permission on whether or not OMGUS is actually a scum tell rather than explaining why he thinks it is, and the general tone of it gives me the feeling that he's merely attempting to appease others.

(Btw, Annachie, I asked you a few questions in my #113. Could ya answer?)

The small text conversation is pointless. Ironically, Ether wasn't even the first one to use small text in-thread -- that was me. No clue why Annachie only has a problem when Ether does it.

@boberz:

Linking posts is easy. See that little paper icon on the upper left side of each person's posts? Right click on that to copy the link location. Then place that location after the equal sign like the way I've done in the following stuff in my code below:

Code: Select all

[url=https://forum.mafiascum.net/viewtopic.php?p=1979262#1979262]Post #126[/url]

This, for example, is a link to your Post #126. You can name links however you want.

[ksen]

Already did that here:

I mean games in which you were scum.

In this one I was a normal scum goon:

http://talkrational.org/showthread.php?t=16891

In this one I was a Godfather:

http://talkrational.org/showthread.php?t=16322

[Annachie]

Happy Birthday Starkmoon

How does that have anything to do with anything? Seriously.

Well for starters, poor eyesight, cheap laptop, and 8 kids at home means I missed the first one. Actually I missed the first 2! One directly after you cast a vote, as in on the same line!!

In writing this over several hours, Incog has posted that he was the fist to use small text.

Where Incog? I missed that one too it seems.
Hence my problem

Even later in the day, much later

My wife's had an oopsie (Manic/depressive episode), I may be absent a couple of days.

VLA 3 days

hopefully less though.

[Ether]

8 kids at home

You poor sucker. If you're really missing the small text notes, though, I'll try to stick to parentheses in the future. I hope your wife feels better soon.

I don't see how you could miss Incognito's questions when he linked to the post; it wasn't that big. What he asked was,

Herd I suspect of ducking questions and content. Perhaps being a touch confrontational. I really don't like his professed love of random voting.

What areas of the thread have you found to be examples of confrontational behavior coming from herd? Do you think herd's been more confrontational than, say, Ether?

I want to know similar: I'm not wild about your Herdvote, and I want to know why your one-line case against him is more damning than other people you listed.

I am still voting ksen. Hmm hmm.

[boberz]

Sorry to hear about your problems annachie, but 8 kids sounds great fun if a little challenging.

I wonder what can be done to break the deadlock. The post count is ok but I feel we keep treading old ground.

Any news on Yarmond???

[Incognito]

My small text examples:

At the risk of licking more rear-end

(heh)

what boberz said in 14 covers this.

tl;dr: I'm corny

sometimes

.

I guess it's not as extensive as Ether's whole sentences, but yeah, we can't all be like Ether.
Also, in addition to the question Ether brought forward, I wanted to know how scum could somehow gain manipulativi---ty

?

by not explaining votes as opposed to just explaining them.



(I was tempted to use small text again poking fun at the situation where Annachie still couldn't see my examples even after I brought them to his attention but then... I stopped myself. I dunno why. Maybe I have a heart after all.)

Even later in the day, much later

My wife's had an oopsie (Manic/depressive episode), I may be absent a couple of days.

VLA 3 days

hopefully less though.

This sounds interesting.
Your kid story reminded me that on Halloween, I met two people at a bar who dressed up as Jon and Kate Gosselin. That was

awesome.

[ksen]

Any news on Yarmond???

I looked at his profile and it says he's only made two posts. The first on 11/15 to sign up for this game and then another one on 11/16 to sign up for a different game.

I can't tell from his profile when the last time he's been on the site. Is there somewhere else to find out that sort of information?

Where I've played off-site a first day voting strategy would be to vote for an inactive or someone who is not that good of a player or is known to not be that helpful even when town.

Based on that experience I find Yarmond still a good lynch candidate.

Annachie would be my second choice for a lynch. I know RL interferes with Mafia but her post sounded kind of like a "hittin' da club" post which was our way of saying it looked the poster was posting something in order to have an excuse to lay low.

[boberz]

I hope that is not true, it sounded truthfull to me and I will asume it is.

I do not like your theory on Yarmond. He is neutral to us all, surely he must be it would appear he is not going to contribute so therefore he will be replaced and we will have to hope that the replacement is more active. We can only have a dead neutral read till then.

We should vote off the most scummy, ie the person we think is most likely to be scum. Do you truly have a slightly town read off everyone other than Yarmond? if not then i think you should vote for that person. This would appear to be another theory you and I disagree on, but again I think I am on the side of conventional wisdom.

Can I ask Patrick ether

and

incog: is bad theory scummy? I do not really think it is but there might be logic i havent heard.

Either way

unvote vote: ksen

(btw this is L-2 I believe, correct me if I am wrong)

He moved from chatting about no lynching, in an unconvincing manner; to not really answering who he thought was scum; to then linking endless games in response to requests; to finally raising concern over annachie's VLA I think fairly unfoundedly. He does all this without doing any scum hunting.

[ksen]

I hope that is not true, it sounded truthfull to me and I will asume it is.

I do not like your theory on Yarmond. He is neutral to us all, surely he must be it would appear he is not going to contribute so therefore he will be replaced and we will have to hope that the replacement is more active. We can only have a dead neutral read till then.

Allowing people to fly under the radar is a good way to help town lose. You may not like my reason for keeping my vote on Yarmond due to his inactivity but I think it is good strategy because in my experience scum try to lay as low as possible and all too often town lets them.

We should vote off the most scummy, ie the person we think is most likely to be scum.

And that's what I'm doing with my vote on Yarmond.

Do you truly have a slightly town read off everyone other than Yarmond?

No, and I said as much in the post you responded to. I said I also have a slightly scum feel about Annachie. Why would you ignore that and act as if I hadn't said it?

Now I'm getting a scummy-vibe from you because you seem to consistently miss things I say.

if not then i think you should vote for that person.

Why does it look like you are trying to get me to change my vote from Yarmond?

This would appear to be another theory you and I disagree on, but again I think I am on the side of conventional wisdom.

Maybe you are. The more involved I get over here the more I'm thinking I have a lot to unlearn from playing over at the other site.

Can I ask Patrick ether

and

incog: is bad theory scummy? I do not really think it is but there might be logic i havent heard.

Either way

unvote vote: ksen

(btw this is L-2 I believe, correct me if I am wrong)

He moved from chatting about no lynching, in an unconvincing manner; to not really answering who he thought was scum; to then linking endless games in response to requests; to finally raising concern over annachie's VLA I think fairly unfoundedly. He does all this without doing any scum hunting.

Well, I have answered who I think is most likely to be scum, the links I've provided have been in response to specific requests for such links.

The more I read your posts boberz the more you stand out as scum to me for the constant misrepresentations as you've tried to place suspicion on me.

Normally I don't like to vote for someone who's voted for me because people often read it as revenge-voting which can be a scum-tell. However in this case you leave me no choice but to vote for you because I feel you have continually trying to hang suspicion on me by misdirection and misrepresentation.

unvote, vote boberz

[Incognito]

@ksen:

There's no way to figure that kind of information out, no. The site doesn't keep "last log-in" information in a public place. I think your strategy of offing an unhelpful or "bad" player shouldn't generally be applied to Newbie Games or really any games in general. What you're calling for is called a "policy lynch" on this site. In Newbie Games in particular, it's not uncommon for one of the newer players to just not show up at all for one reason or another (maybe they forgot about the site, maybe they can't find the thread, maybe they became busy, maybe they just didn't want to play after all?). We should be aiming to lynch scum Day by Day.

I think it's probably better to just wait for the mod to replace Yarmond instead of dealing with him at this time; keep in mind that all Days have fixed three week deadlines, so we're not in any desperate situation for a lynch just yet considering the fact that we're only about 3 or 4 real life days into Day 1. If Yarmond was replaced and we

still

hadn't gotten much information from that player slot, then I might be willing to entertain that lynch.

And with regard to Annachie, I don't think he's lying about his real life situation. If he is that would be pretty fucked up, but I'm hoping that we're all holding to some kind of moral standard while playing this game, ya know?

Can I ask Patrick ether

and

incog: is bad theory scummy? I do not really think it is but there might be logic i havent heard.

Crap logic can be considered scummy. With regard to bad theory though, I think you would have to think about whether or not you yourself can believe that a certain player actually

believes

what he's saying and isn't just pushing something as scum just for the purposes of a mislynch. If you can't find yourself believing that a certain player would actually believe a certain theory as town, then you might be dealing with a person who's scum.

---

Ftr, I don't really understand why ksen is the largest wagon. He's been a bit strange at times, but I'm getting the feeling that he seems to believe what he's saying. The theory that one of the experienced players needs to be scum because the GM set it up that way seems like a town-ish theory to me since it requires a decent amount of creativity to come up with that I don't see a newb-scum using. Also, his support of a policy lynch seems like something he's just familiar with doing from his other site and is probably something he's not just doing for malicious purposes.

[Incognito]

And I just cross-posted. Reading a bit.

[Incognito]

Yeah. I think what I said still holds.

[boberz]

I hope that is not true, it sounded truthfull to me and I will asume it is.

I do not like your theory on Yarmond. He is neutral to us all, surely he must be it would appear he is not going to contribute so therefore he will be replaced and we will have to hope that the replacement is more active. We can only have a dead neutral read till then.

Allowing people to fly under the radar is a good way to help town lose. You may not like my reason for keeping my vote on Yarmond due to his inactivity but I think it is good strategy because in my experience scum try to lay as low as possible and all too often town lets them.

We should vote off the most scummy, ie the person we think is most likely to be scum.

And that's what I'm doing with my vote on Yarmond.

I agree with what incog says on the policy vote. I am essentially arguing that you could not have had anything other than a neutral read on Yarmond at the moment. So unless you have a neutral/town read on everyone else your vote is better placed somewhere else.

Do you truly have a slightly town read off everyone other than Yarmond?

No, and I said as much in the post you responded to. I said I also have a slightly scum feel about Annachie. Why would you ignore that and act as if I hadn't said it?

Now I'm getting a scummy-vibe from you because you seem to consistently miss things I say.

I did not miss that, it was a hypothetical question i knew to be untrue, to try and make you see the logic behind what i was saying. I cannot work out if you have yet. My point is if you have a scummy feel about annachie then you should have voted for him, I was trying to show that your vote on Yarmond was unfounded.

if not then i think you should vote for that person.

Why does it look like you are trying to get me to change my vote from Yarmond?

Because I am. I consider your vote unfounded and ill-thought through.

If you are suggesting I am defending a scum partner then I would be a crap player as scum. It would be idiotic for me to jump to defend an inactive scum partner who is probably getting replaced on the basis of a couple of votes.

This would appear to be another theory you and I disagree on, but again I think I am on the side of conventional wisdom.

Maybe you are. The more involved I get over here the more I'm thinking I have a lot to unlearn from playing over at the other site.

I agree.

Can I ask Patrick ether

and

incog: is bad theory scummy? I do not really think it is but there might be logic i havent heard.

Either way

unvote vote: ksen

(btw this is L-2 I believe, correct me if I am wrong)

He moved from chatting about no lynching, in an unconvincing manner; to not really answering who he thought was scum; to then linking endless games in response to requests; to finally raising concern over annachie's VLA I think fairly unfoundedly. He does all this without doing any scum hunting.

Well, I have answered who I think is most likely to be scum, the links I've provided have been in response to specific requests for such links.

You answered most likely to be scumin an unconvincing manner, first it was one of the three experienced players because of the modding (false) then yarmond for not posting (wrong) and now me. I also say in the quote you are quoting from me that you link in response to requests.

You answer question like that I cannot deny, you fail to add original content. The point you fail to answer is when you have done active scum hunting. ie look for scum signs in people that others have not yet voiced.

The more I read your posts boberz the more you stand out as scum to me for the constant misrepresentations as you've tried to place suspicion on me.

Normally I don't like to vote for someone who's voted for me because people often read it as revenge-voting which can be a scum-tell. However in this case you leave me no choice but to vote for you because I feel you have continually trying to hang suspicion on me by misdirection and misrepresentation.

unvote, vote boberz

I dont agree there have been misrepresentations, give me specific examples and I will try to refute them. Or do you still mean when we were allegedly talking past one another, I still dont believe we were. Obviously there have been simplifications but no deliberate attempts to decieve.

I actually called you more town for most of the game so far. I directed criticism at you for what I (and others) considered bad theory early in the game, also criticism (again not alone) for the Yarmond vote based on the inactive theory. I encouraged you and others to scum hunt on more than one occasion.

The lack of scum hunting, even after being advised to, particularly since you post a fair bit, is worrying and the reason for my vote. You post what I consider (and have noted before) white noise, ie you post nothing relevant to the game, you rehash other peoples reads/tells you chat about theory but do not scum hunt.

Your first example of scum hunting is your vote on me. It does feel very defensive but I would be (am being) defensive after a vote so perhaps a town side factor there, maybe.

---

Incog thank you for your advice on bad theory, I am considering it but encountering circular logic from it in this situation unfortuantly. Can Patrick and Ether verify bad theory as a scum tell or not please?

There is a simple reason why I made him largest wagon, I consider him most scummy.

[Ether]

Ksen and Boberz, can you not fit so many damn quote tags into your posts? A page of those just makes my eyes glaze over. You only need one or two.

Can I ask Patrick ether and incog: is bad theory scummy? I do not really think it is but there might be logic i havent heard.

Just in a vacuum: if the person is using the bad theory as an excuse to make a play that hurts the town, and you think it ought to know better, sure. Otherwise, I wouldn't trust that as a tell too far. Of course, focusing on any kind of theory--good or bad--in favor of scumhunting is a way to active lurk.

Incognito's note on the rigged IC thing is actually a decent point; I hadn't thought about it that way. It'll be cool if it actually works. (The rest of Incognito's stuff doesn't make me more sympathetic. The Boberzvote gives me a bit of pause independently. It's a really dumb vote, though; Boberz is town.)

I'm feeling a bit ambivalent right now. On the bright side, I can use this as my excuse to

unvote; vote: DarthRandal1138

. Awesome.

[boberz]

"Dumb vote", can you explain please. Somehow it has made me more town, before you just thought i was town, now you assert I am town. I dont really understand is what I am saying.

I thought it would be a bit of a pressure vote, but saying it is a pressure vote reduces the pressure associated, I can admit it now because you unvoted. I also stand by what I said about ksen not contributing effectively.

[Ether]

By "Boberzvote," I was criticizing Ksen's vote on you, not your vote on him.

What do you think of my Randalvote?

[Incognito]

boberz, Ether talks funny sometimes. She was an IC in one of my first Newbie Games on here, and I had a difficult time figuring out what she was trying to say (that may or may not have anything to do with the fact that she lurked hardcore in that game, but yeah). I just smiled and nodded. And then voted her becuz she was scum. 'twas a fun game.

Ether, can you explain the sympathy thing you felt with respect to Randal and Patrick's feeling for him?

[Patrick]

It was I who first mentioned herd's random vote. I merely questioned it, I did not call it scummy. I was a little inquisitive because it came after there was already content, and some proper votes and I wanted to check it was random and why it occured. I was happy with the explanation although I did not like it.

Yeah, I don't have a problem with your initial calling him out on it then withdrawing suspicion, which seemed natural enough to me. The Darth and Annachie comments on it which both expressed suspicion of it for unexplained reasons struck me as more opportunistic.

I'm wavering on ksen, too. His boberz vote is terrible but I'm not sure what he'd be trying to achieve by it as scum; I'd expect him to stick to more popular targets. It's hard to tell whether he put that much thought into it, but it does make me wonder. His vote on Yarmond is consistent with what I saw from him in his other games, where I read him stating at least once that lynching scum day 1 is unlikely and that removing someone unhelpful is the best idea. If ksen is scum, I'd see it as a slight something in Yarmond's favour. I think ksen as scum would be more likely to pursue his policy against an easy townie than his partner.

Unvote

.

Vote: herd

. Currently my best suspect, and more suspicious than either Annachie or Darth imo, especially after his last post. I am interested in both their replies to a few questions when they post again though.

boberz - if you were still looking for a third answer, I don't think bad theory is inherently scummy. An example would be a completely new player suggesting no lynch on day 1, which is a clearly bad idea, but gets suggested by a decent number of townies and is probably a null tell.

Was there anything in particular about herd's last post that made you feel better about him?