Mini 892 - Mayor Mafia (GAME OVER)

[MonkeyMan576]

I'm suspicious of anyone who says the election results should be "obvious" or says they should be mayor(seems self serving).

[MonkeyMan576]

I've played with most of the guys here...the only guys I'm unfamiliar with are kyle, moai, Cathart, and Kerrigan.

nhammen, why did you leave xReck off your list for mayor? And would you not consider someone you hadn't played with?

And I didn't realize it was you who killed me in Day Night Mafia:P. I'm not a vengeful person though.

[MonkeyMan576]

Monkey? Have I played with you?

I think we may have played at some point, though I'm not sure which game.

[MonkeyMan576]

I've played with most of the guys here...the only guys I'm unfamiliar with are kyle, moai, Cathart, and Kerrigan.

nhammen, why did you leave xReck off your list for mayor? And would you not consider someone you hadn't played with?

And I didn't realize it was you who killed me in Day Night Mafia:P. I'm not a vengeful person though.

I didn't kill you in day night. I just tagged you as scum, and multiple players agreed with me, including, I think, the player that killed you.


Reck, after my list about who I've played with, I did in fact mention a few qualities about some players for mayor. But I only mentioned players that had qualities that I though were important to the Mayor role. Although, I should have mentioned that I usually can't read Reck (which is surprising because he has been in more games with me than anyone else). That is actually a bad thing for a double voter. However, other players have successfully read Reck, so I'm not too worried about it.


OMG pictures are soooo funny.

You seem rather narcisistic. You're implying that we should all vote based on who you've played with and who you can read, etc?

[MonkeyMan576]

Vote: xRECKONERx

For buddying with nhammen so obviously...

I want to hear more arguments before deciding who to support for mayor.

[MonkeyMan576]

Wow, four votes on me without a good reason...

[MonkeyMan576]

The problem with Socrates' theory of all town should want to be mayor is good except that if we all sat here with supports on ourselves noone would get elected.

My list of 5 criteria were totally made up on the spot by the way - if anyone can think or different ones give us all a shout, I've never played with this mechanic before.

Monkeyman is not coming with the pressure of an early wagon at all. How experienced are you, Monkey?

Support Hoopla

I'm fairly experienced. I've played in a lot of games anyway.

I'm not exactly sure what "proper action" would be at this point, considering there is four votes on me and no case.

[MonkeyMan576]

The problem with Socrates' theory of all town should want to be mayor is good except that if we all sat here with supports on ourselves noone would get elected.

My list of 5 criteria were totally made up on the spot by the way - if anyone can think or different ones give us all a shout, I've never played with this mechanic before.

Monkeyman is not coming with the pressure of an early wagon at all. How experienced are you, Monkey?

Support Hoopla

I'm fairly experienced. I've played in a lot of games anyway.

I'm not exactly sure what "proper action" would be at this point, considering there is four votes on me and no case.

Defend your position or accept that you have acted scummy. Your first post contains a scummy and unjustified generalization and blanket statement that flies in the face of what (I think) optimal pro-town behavior should be.

It's not unjustified or scummy. If someone recommends themselves as mayor I think it increases the likelyhood that the power could be used for scrupulous means. And if election results were so obvious than we wouldn't have elections or debate about it in the first place.

[MonkeyMan576]

All people who vote others without posting their reasons are scum.

See what I did there? I laid down an unfounded accusation with no justification that lets me accuse others of being scum for no good reason.

The same thing as what Monkey did.

I don't actually believe my statement up there, and I don't believe that those who want themselves to be mayor are scummy for pretty much the exact same reason Socrates said. If you're town, the best person (in your view) to be mayor is yourself, since you know that the extra power is going towards furthering the town's agenda. I thought about pushing myself for mayor, but I have no delusions of getting anyone else's votes to be elected.

Monkey's argument for why self nominating is scummy is not the justification I would expect town to use at all (if they believed that), and it furthers the notion that Monkeyman is, indeed, trying to push suspicion onto others rather than find scum. His reason for why election results being obvious is scummy is just ridiculous.

Cathart, who are you most suspicious of right now?

MORE PEOPLE SUPPORT SERIAL! HE DOES NOT RAPE BABIES (I hope).

What argument were you expecting? Because if you don't have one, it just looks like you are trying to get other people to vote on a bandwagon with no legs.

[MonkeyMan576]

Your argument was if someone nominates themselves for mayor, it increases the chance that they will use it for unscrupulous means, which I assume means increases the chance scum will abuse it.

If you were town and thought that self noming is scummy, I would have expected an argument that tries to explain why scum and not town would self nominate. Not just that people who self nominate are power hungry scum. I can't think of such an argument, but all you did was repeat your earlier generalized statement, just used more words to say it.

Also, if you're not advocating self noming, then that means, if you were town, you're increasing the chance scum will be elected, which is contradictory to your statement.

Serial, how come you're not voting Monkey? You'll lose out on a lot of town points when he flips scum.

You're really over-reaching the strength of your argument, which is scummy.

I don't see why I would need to use more words to explain my position if fewer words is just as adequate. And there is no mathematical connection between self nominating and electing town. My hypothesis is that asking to be nominated has the potential to be self serving, I would rather nominate someone who has more altruistic motives. "I am a great player" "I could be town" "Therefore I should be mayor" doesn't really seem like good logic to me.

[MonkeyMan576]

[quote="SerialClergyman"]Monkey - If you're fairly experienced, why are you so worried about an early wagon on nothing? Your reaction looked telling to me because I generally find the townie response to an early bandwagon is bemusement, especially if there's no reason to the wagon. Your reaction was genuine concern and asking about reasons for it. I'd possibly expect that from someone who is a little inexperienced, but if that's not you, then I'm suspicious.

Vote monkey

I don't think there's a problem with pointing out if a wagon is based on scummy logic. I wasn't worried after the first or the second vote. But I think after four or five votes anyone has a right to point out that a bandwagon has no basis behind it.

[MonkeyMan576]

Monkey, who are

you

suspicious of?

Reck and nhammen are my top suspects right now. Although since it's still early day one opinions are changing rapidly.

[MonkeyMan576]

MOI, why was Kerrigan a better vote than Monkey?

I don't plan on calming down. We have scum dancing on a bed of hot coals, no need to let the feet cool off.

Charter was like this in Muppets Mafia too. When he thinks he's right about something he doesn't think clearly. I might also add that he was lying as town on his roleclaim in that game, so I would think twice about who you trust.

[MonkeyMan576]

Reck and nhammen are my top suspects right now.

Why?

Because reck's rubbing noses with you early in the game looked like he was trying to get you to agree to some sort of alignment with him.

[MonkeyMan576]

Okay, so what I get is that charter thought I was wrong to think that self-noming was bad, and then charter thought I was wrong to react to being at L-3 and that I didn't give him the exact argument he wanted(not that my argument itself was bad).

[MonkeyMan576]

Okay, so what I get is that charter

thought I was wrong to think that self-noming was bad, and then charter thought I was wrong to react to being at L-3 and that I didn't give him the exact argument he wanted(not that my argument itself was bad).

actually said was, Monkey was trying to shove suspicion under people without justifying it and then your justification didn't actually justify your claim. Charter hasn't said anything about how you reacted to votes on you.

Speaking of trying to shove suspicion on to people, you're trying too hard to make me look suspicious without considering the possibility that I'm town(which I am).

I'm not trying to shove suspicion onto anyone. I'm suggesting that weather or not people want themselves to be mayor or someone else may say something about their motives. To me, it would be something obvious to look at, not something that makes someone scummy for suggesting.

[MonkeyMan576]

Very contradictory.

Vote: SaintKerrigan
Support: Moai Interceptor Cannons

[MonkeyMan576]

I don't see why it's page four and I'm getting flak for not being helpful.

Exactly because of posts like this. Even though we were at page 4 at the time, everyone already meant business and started serious discussion. You're still acting, like we are in RVS. We don't even know any opinion from you, other that you like bigger wagons.

Hoopla's idea of lynching the Mayor on D1: Am I missing something? According to the rules:

The mayor decides who will succeed him

how are we supposed to choose someone more obvtown on the next day, when it's the Mayor who decides his successor?

There has to be some accountability for the eventual mayor. If the mayor advocates lynching someone who flips town, then at some point we need to consider a change of leadership(from what I understand this can only be done through lynching or NK, and even then the mayor decides who his successor will be. But even so, if the mayor chooses someone the town isn't supportive of, they are an obv lynch target.)

[MonkeyMan576]

The purpose of a guarenteed alignment choosing the mayor means if it's town, we know motivations are pure. Yes, that player could still be wrong, but I'd favour one confirmed town player's choice, over a whole town suspectable to manipulation.

I'm sorry, I think I missed the part on how we are supposed to garauntee someone's alignment at this point in the game?

[MonkeyMan576]

There's a lot of WIFOM there, isn't it? I mean, if the mayor was scum, how do you determine if they would be more likely to choose a scum mayor or a town mayor? Since the town would less likely to trust someone chosen by scum, it might be a valid gambit to choose a townie to make them suspicious.

Which is basically the point that Hoopla was trying to make I think.

I think at this point it's best to elect the person with the most support to the position, rather than succumb to the WIFOM of a mayor lynch gambit so early.

My opinion that recommending yourself for mayor is suspicious is just my personal opinion. I would be willing to consider a campaigning player if there is ample support from other players. My point is that campaigning for mayor before you are nominated by someone else isn't a tell per se, but to me it seems self serving. Scum could do it and town could do it, but it would be more dangerous in the hands of scum. I would be more likely to trust someone that was nominated by someone else. It's like if someone is being attacks and campaigns for their own pro-towniness, it is less effective if they are the only one's doing the defending, rather than if there are other players making a valid defence of a player being attacked.

[MonkeyMan576]

@ MIC: Okay, consider argument dropped. Right now, I'm a little wary of Monkey. He just seemed to jump straight on to the Post 66 argument, blindly agreeing with what you said.

I didn't blindly agree. I actually thought about it.

[MonkeyMan576]

My opinion that recommending yourself for mayor is suspicious is just my personal opinion. I would be willing to consider a campaigning player if there is ample support from other players. My point is that campaigning for mayor before you are nominated by someone else isn't a tell per se, but to me it seems self serving. Scum could do it and town could do it, but it would be more dangerous in the hands of scum. I would be more likely to trust someone that was nominated by someone else. It's like if someone is being attacks and campaigns for their own pro-towniness, it is less effective if they are the only one's doing the defending, rather than if there are other players making a valid defence of a player being attacked.

I had lots of responses to this at once.

My first is: none of this actually argues why scum would be more inclined to do this action, or why townies shouldn't do it.

It actually does. You just aren't taking the time to look at my argument.

My second is: This attitude is preying on (or falling prey to) two things 1) a central dislike/distrust of people who want to lead: "This guy is asking for my trust, he MUST have ulterior motives." and 2) the impulse to think of the guy highlighting his qualifications as arrogant. This is why nobody trusts politicians even though a signifigant portion of them aren't corrupt

. It is comforting to look at somebody acting all humble and modest and think "that guy isn't trying to mislead me, I should trust him. and he isn't an arrogant jerk who only talks about how awsome he is." Even though this ignores that modesty isn't proof of qualification for a position, and modesty is easy to fake.

Mafia isn't a game where you are supposed to trust everone. Trust is earned through your actions, it's not pro-town behavior to trust everyone at the beginning of the game.

My third is: that point about a defense coming from someone other than the accused is really bad. You should judge the logic and the facts, not where it is coming from to determine if the points are valid.

Looking at statements alone and not in game relationships is pretty dumb.

My fourth is: if you are genuine, scum would have such an easy time manipulating you it isn't even funny.

I don't see how.

I guess what I am saying is that your argument is a complicated form of AtE and you are being too irrational Monkey.

[/Quote]

It's not AtE at all. It's actually logical.

[MonkeyMan576]

DDD, how do you feel about Monkey, the people on his wagon, and MIC, who jumped off the wagon?

I think many uncomplimentary things about Monkey frankly from my experience with him I don't know if he's acting scummy now or if his view of the game is really so pathetically simple. The people on his wagon excluding Rec are all people I've played with and I trust their ability if not their intent and I have to assume they've considered their meta of Monkey and still think he's suspicious. MIC's behavior on this likely rules out scum-MIC, town-Monkey but everything else is still in play.

I don't know what's simple about my game philosophy, and this seems like a rather poor reason to vote for someone.

[MonkeyMan576]

DDD, how do you feel about Monkey, the people on his wagon, and MIC, who jumped off the wagon?

I think many uncomplimentary things about Monkey frankly from my experience with him I don't know if he's acting scummy now or if his view of the game is really so pathetically simple. The people on his wagon excluding Rec are all people I've played with and I trust their ability if not their intent and I have to assume they've considered their meta of Monkey and still think he's suspicious. MIC's behavior on this likely rules out scum-MIC, town-Monkey but everything else is still in play.

I don't know what's simple about my game philosophy, and this seems like a rather poor reason to vote for someone.

Good thing I didn't vote for you then, huh, clownshoes?

Oh and charter, Reckoner has in fact been pretty damn useless the entire game, only question comes from the aggresiveness of lobbying to be mayor but I don't know him well enough to know if that's anything unusual for him. His latest vote sucks as well. Lots not to like.

My point wasn't that you voted for me, it was that you sounded like you're looking for an excuse too.

[MonkeyMan576]

More from my reread:

Very contradictory.

Vote: SaintKerrigan
Support: Moai Interceptor Cannons

Why?

@ MIC: Okay, consider argument dropped. Right now, I'm a little wary of Monkey. He just seemed to jump straight on to the Post 66 argument, blindly agreeing with what you said.

I didn't blindly agree. I actually thought about it.

Give us your thoughts.

I think he actually was indicating he wanted to be mayor, and then later said that he didn't want it after realizing there could be implications to overtly campaigning yourself.

[MonkeyMan576]

If charter thinks someone is scum, I would take it as evidence they are town...

From Muppets mafia...

Kirbyoshi is scum. Slam dunk.

vote Kirbyoshi

Kirby was town

Well, looks like I can't nail you(monkeyman576) to a cross due to a technicality (not talking about my catch up post), but I'm still really sure you're scum.

I was town.

[MonkeyMan576]

It is an argument. Charter is a tunneler and is wrong more often than not on his reads. I have firsthand experience of him being wrong on me specifically.

[MonkeyMan576]

I'm the cop by the way.

[MonkeyMan576]

I'm the cop by the way.

[MonkeyMan576]

I'm the cop by the way.

Shit! I can believe this.

unvote

Note: This may only be temporary. Monkey, you need to answer the questions I have asked you. Here they are again:
Have you ever been scum, and if so, in what game?
Can you quote exactly what Saint has said that makes you think he wanted to be mayor?
Why did you attack Saint for something that Serial did as well?

@Nhammen, I cannot answer for anything Monkey did. It almost looks like you're expecting me to. Just a warning.

Nope, but I can see why you thought that. I was just saying that your argument sucked. Then I said that Monkey's support of this argument sucked as well. Two different comments aimed at two different players.

It looked to me like Serial wanted everyone to comment on it. Commenting and showing why he is not a good candidate looks like he didn't want to be mayor to me.

I completely disagree here. Serial wanted people to comment on the

validity of the list itself

and/or

players who fit the criteria

(i.e. 'candidates' - not 'non-candidates') maybe, but I honestly do not see a reason to fill it out when you don't want to be at least considered for mayor (with the

possible

special exception of its creator, see below). Wouldn't a simple 'I don't want to be mayor' suffice? Or even 'I shouldn't be mayor because I suck at scumhunting, townhunting and convincing people'. Or even not mentioning it at all, like most people. Again, I don't think anyone can truthfully claim that they fit all the criteria (I mean yours was 1/5, yet you're still supporting yourself).

Well then we disagree, because that is what I saw. How about we do what we should have done pages ago: Saint, what was you reason for filling out Serial's mayor criterion list?

I wasn't even attacking Kerrigan until Charter asked me to (it was a page 4 gut vote FFS).

Ummm... Two comments on this line: 1 - Gut votes are crap. 2 - So after Charter asked you to explain your vote, you decided to find a reason? Am I understanding what you are saying incorrectly here?

Also, Serial's context was not the same. There were several people campaigning for him to be mayor. He then creates a list of mayoral qualities, and demonstrates that he himself does not fit all these qualities (meaning there are better options). And seriously Nhammen, think of how fishy it would be if Serial spews out this list and proceeds

not

to answer it himself given the support on him at the time. But I do believe Serial wants to be mayor

to an extent

, he's just saying that it might not be the best idea. I have a (very) mild scum read on Serial anyway, as mentioned in my last post.

So Serial wanted to preempt the push for him to be mayor. How is this different from Saint?

I was scum in Mafia...91? I think. Also in TTGL Mafia.

When he felt out the 5 point checklist, then said he didn't want to be mayor, but then again...it seemed like he did want it and disingenuine.

It was the way that he went about it.

[MonkeyMan576]

And yet even more evidence to make me worried about a possible nhammen/reck scum team...

[MonkeyMan576]

nhammen - After monkeyman gets to L1, he says that he's a cop. nhammen says

Shit! I can believe this.

The fact that he believes the claim of cop when he was about to be lynched when he has already acted scummy.

Sorry, but I have seen how he plays as town, and I can easily see town Monkey doing all of these things.

I was scum in Mafia...91? I think. Also in TTGL Mafia.

Thank you for providing this. Unfortunately after comparing your play here to both Mafia 91 and Mafia 97, I cannot tell the difference between twon Monkey and scum Monkey. It seems like this reaching with bad arguments and refusal to back down is part of his general meta. He does this both as scum and as town.

I find it difficult to peg down players early in the game. Thus I am forced to make arguments on less than stellar evidence and then get bushwacked for it. I think I play better the later in the game I get.

When he felt out the 5 point checklist, then said he didn't want to be mayor, but then again...it seemed like he did want it and disingenuine.

Explain how "it seemed like he did want it" please.

The way he said "I wouldn't vote for me, but..." seems like a disclaimer in case people might want to vote for him.

It was the way that he went about it.

Explain. I don't want short "just because" type answers. I want a real explanation here.

Well, I think I provided a better explanation above.

[MonkeyMan576]

And yet even more evidence to make me worried about a possible nhammen/reck scum team...

...how is that evidence of a me/nham scumteam, exactly?

Cause you were buddying with him in the beginning and buddying with him now.

[MonkeyMan576]

DDD, why are you voting for Kerrigan?

Didn't like him following SC's silly little mayoral candidate test, don't like him not wanting to be mayor, don't like his suspicions of me.

So you're saying that your vote wasn't random, then? Why don't you like the fact that I don't want to be mayor, and why don't you like my suspicions of you?

The way he said "I wouldn't vote for me, but..." seems like a disclaimer in case people might want to vote for him.

I assume the part in quotation marks was paraphrased, right? Because what I actually said and you make me out to say are two entirely different things. How difficult is it to understand the sentence "Basically, I wouldn't nominate me for mayor." As I already explained to MIC, I answered Serial's questionnaire because:

A: I thought it was a good idea.
B: I used it to highlight why exactly I shouldn't be a mayoral candidate.

Do you get it now? I don't want to be the mayor, and I never wanted to be the mayor.

@ MIC: See above.

@ Kyle99: You state in your post that you don't know whether you want to vote MonkeyMan, but then change your mind

within the same post

and vote the guy? Explain yourself, please.

I get that you're saying it. I'm not sure I believe you.

[MonkeyMan576]

As far as the claim, I thought I was at level 1 and I don't believe in letting scum have the chance to lynch me before having the chance to claim...

[MonkeyMan576]

As far as the claim, I thought I was at level 1 and I don't believe in letting scum have the chance to lynch me before having the chance to claim...

Bullshit.

Either you're lying, or you didn't read the rules.

The day wouldn't end, even after reaching the majority of players, before the Mayor will be chosen. We're still far from doing it, so you would have plenty of time to defend yourself even after hitting L-0.

I'm happy with my vote.

The rules don't say a player can't be lynched before deciding on mayor. AFAIK. Maybe you should rethink your position.

[MonkeyMan576]

Okay, well I didn't know that. It doesn't specifically say that players can unvote and vote someone else. The situation was convoluted enough that I think a claim was warranted.

[MonkeyMan576]

@ MonkeyMan576: So, you mean to say that you didn't read the bottom of every single one of MichelSableheart's vote/support counts (except the first), as well as his response to MIC's question regarding this exact mechanic? I find this difficult to believe.

I'm not using it as an excuse. I'm saying even with the rule, I still feel being at L-1 warrants a claim.

[MonkeyMan576]

Latest back and forth seals the deal in regards to lynching Monkey, I really can't view such willful negligence as anything other than scummy as hell.

We need to either adopt Hoopla's plan or select someone else to be mayor and then get with the lynching.

Unsupport; Support: Monkeyman

Nothing like a false dilemma.

[MonkeyMan576]

Wait What?? How does the latest back and forth seal anything?

You mean the part where he said he thought he was going to be lynched where basically admitted to not reading the thread and then changing that to “L-1 always warrants a claim” which is also wrong.

I didn't say L-1 always warrants a claim. Quoting(incorrectly) out of context is scummy. In this case, I felt it warranted a claim. It had nothing to do with the rules.

[MonkeyMan576]

I wouldn't oppose a kyle lynch, although he's not my top suspect.

[MonkeyMan576]

I am suspicious of SaintKerrigan(the mayor campaiging), xreckonerx(buddying and being rejected by nhammen), kyle99(play seems peculiar, lots of fence sitting), and DDD(overagressive, lack of logic), I wouldn't really say one stands out over the others at this point.

[MonkeyMan576]

Responding to SC's problem with me because I put it off.

This looks to me like the goal of the entire bit of play. I don't have much problem with the statement itself, it's the grandiose nature of what he's said that makes me somewhat suspicious.
It is roughly equally important to get mayor for scum and town. Thus both scum and town have a reason to try to get themselves elected to the position.

However if scum refuses the mayorship, then the chances that the mayor will go to their team are greatly lessened. If a town member refuses the mayor role, the chances remain high it will end up in the hands of a townie.

This is my first problem with your logic. 1) scum know exactly who their buddies are. They can easily play the "I don't want to be mayor" card while still pushing scum for mayor. 2) You are assuming that the mayor role is chosen completely at random, which is so obviously not the case I am mildly frustrated that you would argue that.

So on the face of it, before WIFOM is introduced, it looks to me like scum would be more likely to want it than to not.

I actually disagree completely. My first thought going into this game was that the scums were going to try to throw shit on anybody that tried to sell themselves, and most of them would try to generally to prey upon people's general paranoia (see my second point in post 154). Also, scum could feasibly be inclined to avoid the mayor position at first for the same reason they lurk: they don't want to attract attention to themselves. I know this is WIFOM and I don't have a meta to prove it yet, but if I was scum I would not push myself for mayor nearly as hard as I am.

Now, I accept that there is town motivation to want it as well, which is why the action is not scummy. But to call people not wanting the mayorship scummy, when in fact it hurts scum more than town to be in this position, is a bizarre argument that takes a fair bit of WIFOM to even approach. (Scum want to be seen to do things that hurt scum so they refuse the mayorship to be seen to be more town).

First, its less the people that don't want to become mayor are scummy, and more the people who attack people that DO want to become mayor are scummy, and that I extremely encourage townies to campaign for themselves.

Second, where do you get that not becoming mayor hurts the scum more than it hurts the town? I thought I have already explained numerous times how much it hurts the town if scum become mayor, not to mention that scum can NK the mayor quite easily, while getting a scum out of mayordom would take an organized lynch from almost the entire town. If an even halfway competent scum becomes mayor, lynching him will be an uphill battle at best.

As such, I think I'm coming ot the opinion that I don't want Socrates to be mayor. He's just made too big a deal out of his proposition. I dont' necessarily think he's scum, but he has me uneasy because of it.

Let me ask you a question. Say I AM town, see that both Monkey and Cathart have pushed what I think is a scummy agenda, and I do want to be mayor. What exactly to you expect me to do? I can understand thinking that I am scum and had all of this pre-planned out, but do you think I wouldn't do as I am doing as town?

Finally - what's with ignoring the meta you have on me Socrates? You know exactly how I play and you've seen me deliberately take a lynch because I thought it was the best thing for my team. You know that I have a heavy team-first attitude, so why ask me?

I am fully aware of your meta. I never said I was suspicious of you for nominating Hoopla for mayor, and I can fully see you doing it as town. I still think it is suboptimal play in this instance though, and if you are town I want to convince you to behave optimally.

I am sick of talking theory. Maybe we can just agree to disagree for now SC and continue this debate another time? I am not getting anything about your alignment from this.

Ok, now to post something that is actually productive.

I never said wanting to be mayor was scummy, my suggestion was that players should be nominated first by non-campaigning players, and this was more pro-town play than simply stating you want to be mayor. Reason being, a one person campaign has the potential to be misused by scum campaigning, wheras if there are several people behind the support for a mayor there is more of a consensus and less potential for misuse.

[MonkeyMan576]

This is all I could be bothered, it's a quick skim of the first page for completed games. I'd say it's about 50/50, maybe leaning towards no roleblocker.


872 YES
865 NO
868 NO
838 NO
831 YES
813 YES
827 NO
823 YES
835 NO
807 YES
806 NO

I said games

with

cops, I just checked the first two games on your list and neither of them have cops. Do it again and do it right.

Too lazy to do it yourself?

Unvote:
Vote: DDD

[MonkeyMan576]

I'm really not seeing any way that Reckoner isn't scum. Just saying.

If I'm scum, what does that make nhammen?

Who are my scumbuddies?

Don't bother reasoning with him, once he thinks someone is scum, they are scum. Reason doesn't matter.

I'm not getting the hate on my DDD vote. It's obviously hypocritical to berate for someone for doing research wrong by mistake when you're not willing to do it by yourself.

I'm not also getting the lynch the mayor theory. What's to stop a scum lynchee from refusing to nominate a successor?

Col.'s reasons for attacking me were pretty flimsy...

If the mayor choice is between nhammen and socrates, I think I'd pick socrates. His analysis mostly makes sense, wheras nhammen hasn't added much this game, despite xReckonerx singing his praises. This also adds suspicion on xReckonerx.

Support: Socrates

[MonkeyMan576]

Where did DDD wander off to?

Well Sportscenter was just on so I was watching that.

I don't see the point in arguing with you since you've effectively dropped your case against me and since I think you're town I have no desire to try and counterstrike. And I disagree with your comment to a degree about Hoopla, if I know I only have a short amount of time it's very easy to waste that time and joke instead of playing the game seriously. But I'm not confident enough in her alignment to try and be her standard bearer. Still think Monkey is a good lynch with Kyle and Rec probably the two closest behind him.

Your read on SC is based on what his view on your alignment is? This reeks of scum.

[MonkeyMan576]

Where did DDD wander off to?

Well Sportscenter was just on so I was watching that.

I don't see the point in arguing with you since you've effectively dropped your case against me and since I think you're town I have no desire to try and counterstrike. And I disagree with your comment to a degree about Hoopla, if I know I only have a short amount of time it's very easy to waste that time and joke instead of playing the game seriously. But I'm not confident enough in her alignment to try and be her standard bearer. Still think Monkey is a good lynch with Kyle and Rec probably the two closest behind him.

Your read on SC is based on what his view on your alignment is? This reeks of scum.

Well at least you've convinced me that you're town since I don't think scum would go through so much trouble to get such a bad read.

Yes, I know you're not actually reading the thread since you're scum but could you make it less obvious? Or at least admit to being scum so we can lynch you already?

That makes no sense.

[MonkeyMan576]

Nothing like the old "It's day 1, I don't have to scum hunt, argument". I still like a DDD lynch.

[MonkeyMan576]

Scum-DDD, and Tunneling-charter are trying to get a wagon going on the cop, big surprise.

[MonkeyMan576]

charter, I'm not saying anything about MM because

I don't feel like wasting time even considering lynching the claimed cop

. There are other places to find our D1 lynch.

MM is semi-right, though, your tunneling is rather... stand-out.

How am I only semi-right? It seems like you're trying to agree with my statement without looking like you're buddying me. If I'm right, you should say so.

[MonkeyMan576]

Well, Hoopla's not my top choice, but in the interest of not being lynched...I don't have any strong town readings on her either.

Unvote:
Vote: Hoopla

[MonkeyMan576]

Kyle's theory on cop claiming is incorrect. I think it's better to claim cop and hope for a doctor than to lie as town.

[MonkeyMan576]

The Monkey wagon got its second wind. He joins every possible wagon with even more non existent reasoning than his last vote. He is too scummy to let live. I basically see it as anyone else besides him, is just a bad lynch because no one comes within miles of how scummy Monkey is.

I think I was very clear with my reasoning. If it's between me and Hoopla, obviously my choice is Hoopla. And way to misrepresent my wagon as "gaining steam" as opposed to the Hoopla wagon.

[MonkeyMan576]

I think it's a bit conceded to presume that someone bases their whole posting style based off of "being afraid" of one player. But I'm also interested in seeing what he has to say.

[MonkeyMan576]

Just saying that Hoopla and Monkey are at L2 and Socrates is at M1.

What a useful post, I mean it wasn't like there was a vote count posted just a few posts ago or anything that anyone could clearly read. Tell me Kyle, are you afraid of posting much because I'll compare your play here with the newbie game we just got out of?

Well, this is interesting. Can you link to this game? What is your interpretation of Kyle so far?

All of my games are in my wiki page, and the one he's referring to is the game furthest on the bottom of the table.

That makes anything he has to say not relevant?

[MonkeyMan576]

Just saying that Hoopla and Monkey are at L2 and Socrates is at M1.

What a useful post, I mean it wasn't like there was a vote count posted just a few posts ago or anything that anyone could clearly read. Tell me Kyle, are you afraid of posting much because I'll compare your play here with the newbie game we just got out of?

Well, this is interesting. Can you link to this game? What is your interpretation of Kyle so far?

All of my games are in my wiki page, and the one he's referring to is the game furthest on the bottom of the table.

That makes anything he has to say not relevant?

Anything who says? I'm confused about your statement.

DDD, your pointing out that your game is "on the bottom of the list" looks like a preemptive excuse to disregard his comments.

[MonkeyMan576]

@Monkey: Could you be ever so kind as to link me to a game where you were a town power role?

Disney Mafia 2
http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... 98&start=0

[MonkeyMan576]

Yeah, but there's a decent chance you don't get to cash in your scum lynch until Day 3. Is it really worth waiting that long for a confirmed scum?

There's also a decent chance we can cash in our scum lynch on Day 1. If he really is the cop, then lynching him is retarded. The cost of lynching the cop more than makes up for the likelihood of him being scum. Waiting until Day 3 is always a possibility. Are you suggesting that we avoid having 1 for 1 situations? I think these are good things.

Also, remember this:

I don't think we should lynch him though. Monkey is more likely to claim cop as cop, than claim cop as scum. I think the value of a potential investigation can be quite damaging for mafia, and if he is truthful, he will likely absorb the night kill (saving us a lynch).

If Monkey is mafia, we have him captured. There is not much difference between lynching him D1 than on D2. In both of these scenarios we have 2 other scum to hit out of everyone else. So if there is little difference in the scenarios if he is mafia, we might as well choose the option that benefits town more if he is town - which is an investigation or night kill. Unless mafia have a roleblocker they run a serious risk in leaving Monkey alive.

What changed your mind?

Nhammen, Can you get behind a Kyle lynch? Why Hoopla over Kyle? What do you think about the take on the Hoopla wagon that I gave earlier?

I can definitely get behind a kyle lynch. However, I think Hoopla looks scummier than kyle. Her suspicions are without reason. Yes, it could be "apathy and a low confidence" from a townie, as you say, but it doesn't look that way to me.

You still haven’t shown that there’s a significant chance that there’s no roleblocker. As long as logic dictates that the game is “properly” balanced with a roleblocking or redirecting role in the hands of scum then Monkey’s hypothetical role now that it’s been outed is no better than vanilla.

Then we will find out that there is a roleblocker. I don't see how this is a bad thing. "Useless to us now" is bad bad BAD logic.


Sigh, I just ISOed Hoopla to compare with Socrates' comments on the Hoopla wagon. I can see his arguments. Ummm... I guess I'll go with

unvote
vote kyle

But if Hoopla turns out to be scum I will be annoyed that you have convinced me.

You can see his arguments? You guess? Do you think the Kyle argument is stronger than the hoopla argument?

[MonkeyMan576]

What happens if the person I investigate ends up dead? What should I do? Lie? Decline to report it? Resign to being lynched?

I'm not doubting Socrates is town, but I am doubting weather he should be mayor.

Unsupport: Socrates

[MonkeyMan576]

That's really nice of you Socrates...but you are not giving me much incentive to truthfully report an investigated NK if I am going to get lynched no matter what.

Of course, I already know who I plan on investigating, but I have no control over who scum NK's, the idea that scum only kill obvious NK targets is rather poor logic.

So basically, all scum needs to do is guess who I am going to investigate to ensure a power roll gets lynched. Great town play(sarcasm).

[MonkeyMan576]

What happens if the person I investigate ends up dead? What should I do? Lie? Decline to report it? Resign to being lynched?

I'm not doubting Socrates is town, but I am doubting weather he should be mayor.

Unsupport: Socrates

If a cop is investigating people that are likely NK targets they R DOIN IT RONG.

What qualities do you think a mayor should have, and what reasons did you have for unsupporting Socrates? Who is your second choice for mayor?

I think the mayor should , be likely or obvtown, be a good scumhunter, and show good logic and decisionmaking skills.

Saying that you are going to lynch a claimed cop no matter what on day 2 is pretty poor play. If that is the case then you should just lynch them on day one and not waste the time. I could forsee a scenario where a lot of scum hunting time is wasted on people who disagree with the mayor on this issue.

My second choice at this point would be either SC or MIC, both exhibit the characteristics I listed above to a fairly high degree.

[MonkeyMan576]

Charter reminds me of the 12th Juror on 12 Angry Men...

[MonkeyMan576]

Reck makes some good observations. My current likely scum team is Hoopla, and nhammen and Kyle

[MonkeyMan576]

Ok, this has been discussed, it's clear that no one is going to change their mind.

xRECKONERx, Socrates, nhammen, Hoopla, SerialClergyman, Moai Interceptor Cannons: are any of you going to vote Monkey today?

If not, then I'm dropping Monkey and turning my attention elsewhere.

Nope. Not voting Monkey.

Couldn't be more irrelevent. If there's a cop that the blocker is blocking - they both cancel each other out. If there's no cop, then the blocker is free to try to disrupt any other PRs.

Charter, I'm not voting Monkey, although I'm pretty sure Hoopla will as any alignment.

QFT

IF Hoopla flips scum, THEN you're next up for the lynch. That's how I interpreted it. There's no way Serial's setting up a quicklynch, because then Serial has to be scum, Hoopla has to be NOT scum, and the IF/THEN argument on you dissolves into pretty little butterflies. Or do you know that Hoopla will flip scum?

No idea if Hoopla flips scum. But you forgot the possibility where both Serial and Hoopla are scum. Then it makes sense. Of course, that doesn't make sense. Serial has been attacking Hoopla all day. So there is that point.

Reck makes some good observations. My current likely scum team is Hoopla, and nhammen and Kyle

So you think I've been bussing BOTH of my partners? Your logic is amazing!

Yeah, since bussing never happens...

My evaluation is on who is acting scummiest.

[MonkeyMan576]

Unvoting without any other follow up explaining your thoughts or voting someone else is a cardinal sin.

If xrecx has just avoided your wrath, where are you at now?

If it's a cardinal sin why aren't you voting reck?

[MonkeyMan576]

..

It's a cardinal sin to unvote ANYONE without then talking about your thoughts or voting someone else.

Kerrigan essentially just said 'Rec, I no longer think you're scum' then sat there blowing bubbles.

I meant Kerrigan. Why aren't you voting him?

[MonkeyMan576]

You need to be more specific or have less typos or possibly both.

I'm taking that as you asking ME why I'm not voting KERRIGAN.

This is because I am very happy with my vote on Hoopla. I'm pointing out to Kerrigan and the town in general that that was a scummy action and I want him to actually answer my questions, but I see no reason to switch.

But not even an FOS after saying an action is a "cardinal sin"? Seems fishy to me.

[MonkeyMan576]

For the record, I never FOS. I think the entire process is overly dramatic and silly. But good on you for thinking that me bothering to bring a scumtell on another player to the table makes me more likely to be scum (with him? without him?)

That wasn't my point. My point was that you were willing to say he was scummy but not willing to vote or explain how he's a less attractive option than Hoopla. Is Hoopla's sins more than "cardinal"?

[MonkeyMan576]

I'm not the one who said it was a "cardinal sin".

Saying that someone who is moderately scummy the whole day is worse than someone who is really scummy for one thing is a valid observation, but that's not what you originally said. The hypocricy is clearly on your part, not mine. And I never said Kerrigan was scum.

[MonkeyMan576]

I love it when players think they're above being questioned...

[MonkeyMan576]

@ SC: Chill, dude. I voted xReck to try and provoke a response to my question. When I got an answer I unvoted, and didn't feel the need to revote yet. If that so terribly concerns you, though, I'll have a vote out by the end of this post.

xReck did bring up some interesting points regarding Kyle99, but I don't feel that Kyle is the right lynch today. I have people who I think are scummier.

My top two suspects are MonkeyMan and Hoopla.

Hoopla: I went back through ISO, and I found a few things that stood out to me:

- Claimed in her 13th post that she didn't think MonkeyMan was a good lynch because he was more likely to claim cop as cop, versus claim cop as scum. However, she doesn't unvote him in that post.

- After being met with much disapproval, she abandons the lynch-the-mayor strategy, yet doesn't seem interested in trying to elect a town mayor.

- She votes Monkey out of "self-preservation." Since when are town players so worried about keeping themselves alive over doing actual scumhunting?

MonkeyMan: Well, I still think the misrepresentation back in [url=http://mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.ph ... 90#1996090]Post #184[/i] is scummy, and I don't like his cop claim. He also voted for Hoopla primarily out of self-preservation, over doing real scumhunting.

All in all, cop claim or no, I think Monkeyman needs to go (hey, that rhymed).

Vote: MonkeyMan576.

Time to claim.

Oh wait...you already did...

I've done plenty of scum hunting. I only voted out of self preservation when it was clear the choice was between me and Hoopla.

[MonkeyMan576]

I'm not happy with Socrates position on me, but I'm willing to support him. The town could have made a worse choice.

[MonkeyMan576]

If you must know, I had thought of the possibility of a kyle Hoopla pair, and wanted to see if you had any reason not to switch.

He isn't a bad lynch - I'd support it over my own.

Is there any lynch you'd support over your own? This is an incredibly scummy post. That being said, Kyle is in my top 3 scum prospects still. I would switch if that's what the majority decided.

[MonkeyMan576]

*you wouldn't support

[MonkeyMan576]

If you must know, I had thought of the possibility of a kyle Hoopla pair, and wanted to see if you had any reason not to switch.

He isn't a bad lynch - I'd support it over my own.

Is there any lynch you wouldn't support over your own? This is an incredibly scummy post. That being said, Kyle is in my top 3 scum prospects still. I would switch if that's what the majority decided.

No, there isn't. I am confirmed town to myself and do not know the alignment of anyone else in the game, so I should support anyone elses lynch over mine. This is essentially the same logic that Socrates got elected for.

Yes, but you are not giving good reasoning for anyone else to follow your lead so the post is redundant.

[MonkeyMan576]

Stop trying to link yourself with me.

LOL, Nice try. It's also obvious that's not what I'm doing. I have every right to criticize your play as anyone else.

[MonkeyMan576]

Have you ever fake-claimed as scum before, Monkey?

Sure...have you?

[MonkeyMan576]

Mafia 91 - Hell Aboard The Purple Flower
http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=10946

TTGL Mafia
http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... 54&start=0

Although I don't know why I'm giving this to you in good faith when you don't have any meta to go on.

[MonkeyMan576]

No, I forgot...I don't have a list of all the games I play in. Please explain how that is more closely related to my play here.

I didn't claim to deflate my wagon. And I don't think I claimed early either. And your analysis is entirely convinient to support your "any lynch is better than my lynch" stance, it doesn't make me any scummier than anyone else.

[MonkeyMan576]

Should we lynch Hoopla after that very blatant lie?

Please explain?

[MonkeyMan576]

You claimed light years early, didn't try very hard to defend yourself, and are scum.

Not true, not true and not true. I've defended myself very appropriately, it's just that most of the attacks against me have been entirely baseless.

[MonkeyMan576]

You claimed light years early, didn't try very hard to defend yourself, and are scum.

Not true, not true and not true. I've defended myself very appropriately, it's just that most of the attacks against me have been entirely baseless.

True, true and true. Your defenses have been inappropriate and the attacks have had an abundant supply of bases.

Wow, that was a convincing rebuttal.

[MonkeyMan576]

You claimed light years early, didn't try very hard to defend yourself, and are scum.

Not true, not true and not true. I've defended myself very appropriately, it's just that most of the attacks against me have been entirely baseless.

Claiming when you could not possibly have been lynched, is way too early. It doesn't matter if you think the attacks on you are baseless, clearly most of the town disagrees with you.

I already explained that I didn't understand that I couldn't have been lynched because of the special mayor rules. Besides that, I have been lynched on day 1 a lot(as town and as scum) and I'd rather be safe than sorry.

[MonkeyMan576]

You claimed light years early, didn't try very hard to defend yourself, and are scum.

Not true, not true and not true. I've defended myself very appropriately, it's just that most of the attacks against me have been entirely baseless.

True, true and true. Your defenses have been inappropriate and the attacks have had an abundant supply of bases.

Wow, that was a convincing rebuttal.

Funnily enough, it was equally as convincing as your initial quote!

But, funnily enough, I haven't lied about my meta.

[MonkeyMan576]

You claimed light years early, didn't try very hard to defend yourself, and are scum.

Not true, not true and not true. I've defended myself very appropriately, it's just that most of the attacks against me have been entirely baseless.

True, true and true. Your defenses have been inappropriate and the attacks have had an abundant supply of bases.

Wow, that was a convincing rebuttal.

Funnily enough, it was equally as convincing as your initial quote!

However, you have been, funnily enough. I think the fact that you have no explanation for your lie is proof enough that you are scum.

But, funnily enough, I haven't lied about my meta.

Although, funnily enough, I wasn't accusing you of lying about your meta.

[MonkeyMan576]

You claimed light years early, didn't try very hard to defend yourself, and are scum.

Not true, not true and not true. I've defended myself very appropriately, it's just that most of the attacks against me have been entirely baseless.

True, true and true. Your defenses have been inappropriate and the attacks have had an abundant supply of bases.

Wow, that was a convincing rebuttal.

Funnily enough, it was equally as convincing as your initial quote!

But, funnily enough, I haven't lied about my meta.

Although, funnily enough, I wasn't accusing you of lying about your meta.

However, you have been, funnily enough. I think the fact that you have no explanation for your lie is proof enough that you are scum.

*double post*

[MonkeyMan576]

Umm, I was serious. You just fakeclaimed JOAT in that game.

Did she get away with it?

[MonkeyMan576]

I can't believe you guys are letting Hoopla live after she lied about her meta and I was honest about mine. That should tell you something.

[MonkeyMan576]

Lying isn't indicative of alignment? Why would a townie feel the need to hide information and blatantly lie?

[MonkeyMan576]

Lying isn't indicative of alignment? Why would a townie feel the need to hide information and blatantly lie?

Why would scum?

Because the meta might be indicative of their scumminess, obviously. If it was indicative of their towniness, they wouldn't lie.

[MonkeyMan576]

The question is asked like that because in this case there's no benefit to scum. Hoopla has JUST PLAYED a game with about 5 of us where she obviously fakeclaimed as scum. She had no reason to expect to get away with that joke (I am 90% sure it's a joke, not a lie). So there's no scum reason or town reason to bring down the wrath of the town upon her, thus you can't determine alignment from it.

Essentially, you're saying that Hoopla is scum because she's stupid enough to think that 5 people in this game that saw her fakeclaim last game wouldn't remember, let alone that anyone would meta her years of games on this site, and would then think more highly of her. I can assure you that's exactly not what Hoopla was thinking.

That comment is a red herring, nothing more.

I'm feeling the need for a lynch. Anyone else prepared to compromise?

i don't know what Hoopla was thinking, all I know is that lying is usually bad. Are you saying that people with experience aren't subject to meta?

[MonkeyMan576]

I also will vote for either Hoopla or Kyle, whichever the Mayor wishes.

[MonkeyMan576]

Although I think Hoopla is getting away with a major infraction, as promised, I will

Unvote:
Vote: Kyle99

[MonkeyMan576]

Ah, ok. Well, have fun then.

[MonkeyMan576]

I'm town, duh! Way to fool them, Hoopla.