Open 192: SCIENCE Mafia, Finished

[SaintKerrigan]

Oops, my bad. Considering you still have your vote on me, I thought it implied you thought it was scummy.

However, if your vote is merely an extreme version of what you claim I did, why is your vote still on me? Because from what I understand, votes with the intent to generate discussion are usually removed once their purpose is achieved.

Vote count

mykonian (2): SaintKerrigan, StrangerCoug
SaintKerrigan (2): malpascp, mykonian
Pomegranate (1): Cat


Not voting (1): MrWhereItsAt

[malpascp]

In a game where the mafia have day-talk, they usually have real time strategies that would be risky in a normal game, but becomes easy to do when we can tell our partner what to say. The relation between SK and mykonian seems like one of those. They really do something, but not too much, lightly attack each other when necessary. I would bet that they have day-talk.

[SaintKerrigan]

In a game where the mafia have day-talk, they usually have real time strategies that would be risky in a normal game, but becomes easy to do when we can tell our partner what to say. The relation between SK and mykonian seems like one of those. They really do something, but not too much, lightly attack each other when necessary. I would bet that they have day-talk.

So then why would my partner and I employ a strategy that puts me at L-1? Something really doesn't feel right concerning this post...

[Cat]

How is it already an endgame situation?

Unvote: Cat. Vote: MrWhereItsAt.

I fail to see how this was worth a vote. However, I also think the followed votes by mykonian and StrangerCoug were unnecessary as well.
I think everyone is just a tad bit jumpy.

And then mykonian and StrangerCoug, who had just agreed on Saint Kerrigan, jump on each other for doing the same thing. DOES NOT MAKE SENSE!

mykonian is votehopping like crazy, and I don't like it.

good, pome, how often were those votes on popular wagons? once.

This is Page 3 of a 7p game. Popular wagons shouldn't be occuring.

Pome's voting density argument

Pomegranate wasn't arguing the ratio of votes to posts. Your three votes are sandwiched in between Pomegranate's first two. That means they happened in a much smaller timespan than Pomegranate's did. That is votehopping.

Vote: Mykonian

[animorpherv1]

wait. I never called you scummy for taking that opportunity to vote Mr, right? I just said that it was not more then that, grasping the opportunity, and that my vote on you was a more extreme version of that. Mr's statement was a good opportunity to vote since he said something that was doubtful.

mod, can we have prods on Cat and Malpa?

72 hours has passe, but I was at school hen it did. Updating vote count then prodding. Now that I've read through, I don't need to.

Vote count

mykonian (3): SaintKerrigan, StrangerCoug,malpascp
SaintKerrigan (1): mykonian
Pomegranate (1): Cat


Not voting (1): MrWhereItsAt

With 7 alive it's 4 to lynch! Mykonian is one vote away from toxic fumes.

[mykonian]

hello cat, same question for you, why is votehopping scummy?

Further, that 3 of my 4 votes are withing pomes 2 votes is also a symptome of me just posting more, and posting more cases. Which is incredibly scummy, isn't it?

On the other hand, I can see why you would like to attack some symptoms of someone being actively busy attacking people, making cases, and putting pressure on them. Because nothing of them is something you do.


and to SK, the vote that is now in place is there because I think you are scum. Mostly because of your hesitance to answer questions (you answer first), your not expecting anything out of your question (you can always try to think what others would say, but you avoided the issue completely). Both seemed to me like you were avoiding/hiding something.

[mykonian]

In a game where the mafia have day-talk, they usually have real time strategies that would be risky in a normal game, but becomes easy to do when we can tell our partner what to say. The relation between SK and mykonian seems like one of those. They really do something, but not too much, lightly attack each other when necessary. I would bet that they have day-talk.

hello

...

bye.

BTW, maybe we are already past this, but how many people are up for a policy lynch? I have no idea if Malpa is scum, but even if he isn't, this way he is plain antitown.

Lets put my vote with my words:

unvote vote malpa

[MrWhereItsAt]

Say what? A policy lynch here? If malpa is town we would have to pick perfectly tomorrow.

Is malpa a really bad player or something?

BTW that vote on malpa looks like OMGUS. First he calls a SK\myko scum pair, then you attack him for it.

[mykonian]

yep. Because it is not based on anything. It is pure omgus. His theory sucks, in my opinion. And since this is all we got after a joke vote, while there is enough to talk about, I have absolutely no trouble to say that Malpa is playing antitown.

To say that there is a scumpair is usually problematic, and it works better, esspecially early in the game, to look at individual scummines. If someone, on page four says: "they could very well be scum that day talk, because it was risky to bring StK to L-1" then there is no way he could actually make that likely, since it could just be (and was) a towny doing it on someone else, knowing that the "risk" of a quicklynch was neglectible.

Plain and simple, all malpa did, was bringing a conspiracy theory into the game. It is based on nothing, it could more easily be explained by normal gameplay, but he has to take the complicated and less likely explanation that it were two scum interacting.

Now I ask you, why would town choose to use (and state) the explanation that is less likely to be the truth? I think town doesn't, or town shouldn't, and my vote reflects that.

[mykonian]

If malpa is town

and if he is scum, we still have a mislynch and only 1 scum to go.
if he is town, and we let him live, he will just attack random people because he thinks they daytalked, and then we lose because scum will cleverly lynch the townies using his vote.

Great, isn't it?

[Cat]

mykonian: posting more doesn't mean you are making cases. Also, votehopping is scummy because it means you are fickle with your vote and you will put it wherever, with little or no reasoning.

[Pomegranate]

Post forthcoming.

[mykonian]

mykonian: posting more doesn't mean you are making cases. Also, votehopping is scummy because it means you are fickle with your vote and you will put it wherever, with little or no reasoning.

you are completely right if you say it doesn't. However, my vote on SC, and on StK were followed or started by a case. The last one on Malpa again has been logically explained why it is good to vote/lynch the guy.

To say that I put it here and there without good reasoning is something that happened only on StK, the first time, when I voted him for picking on something insignificant from Mr. But saying that all my votes have been with little or no reasoning is a simple lie.

Sure, everybody agrees that moving your vote without any reasoning is scummy and antitown. SC stated that, just as pom, and you here. But that was not what I have been doing. I have accompanied all the recent votes (3, on StK, SC, and Malpa) with why I did it, from what points this was, and how this makes that person voteworthy.

[StrangerCoug]

In a game where the mafia have day-talk, they usually have real time strategies that would be risky in a normal game, but becomes easy to do when we can tell our partner what to say. The relation between SK and mykonian seems like one of those. They really do something, but not too much, lightly attack each other when necessary. I would bet that they have day-talk.

hello

...

bye.

BTW, maybe we are already past this, but how many people are up for a policy lynch? I have no idea if Malpa is scum, but even if he isn't, this way he is plain antitown.

Lets put my vote with my words:

unvote vote malpa

malpascp is a village idiot. End of discussion.

[Pomegranate]

everything in blue is defensive. If you don't think I am scum, feel free to skip or scan them.

good, pome, how often were those votes on popular wagons? once.

So, sure, following wagons is scummy, but that was not what I did, right?

I still find the votehopping scummy, as often scum will try to start a bandwagon (in a small game like this) that might take off. If it doesn't look like it will work, then they just vote for someone else. Plain and simple, votehopping

is

scummy, especially when it's so few to lynch.

And on that question, I'm sorry, but I meant it as "what are your own scumtells when playing scum?"

I'm not sure, I'm bad at evaluating my own meta in general. All I can offer is my wiki page, which has links to games I've played. I know it's a pain, but if you would like to and have the tme, then you can meta me yourself.

StK's answer that he didn't know what to expect from his question what everybody thought about my L-1 vote?
SC's unvote without anything else
Mr's post which only answered a question, after which he went out again.
Pome's voting density argument

Well, questions, unless rhetorical, usually are there to be answered, and can have many possible answers. The fact that StK wasn't expecting a specific answer wasn't scummy.

But the fact that my argument was based on the fact that your votes lastd for such a small amount of time each, showing that you were voting for someone you didn't find that scummy (or else you wouldn't have switched). So no, it wasn't voting density.

I have accompanied all the recent votes (3, on StK, SC, and Malpa) with why I did it, from what points this was, and how this makes that person voteworthy.

But obviously you weren't that convinced of each one's scumminess, or you wouldn't have voted for someone else so quickly. I think you're at L-1 again without my vote, so I won't vote you now.

[mykonian]

you pointed it out very well pom. Townies play inperfect, and I also attack townies and vote them. I move on quickly, because on page 4

I don't yet know

. I am convinced the cases I made are sound, and that they conclude the other player must be scum, but logic is so hard to apply to people.

In short, the fact that I vote a lot shows I know a little.

You seem to be scared I am trying to make bandwagons. For that to happen, wouldn't I have to concentrate on one player? Wouldn't it be a better idea not to attack practically the whole town? You seem to be scared I am organizing mislynches.

If multiple cases and votes is what makes you scared, is calming down and wait a moment the thing I should do?

@SC, Start of discussion, I thought. There is little use in policy lynching good players :/

[malpascp]

The mafia having day-talk is a conspiracy theory? I would hammer you if I could

[SaintKerrigan]

@ Malpascp: WTF are you talking about? Again, I ask you: why would my "partner" and I employ a strategy that gets one of us put at L-1?

I call scum on Cat and Pomegranate. Cat's been lurking hard, and both Cat and Pomegranate are coming up with similar arguments (mainly the vote-hopping argument).

Vote: Cat.

Mod: I'm no longer voting for Mykonian.

[animorpherv1]

Vote count

mykonian (2): StrangerCoug,malpascp
Pomegranate (1): Cat
Cat (1): SaintKerrigan
malpascp (1): mykoanian


Not voting (1): MrWhereItsAt

With 7 alive it's 4 to lynch!

[Cat]

I fail to see how similar arguments makes us scum, Saint Kerrigan. Anyway, SC and myko both voted MWIA for the same reason (and it was actually a bad reason, unlike our arguments).

Plus, I would've liked to be more active but I celebrated New Years. Sorry.

mykonian: Apparently you want to policylynch malpascp. But I'm against policy lyches because if you continue to policy lynch them again and again you never give them a chance to fix what their doing. If they play scummily, then we can lynch them.

[mykonian]

cat, see malpa's posts please. He is antitown. But however you see it, town would not come up with such arguments at this time in the game.

StK. From experience with those two players, I am afraid that is a thing they both have to work on (as in, it is a known thing for them).

Regardless from that, SC's reluctance to talk about is scummy. VI's don't get a free pass, though scum like to have them in the game. SC's "end of discussion" is a way of defending Malpa. (doesn't matter if malpa is scum or not).

We do still miss Mr :/

[mykonian]

Cat, your argument was that I votehopped and that that was scummy.

Your reasoning why it was scummy was that it was scummy to move your vote around with little reason.

Since I reasoned my votes pretty well, if I may say so, this argument doesn't come close to "good"

[StrangerCoug]

Regardless from that, SC's reluctance to talk about is scummy. VI's don't get a free pass, though scum like to have them in the game. SC's "end of discussion" is a way of defending Malpa. (doesn't matter if malpa is scum or not).

Says the person flailing like mad. I don't care if malpascp bumbles through this game like a three-year-old that does not understand the consequences of his actions; we are not lynching him as I do not see a legitimate case on him.

[Pomegranate]

You seem to be scared I am trying to make bandwagons. For that to happen, wouldn't I have to concentrate on one player? Wouldn't it be a better idea not to attack practically the whole town? You seem to be scared I am organizing mislynches.

If multiple cases and votes is what makes you scared, is calming down and wait a moment the thing I should do?

If you see a BW doesn't fly, you unvote.

I think slowing down might help. You say that you voted with reason, but obviously not with enough to be convinced of it yourself for more than a few posts.

[animorpherv1]

Found a rule I liked via zoraster's game. Should be easy enough to follow.