Mini 911 - Mike's Pizzeria Mafia (Game Over)

[Dragonfly13]

Votecount #3

Lastsurvivor (3) - Parama, Cuetlachtli, DeathRowKitty
Seven (2) - chamber, HomerSimpson
Idiotking (1) - Lastsurvivor

DeathRowKitty

HomerSimpson

werdna0418 (1) - Thor665
Thor665 (1) - Idiotking
DeathRowKitty (1) - SeerPenguin

Parama

SeerPenguin (0) -

DeathRowKitty

SeerPenguin

Cuetlachtli (0) -

SeerPenguin

Parama (0) -

Lastsurvivor

Not Voting (3) - Evilgorrilaz, Seven, werdna0418


With 12 alive, it takes 7 to lynch.
Deadline: 11:00PM U.S. Central Time, Wednesday, January 27, 2010

Does anyone want me to delete double posts, or do anything differently? This is my first modded game, so if there's anything I can do to help the game run more smoothly, let me know. (Perhaps fewer vote counts? ) By PM would probably be best so that this won't distract from the game as much.... I do appreciate your input though!

[SeerPenguin]

Does anyone want me to delete double posts, or do anything differently? This is my first modded game, so if there's anything I can do to help the game run more smoothly, let me know. (Perhaps fewer vote counts? )

You are doing fine, just leave the thread as it is.

Votecounts on top of every page are the standard, as well, so you are doing fine there.

Also, I like how you cross out the unvotes on the vote counts (Helpful, but sure would be a pain, heh.), but try and remove old crossed out names every votecount, just to keep it tidier.

[SeerPenguin]

Does anyone want me to delete double posts, or do anything differently? This is my first modded game, so if there's anything I can do to help the game run more smoothly, let me know. (Perhaps fewer vote counts? )

You are doing fine, just leave the thread as it is.

Votecounts on top of every page are the standard, as well, so you are doing fine there.

Also, I like how you cross out the unvotes on the vote counts (Helpful, but sure would be a pain, heh.), but try and remove old crossed out names every votecount, just to keep it tidier.

[HomerSimpson]

@Seven

Maybe that's just your play style, but not being willing to commit to a vote, even in RVS where a lynch isn't going to happen, strikes me as kind of scummy. The way you describe FoSing people but not voting for them sounds like trying to scumhunt without the consequences.

In every game I've played RVS has fairly quickly given us something more substantial to talk about. This time it is your non-commitedness (is that a word lol) to voting.

What say you to this?

In the mean time, I'll

Unvote; Vote: Seven

because Idiotking was random and you've aroused my suspicion.

Chamber, I don't understand.. why did you quote my post and add nothing?

[DeathRowKitty]

I did read that, it was what prompted to me to write the lower section of my post and vote for you, which is also why I added the note in the parentheses. The reason I believe you are serious is what you quoted just now.

Wow, are you serious? Notice how I used the words "theoretically" and "actuality." Which would you say refers to the truth (a.k.a. what

actually

happened)?

Both. I feel that it is bad logic, but it COULD also be scum trying to build a case off of bad logic, and I will say it again, CONFIRMATION ORDER/TIME ANALYSIS IS NOT AN EFFECTIVE MEANS OF SCUMHUNTING. There is simply too much WIFOM and hardly ever leads to scum actually being caught.

Now, allow ME to inform YOU that MISINTERPRETING SOMETHING in such a way that it's SCUMMY is NOT AN EFFECTIVE MEANS OF SCUMHUNTING. There is simply too much FAIL and hardly ever leads to scum actually being caught.

The way you're justifying it makes me think your "Random Vote" wasn't really a random vote at all. If you have a real reason for your random vote then it loses its randomness.

Weird. I must have missed the part where I said I had a real reason. Mind pointing it out for me? Also, if I'm scummy for this, why not a vote? From your logic, it looks a lot better than your current vote.

[HomerSimpson]

[note- i'm posting this as a read the posts in chronological order on the message preview page, so things may change from beginning to end..]

@Parama:

1. What's your personal opinion of RVS? Love it or hate it? And why? (I realize a few people have already given their opinion but for the sake of this questionnaire if you wouldn't mind restating it please.)
2. If you had to call someone out as scum right this instant, who would you say is most likely to be scum? I understand that there's very little to go on and assume this will be mostly gut reads.

1. I would say I neither love nor hate RVS. I think it's necessary and beneficial.. furthermore I don't have a clue how else a game would start; every game I've played has basically started this way. It always seems to get discussion going somehow, and then you have actual data in which to look for scumtells.

The 2nd 'round' of voting, what I would call semi-random I think is even more valuable. You pick some little thing that *might* be scummy out of the conversations that come from RVS and watch the reactions.

2. I need to re-read this thread to have a better answer. I'll be gone all day tomorrow, so don't expect me to be active again until sometime Sunday.

...and Homer seems a little jumpy to me.

Ok, I know you say it's a gut feeling.. but how am I 'jumpy'? I'm not sure what you mean exactly.

1. Votes are something that should only be used when one is reasonably sure that the vote will be on scum.

I think that's absolute rubbish. RVS gets discussion going, which is pro-town. Votes are your primary tool in this game, and should be used strategically IMO. See what I say below to Seven for why I think this can be scummy.

2. My bet would be HomerSimpson. I really hate it when people answer questions that they weren't asked. If Person A asks Person B to answer a question, Person B should be the one to answer, not Person C. It stinks of buddying to me.

Heh.. I answer for other people IRL sometimes too if I know/think I know the answer. Some people find it bothersome. Sorry, just how I am. (I do try not to do it in Mafia though)

Vote Idiotking

:goodposting:

?? I don't follow you at all. Are you saying you agree with my random vote?

@DRK:

Withholding information is scummy.

In general, yes. Not explaining a joke that is obvious to everyone in North America or at least the USA (no idea where you live) is to be expected.. and explaining a joke immediately after telling it doesn't make for good humour. Or are you being sarcastic/funny?


@Seer: I don't understand how the 'who do you think is scum' is WIFOMy, please explain. To me it's just discussion.. possibly scummy (as you pointed out starting discussion is not strictly pro-town) in that the mafia would like to know what the town is thinking to better manipulate them, but could just as likely be harmless. WIFOMy, though, I do not get.

@Seven: What I'm claiming is scummy (in general) is being non-committal. Scum are generally afraid to vote because they know it will be a mislynch, and don't want to be connected to it later in the game if they can avoid it. And I think it can be assumed that in general they dont wan't their scumbuddies lynched, so they are reluctant to vote for them either. I think this explains what I meant by consequences as well.

As far as the accusation, there wasn't one per se, more of an observation at this point.

[Idiotking]

Homer, I don't think that votes are the main tool at a townie's disposal. I think logic is. You don't have to be voting for someone to pressure them, but you can make a reasoned case against someone and pressure them with it, for example. One doesn't have to be non-committal to be careful with one's vote.

[HomerSimpson]

Homer, I don't think that votes are the main tool at a townie's disposal. I think logic is. You don't have to be voting for someone to pressure them, but you can make a reasoned case against someone and pressure them with it, for example. One doesn't have to be non-committal to be careful with one's vote.

Touche.

I do believe there is some truth to my argument in general, and I would have liked to hear a bit more from Seven.. but I was putting pressure on him mainly just to see his reaction (and to a lesser extent yours), but I got pretty good vibes on his last response and my gut on him right now is town.

[SeerPenguin]

Vote: SeerPenguin

You and Cuetlachtli confirmed too close together (and were

10th

9th and

11th

10th). You must be scum. Discuss.

Also, you get my vote for

not explaining your joke

explaining your joke only after I pointed out you hadn't explained it.

This certainly looks like trying to put reason behind a vote. Both reasons have also been shown to be complete bullshit with a lack of logic, yet you continue to argue that it is somehow a good reason.

@ DeathRowKitty: What makes simul-confirms scummy?

Theoretically, they were obv-scum talking during the confirmation stage who decided they'd talked enough and were ready to confirm. In actuality, it was just a good reason for a random vote.

Here you say explicitly say that you are serious in thinking we are scum talking pre-game (Using obv-scum and theoretically when talking about the same thing, is also contradictory to each other's meanings, so I'm taking it the obv-scum meaning.), and continue to say that it was good reasoning for a random vote. The fact is, RANDOM VOTES DO NOT HAVE REASONING. Therefore, a vote with reasoning is NOT a random vote (And a

random

vote WITH REASONING that is bullshit results in a scum-vote backed by bullshit.). Please look up the definition to the word RANDOM or go die in a cave.

[Lastsurvivor]

DRK, Seer, why are you two bickering about something so pointless? Unless you two are playing some elaborate joke, getting so angry about this looks strange.

[Parama]

DRK, Seer, why are you two bickering about something so pointless? Unless you two are playing some elaborate joke, getting so angry about this looks strange.

The way I'm seeing things, DRK is stretching his RVS reasonings and SeerPenguin is overreacting to his vote. It's a silly argument but I'd say we're out of RVS at this point thanks to it. I kinda see where SeerPenguin is coming from, though... DRK's vote is a contradiction in itself, really.

The way you're justifying it makes me think your "Random Vote" wasn't really a random vote at all. If you have a real reason for your random vote then it loses its randomness.

Weird. I must have missed the part where I said I had a real reason. Mind pointing it out for me? Also, if I'm scummy for this, why not a vote? From your logic, it looks a lot better than your current vote.

Like I said in my post,

I don't really think any of this is enough to warrant a vote yet but at the very least IGMEOY DeathRowKitty.

Basically, it's a slightly scummy move but it's really too early in the game to tell us much. I'm going to be watching your responses intently for any future scummy actions that may come up, however. Hence the IGMEOY.

[SeerPenguin]

If I were concerned about his vote, why would I continue to put myself out there over this after he changed votes?

Also, forgot about Homer's question earlier...

Homer, basically coming out at the beginning of the game with a question like that can lead into an argument over who thinks who is scummy for what bs reasons early, and can be used by scum, or can be a serious attempt to jump start conversation. However, I would rather have game-start questions be more based on theory, etc.

[Thor665]

The way I'm seeing things, DRK is stretching his RVS reasonings and SeerPenguin is overreacting to his vote. It's a silly argument but I'd say we're out of RVS at this point thanks to it. I kinda see where SeerPenguin is coming from, though... DRK's vote is a contradiction in itself, really.

I agree with you on the first half - DRK is stretching out with an RVS and SeerPenguin is overreacting to it.

However my read fails to see where DRK's vote is contradictory. The condemned cat has, to my eyes, pretty clearly advanced a joke concept and gotten a very large reaction for it. However, I don't think saying something was a good reason for a random vote is inherently contradictory. If someone had a username of Loki I would random vote them in a game because Thor voting for Loki is a good reason to random vote. Suggesting that because I target someone for an RVS due to something funny I see in their avatar or sig to make a joke over does not remove the inherent randomness of where I might see a joke and be able to apply it.

[DeathRowKitty]

This certainly looks like trying to put reason behind a vote. Both reasons have also been shown to be complete bullshit with a lack of logic, yet you continue to argue that it is somehow a good reason.

Weird. I don't recall arguing that it was a good reason. Would you mind pointing that out for me?

Also, UnVote ; Vote: Cuetlachtli I never want to have to type that again, and it's a better RVS vote than the truly random self-vote.

I should be voting you for this. You gave a reason, so it clearly wasn't a random vote and the reasons are bullshit and yet you're attacking me for having bullshit reasons. Amidoingitrite?

?? I don't follow you at all. Are you saying you agree with my random vote?

You voted for IK. What's not to agree with?

Here you say explicitly say that you are serious in thinking we are scum talking pre-game (Using obv-scum and theoretically when talking about the same thing, is also contradictory to each other's meanings, so I'm taking it the obv-scum meaning.), and continue to say that it was good reasoning for a random vote.

Wow, are you serious? Notice how I used the words "theoretically" and "actuality." Which would you say refers to the truth (a.k.a. what actually happened)?

It might be a good idea to consult a dictionary before posting in the presence of big words like "theoretically."

Please look up the definition to the word RANDOM or go die in a cave.

Dude, calm down. You're the one who doesn't know what "random" voting stage means.

Anyway,

unvote, vote SeerPenguin

. You're being completely ridiculous about this.

[Dragonfly13]

Evilgorrilaz and werdna0418 have been prodded.

[Lastsurvivor]

I personally wouldn't be surprised if the two of you were just trying to bus/distance yourselves. Seer, you're saying that you aren't concerned about his vote, or am I just misinterpreting things?

[DeathRowKitty]

[not OMGUS]I have an odd feeling my first real vote was correct[/not OMGUS]

[Seven]

HomerSimpson:

@Seven: What I'm claiming is scummy (in general) is being non-committal. Scum are generally afraid to vote because they know it will be a mislynch, and don't want to be connected to it later in the game if they can avoid it. And I think it can be assumed that in general they dont wan't their scumbuddies lynched, so they are reluctant to vote for them either. I think this explains what I meant by consequences as well.

Gotcha.

When you put it that way you're right it could be a tell, but it could also just be a style of play. I'm still new to mafia and so far this is how I feel comfortable playing. I understand that for a town player his second strongest weapon is his vote, and I want mine to carry weight. I think if I were vote-hopping from one person to the next at whim, it wouldn't be helpful at all. If I actually vote for someone, I want it to be for someone I'm convinced is scum at that point, or at the very least the most anti-town player IMO if that's the best I've got by the end of the day.

Lastsurvivor:

DRK, Seer, why are you two bickering about something so pointless? Unless you two are playing some elaborate joke, getting so angry about this looks strange.

Tend to agree with this... the point seems so minor, I don't see why we're wasting our time on this issue. I partially agree with DRK on the confirm order theory (joke or not), I FoSed chamber because he confirmed last... but it's both WIFOM and just generally not a strong enough tell to actually base a non-RVS vote on once we have actual full-length posts to go on. I think the whole thing about whether or not it was a serious vote "at some point in time" doesn't matter... the thing that's making either of you seem scummy at this point in the game is not the arguments you bring forth but rather the triviality of the issues. Don't know if you're both just oversensitive or trying to distract. Hard to say at this point, but if you're both actually town I think you would let this go and try to find better reasons to call each other scum (if that is the real point of this tiff).

@Chamber:

I'd like to hear more from you.

[Cuetlachtli]

I'm getting the feeling that Idiotking doesn't like the RVS.

I don't like RVS either so...

vote: Lastsurvivor

Saying that you don't like the RVS, then voting someone without justification is just as bad as any RVS vote.

So what is your justification?

Just because I don't like RVS doesn't mean I shouldn't be involved in it. The way I see it, RVS is like washing dishes. No one likes doing it, but it is extremely necessary.

I do think RVS is important. Scum may slip during RVS and though we may not notice it right now, we may notice it in the endgame when the field is narrowed. In my last game, I was scum and I pretty much deceived the town the whole game. But on the last day, when it was 3 town and me LYLO, they reviewed the whole game and noticed my Day 1 scum slips. So, based on that single example, I do think RVS is important even though I dislike it.

unvote

btw...I do have answers to Parama's questions, though it will have to wait until tomorrow because I am sleepy.

also...I hope evil gets replaced because he was hella lurky in my last game to the detriment to the town. Lurking isn't necessarily scummy, but it is absolutely anti-town.

[Dragonfly13]

EG hasn't picked up his prod and will be replaced. Werdna picked up his prod but failed to post within 24 hours, so he will be replaced as well. Hopefully it won't take too long.

[Cuetlachtli]

1. What's your personal opinion of RVS? Love it or hate it? And why? (I realize a few people have already given their opinion but for the sake of this questionnaire if you wouldn't mind restating it please.)
2. If you had to call someone out as scum right this instant, who would you say is most likely to be scum? I understand that there's very little to go on and assume this will be mostly gut reads.

@ Cuetlachtli: What possible links between players have you seen thus far?

1. I dislike RVS because it is boring and it seems to take a long time. I feel like the game doesn't really start until RVS is over. On the flip side, the scum might slip during RVS, though players might not notice it until the end game when the field is narrowed and relationships start becoming apparent.

2. In my one and only game on this site, I was scum. On D1, my scum buddy was being pressured and I tried to divert attention away from him by asking his attacker why he was ignoring another player who was displaying relatively the same behavior as my scum buddy. After my scum buddy was lynched, the town realized my scum slip and I was, in turn, lynched.

I believe there may be some diverting going on in this game. As you know, DRK voted SP and FoSed me for confirming at the same time. Really, this shouldn't be a big deal. Its RVS, therefore votes or FoS shouldn't be taken seriously. But it seems like one player did take DRK's vote seriously. After DRK voted for SP, Seven emulated DRK's reasoning for voting SP by voting Chamber because he was the "last to confirm." This maybe an early Scum attempting to buddy Town tactic. Right after Seven voted Chamber, he asked DRK a direct question:

"DRK: Why vote SeerPenguin and not Cuetlachtli? Do you have something against penguins?"

Seems like Seven is trying to free SP, a potential scum buddy, of some early pressure. Its strange to me that Seven would take issue to DRK voting SP when he himself voted Chamber for very similar reasons.

That said...

vote: Seven

[Dragonfly13]

Flareonage replaces werdna0418!

[Parama]

OH GOD NO NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

unvote, Vote: Flareonage

Policy lynch all the way.

[SeerPenguin]

Oh boy, scum-group speculation this early?

Cuet, do you understand why saying Seven is scum because he was defending hypo-scum me doesn't make any sense, considering I have not yet been revealed (As scum or otherwise), and that argument would not work unless I was revealed as scum. Therefore, your vote on Seven is based on me being scum, so why say you that I am scum?

[Thor665]

@Parama Dare I ask what Flareonage did in other games to make him worth the vitrol?

The conversation seems to be a little slow at the moment in my opinion - and to roughly quote the IC from my first newbie game "what we need is a good bandwagon going." Looking at the two most active options, Lastsurvivor and Seven. Of the two I find Seven more suspicious due to some of his oddities regarding RVS opinion.

Unvote: werdna
Vote: Seven