Mini 912 - Little Golden Mafia (OVER)

[Phlight]

/confirm

[Phlight]

Alright, game's started.

Vote: Panzerjager

for being an IC in my first newbie game like two years ago.

[Phlight]

Vote: chamber.

I'm expecting it to be a royal pain to try to figure out Mr. "Cases are scummy"'s reasons for voting anyone.

Hey, Phlight, could y'all sign your posts so that the rest of us can tell who's saying what?

I could, but why would I? We share the same role. We're likely to share the same opinions (if there's a serious divergence of opinion, I may say something like "one of us thinks X and the other thinks Y") since we can discuss the game privately as much as we want. I don't think there's any need to sign posts, and I like confusing people.

That said, we have distinctly different voices a lot of the time, so you'll probably be able to tell us apart somewhat.

[Phlight]

Vote: chamber.

I'm expecting it to be a royal pain to try to figure out Mr. "Cases are scummy"'s reasons for voting anyone.

Hey, Phlight, could y'all sign your posts so that the rest of us can tell who's saying what?

I could, but why would I? We share the same role. We're likely to share the same opinions (if there's a serious divergence of opinion, I may say something like "one of us thinks X and the other thinks Y") since we can discuss the game privately as much as we want. I don't think there's any need to sign posts, and I like confusing people.

That said, we have distinctly different voices a lot of the time, so you'll probably be able to tell us apart somewhat.

its funner this way. But I see it as a scumtell.

Why would you want to confuse people...UNLESS YOU WERE SCUM???

Found you!

Please explain why confusion as to which of Phate/Light-kun is posting each given post is something scum would want to perpetrate. We're the same player, for the purposes of this game. It would be like signing your posts with "Sincerely, The Portion Of DedicatedScribe That Is Mildly Pissed-Off Because Of Non-Game-Related Circumstances". I don't even think you can make an argument that it's anti-town, much less scummy.

Unvote; Vote: DedicatedScribe

for 1) making a bullshit accusation, and more importantly, 2) doing it a very noncommittal way in order to leave doubt over whether he's serious. Look at his phrasing. "But I see it as a scumtell." is something he can use later as reasoning for a vote if his attack gains support. "its funner this way." and "...UNLESS YOU WERE SCUM???" are elements that imply that he's not being serious and thus can be ignored.

If others agree with the attack, he doesn't look like he's wagoning. If they don't, he can drop the issue and pretend he was joking.

[Phlight]

First off, you said you liked confusing people. Is this protown?

It's rude to ignore others' questions.

Please explain why confusion as to which of Phate/Light-kun is posting each given post is something scum would want to perpetrate.

[Phlight]

I didn't ignore your question; I simply wasn't going to answer until you answered mine.

Excuses? I'm still accountable for all of my actions, just like you are. If you make a post when you're angry, drunk, or indecisive, you still have to deal with it later, even if in retrospect you disagree with it.

If my other half makes a post with which I disagree, I still have to deal with it. If my play is scummy, my other half still has to deal with it. If anything, we have to be more accountable, because we should be on roughly twice as much as the other players.

[Phlight]

Vote: DedicatedScribe

I can sig my posts. I'm choosing not to sig my posts. That's part of the fun of being a hydra. There's no reason to sig my posts.

However, I will make a deal with you. I will agree to always sign my name at the end of each post if every other player in the game also agrees to sign their name at the end of each post.

[Phlight]

if that's how it's gonna be ^^

But it doesnt seem if there's been enough to end the RVS.

The reason you voted for me was not suitable. I already posted why.

You mean a mild argument where very few people isn't enough to end the random voting stage? Taking sides would certainly be a nice means to quickly leave this part of the game behind. Or are you of the notion that arbitrary votes would be a better continuation of the game? I don't understand why you appear to be opposed to leaving the RVS.

[Phlight]

@DedicatedScribe and Phlight, could you please explain to me what you're talking about? I gather it has something to do with Phlight's other accounts being different playstyles. Is there anything else to it or just some history between you two (and perhaps other players)?

Does everyone else follow what they are talking about?

In case your peanut brain couldn't read my sig, I am a hydra account of two players, Phate and Light-kun. Scribe wants me to sig who is making each specific post which, while doable, doesn't seem to actually present any benefit the game. I then said that the argument is similar to being angry-scribe, drunk-scribe, etc. Even IF one is angry or drunk, the post is still there, and the consequences must be handled (or be lynched for the error). In a similar manner, if Light-kun or Phate make a post that the other doesn't like, I must still handle it because it reflect us as a hydra account.

My last post, however, is in response to the fact that Scribe doesn't believe enough has happened between two players to end the RVS, which forces the question: why prolong the RVS or encourage people to not take sides in our argument and thus force town out of the RVS? While not necessarily scummy, it could be detrimental toward town and definitely unhelpful. As a result, I am further supporting my current vote on Scribe.

[Phlight]

I think the whole plight hydra situation depends on the nature of the way they post, if they just log on individually and post without consulting each other then with two quite possibly different opinions there's a good chance Plight's posts are going to be riddled with inconsistencies, which means we're not going to be sure if it's because plight is scum or just the nature of the hydra.

If however they consult with each other before each post, and point out in the thread when they disagree on something then I think it would be fine. It's only the second page so it's kind of hard to say either way.

@Plight: with regards to what I've said could you clear up the way you two will be posting?

So whatever messups they make, unless they say beforehand its bcuz they're hydras, we can take it as a scumtell.

Exactly. As I explained before now, if one of us screws up, I have to accept it as a post with which I disagree, but I cannot simply write it off as irrelevant. For example, if my role is scum and one of us decided to say "I'm scum" (probably through obvious scum tells), then how would it be sensible to not lynch me if I say "Oh, that was just Light-kun. Phate here to say he's just an idiot and to ignore it?" If I were Dram or someone else, I would almost definitely lynch the hydra anyway or push hard for it.

The fact that I am two people doesn't change how my posts should be perceived. If I talk between my two parts before hand, it would be similar to going over one's post in your mind to ensure that you post what you intend to post. If done afterward and my post is blatantly wrong, stupid, or scummy, I would expect the town to punish me for it and not allow the excuse of "hydra" to come up much less be validated. To allow such excuses to be accepted is very anti town, and the following confusion would be pro-scum.

As for signing, how would it help? I could simplify things and sign every single post "Phate" but how would that help? It would tell you nothing and I will still be behind one name regardless of who I really am, and to the end your defending, nothing's changed. My point is:
No, I will not sign each post with what part is currently posting.
No, the fact I am a hydra doesn't change whether my posts are scummy or not.
And Scribe, I see your point about the RVS, but still, would you say something must occur in the RVS for it to end? Or is it just that this one time is an exception that it should be more than a hydra discussion and opinion?

VOTE COUNT:

chamber (1) - Trumpet of Doom
DedicatedScribe (2) - Phlight, MacavityLock
dramonic (0) -
kunkstar7 (0) -
Limerickx (1) - Kunkstar7
lobstermania (1) - dramonic
MacavityLock (0) -
Panzerjager (1) - peanutman
peanutman (2) - totallynotmafia, DedicatedScribe
Phlight (0) -
totallynotmafia (1) - lobstermania
Trumpet of Doom (1) - Limerickx

With 12 alive, it takes 7 to lynch.

[Phlight]

@Plight: with regards to what I've said could you clear up the way you two will be posting?

We don't make every post jointly. If I had a particularly important post with which I wasn't sure my other half agreed (say, a long case, or a vote analysis) I would probably post it in Notes (our Notes page is primarily how we communicate) for him to look over it, and once the day gets going and we have some strong suspicions, we'll likewise discuss them and try to bring the other 'round, but other than that and until then, we just post.

[Phlight]

Mod: Chamber hasn't posted in 5 days and 16 hours. According to your ruleset, 72 hours of inactivity leads to a prod, with 48 hours from the prod to post. Even allowing 16 hours that you didn't notice inactivity, that's grounds for replacement. Can you confirm that you are searching for a replacement?

[Phlight]

Mod: Also, kunkstar7 and Trumpet of Doom both hit 5 days of inactivity in 2 hours, and peanutman is due for a prod. With such a lurk-friendly ruleset, would you please announce in-thread when you're prodding and searching for replacements?

[Phlight]

DedicatedScribe is claiming that he's acting scummy on purpose in order to achieve a bandwagon on himself to end the RVS. Heh.

I'd like to see votes from some of the fence-sitters like totallynotmafia who giving the wagon lip service but no votes.

[Phlight]

Hmm....DedicatedScribe finally managed to end the RVS. I'm not sure how I feel about the Mason claim. Granted, it's better than VT, it's going to take a little while for me to feel comfortable viewing him as confirmed town.
Also, I don't understand how the title of the story would affect DedicatedScribe's claim....

Hm... rather than know the title of the story DS is, I would prefer to know what kind of information he has on his mason partner that is guaranteed. I'm going to

unvote

to think things over.

[Phlight]

I think a fullclaim is best, excepting the name of the mason partner.

[Phlight]

Actually, don't give the partner's story name either. That's for partner to claim.

[Phlight]

It would be a better idea to invent a heavily cryptic code that he could have the partner explain. An "obvious breadcrumb" which worked decently well in my Death Note game for L. That way, he can claim and not give the mafia information on his partner. I would like the story title of the partner and the partner to not be named.

The point still remains that giving the mafia the names of two masons, especially mutually confirmed masons, is a terrible idea. If they are not confirmed, we should still not tell mafia the connection since the mason claim is sufficient for the time being (along with other details).

[Phlight]

Assuming we have a cop and a doctor is a

terrible

idea.

If he claims the name of his partner, he's just outed a power role for no reason.

Later, if the mason partner dies, he can point to the mason and be like 'that was my partner. See, now I'm confirmed.' Alternatively, if he dies and flips mason, the partner has the option of immediately claiming or waiting 'til he's close to lynch or at lylo.

Not claiming the partner's name gives the town much more strategic depth. Even if he claims his partner's name, there's still no guarantee they're masons until one dies. We don't gain anything from the name, and we lose power-roles.

[Phlight]

Trumpet, you seem to be missing my points completely. Let me see if I can make this simpler for you.

Point 1) Mason generally means 'confirmed town alignments of all masons in the group to all masons in the group'. So I took DS' mason-claim to mean that, and will continue to do so until he tells us otherwise.

Point 2) If both masons claim, town still doesn't know their alignment; only that they're the same alignment (assuming that they are confirmed, as noted in Point 1, above)

Point 3) Scum, however, knows their alignment (assuming a standard scum ratio, a scumgroup of three players would know beyond a shadow of a doubt that the masons are town, unless riceballtail has five scum in this game, which isn't likely.

Point 4) Scum can use that information as they see fit. They could decide to keep the masons alive in order to gain a WIFOM-fueled mislynch, or they could decide to kill the masons, depending on whether the masons appeared to be competent players. DS, from what I've seen, is hardly a threat to the scum if he's town, but the partner could be myself, or Panzerjager, or some other competent player. If the scum decides that the masons are not a threat, they won't kill the masons; instead, they'll kill whomever they suspect of being a cop or a doctor or what-have-you, and now are more likely to hit because they know two players who

aren't

the power-role they're seeking.

Conclusion: In essence, revealing the name (and to a lesser extent, the title, as it might force the other mason to fakeclaim or reveal his role before it's advantageous to him) gives information to both the town and the scum, which is always a double-edged sword. In this case, the extra information clearly helps scum, because it better informs them on how to make night-kill decisions and on which mislynches to push, but

it does not help town

.

The identity and rolename of the mason partner, if any, are for that partner to reveal if and when he so chooses, and no one else.

FomS: Trumpet of Doom

for being so anxious to make public information that is so much more beneficial to scum than town.

VOTE COUNT:

DedicatedScribe (3) - Panzerjager, Trumpet of Doom, totallynotmafia
dramonic (0) -
kunkstar7 (0) -
Limerickx (1) - Kunkstar7
lobstermania (1) - dramonic
MacavityLock (0) -
Panzerjager (0) -
peanutman (1) - DedicatedScribe
Phlight (0) -
totallynotmafia (2) - lobstermania, peanutman
Trumpet of Doom (1) - Limerickx
Wolframnhart (0) -

With 12 alive, it takes 7 to lynch.

[Phlight]

Mod: DedicatedScribe has not posted in 72 hours. Can you confirm that he's been prodded?

[Phlight]

In addition:
MacavityLock hasn't posted for 72 hours.
Panzerjager hasn't posted for 84 hours.

And would you update the first post to reflect that chamber has been replaced, please?

Thank you in advance.

[Phlight]

No, you cannot assume that there are other power roles worth protecting.

Let's say the masons are the only power roles we have because there is no guarantee that we have others:
We just lost all our power roles, and we're in a really bad position as a vanilla town.

IF we have other power roles, so be it, but then why waste our ability to keep as many power roles alive as possible? Plus, your assertion only works if and only if the masons suspect scum (if they kill them no matter who they suspect, the wifom around why they died could lead to a mislynch or have not been strong enough to convict scum who offed them) and the masons are not lying.

Also, masons are at that point confirmed vanilla townies, but they are worthless at that point except to talk to each other if both are alive. So, my point is that they know 12-2-3(Guess at avg scum number)= only 7 people who could have a more threatening power role to the scum's position.

The information of having the partner's name actually does more harm to town's position than good.

[Phlight]

Dramonic, we need to discuss how to handle the claim. If you have a better idea or pressing matter, I'm all ears.

[Phlight]

Why would his partner claim, wolf?

[Phlight]

My only scum read other than totallynotmafia is, ironically, Panzerjager. He pushed for my predecessor's claim too early to my liking, and I really don't like him asking for a confirmable role to be lynched anyway.

I'm split here, but I'll go ahead and

vote Panzerjager

.

Not buying this. You played with Panzer in Mini 786. He was on your ass for little-to-nothing early on, and stayed that way for the entire game. You were both town. Panzer's always this twitchy, and you know that.

For those of you too lazy to look up the game:

http://www.msutils.net/multisolation/in ... rangerCoug

I also don't like how easily the votes on you melted away, even given DS' claim. I can't decide whether I find you scummier, or some of the players (totallynotmafia, peanutman, possibly MacavityLock, Trumpet Of Doom to a lesser extent) who seemed to swap as soon as it became clear that you weren't an easy lynch.

Vote: StrangerCoug

. You're still my favorite wagon.

[Phlight]

Oh, and also: you're not a confirmable role until you're dead.

[Phlight]

I don't know whether you're trying to paint an NK target on me or trying to get my mason buddy to claim to bail me out. Confirmable-to-each-other mason is an idiotic fakeclaim as it outs the fakeclaimants as scum. If my buddy sees it appropriate to claim, that person will do so on his or her own accord. If he or she sees it better to stay hidden, he or she will.

Neither (and I've already stated that the mason partner should not claim); I'm correcting your statement that you're a confirmable role.

To hell with Panzerjager's meta for posting little to no reason for his votes. I find it scummy, and if Panzerjager does it, that obviously means I find him scummy.

Now I have to go meta you to see if you're always this dumb. You admit that Panzer has a tendency to vote aggressively and with little reasons regardless of alignment, but think that's indicative of scum anyway?

[Phlight]

So this is a policy lynch? You want to lynch him for behavior that you know is not indicative of his alignment? Why didn't you just come out and say so?

VOTE COUNT:

dramonic (0) -
kunkstar7 (0) -
Limerickx (0) -
lobstermania (0) -
MacavityLock (0) -
Panzerjager (6) - peanutman, totallynotmafia, StrangerCoug, MacavityLock, dramonic, Trumpet of Doom
peanutman (0) -
Phlight (0) -
StrangerCoug (2) - Panzerjager, Phlight
totallynotmafia (3) - lobstermania, Wolframnhart, Kunkstar7
Trumpet of Doom (1) - Limerickx
Wolframnhart (0) -

With 12 alive, it takes 7 to lynch.
Searching for a replacement for Limerickx.
Prod issued to Panzerjager.

DEADLINE:2/20

[Phlight]

Actually, let's stop fucking around here. This question skeleton should cover everything I'm asking without the opportunity for semantic dodges.

1) For Panzerjager, do you believe aggressive behavior and baseless or near-baseless votes are a scumtell (ie, behavior he is more likely to engage in as scum)?
1a) If so, this contrasts with your prior experience. Why do you think it's scummy anyway?
1b) If not, do you think he's scum?
1bi) If so, why?
1bii) If not, why are you voting him?

[Phlight]

Panzer, what the fuck are you doing?

[Phlight]

Oh, that was a hammer. -_-. Too late to do anything about it now. I agree with Panzer that SC and tnm are probably scum.

[Phlight]

Panzer, even if we were going to assume that you were lynched, you just cheated us out of two weeks of scumhunting. If you're town, this is my (Phate speaking) last game with you.

[Phlight]

If I have a role that targets, I targeted Trumpet of Doom in the last day/night cycle.

If I have a role that inspects for alignment, I didn't receive a result.

If I have a role that tracks or a role that watches, no one targeted Trumpet of Doom and Trumpet of Doom targetted BridgesAndBaloons.

I would like for everyone to hypoclaim in the above fashion in their next post. Whether you do have a role that targets or not, claim that you do and claim a result. Vigilantes, if any, should consider lying, lest they become obvious. This gives very little information to scum and means that if/when an investigative role dies, we'll have all of their information.

In other news,

vote: Trumpet of Doom

.

[Phlight]

If I have a role that targets, I targeted Trumpet of Doom in the last day/night cycle.

If I have a role that inspects for alignment, I didn't receive a result.

If I have a role that tracks or a role that watches, no one targeted Trumpet of Doom and Trumpet of Doom targetted BridgesAndBaloons.

I would like for everyone to hypoclaim in the above fashion in their next post. Whether you do have a role that targets or not, claim that you do and claim a result. Vigilantes, if any, should consider lying, lest they become obvious. This gives very little information to scum and means that if/when an investigative role dies, we'll have all of their information.

If I have a role that targets, I targeted [X] in the last day/night cycle.

If have a role that inspects for an alignment, [X is guilty/X is not guilty/I didn't receive a result.

If I have a role that tracks or a role that watches, [Y] targeted [X] and [X] targeted [Z].

I can clearly see why this plan makes sense, Phlight! Since everyone is hypoclaiming, the scum won't know who to kill!

Fixed.

Trumpet of Doom doesn't want a hypoclaim because he's scum. Although I didn't claim a result on him that implicates that he's scum (I hypoclaimed one, which is quite different), you can see the way that he absolutely freaked out. That's much more indicative of scum than my hypoclaim results.

[Phlight]

2/3 of my top three possible scum have now refused to hypoclaim; let's see what SC does.

[Phlight]

Why did you vote for Trumpet of Doom?

Because he's scum. This may or may not be related to my hypoclaim. Explaining hypoclaim results introduces too much wifom.

Did Phlight just claim? Has hypoclaiming ever worked before?

Do your own damn Google searches.

Why is Trumpet of Doom scum?

Read Trumpet of Doom in iso. Watch how he behaves with DS. He immediately jumps on my DScase.

20 definitely feels off, and Phlight does a nice job explaining why in 21. <snip> I'm gonna have to go with Panzer and Phlight on this.

After his first few points, he completely ignores DS until the claim, at which point he falls off the wagon and puts Panzer at L-1 (although specifically states that it's L-1, which fooled totallynotmafia and I and possibly others because the votecount wasn't there, and neither of us thought to check).

Claim makes sense, and I like what people are saying about Panzer's 133.

Now, he's up to

SC already claimed mason. Pay attention, scumbag.

1) A seemingly serious attack is made against his seemingly incompetent scumbuddy.
2) He sees the opportunity for an easy bus, and seizes it.
3) His partner claims mason and then is replaced by a competent player. All of the sudden, his vote isn't so well-placed.
4) Another wagon forms. An easy one, for an overaggressive lurker, that he can jump on without it being too obvious.
5) The next day dawns. His earlier 'suspicions' of his partner are nowhere to be found. Indeed, he agrees with everything his partner says without any questioning.

The next big point is during our discussion over whether the partner should claim. Remember that this is, in his words "as much a theory discussion as anything else".

HoS: Phlight

- my vote's staying on DS until he fullclaims, and it might stay there after the claim as well (it depends what he says). If I unvote DS, you're next.

The fact that he's looking for a safe way to jump off of DS and a town target aside, he's launching a full-scale attack, but without a vote. He's trying to start a wagon without voting. This is another example of trying to spread suspicion while leaving yourself an out (see the early discussion between DS and I).

25 hours later, several people have weighed in and no one has taken the bait. He immediately and completely backs down. At the end, he adds:

(In other news, I should probably refrain from making decisions on someone's towniness or scumminess after about 11:15 PM GMT-6.)

This is scum talking. Town (barring very inexperienced players) does not feel the need to apologize for their suspicions. I can't see this reconciliatory tone coming from a town player in this instance.

Fast forward to today. His response to my hypoclaim mirrored his attack against me over whether the specifics of the mason claim. As his scumbuddies jump on the wagon, he gains confidence and the attacks increase.

Are you serious?
<snip>
In other news, your claimed hypotrack result on me is BS.
<snip>

*cough*Phlight*cough*

<snip>
I can't believe I have to explain this.
<snip>
Pay attention, scumbag.

This is not a townie who thinks he knows who the scum is. This is not a townie who knows he knows who the scum is. This is scum playing for an audience. A townie would not argue theory with someone he was this convinced was scum - why would you? What's the point in arguing theory with scum? Unless Trumpet of Doom is either very inexperienced or very childish, there's altogether too much bravado here for this to be anything but acting.

Also of note is Trumpet of Doom's response to totallynotmafia over his claiming that Panzer was at L-2 when he was at L-1.

Hopefully those are all satisfactory.

Here's that reconciliatory, sucking-up tone again.
I think it's pretty obvious that SC is scum, and I believe I've stated why. I'll do a case on dramonic when I wake up in about 10 hours if a townie wants it.

[Phlight]

@MacavityLock:

Why did you vote for Trumpet of Doom?

Because he's scum. This may or may not be related to my hypoclaim. Explaining hypoclaim results introduces too much wifom.

Quit fence-sitting. Either refuse to hypoclaim and explain why, or hypoclaim. Either of those provides information to analyze.

You're accusing me of laziness? Really? This is like the pot calling the napkin black. You've made ten posts in this game. One of them is a confirm. Three are utterly devoid of game-related content. You don't have a single post longer than ten sentences. You've been asking pointed questions and doing nothing with the answers all game. Either get off your ass and start contributing, or ask for replacement.

[Phlight]

I've made more posts than any other player in the game. My word total is more than the combined word totals of you, lobstermania, dramonic, wolframnhart, peanutman, and you again.

I'm finding it difficult to find an accusation of laziness seriously.

I'm more interested in your opinions on my case, other than your disapproval of when I posted it.

[Phlight]

Quid is an equivalent to WTF, but polite.
And it confuses me because mason is a pr. It's weird for scum to leave a pr alive.

But both of the night kills were power roles. Better for them to leave someone alive who still has suspicion on them.
Also, no one has brought up the two night kills. Is it too early to consider it?

Personally, in order of likelihood

1) A vig is likely.
2) Kunkstar hiding behind B&B as wifom.
3) Two scumgroups

Not enough information yet to really discount any of those.

VOTE COUNT:

dramonic (0) -
lobstermania (0) -
MacavityLock (0) -
peanutman (0) -
Phlight (3) - Trumpet of Doom, dramonic, StrangerCoug
StrangerCoug (0) -
totallynotmafia (0) -
Trumpet of Doom (1) - Phlight
Wolframnhart (0) -

With 9 alive, it takes 5 to lynch.

[Phlight]

Little Duck. No powers other than my voice and my vote. I'll make this post assuming 'Lock hammers me, because nothing about a vanilla claim warrants a wagon ending.

Hypoclaim is because I genuinely believe (and still do) that it helps town. I hypoclaimed the way I did more-or-less to stir up discussion, persuade more people to hypoclaim, and possibly get myself night-killed (which is something townies should strive to do. And yeah, the tracker flipping during the day flipped me up - I'd assumed that there was some theme role that was causing players to come up noreveal.

You should massclaim tomorrow (preferably crypto, since RBT's ruleset doesn't disallow that). I'm pretty sure that there are at least two scum among [dramonic, StrangerCoug, Trumpet of Doom]. The third's probably a lurker. You can't afford to go easy on lurkers in this game; make sure the mod is prodding, and if they lurk repeatedly, lynch them or get them to replace out. Watch MacavityLock, he's my next choice as scum behind the three I mentioned, and he fits 'lurker'.

Good luck.

[Phlight]

http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=6500