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

[Seven]

danakillsu:

Voted for Idiotking: [ISO 1]

1. "Idiotking wanted to be over with the RVS before it started, which seems like he had prior information on which to vote (i.e. he is scum)"
2. Aggressiveness


I think participation in RVS can not be used as a tell, in general. This has been said before in different words, but it would be too obvious if not participating in RVS automatically meant you were scum.

I'm also annoyed by IKs aggressive style, simply because I don't see the benefits for anyone at this point, but your reason is "it shows that there is no real defense for Idiotking. He has to focus on insulting me instead of actually defending himself, and all over one vote." [ISO 8] What does he have to defend? You haven't come up with anything that's an actual tell thus far, and you follow up with a statement that's meant to make him seem like he hasn't responded to you when he has.

If there's more on IK than what you've stated up to now, I'd like to hear it. I don't see your current vote for him as anything solid at all. Are you able to find anything on him if you look past his aggressive play?

[Seven]

DeathRowKitty:

I've said this before but it hasn't been addressed. I want to know why you voted for SP in RVS instead of Cue. Based on your "reasoning" (I'm not trying to debate here whether or not the vote was a "real" or "random" one) it could have been either one of them.

You initially thought HS was someone you might find scummy throughout the whole game. What are your thoughts on him at this point?

My thoughts on the DRK/SP debate at this point is that both of them overreacted, and although initially I thought DRK was most suspicious for this, I don't still believe that to be the case.

Why did you place a vote on Lastsurvivor at the beginning of the game (ISO 4)?

At some point he felt his vote on SP was justified, and then later on said he was probably newb-town. This seems to me like his attempt at dismissing SPs opinion instead of addressing the issues directly. If you were aware of his meta why did you say this?

I feel like DRK is doing a lot of jumping around and I don't really know if he's trying to get reactions or if he's actually serious when he votes. DRK I'd like you to comment on this please.

[Seven]

DiamondCrash:

ISO 1:

Unless anyone feels killing him off now would be a good idea.

This has already been brought up as an issue, but I do think it's pretty weird. DC, in what circumstance would you think it could have been beneficial? What would someone have had to say to get you to vote or hammer at that point? And what if I had claimed doc or some other power role, would that sway your vote? [I'm asking this purely because of what you said in ISO 2]

ISO 4:

Closer to a nulltell, when I think about it, but realistically could be either; I'm just swaying towards nulltell. It may be that that post was made as a sarcastic post; possibly the answer to the post he answered was so obvious it didn't even need the person it was directed towards to answer? It looks sarcastic from here. But it's equally scummy; answering for someone else is usually a scumtell.

I didn't catch the first time around how much you're pussyfooting in this post. You started of by saying answering for someone else was a null, and then say it could be either, and then defend me (somewhat) by saying it could have been sarcastic, and then say it's still scummy even if it was sarcastic, and then it's usually a scum-tell... Could you have covered every possible answer more thoroughly? So what's your actual stance on this? (Just one answer and why this time around)

And can you elaborate on your vote for SP?

[Seven]

HomerSimpson:

Seems to feed off what's already been said quite often. I'd like to hear more from you. What's your top reason for voting for me (ie what do you think is the best argument)? If you had to pick two other people to pin as scum, who would they be based on the game so far?

You also said you were going to analyze the DRK/SP argument, I look forward to your thoughts on that.

[Seven]

Idiotking:

In general, IK hasn't done/said anything I can spot to be a scum-tell, exactly. He brought up my multiple noob-claims, which is a good thing (sucks for me, but oh well), but besides that there wasn't much.

Here's one thing I thought was interesting, though. Days 1 through 6 he has little to nothing to say. His posting average is 1.17 posts per day, and most of it has little content. From the moment someone places a vote on him his posting increase dramatically not only in length but in frequency. His average for the last 3 days is 4.33 posts per day. That's more than three times as much.

Ok... I understand that he was defending himself, and it's normal for his responses to be longer, but it seems weird to me that he would feel the need to respond this much if the accusation is in his opinion (and mine as well) not very solid. I feel like something made him nervous or he wouldn't be reacting so strongly.

[Seven]

Lastsurvivor:

ISO 7:

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.

What are your thoughts on this at this point in the game?

Nothing much to say about LS at this point. I understand he's LA. I'd like more from him in general once midterms are through, though. LS: If you had to place a vote right now who would it be?

[Seven]

Parama:

What are your current thoughts on DRK? You've expressed suspicions (or had problems with his logic, if you'd rather I put it that way) almost from the start. Eager to know where you stand.

ISO 16:

If we connect potential scum-links ASAP then there's less confusion on the following days based on previous lynches and NKs.

I have a huge problem with lynch-chains. Seems very suspicious to me.

You also said in ISO 17 your vote was pending my claim. You then voted for Cue in your next post. I want to know if my claim had any influence on your vote, and if not why did you switch from me to Cue? I know you posted your reasons for voting him but I'm unsure why they are better than those you had for voting me.

[Seven]

SeerPenguin:

I'm not too crazy about how SP was immediatly annoyed with DRK. I thought originally that DRK had started that whole thing, but it really does seem like DRKs RVS reasoning was just that: RVS. Even if he did somewhat mean his random vote, I don't think he meant to use it later on in the game at this point. SP seems unusually annoyed about this vote.

ISO 6:

And don't think that discussion-starting gets you town vibes, scum can start discussion at the beginning of the day, too.

This was directed at Parama. Trying to pin Par as a scum possibility early on for later use? Not sure...

Later on in this post he votes DRK for bullshit reasons because DRK is voting for him for bullshit reasons... Doesn't make sense. Although I don't disagree completly with a vote on DRK, I think the reasons you state are not good ones at this point. Even though DRK and SP are both fueling the fire during this argument, I think it's ridiculous that SP is reacted so strongly in the first place. If anything, DRKs vote spurred a significant reaction, whether it was his intention to do so or not.

ISO 12:

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?

Although I agree that it's too early for buddy speculation, and I also don't like the vast majority of Cuet's posts, there were several other reasons brought up for my being pinned as scum and SP seems to be ignoring those completely and focusing only on the weakest argument, which I think is argument from fallacy?

I'm not too sure what the vibe on SP is right now. I have agreed with a lot of the things he's said, especially about DRK, but I'm unsure at this point whether his persistance in not wanting to lynch me is because he genuinly thinks I'm town or rather because I've sided with him and it helps him in some way. I don't really like his more recent arguments with Thor because they seem once again irrelevant or at the very least badly constructed.

[Seven]

Thor665:

I have nothing to say at this point. Most town player so far IMO, he expresses his ideas clearly, promotes discussion, etc.

Is this a specific question of which I should address and is there any sort of timeline you're suggesting I should follow? You seem to be implying something here, but I'm too dumb to figure out what and need your help.

Not really, I just assume there's a reason for you not giving your thoughts on these other players at this point in the game?

[Dragonfly13]

Votecount #7

Seven (4) - chamber, HomerSimpson, Cuetlachtli, Thor665
Idiotking (2) - Lastsurvivor, danakillsu
Parama (1) - DeathRowKitty
Cuetlachtli (1) - Parama
SeerPenguin (1) - DiamondCrash
Thor665 (1) - Idiotking
DeathRowKitty (1) - SeerPenguin

Not Voting (1) - Seven


With 12 alive, it takes 7 to lynch.
Deadline: 11:00PM U.S. Central Time, Saturday, January 30, 2010

[Thor665]

Not really, I just assume there's a reason for you not giving your thoughts on these other players at this point in the game?

I'd certainly like to be able to claim a master strategy, but I have no specific reason per se'. However it is my opinion that pointing out each and every thing that may or may not be a scum tell creates a certain amount of 'white noise' that can occlude more serious scum hunting. I also feel it comes across as mud-slinging (hey, let's toss out every little suspicion and see what sticks!) Also, it is my opinion that what is or is not a scum tell tends to be highly personal and subjective in nature (and WIFOM but that's a pet theory without much outside support thus far) - so unless one is actively questioning the nature of a scumtell or accusing someone I don't see a desperate need for everyone to know about it and by not expressing everything it helps keep my 'safe list' a bit...well, safer, which I think also helps town.

[Lastsurvivor]

What exactly are you confused about?

You say "We should lynch seven." and then you vote to lynch Parama. Unless I'm missing something (I've been out of sync all week, to be honest), this makes little to no sense to me.

@Seven: I said a bit earlier this week that I thought Seer's overreaction was strange, and that's still what I generally take from it. If I had to vote someone, I'd vote dana for his illogical and weak case against Idiotking, which he still managed to stick by. I've been out of touch, so my reevaluation might change things.

[Dragonfly13]

chamber has been prodded.

[DeathRowKitty]

Apparently people are confused by my vote. I think it makes perfect sense. Well, it might if I hadn't just said I should be voting someone else and/or if I'd given any reasoning whatsoever, but no reason to get caught up on technicalities.

@Parama
I know some people have expressed confusion about my vote, but you understand, right?

Because you're being awfully obtuse methinks.

Obtuse? I'd prefer to think of it as "full of sagacious wisdom," if it's all the same to you.

I want to know why you voted for SP in RVS instead of Cue.

My reason for voting Cuet would just be the simul-confirm. With SP, I could add in his joke as part of my reason. Had Cuet made the 911 joke instead of SP, I would have voted Cuet.

Why did you place a vote on Lastsurvivor at the beginning of the game (ISO 4)?

I guess I didn't make that vote clear enough. It was a serious vote. I was responding to a question of who I found most suspicious (IIRC) and I found him most suspicious, if only as a gut read.

At some point he felt his vote on SP was justified, and then later on said he was probably newb-town. This seems to me like his attempt at dismissing SPs opinion instead of addressing the issues directly. If you were aware of his meta why did you say this?

I only meta'd him after I voted for him. As far as I'm concerned, he's still new enough to be newb-town. That's what I think he is.

I feel like DRK is doing a lot of jumping around and I don't really know if he's trying to get reactions or if he's actually serious when he votes. DRK I'd like you to comment on this please.

Yea, I agree; DRK is a bit of a whacko (somehow, I always end up in games with him...stalker much?). I second the request for him to comment on his odd voting.

@Anyone voting Seven
Why aren't you voting Parama?

[DiamondCrash]

Unvote.

DiamondCrash:

ISO 1:

Unless anyone feels killing him off now would be a good idea.

This has already been brought up as an issue, but I do think it's pretty weird. DC, in what circumstance would you think it could have been beneficial? What would someone have had to say to get you to vote or hammer at that point? And what if I had claimed doc or some other power role, would that sway your vote? [I'm asking this purely because of what you said in ISO 2]

That was aimed at other people that would perhaps vote for you, not for them to say to me, "vote for him". I didn't want to hammer or rush a lynch; in my opinion it was too early in the game to do anything like that. But I can't stop people from doing what they're going to do. If you had claimed doc or what have you, it probably would have put whatever doubt I had away, except in the event of a counter-claim.

ISO 4:

Closer to a nulltell, when I think about it, but realistically could be either; I'm just swaying towards nulltell. It may be that that post was made as a sarcastic post; possibly the answer to the post he answered was so obvious it didn't even need the person it was directed towards to answer? It looks sarcastic from here. But it's equally scummy; answering for someone else is usually a scumtell.

I didn't catch the first time around how much you're pussyfooting in this post. You started of by saying answering for someone else was a null, and then say it could be either, and then defend me (somewhat) by saying it could have been sarcastic, and then say it's still scummy even if it was sarcastic, and then it's usually a scum-tell... Could you have covered every possible answer more thoroughly? So what's your actual stance on this? (Just one answer and why this time around)

The more I look at it, null tell. It was probably done in a "you dumbass how did you miss that" way.

And can you elaborate on your vote for SP?

SP was coming under a bit of suspicion, I thought it might have provoked a reaction. I suppose he might be too experienced for that kind of cheap attempt to prod scum, especially since he's an alt, but it was worth a try I suppose.

Has that cleared up everything?

And back at you; you're not voting?

[Parama]

Parama:

What are your current thoughts on DRK? You've expressed suspicions (or had problems with his logic, if you'd rather I put it that way) almost from the start. Eager to know where you stand.

Dunno really, his early actions are pretty weird/scummy, and I don't see his reasoning for voting me at all, though I can't fault him for it. I really don't know who to vote for at this point, really :/ Not getting town vibes from anyone.

ISO 16:

If we connect potential scum-links ASAP then there's less confusion on the following days based on previous lynches and NKs.

I have a huge problem with lynch-chains. Seems very suspicious to me.

Trying to cover for scumlinks you might have dropped?

You also said in ISO 17 your vote was pending my claim. You then voted for Cue in your next post. I want to know if my claim had any influence on your vote, and if not why did you switch from me to Cue? I know you posted your reasons for voting him but I'm unsure why they are better than those you had for voting me.

It hasn't changed my read on you much, it's the easiest claim to make for mafia I guess. Meh, I'm still rather suspicious of you but Cuetlachtli is just making my scumdar twitch a lot, even more than you :/

DRK, tbh, I don't understand your vote at all. Whatever. Not going to fault you for it, since I honestly don't know what you're thinking, and I don't know your alignment, etc. etc. If you see something I don't, please feel free to clear it up <_<

[DeathRowKitty]

Why don't you fault me for it? Do you think you deserve my vote? If I think we should be lynching Seven, then why am I voting you???

[Thor665]

Because you're being awfully obtuse methinks.

Obtuse? I'd prefer to think of it as "full of sagacious wisdom," if it's all the same to you.

Hardly mutually exclusive. Though I've only seen reasonable evidence of the former rather then the latter.

@Anyone voting Seven
Why aren't you voting Parama?

No fair - I asked you first.
Here's why;
Post 99
Post 131
Post 137

You're apparently trying to play some sort of odd word trap game with Parama, so feel free to trap him in whatever. I'm not sure I'm impressed by your antics and hope they get to a point sooner rather then later as I don't see a good pro town angle here.

[DeathRowKitty]

That's why you're voting Seven, not why you aren't voting Parama.

Okay, so about my vote. We should be lynching Seven right now. When someone claims vanilla, that person basically becomes disposable. A vanilla claim shouldn't stop a lynch.

Unfortunately, I've had a recent change of heart. His vanilla claim (even if he just claimed "town") doesn't seem like scum claiming to me. His player by player analysis when he expects to be lynched doesn't look to me like scum posting thoughts on players. I'd prefer not to lynch Seven right now, even though we should.

At the same time, I'm leaning towards Parama-scum. I figured I'd at least post a vote against him to get a reaction. I might even post a case against him and try to get a wagon shift if I feel like going through his posts to find something more concrete than gut.

What do you think of Parama and what do you think of Seven's recent posts?

[Thor665]

That's why you're voting Seven, not why you aren't voting Parama.

It is, of course, one and the same. Please note I have reasons to vote Seven - I see no reasons to vote Parama over Seven and if I wasn't voting Seven I can easily think of two other players I'd vote for over Parama. At least now you're actually expressing ideas - which at least lets an actual conversation happen about it, as prior to this it almost felt like you wanted others to help create a Parama case for you.

What do you think of Parama and what do you think of Seven's recent posts?

Then again...

I personally don't have a strong read on Parama one way or the other. He hasn't done anything I read as particularly scummy yet neither has he done anything that screams town. He is not in the top of my suspect list currently. I reasonably like his posts because he uses a similar logic track to what I think I do and the way he writes and responds at least seems clear and concise - which is probably my biggest pro-town read of him as I don't feel much effort from him to cloud any given debate. Most of my issues with him at the moment could be ascribed to gameplay differences so I don't see them painting a clear scum picture at this point.

Overall I like Seven's intent in his posts. I certainly didn't agree with all of his reads but I do agree with you that the activity seems very pro-townish to undergo if he has the concept that he is facing a lynch on Day 1. Overall most of his actions probably come across as continued evidence in support of a newbie claim on him; but I'm not as comfortable as you in presuming (As you appear to) that the newbie-ness I'm reading equates to him being town. He could still be newbie scum - as newbie tells tell only about being a newbie and not being town/scum.

I'm fairly uneasy about you advocating a Parama scum and then basically asking others for their read while the extent of your case is 'I'll vote for him to see if I get a reaction.' It strikes me as either lazy scumhunting or perhaps scum hoping to get others to do legwork. At least you openly admit it's all a gut read and that you'd need to go looking for something concrete - but your gut read on Day 1 doesn't seem like a hook worthy to hang my vote on to me.

[Seven]

@Lastsurvivor: Are you planning on doing another read-through soon?

@DRK: What are your current thoughts on LS, if any? I'm curious because I don't have much of a read on him atm.

Why do you think SP is newb-town instead of newb-scum? I know you've kind of gone over this but I'm not convinced. If you have more that would be helpful.

I'm curious what you might find on Parama. Doing his ISO I can't say I found much compared to some others who I think are more suspicious at this point, but I'm open to having my mind changed pending convincing evidence.

@DC: You kind of avoided answering my question, so I'll ask it again.

DC, in what circumstance would you think it could have been beneficial? What would someone have had to say to get you to vote or hammer at that point?

I did read your response, I know you think it was too early to do any of it, but you asked the question so I want to know what someone would have had to say.

And why would me claiming doc or other power role stop you from voting for me? (If I did understand that correctly...) Is it your opinion that docs are allowed to act scummy on D1?

As for your question, my vote is pending a few answers from the questions I asked in ISO.

@Parama:

Trying to cover for scumlinks you might have dropped?

Not at all. If you want to look for scumlinks on D2 go ahead. I think a lynch-chain will only benefit mafia this early in the game. It's bad enough to tunnel on one player, it's worse to decide in advance who you're going to tunnel on the two following days.

[SeerPenguin]

I need to get caught up in this game, I will post some comments at some point today.

[Thor665]

I need to get caught up in this game, I will post some comments at some point today.

Excellent. When you do I did posit some questions to you in this post that you haven't responded to yet.

[Dragonfly13]

chamber hasn't picked up his prod and will be replaced.

[SeerPenguin]

Thor, the only questions I see are in the third paragraph and their answers are..

Yes

And no, I feel like DRK was trying to legitimize his vote, whereas you just give a joke reasoning, so you jumping on someone for it in Day 2 when random joke reasoning shouldn't be used, isn't hypocrisy. Simply put, things slide in the RVS, but I don't feel like I should let DRK slide.

-----------------------------------------------------

Seven's personal analysis doesn't impress me into thinking he is town for sure, but I'm not saying we should lynch him yet.

This brings me to a theory question: Is anyone else severely annoyed that on this site it seems we HAVE to go to deadline in order to lynch someone? I mean, I know in a hypothetical situation, a group of townies would want to wait until the last moment, but I feel like dragging days on usually ends in a lull of activity in forum mafia, and don't necessarily see the point in wasting time waiting for people to flake. (However, if we need all the time up to deadline, I completely advocate using all of it.)

-------------------------------------------------

I find DRK's most recent argument to show that he is being quite hostile towards pretty much anything in this game, not sure what to take from that. Ftr, I don't completely disagree with his reasoning on the Parama vote, but it was still weird.

----------------------------------------------------

As for however said I wrote Seven off as town on little content...

I said that I didn't believe that Seven was very scummy, and based on his content, I did (And still do) not believe that he is scum. I am still keeping an eye open on him (And advocating for him to be lynched today, because I don't see him to have reacted in a very townie way up until recently, and heck, he's pretty disposable as a vanilla.).