Mini 922 - Mafia in Mo Town [Game Over]

[almightybob]

Bob: I can link you to a page 1 RVS lynch, if you'd like to see it. Sure, it involves a self-hammer, but the point is that it has happened before. I've also been lynched for objecting to a page 2 3-person bandwagon before that was based on little to nothing. To put it simply, random votes are contrary to my thesis of the game. That's why I've been experimenting with the opening questions in newbie games lately.

I would actually quite like to see that, if only to read the aftermath
I agree that random votes are not a good reason to lynch, which is why I would not be involved in a lynching wagon where the votes were based on random choice.

[Netopalis]

http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=12804

It actually, along with attempts to ruin some other games, got Saberwolf banned.

[hitogoroshi]

Yeah, I actually replaced in to the second incarnation of that game AND another game he alted in to and messed up.

I'd like to point out that saying 'I HEREBY END THE RVS' or anything of the ilk is pretty anti-town in itself. I can understand why neto isn't a fan but it's something you let happen organically and not try to call yourself. I'm not talk about Neto here but rather about things like:

Can we end the RVS soon?

The RVS isn't a 'thing' you end. It's just an understanding between players that you can do stupid things in the early game until something actually happens.

@hito, I'm flattered you think I'm a catalyst. Quick, point to a meta example of my catalyst....ism.

Open 191 is on my mind. Admittedly you earned your 'honorary scum' title with your hammer, but before that you helped drive lynches, keep things clear, etc.

Regarding kyle, I'm not actually saying I want to policy lynch him now - just that if I'm in a situation where I don't have any scum suspects to lynch (unlikely, but maybe my main target replaces out without claiming right before deadline or something) I'd probably want to lynch kyle. Having a floater is annoying but not policy-lynch worthy most of the time unless we go a whole day without any good scumtells at all (and in that case, we'd learn plenty from the lack of scumtells in any case so the policy lynch wouldn't be an information sinkhole.)

[Netopalis]

For the record, I was simply stating that I don't like it and won't participate in it, not that I was demanding its end. Quite honestly, I've found that when I do participate in the RVS, I screw it up somehow...So, I generally wait until I'm useful to contribute heavily, which is in the later part of D1 and the subsequent days.

[xRECKONERx]

Neto, who's scum?

[Netopalis]

No idea. Not enough information yet.

[Espeonage]

Neto, who's scum?

That is a stupid question. Maybe a better one would be, who do you suspect is leaning towards scum.

[AlmasterGM]

Neto, who's scum?

That is a stupid question. Maybe a better one would be, who do you suspect is leaning towards scum.

It'd be helpful if you could just answer the inferred question instead of stubbornly arguing about semantics.

[Netopalis]

It was directed at me. I answered that I didn't have an answer, as per the post that prompted the question.

[xRECKONERx]

Scenario: give top three scum candidates or die.

[Netopalis]

Scenario: Try it.

[xRECKONERx]

vote: neto

[AlmasterGM]

Ok, this is getting really stupid.

[Netopalis]

Agreed. I have absolutely nothing to base a read on, so anything I would do would be just randomly accusing people based on not a whit of evidence.

[kyle99]

Wow reck, that vote was really bad.

[Sakako]

I hate being Australian sometimes. I missed this

whole

bit of conversation.

Unfortunately, it could have happened anywhere so I still don't really have any reads, but I'm going to

vote: xRECKONERx

just cause he's being a douche :p

[xRECKONERx]

I'm being slightly douchey, yes. But I find it hard to believe that people don't have at least SOME kind of opinion forming by page four. The idea wasn't "pick three or I'll lynch you and you die" I meant "If you had to pick three or die, who would your three be?". But then he challenged me and I had to vote.

Yeah, my vote'll stay there until Neto provides some semblance of content.

[Netopalis]

Yeah, but that's not what you

said

, now is it? I knew that your threat was ludicrous, but I was curious to see if you could back it up. Clearly, you couldn't. As I've explained, every time I try to give substantial content when I have none, I've proven to be wrong. So, I'm going to wait until I have something to say to say it.

[Sakako]

Well, I don't really have any reads. That's probably cause I still suck at scumhunting, but my vote's staying on you until Neto provides some information anyway.

[DeathRowKitty]

I like Reckoner's vote.

For the record, I was simply stating that I don't like it and won't participate in it, not that I was demanding its end. Quite honestly, I've found that when I do participate in the RVS, I screw it up somehow...So, I generally wait until I'm useful to contribute heavily, which is in the later part of D1 and the subsequent days.

I hate posts like this. We can't get to the later part of day 1 without getting out of the early part of day 1. Ignoring the early part of day 1 keeps us in the early part of day 1 longer. By waiting until you can be more effective, you're making yourself less effective.

Well, I don't really have any reads. That's probably cause I still suck at scumhunting, but my vote's staying on [Reckoner] until Neto provides some information anyway.

I don't get it.

@Neto
This post by you was probably the most content-heavy post of the game. You had no problem picking someone out as scummiest then. What's changed since then and now that you now find yourself incapable of forming opinions of people?

[Netopalis]

Both yourself and Bob answered my questions efficiently, and I have nothing else to go on. I'm also not stating that I think we should just drop what we're doing or anything, just that in games in which I am town and have participated in the early stage of D1, we've tended to do a lot worse than in games in which I am town and have not participated in the early stage of D1. I can provide a really extreme example of why this holds true, if you'd like.

[Netopalis]

Sorry, I said efficiently when I meant effectively. Bah.

[DeathRowKitty]

I don't particularly like Bob's vote on DRK. He put on a second vote without a lot of reasoning behind it. It's a light tell, but it is one nonetheless.

It didn't look to me like he was serious, nor that the vote that he was talking about was serious. I figured it was just another excuse for a random vote, since most players like giving faux justification for their random votes. Honestly, though, I really hate the random votes thing. I think it's pointless and usually ends up lynching town.

You said you thought it was a random vote, yet you'd voted him for giving a bad reason with his vote. What exactly about his vote did you find scummy and why?

[Netopalis]

I didn't say it was a bad reason, I said that there was no reason. I don't like putting more than a single vote on a player without a reason. Truth be told, I hate putting any votes on anybody without a reason, but second votes are scummier than first votes.

[DeathRowKitty]

Anyways,Vote: DeathRowKitty for being obvscum trying to get a quicklynch.

Looks like a reason to me. Plus, you originally said "without a lot of reasoning behind it", which you've now changed to "no reason." I can has explanation please?

Also, you don't mind if I keep harassing you, right?