Mini 922 - Mafia in Mo Town [Game Over]

[Netopalis]

Strong opinions alone aren't enough to merit a vote. Strong opinions without a good reason, however, do merit one. And yes, you said that, but you do have a vested interest in lying about your motivation if you are scum.

[MonkeyMan576]

Strong opinions alone aren't enough to merit a vote. Strong opinions without a good reason, however, do merit one. And yes, you said that, but you do have a vested interest in lying about your motivation if you are scum.

So you think I might be scum because I might be scum? Talk about circular reasoning.

[Netopalis]

Not at all what I said. I originally said that your motivation appeared to be to lynch. You refuted by saying that you had already said that your motivation was to find scum. I said that you can't say that and expect us to believe you because you might be scum. You are scum because it appears that your motivation is to lynch rather than to find scum.

[MonkeyMan576]

Not at all what I said. I originally said that your motivation appeared to be to lynch. You refuted by saying that you had already said that your motivation was to find scum. I said that you can't say that and expect us to believe you because you might be scum. You are scum because it appears that your motivation is to lynch rather than to find scum.

Anyone might be scum. If you think you are out of the woodwork just because there is a different wagon right now I think you should reevaluate. There's absolutely nothing behind your argument. At least my argument has a solid foundation.

[hitogoroshi]

Hmm. I think Neto is looking scummier and scummier. I mean, there has only been one main claim against him (and that's the whole "no claim/bad claim" thing) - but he keeps trying to defend himself, and that's what I did in my first two games as scum.

Unvote

Vote: Netopalis

Yeah! And he's posting WORDS, which are the things I posted when I was scum! Whelp, looks like we got this one in the bag.

These last three pages are a waste of time.

I'm gonna have to wait a bit before I can get any thought on Sakako. He seems pretty solidly newbtown but newbtown is also a very easy role for scum to act. I don't like the wagon at the moment because if you're interpreting his actions as scummy mistakes Sakako will probably scumslip twenty more times before the end of D1.

The first read that pops in to my head is Almaster-town.

Also, I'd like to point out that while there are situations where I'd be happy with a page eight lynch, when you pare out the back and forths over the same point and the 'DON'T LYNCH ME BRO! ECKS DEE' we're really only on like page three.

[Netopalis]

Does it? Please, put forth the strongest case you have against me. If you can present a sufficiently strong one independent of everybody else's, my vote goes away.

[MonkeyMan576]

You seem to be backtracking a lot

second votes are scummier than first votes.

So you're saying it's okay to vote without a reason so long as its not a first vote?

The reverse, actually, if you read that. I hate all random votes, but random votes which are the only vote on that player are excusable because they are so common.

Then this post acts like you are discouraging scumhunting and attacking the attacker, without really having an argument...

It seems as if your whole point in asking the question to begin with was to ask me a question in which any defense would appear to be weak, allowing you to attack me, which is convenient as I already have the most votes.

I don't assume you're going to give a bad defence, but if you do give one, I'll certainly not hesitate to point it out. This is a flawed argument.

You gave me a reason to suspect you. You attacked the easiest target with weak attacks and set up questions with predictable answers that you knew you could attack.

And then here it sounds like you are again attacking the attacker with a weak defence.

I be fixing them quote tags. ~Kitty

[Netopalis]

How am I discouraging scumhunting? By being against putting 2 votes on somebody for absolutely no reason? That doesn't follow.

Also, if my argument is so weak, I'm not sure why so many others are following me. I think it holds a lot of water - certainly moreso than anybody else I could suspect at this stage.

[xRECKONERx]

Despite hito being a mostly neutral read for me right now, his post regarding Sakako's 102 is both funny AND reaffirms everything I thought about Sakako. This isn't just Sakako prying for information - it's an attempt at a case to lynch, and a poor one at that. Sakako needs waaaay more votes.

[MonkeyMan576]

How am I discouraging scumhunting? By being against putting 2 votes on somebody for absolutely no reason? That doesn't follow.

Also, if my argument is so weak, I'm not sure why so many others are following me. I think it holds a lot of water - certainly moreso than anybody else I could suspect at this stage.

A populist argument is not an argument you asked for me to give you an independent argument against you, and I gave you one. You're discouraging scumhunting by OMGUSing without really having an argument. Your only defence of your argument is that others have voted the same way, so to me that's not really a defence.

[KittyMo]

Vote Count V

aka the posting from my phone vote count

I am almost positive I miscounted somewhere. Please let me know where I did so. Thanks.

[4] MonkeyMan576 - (Espeonage, Netopalis, Lowell, AlmasterGM)

[2] Sakako - (DeathRowKitty, xRECKONERx)
[1] DeathRowKitty - (almightybob)
[1] almightybob - (hitogoroshi)
[1] AlmasterGM - (kyle99)
[1] Lowell - (Nikanor)
[1] xRECKONERx - (Sakako)
[1] Netopalis - (MonkeyMan576)

[0] Espeonage - ()
[0] hitogoroshi - ()
[0] kyle99 - ()
[0] Nikanor - ()

[0] Not Voting - ()

With

12

alive, it`s

7

to lynch!

Vi is still in charge of prods. And if you really need to know the deadline, check her last vote count.

[Vi]

Vote Count V

aka the posting from my phone vote count
I am almost positive I miscounted somewhere. Please let me know where I did so. Thanks.

[4] MonkeyMan576 - (Espeonage, Netopalis, Lowell, AlmasterGM)

[2] Sakako - (DeathRowKitty, xRECKONERx)
[1] xRECKONERx - (Sakako)
[1] DeathRowKitty - (almightybob)
[1] almightybob - (hitogoroshi)
[1] AlmasterGM - (kyle99)
[1] Lowell - (Nikanor)
[1] Netopalis - (MonkeyMan576)

[0] Espeonage - ()
[0] hitogoroshi - ()
[0] kyle99 - ()
[0] Nikanor - ()

[0] Not Voting - ()

With

12

alive, it`s

7

to lynch!

Vi is still in charge of prods. And if you really need to know the deadline, check her last vote count.

Very minor fix for xRx's place in the [1] counts. Other than that, this vote count is correct.

[Netopalis]

My point was that I feel that my argument is strong and others feel that it is strong. You seem to be the only one who thinks that it's so terribly weak.

[Sakako]

Okay, so I'm in a bit of a sticky situation here. Firstly, I want to

unvote Reck

, because his cases against me are actually not bad, and they're making him look more townish as we go along.

@hito: You're a douche, you know that?

@Reck: Yes, I know, you don't like me claiming I can't scumhunt. But you're being a douche too, by making sweeping statements like "If you're going to complain, then replace out." The point is, I'm not going to learn if I don't play. If I replace out, that kind of defeats the purpose. I'm still trying to grasp the whole game here, so just chill out for a bit.

@everyone else: I know I'm a fairly good target for lynch today. I'd like to ratify that situation, but I don't really think I'll be able to. So if someone could actually tell me what I'm doing wrong rather than "omglol you can't play mafia" then that would be appreciated.

[hitogoroshi]

@hito: You're a douche, you know that?

To be clear: was that comment for a.) me calling out your bad logic or b.) me insinuating that if you're scum you're not doing a very good job?

[Sakako]

sigh.

It wasn't really that at all. It was just the way you were saying it, like, "omg that's so obvious why didn't i think of that durrrrrrr"; it was frankly patronizing and almost hurtful.

[Netopalis]

Sakako: I think that the problem that everybody is having with your stuff is that it seems that you're just copying everybody else in an attempt to blend in. At least, that's my impression.

[hitogoroshi]

I was insulting you, I was pointing out the very flawed nature of your argument by analogy. You have to understand that people in this game are not aggressive to others because they don't like them; they're aggressive because they think the others could be scum. There is a world of difference between attacking someone and attacking their reasoning, and while I agree personal insults (e.g 'you're a douche') should be kept out of the game barring extremely specific pressuring situations, nothing would ever get done if we censored ourselves from tearing down bad reasoning.

[Sakako]

Well sure, go right ahead, but don't make it obvious that you're insulting me. That really detracts from the point of your point.

Regarding that, by the way, if I still had my vote on Neto, I would probably be more willing to defend my views. But I don't, cause I, too, realised that that was a stupid reason to vote for someone.

[Netopalis]

...only after you were called out on it. That's the problem.

[hitogoroshi]

Well sure, go right ahead, but don't make it obvious that you're insulting me. That really detracts from the point of your point.

Despite hito being a mostly neutral read for me right now, his post regarding Sakako's 102 is both funny AND reaffirms everything I thought about Sakako.

Now, I could have said: That post is a logical fallacy. It assumes that because Sakako, as scum, did X in a certain situation, everyone doing X in that situation must be scum. But it's non-reversible for two important reasons. Firstly, two games with Sakoko says nothing about the average player - there's no reason to extrapolate and say that ALL scum ALWAYS do X in that situation. Secondly, even if it was always true, 'scum always do x in that situation' is a lot different than 'scum always, and only scum, do x in that situation.' In this case, self defense is something that is generally a good idea regardless of role - the argument would perhaps have more merit if Sakoko said 'and I never defend myself as town' but barring that it has no logical ground to stand on.

Now, which one do you think is easier to read? Which one will have more impact?

[Sakako]

Also @Neto: I don't really want to come across that way. I don't want to blend in, but I can't really help it if I'm not the best at this game, and people start wagons before I do. I don't want to blend in, but at the same token, I don't really want to stand out (not that I could really) so I'll get NKed like... N1 or something. >.>

[Sakako]

@hito: Fair enough. Thanks for taking the time to explain it to me.

NotADouche: hito

[MonkeyMan576]

My point was that I feel that my argument is strong and others feel that it is strong. You seem to be the only one who thinks that it's so terribly weak.

People may not be making their vote based on your argument. Also, I would be more worried about the player who bases his arguments on being agreeable rather than the person who is willing to actually make his own arguments regardless on weather someone else agrees.

[xRECKONERx]

Sak's motivations are scummy. Townies should worry about scumhunting, no standing out or blending in.