Mini 922 - Mafia in Mo Town [Game Over]

[MonkeyMan576]

Sak does seem a lot more interested in people being nice to him than scumhunting.

[Espeonage]

Ok. Monkey, you are actually not defending the points made against you so much as making points against who is voting for you. You were at the beginning but that discussion has kinda gone off track leaving me with a suspicious gut to add to the case I made. Therefore i am happy with my vote at the moment. I still hold that Saka (See ain't I nice. I read you don't like Sak) is a newb town.

[MonkeyMan576]

Ok. Monkey, you are actually not defending the points made against you so much as making points against who is voting for you. You were at the beginning but that discussion has kinda gone off track leaving me with a suspicious gut to add to the case I made. Therefore i am happy with my vote at the moment. I still hold that Saka (See ain't I nice. I read you don't like Sak) is a newb town.

That's not true at all. I voted for Neto first, if anyone is OMGUSing its him. There's not really a case against me so there's not really anything to defend.

[Espeonage]

No but instead of countering the arguements against you, you are having an arguement with neto about how he is playing. I never said there was any OMGUS in there.
So now I ask why four people are compelled to place their votes on you if there is no real case on you?

[MonkeyMan576]

No but instead of countering the arguements against you, you are having an arguement with neto about how he is playing. I never said there was any OMGUS in there.
So now I ask why four people are compelled to place their votes on you if there is no real case on you?

Don't ask me, ask them. Maybe it seems like the thing to do?

[Espeonage]

Every single case that has been made against you, you have dismissed with a one or two sentance answer describing how it is all false. If you don't want people to vote you then maybe you should try and actually answer their cases properly.

[MonkeyMan576]

Every single case that has been made against you, you have dismissed with a one or two sentance answer describing how it is all false. If you don't want people to vote you then maybe you should try and actually answer their cases properly.

Again, I haven't seen a proper case made against me so I would have no way to "answer a case properly".

[Netopalis]

Case against Monkey:

1) He completely misrepresented me after I was suspected by the others.

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.

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

Also, I don't like your statement regarding early lurking, it seems like an excuse not to participate.

Unvote:
Vote: Netopalis

The part in which he quotes me and what he says that I said are completely opposite. It's pretty clear that I said that I said that I dislike all random votes, particularly those that land on someone who already has one. He turns it around and says that I don't like random votes unless someone else is already voting for that person. The first position is logical, the one that he tries to make me sound like I am advocating is not.

2) He drags out my responses to illogical degrees. Examine this post:

Monkey: 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.

You can feel free to suspect me for this. I honestly could care less. I've been lynched for it before, but I'm not going to change my playstyle to appear more townie, since that's what scum players do, and since I don't want to ring any false bells based on that. I can link to at least 3-4 games in which I make these same arguments as town, and if you check my Wiki page (Last updated November 2009, I really need to update), I emphasize the same sentiments.

Just because something is common or uncommon is not a logical reason for something to be scummy or not scummy. There are things that are scummy that happen quite frequently, and things that are townish that are quite rare. Lurking, for example, is a frequent scum tactic. Likewise, having made an argument in a previous game does not make you less scummy in this game.

This was absolutely a terrible defence post and I recommend more votes on you with quick haste.

While I don't really like meta that much, I think that this is a fairly extreme example of when it is acceptible - to show that a player regularly does something out of the norm, and that it shouldn't be taken as a scumtell. He seems extremely determined, though, that nothing that I say will dissuade him from his course.

3) Flippant denial of any opposition. Consider the following posts:

Monkey and Sakako are a potential scumteam.

Discuss.

Random Player X and Random Player Y are a potential scumteam(as long as its not me). Discuss.

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.

Ok. Monkey, you are actually not defending the points made against you so much as making points against who is voting for you. You were at the beginning but that discussion has kinda gone off track leaving me with a suspicious gut to add to the case I made. Therefore i am happy with my vote at the moment. I still hold that Saka (See ain't I nice. I read you don't like Sak) is a newb town.

That's not true at all. I voted for Neto first, if anyone is OMGUSing its him. There's not really a case against me so there's not really anything to defend.

No but instead of countering the arguements against you, you are having an arguement with neto about how he is playing. I never said there was any OMGUS in there.
So now I ask why four people are compelled to place their votes on you if there is no real case on you?

Don't ask me, ask them. Maybe it seems like the thing to do?

Essentially, here, he's trying the old propaganda technique of denying that there's any basis for the actions against him without explaining why there's no basis for those accusations. If he says enough times that those who suspect him are idiots, people will start to believe him - at least, that's what he seems to be banking on.

4) Once he realizes that I'm not going to be lynched, he starts breadcrumbing a switch over to Sakako. This is very subtly done, but he's trying to do it enough posts in advance so that it appears that he suspected Sakako all along.

@Monkey
Any comments on the more recent developments? What do you think of Sakako?

I've got a scum read on him. His "I suck at scumhunting" comment seems like a lack of commitment to help the town.

Well I don't really care if I get lynched, it will just be annoying having to wait for a while.

Sorry if I can't practice scumhunting - I'm actually trying pretty hard here, you know. If you don't like it, then that's your problem, but I'm actually trying to save you here, Neto.

He doesn't care if he gets lynched, yet he's trying?

Note that he never really pursues either of these cases. He just posts them and leaves them be. I daresay that if I left him alone, he'd take up the wagon against Sakako in a few posts, and when challenged, he'd bring up these very posts as evidence why his switch isn't scummy. Note too his choice of a new target: Sakako, who is also on the defensive.

[AlmasterGM]

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

I strongly agree with this. The only thought in the back of my mind is that he is could actually be a legitimately depressed emo teenager who wants validation, in which case his behavior would be more understandable. This theory is slightly supported by his strange avatar. He has a pretty detailed game history wiki page and he's already been scum twice - anyone with some spare time want to do a bit of meta research?

[Netopalis]

Almaster: I did a quick iso glance-through of his 2 games. Remarkably similar play...But, I don't really have a town read to compare it with, so take it with a grain of salt. Also, I'm not really a huge fan of using meta.

[MonkeyMan576]

It's pretty clear that I said that I said that I dislike all random votes, particularly those that land on someone who already has one. He turns it around and says that I don't like random votes unless someone else is already voting for that person. The first position is logical, the one that he tries to make me sound like I am advocating is not.

You clearly said second votes are scummier than first votes. This is the point I was taking issue with. I am not misrepresenting your position.

While I don't really like meta that much, I think that this is a fairly extreme example of when it is acceptible - to show that a player regularly does something out of the norm, and that it shouldn't be taken as a scumtell. He seems extremely determined, though, that nothing that I say will dissuade him from his course.

I never said nothing you say would change my position. It's just that I don't find your arguments convincing. I'm not obligated to change my position just because you present an argument.

Essentially, here, he's trying the old propaganda technique of denying that there's any basis for the actions against him without explaining why there's no basis for those accusations. If he says enough times that those who suspect him are idiots, people will start to believe him - at least, that's what he seems to be banking on.

I'm claiming that the cases against me are weak. Not all cases are strong cases.

Note that he never really pursues either of these cases. He just posts them and leaves them be. I daresay that if I left him alone, he'd take up the wagon against Sakako in a few posts, and when challenged, he'd bring up these very posts as evidence why his switch isn't scummy. Note too his choice of a new target: Sakako, who is also on the defensive.

You're my primary case right now. While I am capable of pursuing more than one case at a time, and am currently doing so, it seems to me you are trying to scare me off of my case against you. This is the first time you've actually posted a formal case, up until now, your cases have consisted of...

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.

This is consistant with your tactic against me, which is to exaggerate your case and try to convince others to join you based on said exaggerated case.

Then here, you make the case that as long as you have meta, you should be able to make any poor argument you want and not be scummy...

You can feel free to suspect me for this. I honestly could care less. I've been lynched for it before, but I'm not going to change my playstyle to appear more townie, since that's what scum players do, and since I don't want to ring any false bells based on that. I can link to at least 3-4 games in which I make these same arguments as town, and if you check my Wiki page (Last updated November 2009, I really need to update), I emphasize the same sentiments.

[Netopalis]

1) You said:

So you're saying it's okay to vote without a reason so long as its

not

a first vote?

A proper characterization of my statement would be

So you're saying it's okay to vote without a reason so long as its a first vote?

Also, I used meta to justify the fact that I don't like to put up random votes or contribute until I have something to say, not to justify the building of a case.

[MonkeyMan576]

1) You said:

So you're saying it's okay to vote without a reason so long as its

not

a first vote?

A proper characterization of my statement would be

So you're saying it's okay to vote without a reason so long as its a first vote?

Also, I used meta to justify the fact that I don't like to put up random votes or contribute until I have something to say, not to justify the building of a case.

I disagree with both statements. As far as meta, it's still a scummy argument to say that you can use meta as an excuse to present a scummy argument and not expect opposition.

[Netopalis]

But I didn't use Meta to present an argument. I used it to present the lack of an action.

[AlmasterGM]

Almaster: I did a quick iso glance-through of his 2 games. Remarkably similar play...But, I don't really have a town read to compare it with, so take it with a grain of salt. Also, I'm not really a huge fan of using meta.

I'm not in love with meta either, but if he actually is what I suggested, then, well, his play would make logical sense.

To be fair, though, he was scum in both of those games, so it would be foolish to ignore that connection and only focus on his possible innocence. I suppose I'd be fine with pursuing a Sakako wagon.

[Netopalis]

I'd be OK with Sakako, I guess. The discussion with Monkey seems to be rather circular in nature at this point, and it seems like we're actually getting somewhere productive with interrogating Sakako.

Unvote, vote: Sakako

[MonkeyMan576]

I'd be OK with Sakako, I guess. The discussion with Monkey seems to be rather circular in nature at this point, and it seems like we're actually getting somewhere productive with interrogating Sakako.

Unvote, vote: Sakako

Note that Neto criticizes me for supposedly breadcrumbing a Sakako switch(which I wasn't doing), then he himself switches to Sakako.

[Netopalis]

Oh, and also: A quote.

"Newbie card" is now no longer a legitimate excuse for any mistakes I may make, so anyone trying to meta me, don't let that factor into your explanations.

[Netopalis]

*shrugs* The problem I had was with you setting it up so far in advance. It looked as if your posts were designed not to build a case, but to justify a switch later.

[Sakako]

Guess it's back to the queue with me. I really don't think you guys should lynch me, but it doesn't look as though I'm going to be saying anything new anytime soon, so that's the end of it.

[MonkeyMan576]

*sigh*

If Sakako is determined not to play.

Unvote:
Vote: Sakako

[Netopalis]

Defeatism is also scummy. Sakako, you're not going to get anywhere with that sort of attitude. Chin up, defend yourself, present a decent case against somebody. Stretch if you have to. Tell me who you think is the scum and why.

[Espeonage]

Defeatism gets you knowhere. Trust me.

[Netopalis]

Note: L-3.

[Vi]

Vote Count Vi

[4] Sakako - (DeathRowKitty, xRECKONERx, Netopalis, MonkeyMan576)

[3] MonkeyMan576 - (Espeonage, Lowell, AlmasterGM)
[1] DeathRowKitty - (almightybob)
[1] almightybob - (hitogoroshi)
[1] AlmasterGM - (kyle99)
[1] Lowell - (Nikanor)

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

[1] Not Voting - (Sakako)

With

12

alive, it`s

7

to lynch!

Deadline

is at 7:30AM Pacific Time on Wednesday, February 24th.

Douche Count

[0] hitogoroshi - ( )
[size=0]Nikanor has one day before he is prodded.[/size]