mini 958: Just Another Mafia Problem - GAME OVER!

[JDodge]

/conform

[JDodge]

Vote: MafiaSSK

see: Buttonmen

almost /outed after he joined tbh

[JDodge]

vote: rover9000

Not random.

LOOK AT ME I HAVE REASONING

NO YOU CAN'T SEE

[JDodge]

So as of current I have two votes on my wagon on page 3. Both are based off of policy lynching me. This is not fine for one of the voters, JDodge. He has made an anti policy lynching thread in MD so this is clearly odd for him to vote me solely based off that fact. This is especially considering the fact that this was a serious vote from JDodge and a serious vote means you would be a fan of their lynch.

QED:

Unvote, vote JD

Thanks! You're the exception to the rule. That is how much I really don't enjoy playing with you.

1. What previous experience do you have with Mafia games?
2. How would you describe your playstyle?
3. What would you consider your best Mafia game and your worst?
4. Do you prefer Random Question Stage or Random Voting Stage and why?
5. If we've gather no more information toDay and you were the deciding vote, who would you vote based off of what we have?
6. What time zone are you and when do you post?
7. Do you get nervous before posting?

1. Nope. Not at all. Only the 60 or so games I've played on here previously, and I haven't learned a damn thing from any of them.

2. Do some poking around in MD and find out yourself.

3. If elected I will raise your taxes

4. there is no stage

5. I would vote SSK because he's a toolbag

6. EDT, when i feel like it/have time

7. I nearly faint pressing submit

I would like to again bring attention to this:

Not random.

1. What is your reasoning
2. Why did you not give it to begin with
3. What do you stand to gain from not giving reasoning aside from obscuring your motivation for voting someone and keeping from sparking discussion?

[JDodge]

So as of current I have two votes on my wagon on page 3. Both are based off of policy lynching me. This is not fine for one of the voters, JDodge. He has made an anti policy lynching thread in MD so this is clearly odd for him to vote me solely based off that fact. This is especially considering the fact that this was a serious vote from JDodge and a serious vote means you would be a fan of their lynch.

QED:

Unvote, vote JD

Thanks! You're the exception to the rule. That is how much I really don't enjoy playing with you.

Tell me, for one, how can there be an exception to the rule since you used all definitive vocabulary in that thread?

Because I define those rules, thus if I choose to make an exception I can?

And for two, what makes me so damn special I deserve to be an exception to it?

Every single game I've ever played with you you skate by on the bare minimum then act like this when you're pressured on it, and I'm sick of it. So please, prove me wrong, then I won't care anymore. There's no point in playing with people who are not even playing the game, and at very least most of the chronic lurkers are like that for a

reason

.

And three, we can not trust that I am an exception to this rule as you are biased especially after a case has been written on you with a vote.

So I cannot define the exceptions to the theories by which I play - theories which I myself define I might add - because I might be biased in changing them.

Yeah.

I think I will comment on this part. Why do you ask these questions? How is placing a not random vote without reason that significant in the RVS?

There's random and there's not random. There is no RVS, and I forget who posted that thread about it (either Shea or Shanba, I think it was Shea) but I recall agreeing with it entirely. There is no RVS, there is no RQS, and I'm sick and tired of people defining stages within a dynamic game, especially considering that the circumstances change continually and considerably depending on the situation.

Now, if someone were to vote on page 15 with just "not random", how would you expect people to react? Why should we let people skate by just because it's page 2?

[JDodge]

Because page 2 is a totally different world than page 15? You just give this speech about how circumstances should be what we determine acceptability by and then say that we should ignore the huge circumstantial differences between pages 2 and 15. Whether you like it or not there is a certain zone at the beginning of the game where voting for little to no reason is perfectly acceptable and in fact expected of players so we can begin to generate content. If we replaced that with super serious late day play day 1 would like this.

vote atila the hun cuz i dont like barbarians

look at the roman's scummy voting lets lynch him

k

Awwww, you're like me circa 2008 :3

Yes, there are huge circumstantial differences between pages 2 and 15. That is completely irrelevant to my point, which is that if a vote has a reason,

you should state your reason

. There is no such thing as a vote with no reason to it - randomness is a reason, not liking a person (MEMEME) is a reason, anything is a reason. Not giving a reason is pointless - any "reactions" you get are going to be less than if you'd just stated your reason beforehand. All you're going to get is a bunch of minor psychological feedback that has minimal relevance to anything more than whether or not someone is bothered by it.

I can appreciate that you two have some history. However, JD, please clarify this: What 'reason' do you attribute to most chronic lurkers, and why do you feel that SSK doesn't have a valid 'reason?'

I attribute boredom with the game to chronic lurkers. SSK signs up for so many games, I doubt he'd be "bored" with things, hence I believe him to just be taking the piss, which I believe to be a good reason to off him.

I see what you're saying -- really I do -- but I myself have some biases and inherent 'rules' that, while flexible to a certain extent, don't change all that much. If you have a bias, why would you change it without a very good reason?

I have no solid rules. Anyone reading my writings on theory can see that I speak solely in theoretical senses, and that I myself cannot declare them to be true - I do only what I feel necessary for achieving my win condition, and nothing more.

Tell me, how do you think we leave the "random" stage? How do you, personally, recognize that we have shifted? (I can appreciate that you may think this question null, as you seem to not acknowledge the existence of a "stage." Please answer regardless.) How do you think other people may recognize this, if different from your recognization?

I feel there are no stages because it is a dynamic game, so no, I'm not going to give you a cop-out answer so that someone can later point to that and say OH LOOK OH LOOK OH LOOK. I don't see any reason to demarcate a game into stages, nor do I see any reason to have a random vote stage whatsoever. Anything even minorly justified (such as my own vote) is going to be inherently better than random because you will spark discussion (such as this one) and get the ball rolling, as opposed to not sparking discussion (see everything else) and then suddenly saying OH WE NEED TO PLAY THE GAME NOW.

I feel that the recognition of a random voting stage by the majority of the MafiaScum populace is a tragic lack of understanding in the basic theoretical concepts behind the game itself.

3) I was planning to give it, I just wanted to see reactions.

What reactions did you see, and why was this important to your methodology?

[JDodge]

3) I was planning to give it, I just wanted to see reactions.

What reactions did you see, and why was this important to your methodology?

I saw you calling me out and I saw Elias and socrates wondering why I voted. It's important to how I'm playing because I want to see how people react to things. I really wanted to wait for rover, but I sensed tension from more than just you regarding that vote, and I figured "wait for rover" wouldn't have worked at that point.

So your motivation for revealing it when you did was that you were worried it would bring heat upon you, right? (Note: This is in and of itself not an incriminating question; self-preservation isn't just a scum thing tbh)

Basically, I find it useful to place a vote like that very early in the game to get us discussing things early and so I can see reactions and gauge why they react that way.

Fair enough.

[JDodge]

I see what you're saying -- really I do -- but I myself have some biases and inherent 'rules' that, while flexible to a certain extent, don't change all that much. If you have a bias, why would you change it without a very good reason?

I have no solid rules. Anyone reading my writings on theory can see that I speak solely in theoretical senses, and that I myself cannot declare them to be true - I do only what I feel necessary for achieving my win condition, and nothing more.

I shall search out your wisdom.

Look in MD, you should be able to find the first Book of JD thread; that thread has a link to the first. Read the first one first (obviously) or the second one will make significantly less sense.

Tell me, how do you think we leave the "random" stage? How do you, personally, recognize that we have shifted? (I can appreciate that you may think this question null, as you seem to not acknowledge the existence of a "stage." Please answer regardless.) How do you think other people may recognize this, if different from your recognization?

I feel there are no stages because it is a dynamic game, so no, I'm not going to give you a cop-out answer so that someone can later point to that and say OH LOOK OH LOOK OH LOOK. I don't see any reason to demarcate a game into stages, nor do I see any reason to have a random vote stage whatsoever. Anything even minorly justified (such as my own vote) is going to be inherently better than random because you will spark discussion (such as this one) and get the ball rolling, as opposed to not sparking discussion (see everything else) and then suddenly saying OH WE NEED TO PLAY THE GAME NOW.

I feel that the recognition of a random voting stage by the majority of the MafiaScum populace is a tragic lack of understanding in the basic theoretical concepts behind the game itself.

Just because you don't agree with something doesn't mean it isn't there. Same thing with whether you feel it's unimportant. (I'm not saying it's important, per se; it's just there. See my rambling on stages, below.)

I didn't say I disagree with it, I said that delineated stages do not exist. I say that no delineation should attempt to be made, for that will lead solely to harmful arguments over delineation.

As far as "stages" go, yes I agree that the game is dynamic, but anything can be broken down into observable stages without necessarily affecting (or inflicting upon, as it were) the structure of the observed phenomenon. The trick here is delineating where and when that stage-shift occurs.

There should be no delineation, because there are other ways to start the game. Implying that a game will always go into observable stages is fallacious.

Hey guys, I would just like to take a moment to point out how useless this theory conversation is. Regardless of whether or not the RVS exists, proving it one way or another certainly doesn't find scum, its simply divides the players into "right" and "wrong". So what say we move on? Those of you who feel the RVS exists probably also feel that we're out of it at this point anyhow.

It's more helpful than your nothing!

It helps me think better. I know that if I need to look at evidence, I'll be able to look at these questions and the random posts and they could possibly help us later on.

Then why feel the need to even state "RQS TIME!"? Why the need to wait if you just want something to go on later?

Not only that, it allows less oppertunities for a mislynch to happen later on in the game.

Enlighten me as to how.

That's what it boils down to. There's a slightly longer, more convoluted explanation, but yeah.

I'm not afraid of words. I'd like to see the longer explanation.

[JDodge]

Hey guys, I would just like to take a moment to point out how useless this theory conversation is. Regardless of whether or not the RVS exists, proving it one way or another certainly doesn't find scum, its simply divides the players into "right" and "wrong". So what say we move on? Those of you who feel the RVS exists probably also feel that we're out of it at this point anyhow.

It's more helpful than your nothing!

I've already lynched four mafiosos while you were debating.

Seriously though, as far as someone can do something on page 4 day 1, I've been doing something. And even if I were doing nothing, your theoretical argument is worse than nothing. At least "nothing" doesn't make a whole lot of noise that can be lurked through.

If you're so concerned about lurking, then start calling people out; there's no reason to stop a discussion (which is better than nothing inherently) just because you're worried someone will lurk through it.

[JDodge]

It wasn't actually open for anyone, as it was directed at him, but why do you think that breaking it down into stages helps anything? What does saying "Here's RVS and here's RQS" do at all?

Perhaps nothing,

for you.

Perhaps something for me. I like things in neat little boxes.

The issue is that nothing in mafia falls into neat little boxes; the game itself is an indefinable concept, more of a genre than a game in and of itself. If we must consider it a game in and of itself, it is one of infinite variations, with each little tiny thing being a completely different game - you cannot use definites because nothing itself is definite.

Tell me, how do you think we leave the "random" stage? How do you, personally, recognize that we have shifted? (I can appreciate that you may think this question null, as you seem to not acknowledge the existence of a "stage." Please answer regardless.) How do you think other people may recognize this, if different from your recognization?

I feel there are no stages because it is a dynamic game, so no, I'm not going to give you a cop-out answer so that someone can later point to that and say OH LOOK OH LOOK OH LOOK. I don't see any reason to demarcate a game into stages, nor do I see any reason to have a random vote stage whatsoever. Anything even minorly justified (such as my own vote) is going to be inherently better than random because you will spark discussion (such as this one) and get the ball rolling, as opposed to not sparking discussion (see everything else) and then suddenly saying OH WE NEED TO PLAY THE GAME NOW.

I feel that the recognition of a random voting stage by the majority of the MafiaScum populace is a tragic lack of understanding in the basic theoretical concepts behind the game itself.

Just because you don't agree with something doesn't mean it isn't there. Same thing with whether you feel it's unimportant. (I'm not saying it's important, per se; it's just there. See my rambling on stages, below.)

I didn't say I disagree with it, I said that delineated stages do not exist. I say that no delineation should attempt to be made, for that will lead solely to harmful arguments over delineation.

I can say that

you

don't exist; that doesn't make it so. I get your point, though, about saying that a delineation should not be made [I disagree, however].

Actually, you can't prove I exist, nor can I prove you exist. You saying I don't exist would make it so to your subjective reality.

As far as "stages" go, yes I agree that the game is dynamic, but anything can be broken down into observable stages without necessarily affecting (or inflicting upon, as it were) the structure of the observed phenomenon. The trick here is delineating where and when that stage-shift occurs.

There should be no delineation, because there are other ways to start the game. Implying that a game will always go into observable stages is fallacious.

I can't take responsibility for your reading "always" into my implication. But, more often than not, there is a RVS. I'm not going to drum up stats to prove it; I know I'm right.

You can't split a game into stages as a rule of thumb if they don't always happen - it's unsound on a theoretical stage and intellectually disingenuous.

Hey guys, I would just like to take a moment to point out how useless this theory conversation is. Regardless of whether or not the RVS exists, proving it one way or another certainly doesn't find scum, its simply divides the players into "right" and "wrong". So what say we move on? Those of you who feel the RVS exists probably also feel that we're out of it at this point anyhow.

It's more helpful than your nothing!

I'm not sure I agree that our digression is helpful; therefore, I'm not going to continue in this thread. After this game, I'll probably start a thread in MD.

Another question, JD: How can general arguments over delineation be harmful, yet our discussion is more helpful that Elias' "nothing?" I truly don't follow the logic.

Because I fear what happens when the delineation permeates.

[JDodge]

I'm a bit behind, and I probably won't be able to get around to things until Monday. Please, bear with me a bit.

[JDodge]

JDodge has not posted in thread within 24 hours of being prodded. As per the activity rules, I will begin looking for a replacement. JDodge will be replaced if I can find a replacement before he posts in thread.

Over the past week, I've been busy writing papers, studying for tests, got assigned jury duty, worked 6:30-6:30 saturday and sunday, had to do all the work for the Song Contest and still couldn't get the chance to get to this. Since my free time doesn't seem to be getting any slack in the near future, I'm going to have to unfortunately bow out at this point. My apologies to magnus and the rest of the players.

[JDodge]

Hey guys.

My class is (almost) over with only finals left, so I'm not too worried about time anymore. I'll be able to read up on this over the next couple of days and get back to you shortly.

(me)

[JDodge]

The fact that my internet has been cutting out has delayed me until now. I'm starting my read-through now; I will be going through the thread from where I left off, answering the points that I feel need answering. If anything I mention has already been tackled, please just assume I haven't gotten that far yet until I finish my read-through. My idea is to emulate what I would have said had I been here as closely as possible.

[JDodge]

If you're so concerned about lurking, then start calling people out; there's no reason to stop a discussion (which is better than nothing inherently) just because you're worried someone will lurk through it.

I'm not super concerned about lurking. My point is that all you accomplish is making a lot of noise and drawing attention away from the game thread. I'm not trying to stop it solely because people will lurk through it, but also because there are things more relevant to THIS game to discuss.

I would say that this is highly relevant to this game solely because the topic came up within this game.

@Elias_the_thief: Anything is better then nothing, scummy or not. Now lurking does not equal scum, but at least a scummy post gathers information.

This shows a complete lack of understanding for what I was saying. Further, this is WRONG. A bunch of space taken up by theory discussion is counterproductive, because it draws away from whats happening in OUR game, and encourages/enables lurkers. Worse than nothing.

And yet, it's still better than empty space. Guess which one you're generating!

Was there any particular reason I stuck out to you? How did you choose? random.org? Coin flip? Gut?

In retrospect, if rover is more anti-town than I am, why is your vote still on me?

No, it was basically gut. It was better than a random vote, but really the choice between you and rover was based on nothing solid. Also, I never said rover was more anti-town, I said no lynch is more anti-town than voting mod. At this point I don't feel strongly that either of you are scum, I just don't see the point in unvoting until I have somewhere better to put my vote.

In the vein of "somewhere better to put my vote", I'd like to see confidanon show up and respond to some of the points raised against him, and I'd like to see rover show up at all.

Justify your "gut".

Based on things that had happened to the point where I responded, I felt that was the best place for my vote if the day were to end there.

What exactly do you mean by "this is the best place if the day were to end there"? You do realize how much that sounds like "this is what will look best for me if someone goes back to look later", right?

So when he gets all bent outta shape about me telling him what to do 'cause I wanted to know his reaction to Elias's vote, it tells me he's annoyed at being looked at, which is of course a scum motivation.

Do you think that only scum would be irritated by being looked at? It seems to me that if someone is being overly forceful in their approach, town would be annoyed by what they perceive as a witch hunt. Do you feel that your explanation is more likely or is it the only one you thought of?

Happy now?

No need to get your nose all bent out of shape.

[deleted per request]

1) I would imagine the prod he was given by the mod.
2) Learn to alt, noob.

Mod:

I would like you to note that I

massively

disapprove of your protection of people who can't use their alts properly by removing posts that I did not have the chance to read, thus robbing me of important information. People should be responsible for their own actions, you shouldn't be holding their hands especially when you use it in order to delete posts from the game. Hell, if I were scum in one of your games I'd start randomly posting from alts so that I can have all my unpopular comments deleted.

But I digress

.

Deleting posts per request has been and will be made based on a judgement call in regard to their contents and context. Not all requests will be fulfilled. However, noted.

Whose alt is NS?

Seconding.

Moving onward to page 6.

[JDodge]

Also, on the No Lynch vote, I've seen rover do it before . . . I'm thinking it's something he always does. Last time he did it, he did it to spark discussion, something that isn't particularly scummy.

Stop putting words in his mouth.

I wanted to gather information needed so I can push an decent case on someone. I look at how they react, how much contents they post, among other things.

So why wait until an arbitrary point later instead of starting the game off with it?

I find it interesting how you word this as wanting to "push a decent case on someone" as opposed to wanting to find scum. Secondly, what did you find from the answers to these questions? From what I can tell, you haven't even touched on that.

A accidental random lynch is very well possible if you're not careful with what you're doing. With Random Question Stage, not only does it bring in more information and help reduce the risk of mislynches, it also reduce the possibility of an lynch during the very early stage of the game when we're just getting started, as it would help stimulate discussion in an easier, safer, and a potentially better way.

Mislynches are always going to happen. I'd rather mislynch now than mislynch on day 3.

I'm rather interested in why you bothered asking these questions and then completely ignored them. It reeks of distraction, and shame on

everyone

else for not realizing that.

Shattered is such a pill.

Lynch all lurkers is good

Why aren't you going after lurkers, then?

Elias seems to be sort of floating about.

Since my reaction test has served its purpose, I will unvote.

!!!

Explanation please

Shattered, why is it that you continue to insist that JD gives an explanation to something he doesn't support the notion of? If JD was a game hunter, you wouldn't insist he give you a speech on animal's rights. You can't expect someone to define an end to a stage they don't believe neccessarily exists.

I feel very strongly about animal's rights. If you don't cook the animals right, they'll be a waste.

Alright, now stop. This is one step away from a religious debate.

Philosophical debate, actually. I think that demonstrated my point quite well, really.

Do not put anyone at L-2 this early. We have over two weeks of discussion left, doing so this early is dangerous. Some uninformed player could accidently lynch Super Mega Awesome Pimp! right now.

A great reason to keep him there, actually. It's always good to weed out those sorts of people.

Very odd that you are insisting someone place votes, especially with no reasoning.

grrrrnkl

It seems quite obvious that he's stated his reasoning multiple times. It is

not suspicious for someone to push a wagon they are suspicious on.

Onward to page 7!

You seem quiet, cow. Why is that?

You're trying to make an random response to an serious response. Yeah hasdgfas should have explained his vote, but he did say it wasn't random.

eh wat

It's called "sarcasm"

You do have a point, but I think it's okay to random vote in Page 3, when we don't have much substances or discussions going on.

But he

specifically said it was not random

.

I think SSBF is a good target at this point.

JDodge: His totally unecessary theory discussion which I heard was counterproductive.

"I heard"?

Yeah, you keep drinking that kool-aid, man.

This is wrong using a ni-unto definitive tell. It's called buddying/coaching.JDodge is committing this tell by 1, using a smiley face to the direct person and implying that they are like JDodge. This gives the person happiness and likes JDodge better despite their own beliefs. To add on to this, JDodge begins coaching Shotty on what to do. He gives advice as to the reason why its long. This nurtures the buddying while still seeming town.

So I was buddying up by being nice and then telling someone why something someone else was doing is bad? Yeeeeeeeeeah.

Could you please expand on this last part on how self-preservation isn't just a scum thing? All anti-town factions want to stay together as long as they can.

When was the last time you went into a game as town and thought "gee I can't wait until I die"?

Thanks for reminding me why I wanted you gone from the start

OH CRAP I PUT A SMILE THERE I GAVE US AWAY AS SCUMBUDDIES I'M SO SORRY

I never said I had thoughts on who was scum. I said I had insights to alignment.

Can you enlighten me on the difference?

SAMP has a join date, you should ask him that.

Alts, could mean the join date is useless. He's just being thorough.

I've got too much to comment on. I'm moving on to page 8 now, and I

know

you are all going to really hate me for these posts in the long run.

[JDodge]

Suspecting ConfidAnon-rover connection through 177-180.

Wow, great strawman. That was not what I said at all.

Can you clarify exactly what your point was? I'm confused.

This is going to sound unnecessarily harsh, but SSBF's posts make me groan every time I read one. I mean, they're just

bad

.

Not commenting on the majority of the discussion re:SAMP and his little meltdown over his self-proclaimed "persecution because I said I had an ego". This was an

easily predictable response

. You have no one to blame but yourself.

Can you guys call me when you stop your petty little bullshit and start playing the game please? You're acting like a group of 10 year olds, seriously. It's depressing.

Page 9 seems like time-wasting and wheel-spinning. Can we get back into some arguments without it devolving into stupidity again?

Goes completely off-topic talking about the Gunnkerig Court.

Pretty scummy read here. Mafia games are for mafia games being played, not for off-topic stuff like the Gunnkerig Court.

if i were at a desk it would have a head-shaped hole in it now

Yeah there's not much going on. Disappointed by how little is being contributed by Unsight.

I feel it prudent to choose between the two biggest wagons, so I am going to

unvote, vote: ConfidAnon

and request a claim. Most of the stuff on Buttonmen seems easily explainable by inexperience and stupidity. Confid has been around a lot longer and has no such excuse.

[JDodge]

Mod:

Extension so that Sandman can give some contribution before the end of the day please

[JDodge]

Vote: ConfidAnon

Let's move, kiddies. Playtime is over.

[JDodge]

Not sure how I feel about this. While Confid looks incredibly bad now, this is also an opportunity for scum to ride an easy mislynch if we're wrong and then we're going into a shitty D3 MYLO (assuming 5-3). I need to reread and rethink this game.

I look at things this way. There are two possibilities.

1. He's scum, there was no accident.

2. It was an accident, which makes him

just as dangerous to the town

.

Either way, I'm not inclined to let him live and I'm certainly not inclined to entertain another wagon unless there's some extremely good reasoning behind it.

I want Cow to further flesh out his case on SSBF to see if that extremely good reasoning is there. Quite frankly, I expect more out of you and I'm disappointed by how little you actually seem to be contributing. On another note, why exactly are early day FoSes "useless"? How is expressing a suspicion an anti-town action?

Shotty, I want you to explain exactly what you think exonerates Confid aside from it being an "easy mislynch", because even if I am wrong it's an easy mislynch

for a reason

. Have you considered that we can then analyze who was on any potential mislynch to give us a better idea? I swear, nobody who plays this game understands the idea that sacrifices need to be made for the good of the town.

Unsight - keep up the good work.

SSBF - Wake up and smell the coffee, bud. You need to step it up or be stepped on. It's time to make your choice.

Maemuki - see the question re:FoSes I asked cow above, and answer it for yourself. If either of you post before the other, "what (s)he said" is an acceptable response if you feel it covers your views fully.

Confid: Who are your actual suspects aside from Sandman?

Everyone else: Step it up or be stepped on.

[JDodge]

L-2

SAMP: Wed May 19, 2010

7:37

pm

L-1

SV: Wed May 19, 2010

7:39

pm

L-0

SSBF: Wed May 19, 2010

7:41

pm

^ Either there was a complete failure to use the "Preview" button among all 3 of you or something really scummy just happened here.

I look at things this way. There are two possibilities.

1. He's scum, there was no accident.

2. It was an accident, which makes him

just as dangerous to the town

.

Either way, I'm not inclined to let him live and I'm certainly not inclined to entertain another wagon unless there's some extremely good reasoning behind it.

@2 - There's something inherently wrong in implying we should lynch someone even if they're town... and it boggles my mind that none of the 5 people who posted after JDodge bothered to mention it before voting ConfidAnon.

I'm perfectly willing to try it again, though!

Vote: SSBF

Willing to entertain the following wagons as well:

cow, Shattered, SAMP