mini 958: Just Another Mafia Problem - GAME OVER!

[ConfidAnon]

/confirm

[ConfidAnon]

Vote Super Awesome Mega Pimp!

Anyone with an exclamation point in their screen name will cause headaches.

[ConfidAnon]

Seriously?

Already an argument?

Seriously?

-_-

[ConfidAnon]

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. I've played a few games here, a crap ton on Epic Mafia, Spies 6, and Spies 7.
2. I try to ask relevant questions, I guess.
3. Best game, Werewolves in the WAMB. Worst game, any time I've replaced out.
4. Random Voting Stage. Much more fun.
5. The guy with the exclamation point.
6. CST, whenever I can.
7. No

[ConfidAnon]

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.

I completely agree with this.

[ConfidAnon]

its cool you agree and all, but how exactly is this post any more useful to the game then the theory conversation I was just discouraging?

It's not particularly the most useful post, but it does attempt to steer things in the right direction.

@ConfidAnon: What do you think about Elias still voting for me even though he's admitted that another player is more anti-town than I? (I ask this because you seem so enamored of Elias' desire to put the RVS/RQS discussion to rest.)

Anti-town =/= scummy.

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.

I find it interesting that you brought up this point by asking an unreleated third party instead of the person himself. Why is that?

Vote: SAMP!

Happy now?

Joining the only wagon larger than the one on you?

I don't like this.

Unvote, Vote: Shattered Viewpoint

[ConfidAnon]

I find it totally fascinating that you're asking me something I've already clearly answered. Not just answered -- but answered before you even asked. (I knew someone would.)

Skim much, scum?

Fail. Your right, I skimmed to check if you had asked before that and missed it because it was in between some quotes.

My bad. While that point is now moot, I still don't like the transition over to the wagon competing against your own this early in the day.

[ConfidAnon]

I've been skimming this game, and for that I apologize.

Unvote.

Shattered Viewpoint looks better to me after I've fully read the thread =P.

I just saw his vote out of context.

SAMP: How long have you been playing on MS? Mafia in general?

[ConfidAnon]

How does this help the game at all? SAMP has a join date, you should ask him that. In addition, I'm still not sure why you feel better about Shattered Viewpoint. Why should this make me feel you're not just skimming the thread? I don''t see anything to make me feel better about you.
unvote vote: ConfidAnon
Bring more to the game please, not useless comments. There's no analysis, there's not really any sort of substance.

Certainly.

I asked Super Mega Awesome Pimp! how long he has been playing because his play seems really scatter-brained, characteristic of a newer player. Didn't think to look at the join date. I'm leaning newer town on SMAP, but it's not a 100% confident read.

Shattered Viewpoint's vote switch was scummy, but he has protown posts (asking questions, contributing to discussion) to back it up. Both town and scum commit scumtells, and as of right now, I think his town points outweigh his scum points.

[ConfidAnon]

It's also scummy. You're not better than the town. In fact, having too much of an ego, such as you, is a sign of scum, because it's a sign of arrogance. Arrogance that you can trick the town, arrogance that you're better than everyone, which just won't work as a town member, as you need people on your side. FoS

This IS bad. There are arrogant townies and arrogant scum members.

And why don't scum need people on their side?

[ConfidAnon]

I'm beginning to think SAMP is an alt.

[ConfidAnon]

I see it more as "alt wanting to screw around by being as anti-town as possible."

Which is really annoying.

[ConfidAnon]

I see it more as "alt wanting to screw around by being as anti-town as possible."

Which is really annoying.

Based on comments he made in another game I think this is his first MS account.

If that's true . . .

. . . I think I just died a little.

[ConfidAnon]

There are, but it's incredibly scummy, and I do consider it a sign of scum, more of a subconscious thing that scum just feel like they're better than town.
Scum do need people on their side, but they have more reason to be arrogant, from what I've found, because they are the ones trying to trick people. While they do need to get people on their side, it's just that they have to listen to their argument. They don't necessarily have to work together the same way townies should be, if that makes any sense.

I still disagree, but your viewpoint is valid. It's a personal interpretation thing, no need arguing about.

How in the hell have I been anti-town at all, much less as anti-town as possible?

Arrogance. Antagonistic attitude. Seems like you want to start a fight.

Regardless of alignment, you aren't helping us, and if we get to deadline without a good lynch target, I'd be willing to policy vote you.

[ConfidAnon]

I have NEVER done either of the latter two this game!

Arrogance? Fine, you can call my ego whatever you want, but it's still not anti-town.

Having an ego is not antitown, but letting the ego interfere with the game is. When several people are pointing out that there's a problem, they're probably right.

You know what? I'm going to purposely mess with Super Mega Awesome Pimp! username up until he stops being an *******. Starting with this post.

Not gonna help.

So, based off of the information you have currently, you'd vote for rover9000. But then, you don't list rover in your list of suspicious players. Then you actually cast a vote for SAMP!

Care to explain this discrepancy?

I'd like to see an answer to this.

[ConfidAnon]

ConfidAnon is still not contributing anything useful to the game.

By your requirements, what will I have to do to be deemed useful?

How is bringing up the possibility of SAMP being an alt not useful? An experienced player playing his way should be judged differently than a newer player.

And also, how is my saying arrogance is not a scumtell not useful? I am arguing my viewpoint over whether someone's behavior is scummy. (Current ruling: extremely anti-town, but not neccessarily scummy.)

[ConfidAnon]

By your requirements, what will I have to do to be deemed useful?

Has, I want you to answer this (not asking to be a smartass, but I want to improve my play, and learn from your answer.)

Also, good analysis Elias.

[ConfidAnon]

I find it kind of odd that you compliment an analysis that implicates you as scummy and essentially useless. FOS.

A part does not make a whole.

Obviously I would disagree that I am scummy (although I was useless for the first few pages of the game.) The rest of the analysis, however, is a good post.

[ConfidAnon]

I find it kind of odd that you compliment an analysis that implicates you as scummy and essentially useless. FOS.

A part does not make a whole.

Obviously I would disagree that I am scummy (although I was useless for the first few pages of the game.) The rest of the analysis, however, is a good post.

Well I'm still confused. If that analysis was good, why are you still not voting? You'd think a "good" analysis would be able to convince you to vote someone.

You bring up good points on several players.

I only have one vote.

I don't know where I want it as of right now.

[ConfidAnon]

Specifically, which players do you think I have strong points about? Who would you consider voting at this point? You seem to be avoiding naming anyone specific that you find scummy, and being noncommittal is very anti-town, if not just plain scummy.

The top three on your lists have good points upon them, but the one I think deserves the most attention is rover.

In fact,

Vote: rover.

Imo, going after a lurker isn't that big of a scumtell on it's own (unless its possibly an attempt to derail another wagon, which to my knowledge isn't happening here.) Your summary of rover's play is fairly accurate, and could easily be explained by rover bing scum.

Or, alternately, can you be less useless and do some scumhunting?

Imma try.

See above for an answer to your question.

[ConfidAnon]

Why is me agreeing with a case scummy?

Why do I have to have an entirely new point to vote for someone when valid reasons already exist and have been stated?

I can guarantee that, at the moment, if someone were to post a case on me, you would agree with it and vote for me.

Would your actions be scummy then?

[ConfidAnon]

My second suspect is ConfidAnon. I don't get a sense of scumhunting from him. I read his ISO and I don't see many pointed questions or other tell-tail signs of active scumhunting. I see waffling in regards to his vote. I see piggy-backing on posts of others. I don't see genuine scumhunting. FoS: ConfidAnon

rover - These are the same points that others have brought against me. In essence, Unsight is piggybacking onto me. Why is my agreeing with the case on me vote worthy, but you haven't even commented on this? Double standard?

[ConfidAnon]

Everyone who hasn't thrown their hat in the ring

- What do all of you who haven't said anything about it think about the me/rover/has scenario? Not that many have commented on it.

[ConfidAnon]

@confid:

I still don't think you understand what piggybacking is. Agreeing with someone is not piggybacking. Voting for the same reason as someone else is not NECESSARILY piggbacking.

Piggybacking is voting for someone by doing the equivalent of copy/pasting someone's post, saying "This", and voting. That is essentially equal to your reason for voting.

So, explain to me the difference between my vote and Unsight's vote? I don't see the factor that allows you to comment on mine, but not on her's.

Also:

SAMP:

- Why did you fail to respond to this?

[ConfidAnon]

Buttonmen well he doesn't have any analysis whatsoever is honestly pushing a good lynch. I should be policy lynched in every game I'm in until I have sincerely proven myself and no longer actively lurk even if I give a big anlysis post afterwards. Buttonmen is not scummy he would in fact be acting pro-town for his advocacy of my lynch.

Ewwww . . . emoposting.

Less moping and more playing would help.

[ConfidAnon]

Buttonmen well he doesn't have any analysis whatsoever is honestly pushing a good lynch. I should be policy lynched in every game I'm in until I have sincerely proven myself and no longer actively lurk even if I give a big anlysis post afterwards. Buttonmen is not scummy he would in fact be acting pro-town for his advocacy of my lynch.

Ewwww . . . emoposting.

Less moping and more playing would help.

How is this emoposting? I'm posting the truth. You are being pro-town and not anti-town by rooting for my lynch. Just because I'm being the one anti-town here does not mean that I'm being emo by saying you're right in wanting to lynch me. I am trying to tell people to unvote you.

I'm ConfidAnon, not Buttonmen.

[ConfidAnon]

Hi -- I'm here. Had some Reality visit me on Tuesday; offline since.

If I'm not being replaced, I'll have some thoughts this evening.

Reality Television, by chance?

[ConfidAnon]

It has?

Whoa, my bad. I'm modding a game, and I guess after doing the vote count I thought I had done everything I needed to do. Sorry.

Anyways, I find it very odd that rover ignores this, yet replaces his vote on me when he can't get support for his vote on Shattered Viewpoint. He called SV "ultra suspicious." I take it that he feels strongly on that subject. No reason for him to move off of someone "ultra suspicious" as town.

Which is why I think he's scum jumping over to a bandwagon which is more easy to gather support for.

[ConfidAnon]

It has?

Whoa, my bad. I'm modding a game, and I guess after doing the vote count I thought I had done everything I needed to do. Sorry.

Anyways, I find it very odd that rover ignores this, yet replaces his vote on me when he can't get support for his vote on Shattered Viewpoint. He called SV "ultra suspicious." I take it that he feels strongly on that subject. No reason for him to move off of someone "ultra suspicious" as town.

Which is why I think he's scum jumping over to a bandwagon which is more easy to gather support for.

Convenient timing.

What do you think of the non-rover9000 players here?

If rover is scum, you look very bad in comparison.

I don't like MafiaSSK's AtE and lurking, although this could be a neutral-tell depending on his meta.

I'm not too keen on SSBF right now, but it's a gut read.

[ConfidAnon]

All the more reason for you to vote roverscum!

[ConfidAnon]

All the more reason for you to vote roverscum!

doesn't look like you're going to get the support for this. Who else do you think is scum?

I need to take a look back at buttonmen to get a feel for why he's getting voted so I can make an informed decision on him.

At this point, I would be willing to switch over to MafiaSSK for his total lurkage.

Has - why do you not support what I am saying? Am I totally off my rocker? I'm trying to learn how to play well, and feedback on my suspicions would help even if I'm totally doing this wrong.

Actually, anyone can answer that, not just Has.

[ConfidAnon]

I did not say I did not support what you're saying. I'm not totally against a rover lynch, actually, it's just that you're the only vote on him, and deadline is saturday. You're probably not going to get enough votes to lynch him in time. That's what I'm saying, not that I don't agree with you.

I see your point.

Unvote, Vote: MafiaSSK

[ConfidAnon]

Now I would REALLY like a summary of TBM case. However, the fact that he still hasn't done any serious analysis whatsoever in the game. Along witht he fact that he has a L3 wagon on him that he could analyze.

Unvote

Call this a L2 warning

The fact that you only post when there is some heat on you is fairly suspicious.

[ConfidAnon]

Overall, I'm going to Vote ConfidAnon for dodging and being the most obvious guy that's not contributing.

What have I dodged, exactly?

[ConfidAnon]

Unvote

for replacement.

You use Elias_the_thief's analysis as the reason for why you target rover and state going after a lurker is not a scum tell.

You say you'd which over to MafiaSSK and admit it's for lurking alone. Going after lurkers still doesn't look scummy?

My comment about going after a lurker was not in reference to rover, it was in reference to buttonmen (in elias's analysis).

Completely drop your lurker for a bandwagoned lurker on a whim.

You have dodged making any sort of decision or commitment on who you think is scum.

This is very scummy.

The way you wrote the first line of this quote makes it sound like I was voting rover for lurking. I was not. I originally voted him for the points in elias's analysis, and his play after I voted him furthered the fact that I thought he was scum.

I did not drop my rover vote "on a whim" as you say. That is misrepresentation - you even quoted the post that prompted me to do this in your 377. Hasdgfas pointed out that there was a deadline upcoming, and I was not gathering support for the rover case. Because the person I had the strongest read on wasn't going to get lynched, I switched to MafiaSSK, a lurker who has had some scumtells.

The second line is also blatant misrepresentation. You say I have dodged any sort of commitment or decision on who is scum. This is a

bold-faced lie.

I have said that I believe rover to be scum, and brought up new, original points against him. I have explained why I think MafiaSSK is the second most likely to be scum. I have mentioned my gut read against SSBF. But you've ignored all of this.

I'm fairly certain this playerslot (rover, sandman) is scum, but the current gamestate (two competing wagons, one on myself) forces me to

Vote: TheButtonmen (L-1.)

[ConfidAnon]

I completely failed with that. I had no idea MafiaSSK voted for Button.

Anyways, I will

Vote: MrSandman

because of the things I brought up yesterday.

[ConfidAnon]

Nice shiny, scummy bandwagon.

SSBF - Be sure to tell us the results of your analysis of my case.

Your FoS sounds vaguely like your biding until my wagon gets bigger so you can vote and have an excuse.

But MrSandman is still scummier from yesterday.

[ConfidAnon]

vote: Super Smash Bros. Fan
FoS: ConfidAnon

When I did some rereading during night, I realized that SSBF was actively being scummy, while ConfidAnon was just not contributing that much. Now, at the start of the day, he FoSes Confid(I always find early day FoSes scummy, because they're useless) AND he uses the fact the Buttonmen was a Doctor as part of the reason. Did YOU know that he was a Doctor before he was lynched, SSBF?

While I do agree that early day FoSes are useless and stupid, I skimmed through both and CA needs to post more. He was tunneling in MrSandman, which I don't really mind until...

Imo, going after a lurker isn't that big of a scumtell on it's own (unless its possibly an attempt to derail another wagon, which to my knowledge isn't happening here.) Your summary of rover's play is fairly accurate, and could easily be explained by rover bing scum.

This is all you initially say about rover (that and copying Elias and buddying Elias etc.). Anything else to add?

Are you purposefully misrepresenting what I said, or did you miss this in your reread?

Or maybe I wasn't clear. My lurker comment was in reference to Elias's point on Buttonmen. Early on he was suspected for going after a lurker.

I agreed with Elias's points on rover, and I found new points on both rover and his replacement as the game went on, all of which I have mentioned in thread.

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.

Both this and SSBF's FoS sound like scumstalls.

JDodge - I'd say Sandman, SSBF, and Shotty.

[ConfidAnon]

Bah!

I see a trend emerging . . . SSBF probably gets lynched tomorrow.