Mini 1003 Mafia - Game Over

[chihuahua0]

My Chihuahuas conform this by faxing

a kitty

to Zang's bunny. Many are outraged.

Be careful, this is my first game out of the newbie forums.

[chihuahua0]

Oh, and here's my random vote:

VOTE: AClockworkMelon for making a pun out of a movie that had got the NC-17 rating. And because I see you too much.

[chihuahua0]

21

bottles of beer on the wall...

UNVOTE:
VOTE: nopointinactingup

Vote, now.

[chihuahua0]

How is bandwagoning a scumtell?

I think it's a scumtell if a person is the 3rd or 4th person to vote. However, hammering is a towntell (according to the wiki and second-hand accounts).

The town works best if it's composed of coordinated, organized and rational members rather than a mob of individuals who change votes every time the wind blows.

Sorry

[chihuahua0]

21

bottles of beer on the wall...

UNVOTE:
VOTE: nopointinactingup

Vote, now.

Are you high?

I'm too young to be high.

How is bandwagoning a scumtell?

it definitely isn't in this phase of the game... was just looking for a "reason" to cast a random vote

but

I do belive that bandwagoning is more the thing a mafioso does when game progresses, since then, losing the option of hiding behind randomness and initial disinformation, he has to do something... and the last remaining thing (except lurking...) which does not imply own, new, fresh thoughts is bandwagoning

You're forgetting that scums work as a team, "coordinated, organized and rational members rather than a mob of individuals who change votes every time the wind blows."

Good point. But are you suggesting that the town should act like a mob?

[chihuahua0]

chihuahua0, I have no idea why you voted nopointinactingup. For one thing, nopointinactingup voted Tasky before you changed votes, so your voting reason is moot. Neither AClockworkMelon nor AWA have voted, either, yet you did not address them in your post.

Sorry, that was a mistake on my part.

But now we have three people at L-5. It's

about

a 1/4 chance at least one of them are scum.

[chihuahua0]

Chihuahua's argument is funny.

My arguments always seem funny.


Now let me try to restate this:

The chances that at least one of the scum had been voting on right now. We need to focus on those people's agurments (including me, unfortunately for

me

).

[chihuahua0]

@Magna

Way to rag on me for something I more or less retracted. But yeah, I get why the tunneling argument is illogical. My bad.

I'm kind of curious about Chihu's argument of "we have a 1/4 chance of lynching scum!". You do realize that means you have a 3/4 chance of lynching town, right? Just checking.

Good point. I talk too much.

Way

too much.

By the way, you may call my Chi, Chihuahua, C0, Chi0, Chihuahua0, but

not

Chihu. It sounds bad, and C0 and Chi is easier to type anyways. Just want to give everyone a headsup.

[chihuahua0]

I'm lost here. I need some time to read over the last few pages.


a) which role do you prefer to play (no esoteric roles please)? in particular, do you prefer being mafia or townie?

Anything besides Townie.

b) how would you characterize your playing-style?

Talkative and accusing. I post too much.

c) if you were to cast an arbitrary vote, who would you vote for?

Hmm...do you mean random votes? Or votes between two wagons.

d) what do you think about bandwagons?

If the person is condemned as scummy, yes. Policy vote wagons are fine too.

e) what do you think about RVS?

I don't know what it is.

[chihuahua0]

@nopoinatactingup:

I'll answer your questions.

1> Are you Scum?

This is a test question, and almost any answer I use here will be used against me. No answer.

2> How do you hope to find scums?

The moment someone slips up and everyone piles onto him/her.

3> How do you feel about Magma's attack on you?

I need to go back a little bit to look at it, but I have a gut feeling that he might be using me.

[chihuahua0]

On another thought, he's just pointing out flaws in my logic, like if this is a Newbie game. I keep starting these games on the wrong foot, which might affect my metagame, if I stay on this site.

[chihuahua0]

The reason I didn't answer question one because you wouldn't be asking the question unless you are going to examine my response. Of course everyone will claim town at this stage of the game. And because of my other posts, I thought that my answer would be read as scummy.

@Equi: About thinking about Magma using me. Look at the post below.

[chihuahua0]

chihuahua0: You didn't answer these questions.

But now we have three people at L-5. It's about a 1/4 chance at least one of them are scum.

Clarification of how you got to this result, please. I don't give points to students who don't show their work.

d) what do you think about bandwagons?

If the person is condemned as scummy, yes. Policy vote wagons are fine too.

No comment on pressure bandwagons? Would you only join bandwagons on people who are "condemned as scummy"?

chihuahua0, you voted for nopointinactingup way back in post 62 as a random vote, and you haven't moved your vote since. Who do you think is scum?

These are in addition to the question I asked following your post.

Thanks for reminding me.

1. Well, the 3 people at L-5 doesn't really apply anymore, but I'll "show" my work. There are twelve people playing this game, correct? So with three people, there is

about

of 1/4 of a chance that

at least

one of them were scum.
Of course, that also means that there is at least a 1/3 chance that one of them is town, or a smaller chance that one of them is a cop or a doctor.

2. I would join a pressure wagon, if there is countless evindence that the person is scum. But I won't self-hammer myself, unless I'm a jester (which is considered an unhonorable role, so it's not likely I'd ever be a jester).

3. I thought I changed my vote. I need to look back a little.

No I didn't . Unfortunately, I don't have any vaild reasons to vote for any of the wagons right now. But it seems like you are leaning towards Lemon, am I right? (I might be wrong).

[chihuahua0]

and now another question

for chihuahua0

(I have to make sure he doesn't have the "overlooked-excuse"):
tell me what you think about RetroAudio... I really want you to answer this in great detail, pick apart everyone of his posts...

do not dodge this question!

(well, it isn't technically a question, but still

answer it

)

Okay, I'll answer it.

I looked at the last few pages and he hadn't talked a lot. Plus he went V/LA for one day, but after that, he only posted a few times. So, he's either:

Lurking
Inactive
Don't know what to do


If he doesn't post a lot in the next few days, I'll vote for him for lurking.

There. I used my brain .

[chihuahua0]

Wow, there seem to be a relationship between Tasky and AClockworkMelon. Relationships usually means scum, or masons.

I bet scum, but it would be rash for me to vote for one of them right now.

[chihuahua0]

So what are you saying?

[chihuahua0]

So what are you saying?

I don't quite know what point you are saying in post #200.


Oh, by the way:

UNVOTE:

I'm withdrawing my vote. Right now, I don't know who might be scum, but I'll just keep this vote until I'm sure or to use as a hammer.

And now to answer these questions:

Relationships usually means scum, or masons.

If you think a player may be a town power role, and you are town-aligned, please don't say something like this! You're just pointing out people for scum to kill.

That said, this post looks like you are fishing for masons. Why did you bring this up?

There could be masons in Normal games, right? I just don't want someone reminding me that relationships could be masons.

I bet scum, but it would be rash for me to vote for one of them right now.

How would it be rash? If you think they are scum, you should be voting!

Due to previous experience, people think that joining small-sized wagons mean scum unless they really think that the target is scum. And I don't remember why I said that in response to.

Preview Post:
@Untrod Tripod:

1. You got me stuck here. It doesn't matter now, (I think I was referring to RetroAudio), but voting for lurkers is a policy vote.
2. When I see that two players are constantly posting to each other, with some posts off-topic, they could know each other's role. That usually means that they might be scum, but in other games it could also mean masons, lovers, etc.

But maybe it's scum. I need to look back.

[chihuahua0]

Wow, there seem to be a relationship between Tasky and AClockworkMelon. Relationships usually means scum, or masons.

I bet scum, but it would be rash for me to vote for one of them right now.

There is post #183. So, according to some of the other players, Tasky might be scum, right? But Lemon, RetroAudio, AClockworkMelon, and I are the biggist suspects.

One of us

might

be scum, but not all four of us.


I'll just vote for one of them, even if it means everybody else accusing me of being scummier:

VOTE: AClockworkMelon

[chihuahua0]

@Equinox: Because if people repeatly lynch me and I am revealed as town, I will be branded as a noob. I am determineted to stay with this site, and I am going to develop a metagame.

I

think

Lemon, AClockworkMelon, Tasky, and RetroAudio might be scum. But yet again, everyone have a reason to vote for one of them.


Oh, and by the way, I haven't seem Chevre post for awhile.

@MagnaofIllusion: Looks like I'm the VI, again.

[chihuahua0]

@Quoi: Good argument, even though you're attacking me.

By the way, you forgot to unvote, or the mod messed up the vote count.

[chihuahua0]

make up a sample post (very approximative, you can also explain what would be in it), which could be written by chihuahua0 and which satisfies following conditions:
a. It would make you vote for him if he posted it.
b. If another post was even slightly less scummy than that post, you would not vote chihuahua0 for it.

What is the point of this exercise?

[chihuahua0]

Mod: Sorry, but I request to be replaced. I can't handle three games at once.