Mini 1003 Mafia - Game Over

[Zang]

Votecount-

chihuahua0 - 3 - (youngminii, AClockworkMelon, MagnaofIllusion) (L-4)
RetroAudio - 2 - (Tasky, Untrod Tripod) (L-5)
Lemon - 1 - (Mindgamer) (L-6)
nopointinactingup - 1 - (chihuahua0) (L-6)
Tasky - 2 - (RetroAudio, nopointinactingup) (L-5)

Not Voting: AWA, Lemon, Equinox

7 to lynch

Deadline is July 20 at 9:00 pm EDT

[Equinox]

Mod: I voted AClockworkMelon in 149.

[Equinox]

EBWOP: 147.

[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.

[Equinox]

The reason I didn't answer question one because you wouldn't be asking the question unless you are going to examine my response.

Do you want us to

not

examine you?

As for the rest of your post, townies have no reason to fear scrutiny. They still win if they die, so they are free to accuse, vote, and defend as necessary. Why are you afraid of people criticizing you?

[Lemon]

Was there a reason Lemon questioned Zang in post 27?

Post 76

@Mindgamer - It may be effective scumhunting, but it is also effective in diverting attention from yourself. And he probably isn't the first to act really pro-town to shake off suspicions. Obviously pro-town is usually for the town, but Magna's type of pro-town pushing seems to be doing is spreading suspicions and attention elsewhere, diverting them from himself.

What I don't understand is how else MagnaofIllusion is supposed to do it. His attacks appear to me to be well-rounded, which is a good thing to do in Day 1 as it spreads attention across the player list and prevents tunneling. I also don't see how he is "diverting [attention and suspicions] from himself." Please explain that last part.

By focusing on others, he is able to change our perspective to focus on them. What I only have is a semi-hunch.

I see it as instead of possibly getting rid of a scum, or focusing our suspicions elsewhere, we focus on his newb play.

I may agree with your defense of chihuahua0 (more later), but this is a poor response to MagnaofIllusion's accusation that you are chainsaw defending. Post more evidence behind your defense of chihuahua0, or I start wondering why you so firmly believe he is town.

Well, that's my defense and my purpose. No other. I just feel is is more newbie, and as you said before (I don't know why it never came to me), an easy target.

let's assume for a moment chihuahua really is a newbie (everyone can pretend to be one, so the other will go easier on him/her)... being a newbie does not exclude that he is mafia...
the thing is: if we go to lynch chihuahua0 because we think he is scum, worst case scenario we lynch an useless newbie townie
if however we don't lynch him, but go for a more experienced player, worst case scenario we lynch a really useful experienced townie...

But in the best case, we get a scum. I think we should push for the best case.

still, I really think we should lynch so early (in case someone was thinking of that now), it would just deprive us precious discussion-time we could use to find scum...

Why would you push for a quick lynch? How would that give us more time to discuss who is scum? This statement in its entirety is suspicious.

As for the rest of your post, townies have no reason to fear scrutiny. They still win if they die, so they are free to accuse, vote, and defend as necessary. Why are you afraid of people criticizing you?

Townies have plenty of reason to fear scrutiny. For one, if you die, you can't play anymore. The other, more game related, would be that if a townie dies, it makes the odds better for the scum.

[Tasky]

The "ANSWER MY QUESTIONS OR DIE" Wall of Text

I don't understand this vote. Tasky fears bandwagons... why?

but even if used later in the game, how exactly is the mafia supposed to use it? by starting a bandwagon from it, just so I can change target soon after? or by accusing me to be scum try to have me lynched, but by then you know already that it's just my playing style so that won't work out either?

Are you planning on continuing this practice later in the game, when hard stances are more critical to town's win condition? I thought you said this vote-hopping was an early game tactic.

for the first question: this post gives you the answer
for the second... if you look at the whole quote and not just at a part of it, you will get that I really see it as early game tactic only...

look, as I told the switchy-vote-thing is a technique for the early game, from a certain point onwards, when a discussions is forming/has formed it's no longer necessary

_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_

let's assume for a moment chihuahua really is a newbie (everyone can pretend to be one, so the other will go easier on him/her)... being a newbie does not exclude that he is mafia...
the thing is: if we go to lynch chihuahua0 because we think he is scum, worst case scenario we lynch an useless newbie townie
if however we don't lynch him, but go for a more experienced player, worst case scenario we lynch a really useful experienced townie...

But in the best case, we get a scum. I think we should push for the best case.

but you can get scum only if you have a better alternative... give me a good scum-tell on someone else and I'll accept that... btw, right now my vote is on RetroAudio, not on chihuahua0 anyway...

still, I really think we should lynch so early (in case someone was thinking of that now), it would just deprive us precious discussion-time we could use to find scum...

Why would you push for a quick lynch? How would that give us more time to discuss who is scum? This statement in its entirety is suspicious.

damn... that was a bad typing error... correction:
"still, I really think we

shouldn't

lynch so early (in case someone was thinking of that now), it would just deprive us precious discussion-time we could use to find scum..."

Extremely pro-town play can be both pro-town and mafia.

this is nonsense... extremely pro-town = extremely pro town... nothing more, nothing less...
pro-town is good, anti-town is bad; that's it.

[nopointinactingup]

@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.

1> This makes me suspicious of you. Of course everyone knows this is a reaction-test question. However, given the current meta I've got from you, I'd expect you to answer "I'm not scum" more if you were really town. There's a good chance someone like you being scum would feel awkward about lying and thus, post a No answer.
2> What if they lurk? What if they never slip? What if a townie makes a seemingly scum-slip? Would you actively contribute anything to find scums or just bluff and hope that they will slip?
3> Do tell what you mean by him using you?

I'm going to mimic Minii's vote on Chihuahua and his FOS on Tasky.
VOTE: Chihuahua

Nothing new to add?

Because the question is basically stupid and nonsense. You should know that.

Now how would you know?

@nopointinactingup & youngminii - Then do you think that we should policy lynch Chi for being a newb?

No I do not think we should policy lynch Chi, especially in this early part of the game. I'd like to actually acomplish smt by looking at various players on Day1 before a decision to lynch.

the thing is: if we go to lynch chihuahua0 because we think he is scum, worst case scenario we lynch an useless newbie townie
if however we don't lynch him, but go for a more experienced player, worst case scenario we lynch a really useful experienced townie...

so, in order to not vote chihuahua0 the odds must really strongly be that another player is scum, otherwise the risk just isn't worth it...

This is not how it works Tasky, you haven't even given Chi a chance. The fact that you're trying to take the easy road to get somebody quicklynched really bothers me.

@Equinox and his typical Wall-O-Text:
1> In your post, you pointed out that Tasky doesn't like bandwagoning. Now, however, he's strongly pushing for a quick lynch.
2> On the Aclockworkmelon actively lurking, I do agree with you but I don't think we can tell yet if he really has some analysis of his own going. His behavior is anti town till now, but I feel it too careless to be scum. However, I feel he needs to speak up and get his analysis going because I'd rather have him lynched then Chi now if he continues to act this way.

Unvote.Vote:A clockworkmelon

3> I personally think Lemon's defense for Chi is justified. I would do the same seeing as to how fast the Chi wagon seems to be moving despite its flawed evidence.

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.

That's the point, if you're just town, you wouldn't be thinking that much ..

[Tasky]

the thing is: if we go to lynch chihuahua0 because we think he is scum, worst case scenario we lynch an useless newbie townie
if however we don't lynch him, but go for a more experienced player, worst case scenario we lynch a really useful experienced townie...

so, in order to not vote chihuahua0 the odds must really strongly be that another player is scum, otherwise the risk just isn't worth it...

This is not how it works Tasky, you haven't even given Chi a chance. The fact that you're trying to take the easy road to get somebody quicklynched really bothers me.

1> In your post, you pointed out that Tasky doesn't like bandwagoning. Now, however, he's strongly pushing for a quick lynch.

don't know if you noticed, my vote is on RetroAudio, not on chihuahua0...
so how exactly am I pushing for a quick lynch?

[Equinox]

Ugh. Another wall of quotes...

Thanks for answering my questions! If I don't address your response, that means I'm happy with it.

The Theory Box

Townies have plenty of reason to fear scrutiny. For one, if you die, you can't play anymore. The other, more game related, would be that if a townie dies, it makes the odds better for the scum.

1. There are other games

that need replacements

, so townies shouldn't fear dying. Fearing scrutiny could get one lynched faster, so that's one reason to not fear being analyzed inside out.
2. I see where you're coming from here, but this isn't as big of a concern early in the game. Right now, we have eleven suspects. This list needs to be narrowed down. If we get lucky, we lynch scum by the first or second day. Probability speaking, however, we're going to lynch townies. While the odds grow for scum for every townie who dies, we also increase our odds of finding scum for every townie who gets lynched.

This goes into discussion of theory, which can get distracting in a game... so I'll leave it at that.

By focusing on others, he is able to change our perspective to focus on them. What I only have is a semi-hunch.

On the other hand, if MagnaofIllusion is town, that's exactly what he has to do: focus on other players he feels are scum. This hunch feels like paranoia.

@Equinox and his typical Wall-O-Text:

Haha. Yeah, that wall I made* was pretty damn big. I'm not going to do that again... I think.

* = refers to a completed game

---

I didn't see this until Tasky pointed it out. So much for zoning out.

Extremely pro-town play can be both pro-town and mafia. I would rather leave it at more a, don't trust you completely stage. Your arguments are cogent, and I respect that, but with caution.

This looks like you're going into the "Too Townie" fallacy. Explain, particularly the part where you say pro-town play can be pro-mafia.

[Equinox]

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.

[nopointinactingup]

@Mod: I need to take a VLA for a few days

Keep talking people, and expect me in a few days with a huge post.

[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).

[Tasky]

for chihuahua:

read this post and

answer the question at it's end

, really

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.

I still don't get this...

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).

how exactly to you think to get that evidence?
and what exactly is the connection between joining a pressure wagon and self-hammering?

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).

the question was who

you

think is scum, not who Equinox thinks is...

chihuahua0, you should

really

stop dodging questions...

PS: there are a lot of questions you still need to answer... if want to stay in this game I'd really suggest you read the whole game thread, pick up every question which addresses you answer every one of them...

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

)

[Equinox]

But it seems like you are leaning towards Lemon, am I right? (I might be wrong).

No. I'm quoting Lemon because of some of the things he's saying.

My main suspect, who I want lynched, is AClockworkMelon. I'm reading null on everyone else for the moment... with a few slight-town reads.

[AClockworkMelon]

d) what do you think about bandwagons?

I'd rather people vote for someone because they think they're scum than because they want to follow a trend.

Cool. But the question is what you think of bandwagons, not what you think is optimal play.

I thought that to jump on a bandwagon was to follow a trend. My answer was appropriate.

[Equinox]

d) what do you think about bandwagons?

I'd rather people vote for someone because they think they're scum than because they want to follow a trend.

Cool. But the question is what you think of bandwagons, not what you think is optimal play.

I thought that to jump on a bandwagon was to follow a trend. My answer was appropriate.

So, was that what you did with your chihuahua0 vote?

[Lemon]

Extremely pro-town play can be both pro-town and mafia.

this is nonsense... extremely pro-town = extremely pro town... nothing more, nothing less...
pro-town is good, anti-town is bad; that's it.

Unless it's completely unfathomable that a Mafia act fake pro-town *gasp*.

By focusing on others, he is able to change our perspective to focus on them. What I only have is a semi-hunch.

On the other hand, if MagnaofIllusion is town, that's exactly what he has to do: focus on other players he feels are scum. This hunch feels like paranoia.

Extremely pro-town play can be both pro-town and mafia. I would rather leave it at more a, don't trust you completely stage. Your arguments are cogent, and I respect that, but with caution.

This looks like you're going into the Too Townie" fallacy. Explain, particularly the part where you say pro-town play can be pro-mafia.

Maybe it is paranoia, I realized how the Too Townie argument is somewhat flawed, but I agree with the statement on that wiki page (apply it to a general case) "very easily be playing an extremely convincing double-bluff. His posts do a great job of making the implication "I'm town". So, it's easy to overlook him as a serious candidate for being scum, without ever questioning his motives." And like I said above, it's not unfathomable that Mafia act pro-town.

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.

Except, the Mafia knows who their enemies are. Hence they probably could have influenced all the L-5 wagons, thus making them less random.


And honestly, at the "1> Are you Scum?" question to Chihuahua, stop overplaying it. I would bet that regardless of what answer, you guys would pick it apart. If he said he was townie or no, there would probably be some convoluted method to determine that he's lying and convict him on that basis. Also, in regards to nopointinactingup, last I checked, lying on the internet is as easy as it takes to type the words. Why would you be uncomfortable lying to complete strangers in a game where lying is condoned, even somewhat promoted.

[AClockworkMelon]

d) what do you think about bandwagons?

I'd rather people vote for someone because they think they're scum than because they want to follow a trend.

Cool. But the question is what you think of bandwagons, not what you think is optimal play.

I thought that to jump on a bandwagon was to follow a trend. My answer was appropriate.

So, was that what you did with your chihuahua0 vote?

No.

[AClockworkMelon]

At the risk of being shouted down beneath cries of "OMGUS!",

FOS

: Equinox. The 'case' against me is ridiculous. Maybe you're looking for an easy lynch but I don't think you'll find one here. We've had 7 pages of discussion and you're indifferent towards everyone except me? I'm not buying what you're selling, sorry.

[Tasky]

At the risk of being shouted down beneath cries of "OMGUS!",

FOS

: Equinox. The 'case' against me is ridiculous.

Maybe you're looking for an easy lynch

but I don't think you'll find one here. We've had 7 pages of discussion and you're indifferent towards everyone except me? I'm not buying what you're selling, sorry.

if he were going for an easy lynch he would target chihuahua0
AClockworkMelon, please

don't dodge this

:
pick one player (except AWA), look through his ISO and post a comment to everyone of their posts...
I'd like you to be critical and analytic at least once...
I know it's a lot of work, but you haven't posted much of content so you really should start.

_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_

AWA:

please post

!!

@mod:

please replace AWA, he/she hasn't posted anything at all in this game...

I'll UNVOTE: RetroAudio
VOTE: AWA
lurkers are not accepted in this game

PS: RetroAudio, don't think I'll forget about you...

HoS: RetroAudio

[Equinox]

At the risk of being shouted down beneath cries of "OMGUS!",

FOS

: Equinox. The 'case' against me is ridiculous. Maybe you're looking for an easy lynch but I don't think you'll find one here. We've had 7 pages of discussion and you're indifferent towards everyone except me? I'm not buying what you're selling, sorry.

Seriously?

You have contributed absolutely zero scum hunting in this game, and this is your first original FoS. You can hardly accuse me of being "indifferent towards everyone except [you]" when you, yourself, have posted

nothing

in terms of reads towards players or suspicions. You're either piggy backing or spouting theory. I call that active lurking.

Active lurking == SCUM.

Explain what you were doing with your chihuahua0 vote, then. That wasn't you going for an "easy lynch," was it?

[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 .

[Tasky]

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 .

isn't AWA lurking a lot more than RetroAudio? (hasn't posted at all)
why don't you vote him/her?

[AClockworkMelon]

You can hardly accuse me of being "indifferent towards everyone except [you]" when you, yourself, have posted

nothing

in terms of reads towards players or suspicions.

Sure I can. I'll do it again. You're up in arms because I "have posted

nothing

in terms of reads towards players or suspicions" but you're apparently indifferent towards everybody.

Explain what you were doing with your chihuahua0 vote, then. That wasn't you going for an "easy lynch," was it?

I was convinced to vote for Chihuahua primarily because of these two posts.

pick one player (except AWA), look through his ISO and post a comment to everyone of their posts...

Sure thing.

Second Self-Inconsistancy (

in relation to actual game issues

) is a huge scum-tell IMO. Going out of your way to point out the spelling errors in the sample PM while yourself using h8 in place of hate (along with other issues) is being self-inconsistent. Regardless I don't feel it is anything other than a way to generate discussion in this case.

well... I do agree with you that self-inconsistancy is a huge scum-tell,

but if and only if it's related to the game itself

... not if it is related to something like grammar.
just wanted to point out that logical fallacy, done on purpose or not

So for now:

UNVOTE: Lemon
VOTE: MagnaofIllusion

Tasky points out a logical fallacy where there isn't any and votes because of it.

Tasky's Vote Count: 2

Tasky - Seconding Magna's confusion as to your voting for him for saying

exactly

what you said.

the vote was more like symbolic... I don't have any clear ideas yet, so I am just throwing around my vote and see what happens and what reactions I get

Oh. Right. His vote was

symbolic

.

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.

UNVOTE: MagnaofIllusion

VOTE: chihuahua0

because I absolutely did not get what you said in that first line of yours

Apparently we've regressed to the RVS.

Tasky's Vote Count: 3

UNVOTE: chihuahua0
VOTE: Mindgamer

for trying to form bandwagons

Tasky's Vote Count: 4

I dunno, it looks like Tasky's just rapidly switching targets. He's already voted for 4 different people so far.

I make my opinion known.

I'm definitely going to vote RetroAudio now... for totally dodging my questions:
UNVOTE: Mindgamer
VOTE: RetroAudio

Tasky's Vote Count: 5

AWA:

please post

!!

@mod:

please replace AWA, he/she hasn't posted anything at all in this game...

I'll UNVOTE: RetroAudio
VOTE: AWA
lurkers are not accepted in this game

Why would you vote for someone for lurking while asking for them to be replaced?

Tasky's Vote Count: 6

I don't think Tasky's eclectic playstyle is helpful at all. Even if he does find legitimately scummy behavior it's quickly forgotten so that he can nonsensically vote for someone else a few posts later. He'll argue that there's a method to his madness but I the method is broken. Your vote counts for absolutely no pressuring power when people know that you change it at the drop of a hat. Noncommittal behavior, pointless voting, etc, it's all there. But wait. I already had my FOS on Tasky.

Excuse me if I don't feel like saying what's already been said. People are aware of Tasky's behavior without my making this giant post about it.