Mini 1003 Mafia - Game Over

[Chevre]

Extremely sorry for the delay, I'm not really sure where to start. After a reread, I find my initial suspects to be no different from the main ones: AClockworkMelon, Tasky, and chihuahua0. I'd rather just jump in now, so if there's any specific ponderings you want to ask me about, I'll answer.

[Untrod Tripod]

Ok...I want to specifically know why you think ACM, Tasky and Chi are scum.

[Chevre]

I guess I should've expected that as the first question.

AClockworkMelon:

What about aggressive voting rubs you the wrong way? This is only my first non-newb game, but I thought putting pressure on someone, perhaps through voting, was a good way to find scum.

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.

Unless I am defining "aggressive voting" incorrectly, these two posts eem to have radically different statements, yet they are only 7 posts apart.

...I guess there really isn't much more I can find than that. He isn't really active lurking, but I like the point against him that if Equinox were truly looking for an easy lynch, chihuahua0 would have been an optimal target.

Tasky is definitely the votehopping. 7 votes so far, including the one on AWA, which I find useless. There is a difference between lurking and flaking. AWA didn't post but twice and didn't prodavoid, so I don't think AWA was lurking.

chihuahua0 is suspicious because of his newb behavior, which is tricky, because while it's forgiven in Newbie Games, it makes other types of games trickier. If I were to place a vote though, it would definitely be on hiim.

[AClockworkMelon]

I guess I should've expected that as the first question.

AClockworkMelon:

What about aggressive voting rubs you the wrong way? This is only my first non-newb game, but I thought putting pressure on someone, perhaps through voting, was a good way to find scum.

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.

Unless I am defining "aggressive voting" incorrectly, these two posts eem to have radically different statements, yet they are only 7 posts apart.

I don't understand how you can't see the difference. I think pressuring people with votes is a good way to achieve results but by changing your vote every other post you are partially neutering your vote's influence. Changing your vote constantly is

not

aggressive voting. It's indecisive voting.

[Lemon]

You have the most posts (which is kind of a null argument), but you also have attacked the most people, and very early for insignificant slights.

How is this scummy, Lemon?

It does not necessarily need to be, but I find it that we should not absolutely trust Magna. We have no good reason to.

Top 2 suspects with explanation, please.

My 2 would have to be RetroAudio, for the suspicious dodging of questions, and ACM, for the aforementioned "active lurking". I would put Chi for a close 3rd.

So I can only see a few reasons for using this defense. I think Lemon might be using it because he thinks that it might excuse his own poor play because if we excuse Chi for bad play due to his join date, we might excuse Lemon. No one in the town is excused from poor play. Poor play is anti-town. You trying to excuse poor play with the excuse that he's a n00b. Deflecting suspicion from a bad player is suspicious.

IGMEOY Lemon

Or... we could go the third route. HE ISN'T NECESSARILY SCUM. Here, I will invoke your term, NASAME. Just because he's newb, doesn't mean he's scum. I feel he's more newb townie than newb scum, thus I feel that it doesn't warrant a lynch.

Lemon

1. what is inherently protown play?
2. What is inherently antitown play?
3. Why is Magna antitown? What exactly scares you about active players?
4. When are you going to stop referencing the wiki page instead of using your own reasoning?

1. I don't necessarily feel there is inherently a guaranteed protown claim. Anything protown can similarly be imitated by a mafia.
2. Working against the town. Trying to create confusion and chaos. Lying is also mostly antitown.
3. He is not necessarily anti-town, I just don't trust him completely.
4. I've been using both, not one exclusively.

Acting newb is different from acting scum, and basically policy lynching doesn't help us. Unless you find it does help, or can conclusively rule out newb from scum.

I don’t consider any play outside of the Road to Rome as newbie play. You venture outside those confines and play poorly you deserve to get lynched. Sink or swim. The Road to Rome is there for a reason. Even though I have plenty of experience playing elsewhere I didn’t play outside RtR until I felt certain I was well acclimated to MS. It may be harsh but it’s my standard.

And now you have stated it yourself, it is effectively a policy lynch. Not everyone is you, and policy lynching doesn't help us.

You have the most posts (which is kind of a null argument), but you also have attacked the most people, and very early for insignificant slights.

Way to dodge the question. I asked if you could substantiate my activity as “out of the ordinary”. Which means something that would indicate I am scum based on how I play. Not anyone else. Furthermore I don’t know what you expect players to do. Early on the only suspicious behaviour is likely to be fairly insignificant in the long run. How else do you expect to get things going? Do you expect scum to just blurt out “Lynch me I’m Mafia”?

No, but you even attacked unsuspicious behavior. I can't indicate you are scum, but I will say that I don't completely trust you for your play. And no, I do not expect scum to blurt it out, but I don't expect scum to act inherently scummy. Why not act pro-town to shake off suspicions?

1. Over-focusing on basically the easiest target in this entire game. Especially as metagame shows he's really newb.
2. I'm not saying that you're tunneling. I'm saying that we're focusing on him, because he's an easy target.

1. Do you know what metagaming actually is? It’s using past performance of an individual player to determine whether they are Town or scum. What you are doing is using general Wiki-info to support your theory that Chi is Town. Also, please prove how I am over-focusing.
2. What do you mean “we” are focusing on him? You aren’t, you are defending him to the hilt when he doesn’t bother to defend himself.

1. Apparently YOU don't know what metagaming actually is.

Metagaming is using ANY AND ALL information NOT related to the game at hand.

Metagaming is a broad term usually used to define any strategy, action or method used in a game which transcends a prescribed ruleset, uses external factors to affect the game, or goes beyond the supposed limits or environment set by the game.

Which I believe post counts, what type of posts, join dates, etc. transcends the game.

The mafiascum's wiki definition of metagaming is surface level at best.

2. Which may be my fault. He's getting more suspicious the more he decides to do nothing, but I don't firmly believe in his scumminess.

Some people forget this knowledge. You can probably tell Chihuahua has.

Prove it. I see tons of assertions out of you with little support.

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.

I don't find anybody terribly suspicious, YET. I don't like randomly throwing down my vote on the slightest suspicion or twitch.
And... I am admittedly not that great at scum-hunting. But simultaneously, I don't agree with the idea that throwing down accusations is beneficial to the town.

Your method of not voting is not Pro-Town. It’s overcautious as you appear not to want to make waves and potentially offend anyone. Town do not have any inherent reason to be so indecisive.

I don't really care if I potentially offend anyone. I've basically made waves in the game by defending Chihuahua and using Too Townie. I don't see how that is evading the public eye. Active lurking would make me appear overcautious, but last I checked I wasn't.

If anything your repeated and pointless defence of Chi leads me to believe you know he’s Town and want to reap the benefits if he is lynched.

I don't necessarily see how it is pointless considering that he just might be a newb townie instead of a newb scum. Also, I don't see how my defense is exactly leading him to be lynched either. If you mean the convoluted, if he's townie, I'm probably townie conclusion, then I could see the benefit, but in all realisticness, unless you conclusively see him as scum, then I believe it's almost a policy lynch by the large majority.

[Zang]

Votecount-

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

Not Voting: Chevre, Lemon

7 to lynch

Deadline is July 20 at 9:00 pm EDT.


Prodding youngminii

[Chevre]

ACM: Can you more clearly define agressive voting? The only way I can define it is if you switch votes frequently and with reason, otherwise it's just regular voting.

[Quoi]

Vote: Chihuahua0

He is the one player who can be said to not have made a pro-town post the whole game. Let's run through his ISO:

(Post 0) - Enters the game already playing the newbie card.

(Post 1) - Random vote for ACM, partially because he saw him too much, when he could be getting meta reads off of him instead.

(Post 2) - Switches to an inoffensive vote on an inactive player, for not voting, when the player in question had in fact voted.

(Post 3) - Strongly appeals to wiki/authority in saying that 3rd or 4th on a bandwagon is a scumtell, then apologizes for having offended a policy of what is perhaps seen as the biggest town figure at the time.

(Post 4) - Suggests that the town shouldn't be coordinated with itself?

(Post 5) - Explains nopoint vote with flawed logic, and suggests that only those at L-5 should be suspected.

(Post 6) - Possible newbie card in saying that his arguments always sound funny, and fails at justifying his nopoint vote logic.

(Post 7) - Ignores a question, instead commenting on how he should contribute less and proper abbreviations for his name.

(Post 8) - Answers a bunch of useless questions, continues to say that he should talk less (only scum would want less contribution and talking).

(Post 9) - Openly says in question 2 that waiting for someone to get caught and wagoned is his "scumfinding strategy".

(Post 10) - Criticises Magma for pointing out his logical flaws?

(Post 11) - Says that he didn't want to answer a question because he was worried that his answer would be examined. <--- BIGGEST tell of the game

(Post 12) - Admits to using flawed logic in voting nopoint and paying so little attention to the game as to not know his own vote.

(Post 13) - Mildly dodges a question.

(Post 14) - Fishes for masons.

(Post 15) - Asks for clarification on a posts meaning, apparently having ignored the Tasky/Retro debacle.

(Post 16) - Unvotes, and says it is to save for a hammer. Also ignores Tasky's request for an ISO review on ACM.

(Post 17) - Uses his own post as an example of the popular opinion, suggests that only 1 of a given 4 players can be scum, and votes ACM without actually having given any reasons.

(Post 18) - Suggests that he wants to get lynched as town so he can play the newbie card more. Says that Lemon, ACM, Tasky and me are likely to be scum but still without reason.

[AClockworkMelon]

ACM: Can you more clearly define agressive voting? The only way I can define it is if you switch votes frequently and with reason, otherwise it's just regular voting.

My definition was included in the post of mine that you quoted:

What about aggressive voting rubs you the wrong way? This is only my first non-newb game, but I thought

putting pressure on someone, perhaps through voting

, was a good way to find scum.

And here's why Tasky's style isn't effective at pressuring people:

by changing your vote every other post you are partially neutering your vote's influence

If I know that Tasky will change his vote over nothing I'm not going to be under very much pressure when he decides to plants his vote on me.

[nopointinactingup]

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.

No one is saying you should overlook anybody. What we are saying is that it is considerably harder for scums too look "too townie", but it is very often that many town people looks townie. Thus, you should not dwell too much on the "too townie to be town argument".

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.

No. In fact if he had just said that he was a townie, I'd be more inclined to believe he was really a townie and just leave it there. And refering to your question, I do not think everyone who's playing on this site would be uncomfortable in lying, I clearly stated that players with Chi's behavior would feel more uncomfortable lying. I expect people like you, Magma, Equinox, even Tasky to lie as if they are genuine thus I do not bother to ask you guys such question.

[quote="MagnaofIllusion]I bet scum, but it would be rash for me to vote for one of them right now.[/quote]

Why would it be rash for you to vote one of them right now. They are both a far cry from a lynch. This level of caution is indicative of scum?

I would do the same seeing as to how fast the Chi wagon seems to be moving despite its flawed evidence.

1. Three votes over 5 real life days hardly qualifies as a fast wagon. Why are you attempting to paint it as such?
2. Please provide support for your assertion that evidence against Chi is flawed. I’ve yet to see anything directed at him that is qualifies as flawed. You yourself point out in 157 that Chi is not approaching the questions from a Town perspective.

1> It's not just votes that what's getting me worked up. It's the majority of active people voting and willing to vote Chi after his newb card. That's why I feel that the wagon is scum driven and that we need to take a look at people apart from Chi.
2> It's not logically flawed. Chi would be found most scummy by my book. However, a notice of Chi's joining date and his proclivity towards unseriousness really drove my scum read on him towards null-read. I would like a more thorough read on him and if and he improves to decide if he really could be scum. And besides, his wagon seems to move too fast to be a scum wagon ( based on the fraction of active players voicing their opinion only, there are too many inactives ).

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.

Another post that uses tainted language in an attempt to discredit someone. Chi has hardly been the target of a quicklynch. In fact that heavy defence of his scummy play by multiple players indicates quite the opposite.

The opposite of what? If there were more people like you around, Chi would've been quicklynched already and regardless of how he flips, we lose valuable Day 1 info. With all due respect to your play, just don't expect everyone to behave like you.

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.

No one knows who scum is except the scum but what we need is your opinion. We don't expect you to be 10000% sure who's scum ( that would be suspicious actually ). We need you to voice your opinion on who's acting scummy and find scums and one of the best way of doing that is to vote and pressure, not to make fluffs or to solely answer what's addressed to you.

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

What? .. Chi if you had to put your life on the line, would you randomize your vote like that?

@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.

Chi if you are determined to stay on this site or to not be branded as noob, you should do things to substantiate yourself. Everyone has a reason to vote for one of Lemon, ACM, Tasky, Retro. So what is YOUR reason for voting ACM? Please don't tell me it's random or point out the reasons why others are voting ACM or I will personally brand you as an anti-town noob.

I typically post a lot, but in other games I've played in I've been criticized for being too active. I'm damned if I do, damned if I don't.

What? Please be mega active and we will praise you as king . The joke's out of the way, I mean you are being so terse that it's hard to get any solid read on you.

It does not necessarily need to be, but I find it that we should not absolutely trust Magna. We have no good reason to.

No one is saying they are trusting Magma. Why are you afraid we might be? Do you find him scummy?

My 2 would have to be RetroAudio, for the suspicious dodging of questions, and ACM, for the aforementioned "active lurking". I would put Chi for a close 3rd.

Do you have anything to add or are you going to just use others' reasonings for your biggest suspects?

Right now I'm still seeing more fluffs and zero scum hunt from both ACM and Chi, my two strongest suspects. Equinox, Magma, Tasky and Untrod are currently earning town reads from me while the rest are null. Lemon currently reminds me of the first time I was scum in this site so I have a bad gut feeling about him as well ..

[Zang]

Mindgamer and Youngminii are being replaced

[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.

[Equinox]

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

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

Are you going to defend yourself, then?

Quoi may have made a convincing argument, but it's not a good one if it's wrong. If you're town, you

know

it's wrong. Don't just throw your hands up in the air like this.

Unless Quoi was right?

---

Unvote

Need to look more closely at Lemon, nopointinactingup, possibly Tasky, and youngminii. Unvote is for the same reason as post 221. My reading will have to wait until tomorrow, though.

[MagnaofIllusion]

Just sticking my head in to say I'll have some content later tonight or early tomorrow.

I have some family activities to take care of this afternoon and evening and want to be sure the issues I want to address get the proper attention.

[Quoi]

Unvote

Vote: Chihuahua0

You need to understand that it's only hurting the town if you are a townie and don't want to defend against false accusations.

On the other hand, if you're scum, keep it up.

[AClockworkMelon]

Unvote

Vote: Chihuahua0

You need to understand that it's only hurting the town if you are a townie and don't want to defend against false accusations.

On the other hand, if you're scum, keep it up.

Your vote was already on Chihuahua.

[Chevre]

No acess from July 13th to July 18th. Replace me if need be.

[Quoi]

Unvote

Vote: Chihuahua0

You need to understand that it's only hurting the town if you are a townie and don't want to defend against false accusations.

On the other hand, if you're scum, keep it up.

Your vote was already on Chihuahua.

The rules don't make it clear whether or not unvotes are required.

[nopointinactingup]

@Quoi: Apart from Chi whom everyone is on, do you have any other suspicion?

[Tasky]

I have a little question (well, technically not a question) for everybody who is defending chihuahua0 for a reason which is even remotely connected to the fact that he is (or seems) a newbie... basically this is for Lemon and nopointactingup, but answers are welcome from everybody who would like to answer

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.

[AClockworkMelon]

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 a ridiculous request.

[Untrod Tripod]

I will be V/LA for the next three days. I might be able to post, but probably not. Just FYI.

[Equinox]

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]

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?

[Equinox]

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

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

Are you going to defend yourself, then?

Quoi may have made a convincing argument, but it's not a good one if it's wrong. If you're town, you

know

it's wrong. Don't just throw your hands up in the air like this.

Unless Quoi was right?

<_<