Mini #1007 (Game Over)

[Zachrulez]

Hey guys, what's up?

[Zachrulez]

Hi every one, yay for RVS!
VOTE: Hoopla

Hi.

Vote:drmyshottyizsik

I'm not sure I understand the wagon on Hoopla. I can see reason to question whether or not the claim is optimal, but I'm having a hard time seeing how a claim like this would benefit scum. Has scum even historically fake-claimed PGO ever?

[Zachrulez]

Shotty;

did you genuinely vote randomly, coming into the game? I find it hard to believe of all people you somehow got lucky and voted the one player with a bandwagon on her. I think it's likelier that you're lying than this 1/11 chance happening.

I voted at the beginning randomly. I had no idea there would be a band waggon going, personally I really like RVS's so i thought i would get one going, but what most of y'all think I'm saying about this is that I submitted and then failed to read the 40 other posts before mine, but what happened was I submitted it and it must have been delayed for x amount of time, and then i went to work. So when I submitted it there were no other posts after it yet.

I find that hard to believe.

[Zachrulez]

I'm getting a town vibe from Vel.

Illogical does not necessarily equal scummy.

Plus, there's this gem:

I buy it. Not because of the breadcrumb, those are silly. I buy it because I thought Hoopla claiming PGO was illogical and Hoopla usually isn't, so it seemed out of character.

The declarative statement, "The claim was illogical" has 2 problems: first of all, this is a very arguable point, and many would think it was logical. 2nd, why do you know think it was illogical, when earlier you said that you could understand the reasoning behind it.

In short, I agree with AGar.

VOTE: AlmasterGM

Plus this.

I can get behind this wagon.

Vote:AlmasterGM

[Zachrulez]

Oh right...

Unvote: Vote:AlmasterGM

[Zachrulez]

Vigging a troublesome player whose alignment is unclear is the correct vig play for night 1.

Vigging a troublesome player who you have a strong town read is not.

Honestly, his stance on Hoopla bothers me more.

[Zachrulez]

No see, the issue is you said that you could see the reasoning behind her claim at first. (Which indicates it's logical.) After she rescinded the claim, you said it was illogical in an attempt to backtrack and rationalize your initial stance after the fact. The action you committed that was picked up on was quite clear.

As far as why I'm voting you over shotty and VRK. I can see where VRK is coming from. (Even though I don't feel the same way.) Also as I said before, he's giving me a town vibe.

As for Shotty, he still bothers me... however, as scum, why tell such a noticeable lie about a delayed post? Feeling less confident there and more confident in what I'm seeing with you.

[Zachrulez]

Unvote: Vote: drmyshottyizsik

Die

[Zachrulez]

@Zach and redtail: what do you think of the argument between AGar and AGM now that you're starting to see more of their points? The initial points you both brought against him were based on his statement of an illogical claim AND you were agreeing with AGar. Do you still think AGar's points hold up?

I still think AGM's side of the argument is more likely to be coming from scum. His explanation for going after Hoopla after the fact is inconsistent with his initial judgment of her claim. I see it as a point against AGM and agree with Agar and Redtail that it's scummy.

As for the vig argument, I don't find any of that particularly scummy. That kind of argument tends to stem from play style differences. People have different ideas about how certain roles should be played optimally.

[Zachrulez]

Right now though, I think Shotty needs to be lynched. He's claimed scum, and I feel very strongly about lynching scum claims.

[Zachrulez]

I think that Shotty's scum claim makes him much more likely to actually be scum. I don't see it as wasting a lynch.

[Zachrulez]

@Zach: do you still favor lynching shotty?

Yes.

[Zachrulez]

@Zach: do you still favor lynching shotty?

Yes.

Why?

He's claimed scum. He's lied at least once. (And I think more than once.) He didn't seem too concerned about being lynched when he claimed scum, which is very inconsistent with the goals of the role of doctor. His play just says scummy to me in capital letters.

[Zachrulez]

Unvote: Vote:AlmasterGM

Dislike Almaster's 227 where he seems to be pushing on shotty be scum with shaky theories. I still dislike shotty's scumclaim a lot... but the fact that he later claimed doctor and that claim has not been countered seems to point to shotty town on reflection.

[Zachrulez]

2) shotty is a proven idiot and could still be lying town, meaning we out the doctor AND mislynch shotty.

The fact that you throw this out there as a possibility bothers me. I don't think I ever saw anyone mention it, but if Shotty is NOT the doctor and town, he should take the claim back in his next post because this scenario can be seriously detrimental to the town.

[Zachrulez]

Oh wow...

[Zachrulez]

Third time's a charm... but seriously, why aren't you reading the thread?

[Zachrulez]

Eh, we're running short on time, so I'll just go ahead and go.

Not a protective role.

That just leaves Good and Honest.

[Zachrulez]

Show of hands, who would lynch G&H if he doesn't complete the massclaim?

*Shows hand*

[Zachrulez]

Deadline's about 24 hours from now and I'm not sure what my weekend access is going to be like. Given the deadline rules I'm going to change my vote now as I'm ok with an Elleran lynch at this point and I don't want to risk a no lynch.

Unvote: Vote: Elleran

L-1

[Zachrulez]

I didn't hammer Elleran, I don't know where that's coming from.

[Zachrulez]

Anyway 2 things bother me about Good and Honest right now.

1. The refusal to claim at the end of the mass protective claim when she could have easily protested earlier. Why wait until everyone else has claimed to take that kind of stand? Don't like it at all.

2. Other than that toward the end of the day, there wasn't a peep of contribution from her. That looks pretty calculated to me on reflection.

Vote: Good and Honest

[Zachrulez]

KKN's posts having content would separate him.

ConfidAnon I also want to take another look at in light of his misrep of me from the previous day trying to characterize me as "accidentally hammering" Elleran in conjunction with his overall activity level. The displayed lack of attention to the game is alarming.

[Zachrulez]

I encourage everybody to read my last post from yesterday, but here's the summary I want to get across: in my opinion, G&H's refusal to participate in the massclaim, while anti-town, is not scummy. In fact, I almost consider it quite the opposite; if s/he was scum, why not just participate and claim not a PR?

You can easily flip this around and argue it the other way. If G&H was town, why not just participate and claim one way or the other?

[Zachrulez]

You're assuming that your claim that it was a mistake should be taken at face value.

[Zachrulez]

Either way, my point still stands. The only way it could have been a displayed lack of attention is if I honestly made a mistake. In your post, you attacked me of both intentionally misrepresenting you and unintentionally making a mistake.

Fine, it's not a misrep, but it's still scummy.

Why as town would you throw that kind of accusation out there without verifying it?

[Zachrulez]

Plus the fact that you stuck with the vote even after your most specific and powerful point was discredited.

[Zachrulez]

As I have said, I intend to always be honest when playing a game of Mafia.

So, in general, I won't reveal what my role in a particular game is. In our current game, I was only supposed to say whether I'm a "Doctor" (or something similar) or not - but that still has something to do with my role. I have to say it - I don't plan to NEVER reveal my role. In fact, I can think of special situations when I'll do it. This is also my answer to Hoopla's question at the end of Day 1 - that will really depend on the situation.

If you take the bolded as an honest assessment of the kind of player you are, there is a clear scum motivation for you to refuse to claim.

[Zachrulez]

Better yet, lynch Good and Honest. Seriously, one post through the entirety of day 2?

[Zachrulez]

Also I'm going to be V/LA the week of August 9th (Probably through Friday)

[Zachrulez]

Also I'm going to be V/LA the week of August 9th (Probably through Friday)

Will you be available to claim (if necessary) during this time?

No. I'm going to be out of state without access.

[Zachrulez]

Hi.

Hasn't been a whole lot posted since I last checked in.

btw, lynch Good and Honest. (If anyone's actually interested in the points against her...)

[Zachrulez]

Done that already.

Anyway 2 things bother me about Good and Honest right now.

1. The refusal to claim at the end of the mass protective claim when she could have easily protested earlier. Why wait until everyone else has claimed to take that kind of stand? Don't like it at all.

2. Other than that toward the end of the day, there wasn't a peep of contribution from her. That looks pretty calculated to me on reflection.

Vote: Good and Honest

As I have said, I intend to always be honest when playing a game of Mafia.

So, in general, I won't reveal what my role in a particular game is. In our current game, I was only supposed to say whether I'm a "Doctor" (or something similar) or not - but that still has something to do with my role. I have to say it - I don't plan to NEVER reveal my role. In fact, I can think of special situations when I'll do it. This is also my answer to Hoopla's question at the end of Day 1 - that will really depend on the situation.

If you take the bolded as an honest assessment of the kind of player you are, there is a clear scum motivation for you to refuse to claim.

[Zachrulez]

After hearing from my dad this weekend, we won't be taking a trip to Iowa until Friday, so I will be available for a little bit midweek.

[Zachrulez]

@KKN: Okay, you make a fair point. But I think scumhunting is still happening. Also, a question: to what extent do you think your case against Zach (and this applies to everybody else with such a case) can applay to ConfidAnon?

It's less interesting that pretty much every point that ConfidAnon made against me (minus the wagon hopping point) could easily be made against him and more interesting that KKN seemingly isnt interested in him.

Being that his vote is still on Good and Honest despite his assertion that my play apparently makes me very likely scum, I'm getting the feeling that he seems to be rather interested in his vote being off wagon when I'm lynched, and that's something that's bothering me right now.

As for some of the points against me...

I'm not going to respond to anything that accuses me of fluff or one-liners because it completely ignores my approach to the game in general.

I think that Shotty's scum claim makes him much more likely to actually be scum. I don't see it as wasting a lynch.

@Zach: do you still favor lynching shotty?

Yes.

Why?

He's claimed scum. He's lied at least once. (And I think more than once.)

He didn't seem too concerned about being lynched when he claimed scum, which is very inconsistent with the goals of the role of doctor

. His play just says scummy to me in capital letters.

This seems contradictory. Why wouldn't scum be concerned with being lynched? If he wasn't concerned, what does that mean Zach?

The argument isn't as sound as I thought it was at the time. That would be why I'm no longer pushing for Shotty's lynch.

There is this to consider;

I'm getting a town vibe from Vel.

Illogical does not necessarily equal scummy.

Plus, there's this gem:

I buy it. Not because of the breadcrumb, those are silly. I buy it because I thought Hoopla claiming PGO was illogical and Hoopla usually isn't, so it seemed out of character.

The declarative statement, "The claim was illogical" has 2 problems: first of all, this is a very arguable point, and many would think it was logical. 2nd, why do you know think it was illogical, when earlier you said that you could understand the reasoning behind it.

In short, I agree with AGar.

VOTE: AlmasterGM

Plus this.

I can get behind this wagon.

Vote:AlmasterGM

Again, voting without offering anything himself. Parroting off of the ideas of another player.

So you're making it a prerequisite that whenever someone votes, they need to come up with their own reasoning to do so? I'm not sure how I'm supposed to do that short of making stuff up. Points were raised on Almaster, and they were legitimate ones. I agreed they were scummy and voted accordingly.

Unvote: Vote:AlmasterGM

Dislike Almaster's 227 where he seems to be

pushing on shotty be scum with shaky theories.

I still dislike shotty's scumclaim a lot... but the fact that he later claimed doctor and that claim has not been countered seems to point to shotty town on reflection.

He back steps. Actually, he pulls a complete 180. Shotty goes from being absolute scum, even if he isn't that we should lynch him based on a LAL policy, to partially defending him and attacking Almaster for a lot of the same points. Almaster did add some actual content to that discussion however, whether beneficial or not is up to opinion.

It's called analyzing and reacting. I had new information, and that information changed my primary suspicions. Some people would call it changing your mind. Open minded play is certainly more preferable to close minded play.

Deadline's about 24 hours from now and I'm not sure what my weekend access is going to be like. Given the deadline rules I'm going to change my vote now as I'm ok with an Elleran lynch at this point and I don't want to risk a no lynch.

Unvote: Vote: Elleran

L-1

Zach comments on Elleran

once

all of day one, and yet he is perfectly content with the lynch.

Mislynches are great when you're not on them and can look for an easy target to blame for them aren't they? Have some scumpoints.

I was happy with an Elleran lynch at the time because he demonstrated multiple times that he wasn't paying attention to the game. That behavior left me feeling there was a good chance for him to flip scum. Just because I didn't comment on it doesn't mean I didn't see the scummy things he was doing.

Better yet, lynch Good and Honest. Seriously, one post through the entirety of day 2?

G&H's one post had more content than all of Zach's combined. In my opinion.

Quantity =/= Quality

Plus nothing she says is going to actually amount to a vote... so... she's posting to what end exactly? Contributing to what end? Making points that others might agree with and vote on? How is that content? How is that contribution? It's like the opposite of contribution. It's sitting back and hiding. It's ridiculous. I could care less how much she "contributes" at this point, cause she's NOT contributing anything. I'm more interested in the anti-town behaviors and the potential scum motivations behind them, and I see clear scum motivation behind her refusal to claim. (Refusing to claim because she would have to lie.)

At this point I'd be putting some serious thought into whether I want my vote on KKN or G&H if not for this one little gem that confid directed at Good and Honest.

Good & Honest, is your alignment anything other than Town?

I looked through her iso, and I couldn't find anywhere that she bothers to address this question. If it was any other player it might not be a big deal, but considering her meta...

Why exactly am I the leading bandwagon again?

[Zachrulez]

Sigh... I'm a survivor.

[Zachrulez]

Strangely, I don't remember very much about this game...

[Zachrulez]

The one thing I didn't like about this setup was the lover pair. The site meta is basically to lynch a lover pairing with the accepted belief that one of the two are highly likely scum. I think this practically guaranteed Good and Honest's death. (Even with her own play contributing.)

Consider how differently the game could have been if she was simply a goon and gonnano vanilla.

[Zachrulez]

Oh, Hi Equinox!

I actually forgot you replaced into this game multiple times.

[Zachrulez]

I seriously contemplated nightkilling G&H. Yes, my push to lynch him was a bus, but the rage was 100% real. I wanted him dead. I was REALLY scared he would blow my cover (either deliberately or on accident). I also thought gonnano might be a cop.

Fortunately, the whole lover thing solved that.

It really did feel like we were a 2 man scumteam.

[Zachrulez]

I would steer clear of the lover pairing in the future. (Unless you can establish a willingness to use same alignment pairings.) The meta here on lovers in general in anything but open games does not bode well for the scum who draws the role.

From a balance standpoint it works, but from a player standpoint, it would be frustrating to have few avenues of survival because of the role you draw.

Having a scum/scum pairing for this game would have likely accomplished the same thing you intended balance wise, but at least both sides of the pairing have a vested interest in not being outted and protecting the other from death. Not so much in a town/scum pairing. Town/Town pairings don't seem to have any real legwork in the site meta cause no one seems to ever take the possibility seriously.

[Zachrulez]

town/town can be devastating to town and needs a lot of power to balance it. That's kind of the problem with the inclusion of either town/scum or town/town, a massclaim is going to heavily indicate the alignment of the pairing when you assume the mod is aiming for a relatively balanced game.

[Zachrulez]

Oh, no one ever did?

http://www.quicktopic.com/44/H/TEkT2TTw5JM