Newbie 983 ~ Game Over!

[Prox]

Sorry, I've completely spent the last 2 days doing modding things. I am that sad. Good news is: my appeal upheld and I'm allowed to repeat the first year of my course! wootwoot!

Anywho, I actually didn't notice that question Prox put towards me, thus I am surprised to see it in front of me now.

The majority of my votes on Day One are to gouge a reaction from players, I don't just look at how the person I voted reacts, I look at how the other people in the game react. I call things how I see them, I saw Prox's question as an attempt at rolefishing - I do admit though that I came into the game a lot more aggressive than I usually do. You lot aren't the only ones trying to improve My scumhunting skills tend to be rather dismal, however I have memorised the majority of the wiki pages

*the scum who isn't on this list atm due to the ignorance of the typist*

So basically, you're saying, that you know there is one scum in that list? Is it your scumbuddy?

Edit: Prox, yes it changed.

Please don't edit your posts, Haylen. Just put in an EBWOP next time. Thanks! <3

Oh, I just realized you meant preview edit. Sorry >> ~Kitty

That's a rhetorical question, but I don't quite get the point of it. But, to explain it further, I read this article once that said I'm supposed to express undeniable confidence when playing this game. That last part was mainly me expressing the opinion/hope that there must be one scum on this list.

@Prox: Stop defending hinduragi. Now. If you want to attack me, that's fine, but answering for other players is a big no-no.

This makes sense.

I still don't get this. I would try to avoid drawing an attack regardless of my alliance. Getting attacked is scary. And getting mislynched is failure.

Town have finding the scum at the forefront of their minds. Scum have survival at the forefront of their minds. That post is 100% geared towards survival.

No, he actually seems more accepting of the fact that you will call him scummy for whatever he does (which is pretty accurate). I still don't get it.

I am not interested in the content of his post. I am interested in the structure of his writing. That has not changed.

I'll save my response to this after Hinduragi defends himself then.

I can see that you are a relatively intelligent person! You should be able to understand that people like KittyMo and Haylen play this game NOT because they're blood-thirsty people who dream of lynching people in a mob-ruled society! See it our way- or don't play. You understand what I'm saying? If you want to play the game, then play the game!

Stop. The goal here is not to get Good and Honest t replace out. Like you said this is just a game. We're not here to exclude anybody. If he wants to play his way, that is his right, but there is nothing stopping us from trying to change his mind. No playstyle warrants replacement however.

[/quote]

And there's nothing stopping me from changing his mind about playing- as it is clearly undecided. You have your ethics and I have mine. This is my opinion, and I suppose it can be subject to change as

I

see fit.

@Silverbullet: It's SARCASM. Sorry.

This seems to contradict some of the stuff you've said earlier in this game. Not too long ago, you were all Mr. Hardass "vote or we'll lynch you. Get crackin." How is threatening to lynch him any less exclusive than asking him to replace out? I don't understand why you are going after Prox for saying to G&H what we've basically been saying to him ourselves.

There is a big difference between lynching someone and asking them replace out. Geez, what are you guys doing? If G&H replaces out because we decided to force him out of the game, then he has every right to be upset. This is a game. We're not here to decide who can play and who can't. Lynching him is very different. That is part of the natural course go the game, and in lynching him he is participating. Replacement is always a last resort when there is no other option.

I cannot and will not advocate forcing this player out of the game. I will absolutely support lynching him if he does not contribute to the town. I hope I've made myself clear.

Note: You can't "force" somebody to replace out. You convince him.

Nope. You've never get a reaction from me from a vote, unless it's the hammer.

Well aren't we special. You're almost as bad as G&H

What? Because I don't react to votes on me? Seriously, once you've played 41 games, you start not really caring when people vote for you.

A lack of a reaction is a reaction. I guess you decided to do this and make it part of your meta so that town can't figure out when you're scum?

[drmyshottyizsik]

@Shotty - You here? Did you just go inactive all of a sudden or are you active lurking?

sorry guys. Ya I'm here, but I have the flu so my posts may be minimal for a while. I'm going to read what I missed, then I'll post my thoughts.

[KittyMo]

[2] Hinduragi - (drmyshottyizsik, foilist13)

[2] Haylen - (archaebob, Prox)
[2] Good and Honest - (Switz, silverbullet999)
[1] drmyshottyizsik - (Hinduragi)
[1] Prox - (Haylen)

[0] archaebob - ()
[0] foilist13 - ()
[0] Haylen - ()
[0] silverbullet999 - ()
[0] Switz - ()

[1]

Not Voting

- (Good and Honest)

With

9

alive, it's

5

to lynch!

Deadline is at Wednesday, August 4, 2010 at 9:00:00 PM (Los Angeles time)

[archaebob]

@ silverbullet & switz -

You've expressed your intent to lynch G&H today. This has been noted, and could be the course of action that the town will take. However, it should be clear to the two of you that the town is not ready to lynch him

at this moment

. Therefore, because the case on G&H is based on his playstyle being anti-town (NOT on him being scummy), I strongly feel that the two of you are currently accomplishing nothing with your vote. Neither one of you is attempting to demonstrate how G&H is likely to have a mafia role, and neither one of you are seriously pressuring him for information. To me, voting G&H in the manner that you two have done seems like a very plausible play for scum, who can easily justify wanting to lynch G&H, and can keep their vote on him without actually having to do anything.

We might lynch G&H, but we aren't going to do so now, so please find a more productive place for your vote and your attention. As far as I'm concerned, sticking to that bandwagon right now amounts to nothing more than active lurking.

fos silver bullet

fos switz

[drmyshottyizsik]

My point of that "attack" on you was not to attack you it was to prove how silly your claims were.

Bull. The point of your attack was to attack me for attacking you. If it wasn't an attack meant to attack me, why did you vote for me? Please note that the bulk of your "attack" on me was focused on using the same points I did against you.

I used the exact same points on you that you used on me. I used logical points to defend myself and then attack you. So if you are calling me scummy, then you have a problem with yourself.

You said the points were silly...

You said the points were silly...
You said the points were silly...
You said the points were silly...
You said the points were silly...!!!!!!!!!!!!

Exactly!! I attack you using the same logic that you used against me, neither of us had a valid point, thus silly.
And I voted for you because of the same logic that you voted for me.

But...why would you vote someone for reasons you consider silly?

Ok about this, once and for all lets put this to rest. The point of this was to show you how dumb your reasons were. I simply used your logic against you.

@ Everyone- I would just like to point out that Prox has once again jumped right on to the next bandwagon(Haylen)
Ok about the whole Haylen thing personally I'm not sure I find her as scummy as not caring since she's only a temp. It may be a good idea to pressure her, but I'm not sure how much she will care/react since she is out of the game in two days no matter what.

[archaebob]

@ haylen -

Can you please explain your current vote on Prox? I'm having trouble understanding your motive for voting him.

@ foilist -

You just seem more hardcore and jittery in this game than I'm used to seeing in your town meta. What do you think of Haylen's play?

@ hinduragi -

Describe in detail what you think of Switz's play so far please.

@ switz -

Describe in detail what you think of Hinduragi's play so far please.

[Switz]

I'm indicating that I think he should be lynched?...I'm not sure what your problem with this is. Would you rather I just voted and unvoted every player in succession, as you seem to be doing? We can question people without voting them arbitrarily. Also, how do you expect to definitively find both scum today? For one thing, you can't definitively know anything until after lynching a scum/N1 w/ a cop, and for another, I was under the impression you too were looking to get rid of G&H tonight.

I'd say you have it backwards. You can indicate who you think should be lynched without voting for them, but you can't really pressure players that much with just questions.

And ouch! What a misrep. Really? I'm just randomly voting all the players in succession? I've voted exactly two players, and I've explained clearly why those players got the votes they did. And unlike you, I'm making very active efforts to pressure the players that I vote in ways that I hope will expose their alignment. What are you doing to scumhunt G&H?

Also, I never said anything about "definitively finding both scum." I said I was optimistic about our chances of

nailing

both scum. Suspicions are almost never "definitively" right. They often are accurate though.

And finally, whether or not "I too" was interested in getting rid of G&H tonight should be irrelevant to whether or not you suspect him. And if you were reading the thread carefully, you might have noticed my most recent post that I addressed to him, in which I said I'd be willing to let him live at least into D2 if he were willing to compromise with me.

I don't think it's a misrep at all. You start by voting Hinduragi, then completely drop his case and move on to G&H, then, when you're done with him, you move on to Haylen, and now are spreading out and FoSing me and Foilist. I'm not saying you're not making good points with your accusations, but you're just firing them off one after another without really following up on them. And it's not particularly easy to scumhunt G&H, as numerous others (including you, I think?) have pointed out, because his playstyle is calculated to reveal absolutely nothing.

And you're misinterpreting my last sentence. Those two points were about how you expect to "find" two scum. So I was saying that if we lynch G&H b/c he's anti-town, but not specifically because he's scummy, that won't help us find scum. It has nothing to do with my suspicions of him. I did miss the post about letting him live to D2 though, sorry.

You're also right about me misusing my vote, and for that I apologize. I still think getting rid of G&H is our best bet, but it's best to keep an open mind and scumhunt as long as we can.

Unvote

As for Hinduragi, my current impression is that he's acting townish but I really don't like his latest attack on Foilist because it does seem really desperate...I'll give it a closer look in a bit. I'm not dodging, I just want to give it my full attention rather than skim his ISO quick and make a kneejerk call.

[Switz]

Also,

@Haylen

, before you replace out, I'd like your thoughts on the game and players so far. Something substantial, if you could.

[silverbullet999]

@BOB

@ silverbullet & switz -

You've expressed your intent to lynch G&H today. This has been noted, and could be the course of action that the town will take. However, it should be clear to the two of you that the town is not ready to lynch him at this moment. Therefore, because the case on G&H is based on his playstyle being anti-town (NOT on him being scummy), I strongly feel that the two of you are currently accomplishing nothing with your vote. Neither one of you is attempting to demonstrate how G&H is likely to have a mafia role, and neither one of you are seriously pressuring him for information. To me, voting G&H in the manner that you two have done seems like a very plausible play for scum, who can easily justify wanting to lynch G&H, and can keep their vote on him without actually having to do anything.

We might lynch G&H, but we aren't going to do so now, so please find a more productive place for your vote and your attention. As far as I'm concerned, sticking to that bandwagon right now amounts to nothing more than active lurking.

fos silver bullet
fos switz

Ummmmm bob... where did i say... "LETS LYNCH G&H NOW!"? No kidding the town isn't ready to lynch him yet... all I've said is i'm fine if he ends up getting lynched for now and threw my vote on him to add some actual pressure to him. Maybe he'll actually do something. Since when has adding pressure done nothing (exception being haylen apparently). Also like how you speak for the whole town by saying we.

Why do you want me to toss my vote on someone else? If I toss my vote on haylen that won't do anything... and hey whaddya know.. your votes on haylen. Thus your vote is a bit useless atm so why don't you actually throw more pressure on G&H and join us so we can try to get a better read and a hopeful vote from G&H rather than an ATE?

I don't find a use for fos's but be guaranteed that you damn sure just earned some scum points with how boldly you speak there and the ironic contradiction in your own argument.

[Switz]

Hinduragi ISO:

2: Says we shouldn't vote G&H. Says Shotty is slightly scummy but doesn't give reasoning. Wants more discussion.
3: Gives reasons why voting Shotty--trying to "bond," trying to relocate focus on G&H and away from himself
4: Distances self from Shotty wagon. Points out that Shotty is trying to partner both him and Prox and me and Prox. Says Shotty's defense isn't good enough. Then wants Shotty to defend himself and to look at other players??
5: Says scum might be trying to push Shotty lynch, wants to study others.
6: Responds to Arch's initial attack. Gives list of who he thinks is scum-to-town. Says there hasn't been a case against him yet.
7: Says he's always calm, implicit nulltell.
8: Says why he considers Arch/Foil town. Points out Shotty's vote jumping.
9: Analyzes G&H some, says he will support a lynch if G&H does not change style b/c he read other G&H games.
10: Rebutts Foilist's points about why he is scummy.
11. Calls out Foilist on "contradiction." Asks Haylen why she isn't active, doesn't react. Re-asks G&H if he will change playstyles. Asks Arch why he FoSed Foilist.
12: Says he wasn't being nice to Foilist. Thinks overall argument is weak.

So I guess what I think of his play is...*shrug*

It all seems pretty nulltell to me. I really don't like his 11 because I think it's misguided, but that could just as easily be the mistake of town trying to get back on track as scum trying to pull together a weak case. His early play's the same way. It could be town seeing some scummy things Shotty's doing, then pulling back to avoid a mislynch, or scum seeing some scummy things Shotty's doing, then pulling back to look town and avoid suspicion. I personally am still leaning on the town side of that argument, but it's a weak belief because he hasn't done anything definitively town or scum.

Now I'm going to reverse it and ask what you think about Hinduragi. One of your first posts here denounced him out of nowhere, and since then you've been content to let everyone else do your work for you. Out of all your posts since then, you've mentioned him twice, and neither has been even remotely in response to his defense against your accusations.

[archaebob]

Ummmmm bob... where did i say... "LETS LYNCH G&H NOW!"? No kidding the town isn't ready to lynch him yet... all I've said is i'm fine if he ends up getting lynched for now and threw my vote on him to add some actual pressure to him. Maybe he'll actually do something. Since when has adding pressure done nothing (exception being haylen apparently). Also like how you speak for the whole town by saying we.

Why do you want me to toss my vote on someone else? If I toss my vote on haylen that won't do anything... and hey whaddya know.. your votes on haylen. Thus your vote is a bit useless atm so why don't you actually throw more pressure on G&H and join us so we can try to get a better read and a hopeful vote from G&H rather than an ATE?

I don't find a use for fos's but be guaranteed that you damn sure just earned some scum points with how boldly you speak there and the ironic contradiction in your own argument.

You're right, you never said "let's him lynch him now", but you are communicating that this is what you expect to happen by leaving your vote on him and

not doing anything else

.

I don't expect you to "toss your vote on someone." I expect you to scum-hunt. Voting G&H without seriously questioning him is not scum-hunting. It's active lurking. You haven't given any evidence that he's scummy, and you aren't pressuring him in any way that makes him more likely to expose his alignment. You're just sitting back and passively supporting a policy lynch.

Are you sure you want to glibly compare your G&H vote to my Haylen vote? I'd recommend against it, as there are pretty some glaring differences. For example, I'm actually asking Haylen questions about her play, and demanding responses. Also, I've given reasons that I think Haylen is

scum

, not just detrimental for the town in the long run. And yeah, she's

said

that she's not pressured all that much by votes, but that doesn't mean it's true. For example, her most recent post sounds a little pressured, and seems to have been at least partially a reaction to the votes on her.

But I don't mean to misrepresent you silver. I really don't. If you think you've played well so far, then by all means, show me the error of my ways. In fact, why don't you make a list of all the things you think you've down to help this town? What information have you managed to generate with your play? In what ways are we closer to finding scum because of the things you've done in this game?

[silverbullet999]

ooo your gonna be a fun one bob

@bob
(I'm gonna be lazy and not quote things.... i don't feel like typing [blahblahblah] so my quotes from your above will be represented with --- k?)

----communicating that this is what you expect to happen by leaving your vote on him and not doing anything else.

False I'm putting pressure on him with my vote and expected a reaction, Switz unvoted for w/e reason, I don't see a vote being on L3 - L4 being at all dangerous and an exact expectation of a lynch. The closer G&H gets to being lynched the more likely he'll change his playstyle... that's how i see it in my eyes. I am again not expecting nor saying LYNCH HIM NOWZ!

----Voting G&H without seriously questioning him is not scum-hunting.
This was attempted with fruitless results... vote = pressure = hey maybe something changes so i can get a better read.

----You haven't given any evidence that he's scummy, and you aren't pressuring him in any way that makes him more likely to expose his alignment. You're just sitting back and passively supporting a policy lynch.

I stated his last novel was mainly ATE... vote = pressure... not supporting a policy lynch, he's refusing to take any sort of action to scum hunt himself and has just made observations and light questions... things i'm pretty sure you touched on in your own analysis of him.

----For example, I'm actually asking Haylen questions about her play, and demanding responses.
You attempted this with G&H and also demanded action... there hasn't been any action on his part and since you have seen fit to leave it and move on... I decided to take up the cause

----For example, her most recent post sounds a little pressured, and seems to have been at least partially a reaction to the votes on her.
Frack you for making me quote...

What? Because I don't react to votes on me? Seriously, once you've played 41 games, you start not really caring when people vote for you.

You REALLY believe that this post sounds pressured?... Please Clarify

Also <3 to you for the great sarcasm... please add sarcasm tags next time though... would be appreciated

----If you think you've played well so far, then by all means, show me the error of my ways.
I've gotten reads on mainly everyone here thus far... I concentrate on one scum at a time... the one person i'm leaning scum though am not fully sure is G&H thus my pressure on him.

----In fact, why don't you make a list of all the things you think you've down to help this town? What information have you managed to generate with your play? In what ways are we closer to finding scum because of the things you've done in this game?

You want me to essentially tell you my whole entire play... and what results i've gotten from said play. Let me rephrase your question in my favorite form.

"Hey0 Silver!! Type out all the stuffs you did so that scumz like me can play off the said suspicions and evidencies you gots and lead a mislynchhh!!!! L33t!"

[Good and Honest]

I'll start by saying that I wasn't trying to get people "off my back" with my previous post. I was just feeling very bad and I thought it would be like a therapy for me to write the things that were pulsating in my head. I guess it worked, at least to some extent - I'm feeling better now. The main reasons I was feeling so bad were the attacks against my playstyle and my personality. I'm fine with people discussing my playstyle with me, I even enjoy this - but attacking it is something else. As I said, I strongly believe in my playstyle and this belief is irrational. I guess I can understand now how religious fundamentalists feel - when you attack their religious beliefs, that won't make them change them, it will just give them negative emotions... The attacks against my personality were even worse for me (although I guess people didn't consider them "attacks against my personality") - when someone says my personality is not real, to me that means essentially "It's so peculiar I can't believe it" and that hurts... I love being peculiar but not when people don't believe something about me because it's too peculiar... And then there was the fact that my second game on this forum had just ended and I was thinking how the group of people there had accepted me and my playstyle and I compared that to the reactions here... This saddened me even more...

Well, from what I can see, the majority of players here don't like my playstyle. So I'm absolutely OK with my lynch. But I'll repeat once again - lynch me at (or near) deadline. Let's use the time we were given to have as much discussion as possible and as many interactions between the different players as possible. I'll remind you that there is a player who still hasn't said anything about the game and whom no one has had the chance to interact with - Seraphim. In both of my previous games on this site one and the same thing happened - people were quickly lynched and as a result there was not enough information in the later stages of the game, which in both games resulted in a loss for the town. We shouldn't let this scenario repeat in this game as well.

I have the feeling that I have quite a lot of things to say and since I'm afraid that might make this post gigantic, I'll make two separate posts. In this one I'll talk about me and my playstyle. In the next one I'll comment on the other things that have happened in the game.

First of all, I think none of you have yet explained to me how I can be "fundamentally detrimental to the town" if I'm perceived to be a big threat to the mafia as evidenced by my second game on this site.

Second, you didn't comment on my statement that my playstyle is actually fundamentally detrimental to the MAFIA. I'd like to know your opinions on this.

As the game progresses I'm sharing observations which can prove to be useful to the other players even after my "death"; I'm also interrogating players and the answers (or lack thereof) can again prove to be useful to the other players even after my "death". Do you disagree that this is actually helpful to the town?

By the way, I haven't said that I'll NEVER express suspicion/accusation of any kind. In fact, if you look closely at my first game on this site (which I linked to in my very first post in our current game), you'll notice that I presented a theory which I thought proved that two of the players in the game were mafia partners (the final vote to lynch me was cast shortly before I made that post but I didn't know it at the time of writing)... Well, at the time I was really satisfied with myself because I was so sure I had solved the case! As it turned out, I was completely wrong - neither of the two players was a mafioso... So I prefer to be careful because if I wrongly accuse a person, they might feel bad and I'll definitely feel stupid... Who knows, maybe my problem is with the word "accuse" itself - it sounds too strong... In any case, expressing suspicion/accusation of some kind is NOT something I'll NEVER do.

You all seem to wonder how you are supposed to find out what my role is. I have the feeling that people are relying too much on these "voting patterns" - especially those of you who have played on this site a fair amount of time (archaebob and foilist13). But I, for example, think that I can form an opinion on each player even if they don't vote or make "suspect lists" - as long as they participate in the discussion enough, share thoughts on the game and interact with everyone. If I can do that, why shouldn't you?

Now I'll address the comments/questions of each of you regarding my playstyle. I do encourage everyone to read everything if you want to better understand me.

archaebob - so you're offering me a deal - if I do certain things, you'll let me survive until Day 2. Ah, you and your deals! You do seem to love them as Newbie 968 also suggests. I'll politely decline. I'll continue making comments on the game and asking questions and in the process I might happen to do something that qualifies as one of the things you want from me... but there's no need for you to let me survive in return. I see that my playstyle is making the game less enjoyable for the players here - since that's the case, let me be lynched. I certainly don't want to prolong for another Day the other players' displeasure of playing with me.

By the way, why do you feel it's so problematic if this game differs from what is "the common practice on this site"? I can't see what's wrong with a little different experience...

Prox - when I was writing my previous post, I was so depressed that condensing its points was the last thing on my mind (in fact, it was nowhere near my mind).

I'll tell you the same thing I told foilist13 in an earlier post: "The beauty of this game (and any game, actually) is that it can be played in so many different ways. What matters is that one plays the game in a way which is enjoyable for one. You seem to think people should play the game the way you want them to play"...

What do you mean when you say that if I'm a mafioso, I'm playing in a DECEITFUL way?

About "playing towards my win condition" - well, when I have "good" role, what I'll want is to be able to solve the mystery case, i.e., to discover who the mafiosi are. I suppose this qualifies as wanting to win? However, I must admit that when I have a "bad" role, I won't really enjoy the game and I won't hope that I'll win. "SACRILEGE!", you might scream. But what can I do? If I replace out of games where I receive a "bad" role, after some time people will begin to realize this and my replacements will be put in a very bad position... So I'll have to stay in those games. I'll play in them essentially just so the other players can enjoy the game... But I'm willing to make this sacrifice to be able to solve the cases in games where I do have a "good" role...

Switz - I disagree with the statement "If you know you're naive, you're not naive". The fact that I know I'm naive doesn't prevent me from being naive in many situations...

silverbullet999 - you're saying that you'll be suspicious of me the whole game as if that's a bad thing. Shouldn't you be suspicious (at least to some extent) of every player during the whole game?

About votes applying pressure and thus helping find out a player's role - that's not universal and I'm not the only one who thinks so. I have seen at least one experienced player on this site state that reacting to "pressure" depends on personality - so how people react to pressure might have nothing to do with their role in a particular game. Another thing that player said - some people might actually react BETTER to pressure if they have a "bad" role!

Anyway, in my case, I don't feel pressure when people vote for me. If they vote for me, that means they don't want me in the game - and I'm completely OK with being lynched in a game where I'm unwanted.

Hinduragi - let's see what I have to say about your analysis of my playstyle.

To start, you didn't comment at all on the "good" part of my playstyle. And this is a part which can have a huge influence on a game.

I haven't said that I'll never claim. However, if I do happen to reveal my role, it will be in really special situations. Still, I don't see how it's a problem that I won't answer when asked what my role is - I'm actually doing it for the sake of the other players' enjoyment. Really, will you enjoy it if I openly admit to being a mafioso in a game???

The fact that I'm honest in a game of Mafia will actually have an enormous impact in certain situations. As I said in my previous post, "I have thought about so many exciting situations in a game where I, with my playstyle and my writing style, could make the game enjoyable for everyone"... Who knows, I might be terribly wrong. But I do think being honest can create some truly memorable moments...

I'd like to talk about the concept of being honest when I happen to be a mafioso. In such cases I'll try not to take into consideration my role - I'll share thoughts and observations and interrogate people just like in the games where I'm an innocent townsperson. I certainly won't give special treatment to my mafia partner(s). If I find something they do in the game noteworthy, I'll state that.

Finally, you say that you have read some games on this forum and that's great. But of course these games would have been different if I had participated in them! Each game is a combination of the unique players participating in it with their unique personalities and unique playstyles. Change even just one player and the game changes completely. I'm not sure what your point is.

foilist13 - thank you! Your response to me is actually one of the big reasons I'm feeling better now. Now this is the side of you I was talking about that I'm glad to see more of!

I'd like to ask you what you mean when you say that my character in this game is "contrived", even if it is close to my actual character in real life.

I'll try to explain now why I chose to play this game and what enjoyment it brings to me.

WARNING: This is going to be a VERY long story. It was written mostly in response to foilist13's questions but I feel it will also answer questions by other players. Still, feel free to skip it for now if you're not in the mood for reading (but I do hope you'll all look at it someday).



XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX



As I said in my very first game on this site, before registering here, I had only played several games of Mafia once in real life. Some of the rules were quite different from the ones here (I'll say how they differed if they become relevant during my story). In all of the games I played in real life I was a "Townie". I was learning the rules as I was playing the game. I always hoped I wouldn't be the Killer (that's how the "bad role" was called) because, even though this is a game, the concept of "killing" my friends I was playing with felt awful to me (not to mention that they told me it was OBLIGATORY to kill at Night if you are the Killer - so I was really fortunate I didn't receive that role even once)... Oh, and my friends knew what my feelings about that were - in fact, they voted for me in a couple of games because, considering my good-natured character, they thought I had had a very sad reaction when seeing what my role was and concluded I must be the Killer (I'm not sure why I had reacted in such a sad way)...

My friends told me that there were supposed to be discussions during the Day but in the games we played that didn't happen. Three things happened during the Day - accusations, defenses and votes. Each day three players had to be nominated to be lynched and people "nominated" by accusing someone of being the Killer (the reasons given were usually quite stupid). Then the accused players and anyone else willing to defend them could present a defense. Finally, people voted for someone of the three nominees to be lynched...

Once again, I was terrified by the thought of "lynching" one of my friends. I also didn't want to accuse them, either. I didn't accuse anyone even once; I didn't vote for anyone's lynch, either (with one big exception, which I'll talk about below).

On the other hand, I often defended some of the accused players. My natural reaction to the attacks against someone was to defend them (oh, archaebob and foilist13, I feel this is another thing which we won't be able to agree on - I'm definitely planning to defend people while playing on this forum).

Anyway, apart from defending people, I wasn't doing anything else (I WOULD have if we'd actually had the discussions we were supposed to be having)... I was almost a passive witness. But what was happening in front of my eyes was so fascinating... It was like a mystery movie! And I felt like the detective!

When I was very little, I was obsessed with mystery books. In fact, the first and only "book" I've written (don't forget, I have always dreamt of being a writer) was a mystery book I wrote when I was 10 years old. Of course, it was not actually a book, it was very short... One of the things I especially loved about mystery books was how the detective was gathering information and in the end summoned all the suspects and revealed who the criminal was...

So in one of the games I played in real life what I hoped would happen became reality - only three players remained "alive", I and two of my friends. I had passively gathered information up to then. Now I was the great detective and it depended on me to solve the case and show which of my two friends was the Killer!

I have to tell you, the feeling was FANTASTIC. I have always imagined myself being in the role of a detective solving a case - when I was very little, I even imagined there were mysteries around me which had to be solved - when there was actually nothing mysterious... So yes, I had to vote for one of my two friends - but with that the case would be solved!

In the end, I voted for the wrong person. The Killer was my other friend. Strangely, that didn't make me feel bad (OK, maybe a little). I can't really offer a logical explanation for that - I suppose this is one of the many irrational things about me. Maybe it's because the feeling I was a detective solving a case was too great to make me sad that I had voted wrongly... In any case, that's when I decided that I'm only going to vote when doing so will determine without a doubt who has the "bad" role, i.e., at the last stage of a game.

By the way, in real life, once you were killed, you were allowed to look during the Night and see who were the Killer and the other roles with special abilities. However, even after "dying" in those games, I still closed my eyes at night because I didn't want to spoil myself the excitement of seeing the mystery revealed at the last moment...

So, foilist13, there's your answer to the question what brings me enjoyment in a game of Mafia - the feeling of being a detective who is solving a mystery case.

I think my playstyle can be explained to a certain extent by this - I want to be a detective, not a prosecutor.

After I played those several games in real life, I couldn't stop thinking about the game of Mafia. At first I wanted to play with my friends again as soon as possible (alas, it hasn't happened yet). But I was realizing more and more things. One thing I had realized was how bad it must feel for the players who are killed early in the game (that was especially true in real life as the game started with a Night - a person was killed before actually being able to do anything!)...

So, in addition to my feeling awful at the mere thought of voting/"killing" a player, there is another reason I won't do these things - I don't want to contribute to a player's premature exit from the game.

Another thing I realized while thinking about the game - the Killer would probably do everything in order not to be discovered. That would include voting for innocent players, intentionally making wrong accusations... That felt disgusting to me. "If I someday happen to be a Killer", I thought, "I won't do any of these "bad" things. I'll be honest to my friends - although I'll have to try not to reveal my role to them in order not to spoil their enjoyment..."

I guess you see where I'm going with this, foilist13. Yes, at one point it occurred to me that this may be "a game based on lies and deceit" - but I decided that I'll be honest no matter what.

So I waited and waited to play Mafia again with my friends but nothing happened. In the meantime, I started reading about the game on the Internet and I became even more interested in it. I found out that the game was also played on Internet forums - and that the experience there was different than in real life. I thought: "Since I'm not sure when I'll play in real life again, why not register in some forum?". I read that this is the largest site dedicated to the game of Mafia so I came here.

I made sure to read the rules before I registered. No, it was not obligatory to vote. And, even better - unlike my experience in real life, if you had a "bad" role, it wasn't obligatory to kill anyone! So I registered. This is important:

IF THE RULES MADE IT OBLIGATORY TO VOTE/KILL, I WOULDN'T HAVE REGISTERED HERE AT ALL!

Yes, I knew my playstyle would differ from what is usually expected here. But I definitely didn't expect people would be so bothered by it...



XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX



So in my next post I'll talk about the things that have happened in this game not related to my playstyle (don't worry, I'm almost sure that post will be shorter than this one).

[Good and Honest]

The most important thing during the first pages of this game, I think, was the "Prox, Switz and Hinduragi versus drmyshottyizsik" event. The arguments of Prox, Switz and Hinduragi all sounded logical while drmyshottyizsik's arguments sounded illogical, not to mention that drmyshottyizsik's behaviour seemed unpredictable. First of all, I have to say that being logical or not is much more related to one's personal characteristics that to role in the game. Prox, Switz and Hinduragi will sound logical even in games where they are mafiosi and drmyshottyizsik will sound illogical even when being an innocent townsperson.

About drmyshottizsik's behaviour - let me just say I have observations on it not solely based on this game. Yes, it might seem unpredictable at first but at some stage it starts to look "predictably unpredictable", if you know what I mean. But it can't be denied that it's a strange behaviour.

The problem is that having a strange behaviour doesn't mean one is a mafioso. In my first game on this forum there was a player with a very strange behaviour who was lynched after just several posts on Day 2 (a lynch much, much quicker even than my own on Day 1). That player was an innocent townsperson. In my second game on this forum there were three different players with remarkable behaviours. They were lynched consecutively on Day 1, 2 and 3. All of them were innocent townspeople.

I think there are players with a strange behaviour in most of the games here (at least in Newbie games). While yes, in some games they will happen to be mafiosi, that won't always be the case. However, such players are very easy targets and the mafiosi probably won't hesitate to try to lynch them...

Now, it's true that new players are most likely to attack someone with a strange behaviour - after all, in my first game, I was also suspicious of that player I told you about. But still, I'll have to say I think the likelihood that one or more of Prox, Switz and Hinduragi are mafiosi is greater than that of drmyshottyizsik being a mafioso. Still, if the latter is the case, Haylen seems to be a probable partner because of remaining inactive while all that pressure was applied on drmyshottyizsik. I do think actually that Haylen's lack of participation may be the result of a lack of motivation because of only temporarily being here (this is a case where drmyshottyizsik actually makes a very good point; then again, if they are partners, it's no surprise drmyshottyizsik would say that)...

By the way, drmyshottyizsik does show potential of being logical (I guess this just adds to the "unpredictability") - in post #183 drmyshottyizsik comments on some of Prox's statements and I have the feeling a couple of the points are valid. Prox hasn't addressed these comments in spite of replying to a LATER post by drmyshottyizsik. Prox, why didn't you comment on drmyshottyizsik's post #183? I'd like to hear your thoughts on it.

Prox, I have to say something about this sentence of yours - "I read this article once that said I'm supposed to express undeniable confidence when playing this game". It's just my opinion but I think your playstyle should reflect your personality. What's the point in expressing undeniable confidence about something if you're not undeniably confident about it? Don't play in a certain way just because an article or a player says so - do it if you yourself really want to play in that way.

To both Prox and Switz - just because you agree with a player, that doesn't mean they're not a mafioso. You agree with each other, excellent. But what harm would it do if you interact more with each other - ask each other some questions, for example? This will give information both to each of you and to the other players in the game.

Switz, when drmyshottyizsik said that we shouldn't focus on just one or two players, you agreed and decided to inspect silverbullet999. Was there any reason you chose exactly silverbullet999? What do you think of silverbullet999's answers to your questions?

Let me now discuss the arrival of archaebob and foilist13. At that time there was pressure on drmyshottyizsik. Neither archaebob nor foilist13 attacked drmyshottyizsik. What does that tell? Not much. They are both experienced players and they obviously noticed that drmyshottyizsik was an easy target. They were looking for something else that would show them who's a mafioso, as shown by their attacks on Hinduragi. As a whole, I think regardless of their roles in the game, neither archaebob nor foilist13 would have attacked drmyshottyizsik in this situation.

I also think it's very unlikely either of them is a mafia partner with Hinduragi. Yes, the mafia partners can certainly try to distance themselves from each other but here the situation was special. When the two arrived, no one was actually suspecting Hinduragi at all - in fact, most of us were agreeing with Hinduragi's arguments. I don't see why archaebob or foilist13 would want to suddenly bring attention to their partner in such manner.

I'll discuss again the accusations against Hinduragi. While I still think it's possible that this was just Hinduragi's usual writing style, arhaebob's analysis seems to be influencing me somewhat... It makes some sense, especially regarding one particular situation I have been thinking about. As you might recall, at one stage I noted that drmyshottyizsik hadn't attacked Hinduragi, who had presented a detailed against drmyshottyizsik. To my surprise, drmyshottyizsik's reaction was to try to present a case against Hinduragi. I asked the other players to comment on that and this was Hinduragi's reaction:

"I too saw the case. Then I realized it wasn't a case. Shotty intended to make a case against me and instead ended up just defending himself. I am sure you were just confused by the words he initially had at the beginning of that response"

This quote sounded a little strange to me at the time but I didn't really think much about it. But after archaebob's analysis (as much as some part of me opposes to accepting it), the quote really sounds like trying to remove any kind of potential suspicion. None of us should even think of the possibility that there might be some sort of a case against Hinduragi...

I'm noticing a change in the writing style of the most recent posts of Hinduragi. They sound somehow more... aggressive? Hinduragi, I think you're doing this to show that your writing style is not trying to "avoid attracting animosity" but there is an obvious contrast between your early posts and your recent ones. Are both representative of your usual writing style?

Also, Hinduragi, recently you have been arguing with foilist13, interrogating Haylen and archaebob... Compare that to your earlier statement: "Shotty, I think you're in the right here that we should all get to know each other a little better. Unfortunately, I have nothing to contribute to the actions of achieving this. Suggestions would be welcomed". So at that time you didn't think you could contribute to the actions of achieving this but now you're showing yourself capable of contributing to the actions of achieving this. What has changed? The most logical answer to me would be that you were attacked in the meantime. Before you became the centre of attention, you seemed to be content to just let the other players "get to know each other a little better"...

By the way, there is something Hinduragi noted that I'm only now paying real attention to. Since I did mention a potential drmyshottyizsik-Haylen mafia team, maybe it could be relevant so here it is. Look at what drmyshottyizsik said after archaebob and foilist13 voted for Hinduragi:

"I really wanna hear Haylen's views on who she thinks is the scum pair, cause if she thinks its Prox and hindu then she should unvote prox and get hindu"

drmyshottyizsik, why did you want to hear Haylen's views specifically? And it sounded like you found it likely that Haylen may suspect a Prox-Hinduragi mafia team. Why did you think so?

And then, a very short time after drmyshottyizsik said that, Haylen suddenly appeared and addressed drmyshottyizsik's post... I'm not sure what to think about that. Since almost no one has commented on it, will anyone do it now?

These are some of my thoughts. As you can see, I haven't commented much on the most recent events but I'll do it later.

[Prox]

:O I'm not reading that. G&H, could you PLEASE try to summarize your posts? If you still want to type really long posts, at least put a summarization at the bottom.

Re-reading thread.

[Prox]

Spoiler: Shotty ISO

1. Shotty: could you link me to the games you have played on this site so far? (You can find it by clicking “View My Posts” at the top left part of your screen. ) That’d be great.
a. In your post 10 I found that you asked some questions to everybody, but didn’t answer them yourself. Could you do that, too?
b. In your post 25, you gave me the feeling that you were hurrying to end the day.
c. In your post 26, I felt like you were buddying. The same can be said, to a lesser extent, about post 22.
d. Post 22 also seemed to be far to cautious for you. You seemed to be trying to be all nice about it
e. Post 27 seems like useless spam for the purpose of idle chitchat
f. In post 28 you again asked a question that you refrained from answering
g. In post 29 you seemed to unvote G&H for no particular reason
h. In post 32 you seemed to indirectly contradict yourself by answering your question on post 28 without really answering it.
i. In post 35 you seemed to indirectly contradict yourself because you unvoted G&H and yet said you would hammer him if given the chance. Why unvote G&H (and not change it to someone else) if you still want the player lynched? Do you usually keep your vote off of players you find harmful to the town’s aims until they are at L-1?
j. In your post 36, you post a failure of an attack in retaliation to my attack on you (OMGUS). You do know that OMGUS is a stupid/scummy thing to do? Speaking of which, your attack on me had many more flaws than mine did. You vote for me.
k. In your post 37, you quickly and amazingly change your opinions on G&H to “you’re pretty okay”,; also, you later make another failful attack on Hinduragi for attacking you without actually defending yourself against the attack
l. In post 38, you try to rebut my rebuttal.
i. You said that the point of your attack was to prove how silly my claims were. However, you ended your attack with a vote on me and propositions that I am part of the scum faction. If your attack was not really an attack, you have yet to validate your suspicions on me.
ii. You misrep my post by saying I contradicted myself when I clearly had not. You have yet to comment on this.
iii. You claimed to have used the same logic to attack me as I used to attack you. This is untrue. While you

tried

to do this, you completely failed and used a different mode of logic than I did.
iv. You tried to defend your past opportunistic actions by changing the subject to your current actions
v. You again misrep me by saying that I lashed out at you for lashing out at me, despite the fact that I was the person attacking you, and I did this because you were scummy, not because you “attacked” me. (How can I lash out at someone if they didn’t actually make an attack on me?)
vi. You misdefined the term “buddying” to support your claim that you were not buddying. Again, you used an illogical fallacy to defend your actions.
m. In post 42 you do two things: 1) announce that you believe I am scum, despite the fact that you never explained why you thought this; 2) changed your mind about G&H again, declaring that his play is anti-town. You also restate that you never made an attack on me, despite the fact that at the end of this “attack” you voted for me and declared me scum.
n. In post 43 you elaborate further your “new” opinion on G&H
o. In post 44 you declare that you don’t like Good & Honest’s playstyle “at all”. You also use the fallacy that G&H should be lynched just because we are talking about him getting lynched.
p. In post 45 you try to repair the contradiction you made about G&H with a small platitude about how you were talking about his scumminess, not his playstyle quality. Despite the fact that your contradiction is COMPLETELY focused on G&H’s playstyle.
q. In post 47 you blatantly buddy some more. Remember when I told you that was bad? I meant it.
r. In post 48 you declare “OK everytime I'm nice to someone you can't call us scum buddies!!!”, despite the fact that being nice and blatantly trying to get the favour of someone are two different things.
s. In post 50, you just say something else fallacitical, misreppy and stupid.
t. In post 51, you announce who you think is scummy without saying why. Let it be noted that all the people you listed are people who were attacking you. Also, wtf is “over scumhunting”???
u. In post 52 you realize your true nature.
v. In post 53 you continue to tunnel on me, still with no justification.
w. In post 55 you finally start to explain your accusations. I almost loled.
i. First off, you say “I really wish there were 3 scum”. That is stupid, I don’t care what faction you’re part of.
ii. You MISREP ME AGAIN by saying that something was asking for a claim BUT IT WAS NOT. You say that there is no denying that I asked for a claim- but I did deny it, and you did nothing to refute that! Idiotically, you use failogic to contradict my refutation. It’s really sad. Sorry for saying that.
iii. You call me scummy for changing my mind. How hypocritical is that! I even give key words showing that I changed my mind. I mean, really.
iv. You again confuse scumminess with playstyle. I never said a thing about G&H being scummy
v. You said something else stupid. I mean really stupid. You know my job is to push cases on scum?
vi. Then you stupidly accuse me of OMGUS voting with the quote of me calling you an OMGUS voter. Wtf?
vii. I’m sorry, but your attack is complete bull. Feel free to respond to this, but try to think before you do so.
x. In post 56, you ridiculously accuse foilist of scumhunting too much. xD
y. In post 57, you become indecisive about G&H again…
z. In post 58 you repeat yourself. I’m sure you find a comment about that above. In post 61 you repeat yourself and try to get me to give up on you. Not just yet.
I didn’t want to go past Z, sorry.
Shotty, I request from you the following:
1. Read this post.
2. Link me to all your games.
3. Explain your opinions about G&H
4. Rebut my defenses (funny to call them that) and attacks.
5. Explain “overscumhunting” and how it is bad. And how foilist is scummy.
6. Stop buddying. What you are doing is buddying. Bonding is different, though my thesaurus disagrees.
7. Whatever else
8. Think before you post.

[Prox]

@Archaebob: In retrospect, I don’t like how you restricted the town by ordering them not to discuss your attack on Hinduragi, even approvingly. The discussion could have created a lot of information that is no longer accessible. No big deal, though, I suppose.

[quote=”Hinduragi”] drmyshottyizsik
Prox
silverbullet999
Switz
Good and Honest
Haylen
foilist13
archaebob[/quote]

Wait, where the heck did this come from??? For the second most scummy person on your list, I’ve received very little attention from you. Could you please explain that before I OMGUS (joke)?

I guess Haylen just doesn’t care about us anymore…

[quote=”silverbullet”] Hey0 Silver!! Type out all the stuffs you did so that scumz like me can play off the said suspicions and evidencies you gots and lead a mislynchhh!!!! L33t!"[/quote]
I saw that when I was reading bob’s iso, not realizing you had already responded ^^ Good call there. It’s interesting why Bob would ask for that. I’m just saying.

Btw, I couldn’t get a nice read on silverbullet, but the game of Mafiascum itself makes me suspicious of him. But that’s all I got (about him). Hm.

Off to play chess on kongregate now. Really fun place.

[Prox]

...why didn't my tags work? (Don't mess with them kitty, either way]

There's something wrong with the "s. If you copy-paste your posts out of a word processor with a different font, that could be the cause. I had to switch from Microsoft Word to Notepad to prevent that issue a while back.

[Prox]

Post 237 Readability statistics: 3280 words, 14323 characters, 164 sentences. 20 words per sentence.

Readability:
Passive Sentences: 8%
Flesch Reading Ease: 69.8 (easily understandable by 13- to 15-year-old students)
Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level: 8.4

Kudos, G&H

I still haven't read the post, so if you can just summarize your huge posts that you make in the future (at the end) as well as those few above, then I'll be happy.

[Haylen]

I do, it's just in the past few days I've been given a lot of hell on the site, which you can find in GD if you want proof. I'm also being put off of walls of text.

Gimme a second, reading back.

Btw, you're lucky, as posted before, I don't play games at weekends.

[drmyshottyizsik]

Spoiler: Shotty ISO

1. Shotty: could you link me to the games you have played on this site so far? (You can find it by clicking “View My Posts” at the top left part of your screen. ) That’d be great.
a. In your post 10 I found that you asked some questions to everybody, but didn’t answer them yourself. Could you do that, too?
b. In your post 25, you gave me the feeling that you were hurrying to end the day.
c. In your post 26, I felt like you were buddying. The same can be said, to a lesser extent, about post 22.
d. Post 22 also seemed to be far to cautious for you. You seemed to be trying to be all nice about it
e. Post 27 seems like useless spam for the purpose of idle chitchat
f. In post 28 you again asked a question that you refrained from answering
g. In post 29 you seemed to unvote G&H for no particular reason
h. In post 32 you seemed to indirectly contradict yourself by answering your question on post 28 without really answering it.
i. In post 35 you seemed to indirectly contradict yourself because you unvoted G&H and yet said you would hammer him if given the chance. Why unvote G&H (and not change it to someone else) if you still want the player lynched? Do you usually keep your vote off of players you find harmful to the town’s aims until they are at L-1?
j. In your post 36, you post a failure of an attack in retaliation to my attack on you (OMGUS). You do know that OMGUS is a stupid/scummy thing to do? Speaking of which, your attack on me had many more flaws than mine did. You vote for me.
k. In your post 37, you quickly and amazingly change your opinions on G&H to “you’re pretty okay”,; also, you later make another failful attack on Hinduragi for attacking you without actually defending yourself against the attack
l. In post 38, you try to rebut my rebuttal.
i. You said that the point of your attack was to prove how silly my claims were. However, you ended your attack with a vote on me and propositions that I am part of the scum faction. If your attack was not really an attack, you have yet to validate your suspicions on me.
ii. You misrep my post by saying I contradicted myself when I clearly had not. You have yet to comment on this.
iii. You claimed to have used the same logic to attack me as I used to attack you. This is untrue. While you

tried

to do this, you completely failed and used a different mode of logic than I did.
iv. You tried to defend your past opportunistic actions by changing the subject to your current actions
v. You again misrep me by saying that I lashed out at you for lashing out at me, despite the fact that I was the person attacking you, and I did this because you were scummy, not because you “attacked” me. (How can I lash out at someone if they didn’t actually make an attack on me?)
vi. You misdefined the term “buddying” to support your claim that you were not buddying. Again, you used an illogical fallacy to defend your actions.
m. In post 42 you do two things: 1) announce that you believe I am scum, despite the fact that you never explained why you thought this; 2) changed your mind about G&H again, declaring that his play is anti-town. You also restate that you never made an attack on me, despite the fact that at the end of this “attack” you voted for me and declared me scum.
n. In post 43 you elaborate further your “new” opinion on G&H
o. In post 44 you declare that you don’t like Good & Honest’s playstyle “at all”. You also use the fallacy that G&H should be lynched just because we are talking about him getting lynched.
p. In post 45 you try to repair the contradiction you made about G&H with a small platitude about how you were talking about his scumminess, not his playstyle quality. Despite the fact that your contradiction is COMPLETELY focused on G&H’s playstyle.
q. In post 47 you blatantly buddy some more. Remember when I told you that was bad? I meant it.
r. In post 48 you declare “OK everytime I'm nice to someone you can't call us scum buddies!!!”, despite the fact that being nice and blatantly trying to get the favour of someone are two different things.
s. In post 50, you just say something else fallacitical, misreppy and stupid.
t. In post 51, you announce who you think is scummy without saying why. Let it be noted that all the people you listed are people who were attacking you. Also, wtf is “over scumhunting”???
u. In post 52 you realize your true nature.
v. In post 53 you continue to tunnel on me, still with no justification.
w. In post 55 you finally start to explain your accusations. I almost loled.
i. First off, you say “I really wish there were 3 scum”. That is stupid, I don’t care what faction you’re part of.
ii. You MISREP ME AGAIN by saying that something was asking for a claim BUT IT WAS NOT. You say that there is no denying that I asked for a claim- but I did deny it, and you did nothing to refute that! Idiotically, you use failogic to contradict my refutation. It’s really sad. Sorry for saying that.
iii. You call me scummy for changing my mind. How hypocritical is that! I even give key words showing that I changed my mind. I mean, really.
iv. You again confuse scumminess with playstyle. I never said a thing about G&H being scummy
v. You said something else stupid. I mean really stupid. You know my job is to push cases on scum?
vi. Then you stupidly accuse me of OMGUS voting with the quote of me calling you an OMGUS voter. Wtf?
vii. I’m sorry, but your attack is complete bull. Feel free to respond to this, but try to think before you do so.
x. In post 56, you ridiculously accuse foilist of scumhunting too much. xD
y. In post 57, you become indecisive about G&H again…
z. In post 58 you repeat yourself. I’m sure you find a comment about that above. In post 61 you repeat yourself and try to get me to give up on you. Not just yet.
I didn’t want to go past Z, sorry.
Shotty, I request from you the following:
1. Read this post.
2. Link me to all your games.
3. Explain your opinions about G&H
4. Rebut my defenses (funny to call them that) and attacks.
5. Explain “overscumhunting” and how it is bad. And how foilist is scummy.
6. Stop buddying. What you are doing is buddying. Bonding is different, though my thesaurus disagrees.
7. Whatever else
8. Think before you post.

1.Ok read the post.
2.All of my games on this site are on going, I'm in about 7 or 8, when they end i will send you links.
3. I hate his play style, end of story. I don't think he is scummy, but I can't read him either way. I think D-2 we should kill him because the town will be at a huge dis advantage.
4. A. 1) I have played a few off-line games, and I am currently in i think 7 on this site.
2) I really like being a PGO
3) The most fun thing I've ever done I bungi jumping, or maybe acting professionaly.
4) I can lick my elbow
5) My dream job is to be a Broadway actor.

B. In post 25 I simply said that we should get rid of G & H D-1, I know disagree with my statement and think we should get rid of him D-2.

C.In my post 26 the reason I thanked Haylen was that I was so overwhelmed by people saying thing I disagreed with and felt I needed to argue and she said something that I agreed with and that thanks was basically a sigh of relief.

D. In post 22 I was agreeing, just because I shared the same opinions as someone and I voiced them doesn't mean I was making friends.

E. In my post 27 I was just trying to tell G & H that his playstyle not only made people want him out, but it really makes people dislike him. And there was a bit of useless boredom spam, yes.

F. In my post 28, yes I didn't answer it, I thought it was fairly obvious I wanted G & H, but right now my answer would be you Prox.

G. In my post 29 I realized that G & H wasn't particularly scummy just super annoying, and that I wasn't going to get a read from him so I needed to focus on someone else.

H. In post 32 I simply meant that when I asked the question in 29 I myself didn't even know my answer to it.

I. Ok I understand how post 35 could be confusing, but I've explained it a few times already. I wanted and still want G & H out of the game, but I didn't see a point in keeping my vote on someone that no one else was going to have a true vote on. And the reason that I didn't vote someone else is because at that point I had no case against anyone else.

J. In my post 36. Well I'm not sure you will ever understand what I meant by that one. I've explained it a few times, but I'll give it one more go. Your reasons were silly, yet you voted for me, so yes my reason were silly too, but using the same logic I voted for you.

K. In my post 37 I stand by my statement about G & H, he is pretty ok, as a person, but he will never succeed in this game with his play style, also I kinda felt bad for the guy.

L. Actuall I was re-butting you rebuttal to my rebuttal.
i-vi- GRRRR ok I'm done explaining the same things over and over! Next topic.

O. In post 44 I simply said that I would hammer if the rest of the town provided convincing arguments and casted votes on him.

P. Ok about 47 I can't get a scum read on him because of his play style, but his play style doesn't make him scum.

Q. It wasn't buddying I was just saying I liked how he scum hunted, until he pushed it over the top. Also, since when are you God? Just because you say it's bad it is? uhhhh no!

R. I'm a nice person, end of story.

S. HOW?!

T. Bob asked for a straight answer, and asked for no logical reasoning. And overscumhunting is when a person makes it very obvious that he is scum hunting and tries to make him self very useful. Also when people overscumhunt they are too agressive and quite rude, provoking a reaction from the one being attacked and causing alot of the town to agree with him.

U. Aweee You're talking smack talk, ooooh I'm scared.

V. My reasons came later, remember? I already knew them there were just so many it took awhile to type them out.

W. LOLed!?!?! Wow what are you a 5th grade girl? I just Lawled. Plus my reasons all made sence. And you can't just say I misrep you when ever I point out something scummy about you. I know you are scum it's ok. And I think alot, all the time. I'm sort of a philosopher.

X. Yes, yes I did, butttt it wasn't ridiculous, and how about you let him defend himself.

Y. NO NO NO NO!! I staid the same. I still want G & H gone, but killing him D-1 and letting the Mafia get a free kill on night one isn't worth it.

Z. I repeated (and bolded just fyi) for dramatic effect.
(WOW!!! You know you alphabet! Good job!)

5. I already did this in letter T

6. I'm friendly deal with it.

7. ?

8. I do.

WOW that was alot of typing Prox please read this so i didn't just waste my time.

[Haylen]

A lack of a reaction is a reaction. I guess you decided to do this and make it part of your meta so that town can't figure out when you're scum?

Uh oh, Busted.
You've hit the nail on the head. The only way people tend to be able to differentiate between town haylen and scum haylen is because as town I get very emotionally involved in the game, and as scum I'm very cold and scorn votes against me. In order to make myself less obvious, I've developed a sense of deindividuation as town that way I can pretend the votes are on somebody else rather than myself. Occassionally, I let it slip through though.

As said before, I am not going to be giving two names on who I believe are a scumteam. I don't mafiateam hunt, I scumhunt. Trying to find two players is a lot harder than finding the one. Leave the other scum til we've lynched the first, then you can use loads of fun things like voting analysis.

Unvote: Prox

I forget that was still there.

And then, a very short time after drmyshottyizsik said that, Haylen suddenly appeared and addressed drmyshottyizsik's post... I'm not sure what to think about that. Since almost no one has commented on it, will anyone do it now?

Technically, I am always online. However, I am not always available.

This may surprise you, and it totally isn't OMGUS, but I am getting quite odd/possibly scummy vibes from Archeobob. I am pretty sure that Switz is town, if he is scum, then he has been coached by experienced scum in the quicktopic. Good and Honest I am seeing as neutral right now. I would look Shotty to be looked into.

[drmyshottyizsik]

Ok people don't freak out I'm not band wagon jumping, I just realized that my posts and thought don't correlate with my vote

Unvote

Vote: Prox

[archaebob]

You've hit the nail on the head. The only way people tend to be able to differentiate between town haylen and scum haylen is because as town I get very emotionally involved in the game, and as scum I'm very cold and scorn votes against me. In order to make myself less obvious, I've developed a sense of deindividuation as town that way I can pretend the votes are on somebody else rather than myself. Occassionally, I let it slip through though.

I don't buy this it all.

This may surprise you, and it totally isn't OMGUS, but I am getting quite odd/possibly scummy vibes from Archeobob. I am pretty sure that Switz is town, if he is scum, then he has been coached by experienced scum in the quicktopic. Good and Honest I am seeing as neutral right now. I would look Shotty to be looked into.

Congratulations on making the scummiest post in the game so far.

This reeks,

reeks

of a mafia mindset. You throw around a bunch of softball suspicions at people without actually doing anything yourself.

Good good Haylen, it's super important to make sure that NOBODY thinks your suspicion of me is omgus. If you hadn't made that little comment there, I think a lot of people might have interpreted your

fierce

attack on me as being a defensive reaction rather than a genuine suspicion.

Your comment about Switz is hugely suspect as well. Tell me, do you have any experiences in which an otherwise bad scum player magically became excellent because of the three or four quick topic comments that he exchanced with his partner before the game started? This was a really jittery strange way to express your opinion of him.

Also, why are you even mentioning Switz to begin with? Of all the players in this game, Switz is the one you thought to talk about? Your declaration that he is probably town is utterly out of the blue and expressed in a really awkward manner, and it seems extremely scummy to me.

Oh yeah? You'd like Shotty to be "looked into" huh? Why not do some of that yourself? You could try scum-hunting.

Also, this comment ignores that Shotty is one of the most discussed players in the game. He IS being looked into, and multiple players have posted cases on him. You've contributed nothing at all with your comment, and are just passively expressing the softest suspicion you possibly could on someone who is already one of the top lynch candidates for the day.

If you're getting scummy vibes from me, than vote me, dammit. Or Shotty. Whatever. DO something. Your play up to this point is basically the epitome of active lurking.

@ everyone-

Please pay careful attention to what I've just said about Haylen. Read her iso. Keep in mind that she is one of the most experienced players here. Her play is extremely scummy.

[foilist13]

Hmm.... I can't vote Haylen yet. She's getting replaced too soon, so we have to take into account that she isn't really invested in this game. That has been evidenced further by her continual disappearances. Yes she is clearly overdrawn, but that just shows us that this game is not the priority for her. Because of this, I can't read as deeply into her posts as I would like to.

I've been overdrawn before, and her post is exactly the type of thing I would have made as town. I quickly read the game, and throw some stuff out there, as much to avoid as lynch as anything else. I'm not proud of having done that, but it's what I did and I was town. Her situation creates a plausible explanation as town for that mentality. We won't have any real information on that player slot until we see her replacement's play.

@G&H: I read everything you wrote and that pretty much took out all the energy I would have had to respond to it. You

must

write shorter posts. The whole first half of your first post could be rewritten as this: "I've seen town players behave irrationally." You are actively preventing people from making use of your play by writing novels like that. I appreciate that you love to write, I do too. I have three novels in the works with a combined length of over 500 pages so far and numerous short stories. However, I have to adapt my writing for my environment. Long posts like that just don't work here. I had to sift through pages to get to the part I was interested in, which was your analysis of Hinduragi. That part was very useful, but even it was long winded. You must shorten your posting.