Newbie 983 ~ Game Over!

[Hinduragi]

Also, Shotty -

@ everyone if you are the real cop please say so.

Wtf? You have no idea how much more assured I am that you're scum playing VI or newbscum now. If they're the real cop, why the hell would they counterclaim now? They'd get NK'd after the lynch.

[drmyshottyizsik]

Not if the Doctor protects him

[Hinduragi]

Did you read what I said about the Follow the Cop situation?

[drmyshottyizsik]

UMMMM we are in a newbie game, the Mafia role blocker is all we have to be worried about.

[drmyshottyizsik]

UMMMM we are in a newbie game, the Mafia role blocker is all we have to be worried about.

[Tac0]

/confirm

I'll leave this post because deleting it would cause issues in post numbers, but I acknowledge that it does not belong here. Hi anyway.

[Hinduragi]

Possible F11 Setups:

• 1 Mafia Goon, 1 Mafia Roleblocker, 1 Sane Cop, 1 Sane Doctor, 5 Townies
  1 Mafia Goon, 1 Mafia Roleblocker, 7 Townies
  2 Mafia Goons, 1 Sane Cop, 6 Townies
  2 Mafia Goons, 1 Sane Doctor, 6 Townies

^Meaning, we have:

• 1.) No cop (Seraphim is obvscum lying)
  2.) 1 cop (Seraphim is our only PR)
  3.) 1 doc (Seraphim is obvscum lying)
  4.) 1 cop, 1 doc, and 1 mafia roleblocker (The situation you're talking about)

[Hinduragi]

Also, wrong thread, Tac0. This game has been in progress for a while. Check your role pm. The link to your thread should be there.

[Switz]

Also, Shotty -

@ everyone if you are the real cop please say so.

Wtf? You have no idea how much more assured I am that you're scum playing VI or newbscum now. If they're the real cop, why the hell would they counterclaim now? They'd get NK'd after the lynch.

Uhh...because when scum claims cop and you're the real cop, you counterclaim so the town doesn't get led around by the nose by the scumteam. Real cops staying quiet to save themselves are not playing to their win condition.

I did not think I was going to be doing this earlier in the game but

Vote: Hinduragi

.

And since I haven't gone back to look at Seraphim yet I'm definitely not sure what to make of the claim. I feel like it's standard procedure in games to leave the claimed cop alive one Day at this point in the game, right?

[KittyMo]

Vote Count XIV

[3] Seraphim - (archaebob, foilist13, Prox)

[1] drmyshottyizsik - (Hinduragi)
[1] Prox - ( Seraphim)
[1] archaebob - (silverbullet999)
[1] Hinduragi - (Switz)

[0] foilist13 - ()
[0] Good and Honest - ()
[0] silverbullet999 - ()
[0] Switz - ()

[2]

Not Voting

- (Good and Honest, drmyshottyizsik)

With

9

alive, it's

5

to lynch!

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

[Hinduragi]

I think you missed the point I was trying to make, Switz. Since no case has been posted against Seraphim and he has claimed already, wouldn't it be smarter as the cop to wait until a case is posted? Let me put it into a scenario.

If he's L-1 and he claims Cop(This is assuming we have a cop in this setup):

(Let's assume he's scum)
1.) The real cop counterclaims. Scum gone. Cop is NK'd N1.
2.) Noone counterclaims. A case is posted. Noone is convinced. Cop has to claim. Scum gone. Cop is NK'd N1.
3.) Noone counterclaims. A case is posted. People are convinced. Scum gone.

(Let's assume he's town but not cop)
1.) He gets counterclaimed. He gets hammered/mislynched. Cop is NK'd N1.
2.) Noone counterclaims. A case is posted. Noone is convinced. Cop has to claim. He is mislyched. Cop is NK'd N1.
3.) Noone counterclaims. A case is posted. People are convinced. He is mislynched.

(Let's assume he's cop)
1.) He doesn't get counterclaimed. Someone posts a case against him but it's nowhere near enough proof to lynch if he is the actual cop. No mislynch occurs.

The way I see it, it's best to wait until a case is posted.

[Prox]

Actually, foilist made a pretty good attack on Seraphim.

Anyways, here's my thoughts on the cop claim:

If the cop is not Seraphim, his best bet is to claim tomorrow after scanning. We'll have another confirmed townie most likely and a scum to lynch.

[Prox]

Also,

unvote

Also, Shotty -

@ everyone if you are the real cop please say so.

Wtf? You have no idea how much more assured I am that you're scum playing VI or newbscum now. If they're the real cop, why the hell would they counterclaim now? They'd get NK'd after the lynch.

How does this make him more scummy?

[Seraphim]

Uh, foilist made an attack on my attack on shotty. He hasn't actually posted a case as to why I, personally, am scummy yet. In other words, I'm being bandwagoned for Haylen's terrible, terrible play.

Can we lynch Prox please? I'm getting tired of this bullshit. I'm probably not going to get an investigation off thanks to this...*sigh*...

[Prox]

Also, there's the case on Haylen that Seraphim can't defend against.

As for HinduPost25, you forgot the possibility that he's cop and people are convinced to believe otherwise.

*sees G&H online*

My reason for voting him is his sudden turnabout, changing wagons with little reasoning besides the fact that he was "satisfied" with shotty's answers. It reeks, reeks, REEKS. Scum players don't want to appear inconsistent or backtrack at all which is why Prox made the attempt to transition from shotty's wagon(even if he wasn't on it when he switched to my wagon) to my wagon. I don't think my wagon is scumdriven as I'm cautiously sure both Foilist and archaebob are town at this point. These players are generally regarded as town. So, Prox is jumping onto the wagon he believes is more solidly founded and more likely to progress forward.

This is an action I see coming from scum especially this close to deadline.

This is closeminded. Shotty's answers proved to me completely that he was VI. Also, it seems to go without saying that townies don't want to appear to backtrack or appear inconsistent either, due to their inherent goal to not be mislynched. I didn't have a vote on shotty because I saw no point to it; no one was joining in. I jumped onto the wagon that seemed most likely to end with a scum's neck on the noose.

Sorry about the multipost. I keep on thinking I'm about to leave and then don't.

[Prox]

Also, wasn't Seraphim still away when I left the shotty wagon?

[Seraphim]

Shotty's answers proved to me completely that he was VI.

How?

townies don't want to appear to backtrack or appear inconsistent either, due to their inherent goal to not be mislynched.

Appearing "inconsistent" and backtracking are two different things. The definition of inconsistency is:

didn't have a vote on shotty because I saw no point to it; no one was joining in.

This is very much a scum mindset AND it contradicts what you said when you jumped wagons:

Oh. I didn't notice that Haylen didn't respond to that.

You unvoted Shotty and then then continued to attack Shotty even though your vote was on Haylen. In other words, if you changed wagons because it "wasn't working out", it stands to reason that you changed wagons because the new one WAS working out which correlates with what I said earlier which is this:

You only changed wagons because it suited you not because you believed the wagoned players were scum

.

Prox is scum, people.

[Seraphim]

Whoops. I knew I forgot part of my post. The part after the second quote...heh heh...

Appearing "inconsistent" and backtracking are two different things. The definition of inconsistency is:
1. lacking in consistency, agreement, or compatibility; at variance
2. containing contradictory elements
3. irregular or fickle in behaviour or mood

A town player can be inconsistent and a scum player can be inconsistent because things can change in a game of Mafia. If at the end of Day 1, you go in calling one player scum, but then something happens, an investigation result, perhaps the nightkill?, it doesn't matter, you change your mind at the beginning of Day 2 and are suddenly calling that one player from earlier town. That's inconsistent.

Backtracking is taking actions or statements you may have made and changing them, altering them. You, sir, are backtracking with your shotty/Haylen votes/unvotes.

[Prox]

You only changed wagons because it suited you not because you believed the wagoned players were scum.

Not exactly. I changed wagons because it suited me AND I believed the wagoned players were scum.

When I changed my mind about shotty, I knew I couldn't help but look scummy. But what could I do at that point?

I have not backtracked; I have changed my mind.

[Seraphim]

You were backtracking and you continue to backtrack. And what exactly about his responses made you "realize" shotty was town?

[Seraphim]

You were backtracking and you continue to backtrack.

To clarify, your reasons for unvoting and voting seem to change with every post. THIS is backtracking.

[Prox]

You were backtracking and you continue to backtrack. And what exactly about his responses made you "realize" shotty was town?

Not exactly. I suppose I just haven't been clear enough.

I realized shotty was town because the things he's done make more sense if he's VI instead of badscum. How often do people pretend to be VI in their noob phase?

I changed my vote/opinions for a variety of reasons. I can't honestly say that I did it just because I decided that Haylen seemed scummy and needed more pressure.

[Seraphim]

I changed my vote/opinions for a variety of reasons. I can't honestly say that I did it just because I decided that Haylen seemed scummy and needed more pressure.

WHAT ARE THESE REASONS YOU ARE DODGING THE QUESTION.

[Good and Honest]

I have the feeling this post is going to be chaotic but hopefully not too much.

Seraphim, the entire idea is that my playstyle will be Good and Honest even when I'm a mafioso in a particular game. By the way, I'm surprised that you found drmyshottyizsik so suspicious. You have been on this site for quite some time, haven't you come across other players who are unpredictable and constantly seem to change their mind - regardless of role?

As a whole, I don't want to pay too much attention to claims - yes, they are something to take into consideration but I think people should try not to concentrate too much on them when judging a player. This case, of course, is special, since if Seraphim is a "Cop", so was Haylen. I have read theories that players who have "power roles" often try to stay in the background and that's definitely what Haylen was trying to do... until Haylen's last couple of posts, at least.

However, there is something which I feel might be important. If you remember, at the beginning of the game I asked Haylen: "How will the fact that you're only temporarily in this game affect your playstyle? Will you play as if you'd remain here until the game's end? Are you thinking about what you are going to leave for Seraphim once Seraphim comes?". Here is Haylen's answer:

"The fact I'm a temp. replacement won't affect my playstyle. The last time I was a temp, I was scum and actually won the game in 6 days for my team. (Newbie 880). I will be playing as though I am a normal IC in the game. I've never really thought about what I might be Seraphim to come back to - whatever it is, I trust he'd be able to deal with it adequately"

Well, there are obvious differences between the two situations - Haylen might have been a temporary replacement in Newbie 880 but the replacement there happened during the later stages of the game, when it was entirely possible that the game would end before the person Haylen replaced would return (and that was indeed what happened). In our current game, Haylen was a temporary replacement in the very beginning - so why wouldn't Haylen consider at all what "legacy" would be left for Seraphim once Seraphim came? That seems even stranger if Haylen were a "Cop" - wouldn't it be important to try to secure a good position for your replacement with such a role?

And then there were Haylen's last posts, which, as I said in my previous post, were quite confusing. Yes, Haylen may have been in a bad mood - but the result was that the attention was brought to Seraphim. All the previous work of having stayed in the background was undone. Really puzzling. The only explanation I can think of is that Haylen did mean it when saying "I've never really thought about what I might be Seraphim to come back to - whatever it is, I trust he'd be able to deal with it adequately"... but it still baffles me.

silverbullet999, I was simply comparing your playstyles in the different games. I have the feeling that you're playing in a more "planned" manner now than before. I mentioned "silverbullet999 strikes back" because I think it will be a very curious coincidence if once again the person that provoked your "strike" turns out to be a mafioso, like was the case with Nothing Special. By the way, since you said: "Haylen's actions has seemed like haylen being her normal self to me" - do you find the way Haylen played in our current game similar to the one in Newbie 940?

Switz, I had asked you something previously and I don't think you answered so I'll repeat it - 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?

Hinduragi, no, I won't kill anyone if I'm the only mafioso remaining "alive". As I said, I checked the rules before registering here and wouldn't have registered if the rules made it obligatory to kill. Also, maybe I'm misunderstanding you but I have already given thoughts and analysis of my playstyle. If you want me to discuss something specific about it, just ask.

I'm not sure what you mean by this sentence: "Well, I'm going to give our mod the benefit of the doubt and assume that there isn't a possible "Follow the Cop" setup in this game". Would you clarify it?

Prox - OK. So in post #206 you unvoted drmyshottyizsik. Now you're saying that you didn't intend to vote for Haylen in the same post. But then there is your post #253 where I can't understand what's going on. In that post you made some comments on Haylen and then placed a "Finger of Suspicion" on Haylen. Later in the same post you stated "I've already read Haylen's posts today, and my opinion of her stands, though technically she's one of the scummiest people here"... and you unvoted!? But at that point you weren't voting for anyone! If we assume that you were unvoting Haylen, why did you tell me you hadn't voted for Haylen in post #206? And again, if you thought you had voted for Haylen previously, what was the point of placing a "Finger of Suspicion" on somebody you had already been voting? On the other hand, if you didn't think you were voting for Haylen, who were you unvoting in post #253?

Also, what did you mean when you said this:

"I'm surprised it didn't take longer for this to happen. However, I don't get how it took someone else to say it for it to matter"

[Prox]

I changed my vote/opinions for a variety of reasons. I can't honestly say that I did it just because I decided that Haylen seemed scummy and needed more pressure.

WHAT ARE THESE REASONS YOU ARE DODGING THE QUESTION.

No, I am not.

I'm sure I've said so before but to make it painfully clear:

1. I was annoyed/bored with shotty
2. I found Haylen scummy and decided she needed pressure.
3. I wanted progress
4. No one seemed to care about my shotty-related posts.

There were some other things, tip of my tongue, but I can't completely remember.

Also, Caps Locks are annoying. Trying to get a person to slip just to validate your attack only causes mislynches.