Newbie 993 - Game Over!

[Trachimbrod]

Thian: I'm having a hard time judging if your post 57 catch is just word nitpicking, or significant slip in this case.

When you ask me about my hesitance to band wagon, are you referring to the beginning of the game when I didn't want to cast the 2nd vote on Mysterio during RVS? I was going to vote in RVS on a minor suspicion, but I felt that as the 2nd vote, it would have implied a gravity behind my vote that was not actually there.

Mysterio: That's because I didn't find you addressed my concerns. You didn't so much clarify as just repeat yourself. Are you not saying that pursuing leads (whether you call them "weak" or not) muddles the game, wastes time, and takes attention from others? We have been voicing other concerns and questions to people besides you and Leech. We are capable of pursuing multiple leads. I don't think any concerns were just dropped dead because of a lead on you.

The lurkers are definitely not flying under the radar because we all keep mentioning them. They'll get scrutiny when they start posting content, but until then what else can we do?

And as for you backing Leech twice, that's not the only thing. That was the lead, and from the discussion it lead to, your responses have been poor.

Kirby: The vote is the sword, yes, but reason and logic are the eyes that help you strike true. I don't see the use of swinging blindly, hoping your gut is right. Would you be okay with the lynch of the person you are voting for now?

[Kirbyoshi]

At this moment, yes. I don't find anything scummy enough to change my vote, so if I were to determine the lynch for toDay, I wouldn't change my vote. However, I do not determine the lynch by myself. Notice I haven't been pressing for people to wagon on Hindu. He's still my best bet for scum, but Illume and Steppen haven't been giving me much to work with.

[Thian]

Trachimbrod, you stated you never played Mafia before, and that this is your first game on here? I am sure you have noticed how newbies are often referred to the wiki, did you check it out?

[Trachimbrod]

I have looked at the flash thing, the Newbie Guide, and the common abbreviations. Is there something you feel I should read?

[Thian]

Well, I am just on my way into work here. I will get what I saw later on tonight once things settle down there and then post why I questioned you on the hesitance of a bandwagon.

[Leech]

You're stretching that comment far beyond it's fairly obvious meaning. Which is this: I think you're scum, you claim you're not. As such, my reasoning behind you being scum isn't something you would readily admit to. In other words, I don't expect a post from you admitting that your scum and we should go ahead and lynch you. And I now feel dumber for having to explain this.

First off, the "obvious" meaning isn't always the "true" meaning. When you question actual motives or reasons for someone posting something, then you catch scum slipping. I have absolutely no intention of taking things people say completely at face value. The fact that you are even insinuating that anyone does, as such, is completely ridiculous. You had explicitly drawn lines between you, and myself. I'm not sure if you are scum, so I am willing to admit that I'm wrong, if I find that to be the case. However, you on the other hand have such a black and white attitude, that it's leading me to believe you have knowledge that I do not. Subtle things people say add up over time and result in one large scummy picture. That is what I'm seeing here.

Leech I know I'm going back a bit on your theory for Incognito's first post
scum theory, but can you link me to it or direct me to it please?

I'll try and dig up a link. He explained it in a game that I had to replace out of extremely early, so it's not on my wiki. I'll try and find it though. It might just be easier if you look at one of his games, he uses it every time he plays, and eventually explains it.

Leech Do you really believe in town lynches providing more
information than Scum Lynches?

The keyword that I used, which you didn't, is: Sometimes. Yes, I do believe that to be the case sometimes. First off it lowers the ration of town to scum so your odds get higher, and also there is almost always scum on a town lynch. All town lynches have happened, but it's very rare. When you lynch scum, there is this giant pool of WIFOM over whether or not his buddy bussed or not. Information wise, sometimes a town lynch can be more providing. This is the exact reason why you do not no-lynch.

Personally I don't like listing my top list of scum reads, but if the question is asked, I'm going to answer it.

I'm going to request that you do not do that. This is a subject that has been debated since the dawn of mafia, but I firmly do not believe in posting scumlists. They show the scum when they are blending in, and when they are not. They also show the scum who is considered the scummiest town, and guides their night kill. I do not, under any circumstances, support scumlists. They are somewhat beneficial to the town, but more beneficial to the scum.

At this moment, yes. I don't find anything scummy enough to change my vote, so if I were to determine the lynch for toDay, I wouldn't change my vote. However, I do not determine the lynch by myself.

Would you care to elaborate on that? That statement can be taken multiple ways.

[Thian]

Trachimbrod: Mastin's Insane Tells ((Theory)) (MiT))

One of his theories is the second vote on the bandwagon is more than likely a scum tell especially in newbie games. Also that someone who expresses caution is scum. Now this is just theory, no real stats to prove effective enough to state 100 percent that this is a true scum tell but I can see where it comes into play here with you Trachimbrod.

To put your name second on mysterio it would raise the suspicion meter on you, scum would not want suspicion on them that early and would be more hesitant to join a bandwagon without a consensus or others on the bandwagon before them. You expressed a desire to put a vote on Mysterio but only after you had discussed it with everyone and formed a consensus.

You also approached putting any type of voting on Mysterio with caution because it would put him at L-3 as stated L-3 is not so much to worry about compared to L-2 but more so L-1.

Caution based on MiT states that because one is cautious it is scum trying to look protown. So your reaction to putting someone at L-3 seems a bit contrived.

Also
The fact that I had questioned you in post 45 by asking if you wished a consensus first before voting and then you continued in post 47 to say "No thats not it" and explained in your own words that you really did want a consensus first before you voted. you went and stumbled with trying to explain what you meant to Leech and Myself after we tried to get clarification from you.

Of course it is theory, is it 100 percent accurate no, but it is something to look at.

Leech: about the link, no worries ill see what I can find on my own hunting, if you do happen to find it great, if not ill see if I can dig it up.

Also, fair I didn't use the word sometimes, thanks for explaining it to me it makes sense. and to the fact that you do not like scum lists. I side with you on that. I don't either but if someone asks me, as Kirbyoshi did, I am going to answer as town really should be answering questions posed.

Kirbyoshi, any particular information you gather from peoples scum lists? Do you find scum lists help or hinder town more?

[Trachimbrod]

I would not mind putting my name second, first, or last on a player that I think is scum. I am cautious, I see no reason not to be when we have time to spare for discussion. As I said in 150, I did not want to wagon on minor suspicion. As I said in 58:

Noted about L-3 not being dangerous. However, as my only reason at that time was that he posted first, it wasn't worth wagoning on. I wouldn't have wanted everyone else to vote for him just because he posted first.

I'm curious what reaction to putting someone at L-3 seems contrived to you, since I don't think I had a reaction to putting someone at L-3 besides the quote above. Elaborate if you can.

I also don't know how you got that I really did want a consensus prior to casting my vote. As I said in 47, 58, and repeated here, I would vote first for someone if I thought they were scum.

I did not approach putting any type of voting on Mysterio with caution because it would put him at L-3, rather I did not vote for him because I did not have a good reason to. Just look at the above quote.

[Thian]

Trachimbrod:

There's a difference about putting a hammer down without proper discussion before deadline and only putting someone at L-3.

If you do not remember where you stated you wanted a consensus, I will quote it here and let you see why I feel this way original post 44

I don't think I'll vote for anyone until I'd want everyone to vote for that person too.

I don't think I will vote for anyone = you saying you are not voting
until I'd want everyone to vote for that person too = until everyone comes to a consensus

My question to you post 45

I don't have a policy for my voting yet, I can see the merits of voting to pressure, but right now I don't think I'll vote for anyone until I'd want everyone to vote for that person too.

So you are saying you will wait around until a consensus is formed and then proceed to vote?

Your response post 47

Not at all. I'm saying that I won't vote until I would want everyone to vote with me, not that I won't vote unless it's with the current majority

You disagreed with me by saying "no, not at all" then you went to practically say you actually would not vote until a consensus is formed.

I won't vote = you not voting
until I would want everyone to vote with me = until a consensus is formed

So, I read it as you will wait till everyone agrees on someone and then send out a vote but now you are saying you would vote first for someone who you think is scum.

I am addressing why were you so hesitant/cautious to put that second vote on Mysterio. If you believed that Mysterio based on Leech's "Incognito theory" minor reason or not, was worth to place a vote, why didn't you?

I feel you were a bit contrived here

I was gonna vote Mysterio for being first as well, but I don't want to pile on in RVS.

at that time you responded when Leech and Mysterio brought it out of RVS, you would have put him only at L-3 it was hardly piling votes on, as only Leech had a vote on Mysterio at that time. We all know that there is quite a bit of time. Seeing as we need 5 people to vote that one person, no one would have made a hasty decision to pile on 3 more votes without adequate discussion first. Two scum could have easily dropped 2 votes on Mysterio and still left it at L-1. Now THAT would be piling on votes and that is something to worry about and question.

I did not approach putting any type of voting on Mysterio with caution because it would put him at L-3, rather I did not vote for him because I did not have a good reason to.

you said "you don't want to pile votes." To me that means you approached with caution because it would put him closer to lynch meaning L-3 at the time.

[Kirbyoshi]

Brod, if you read Thian's posts carefully, he's basically saying what I've been trying to say. One vote on a person isn't dangerous. Two votes on a person isn't dangerous. Hindu is in no danger of being lynched right now because I'm the only one voting him, and I'm not pushing for a wagon. If I see something worthy of changing my vote, I'll change it.

[Trachimbrod]

Thian: until I'd want everyone to vote for that person too =/= until everyone comes to a consensus. As I've been saying, I'd vote before the consensus, I'd hope that my reasons could form the consensus if there isn't one.

I think I've been pretty clear now but you're reading what isn't there. I could be the first person voting, and think I have a good enough reason that others should vote for the same person too. I did not say that I would want everyone to come to an agreement prior to my vote. I am not just now saying that I would vote first for someone I think is scum, I've been saying it earlier too.

I think that voting for someone for first post is okay in RVS. I don't think it's an adequate reason to wagon on them. That is why I didn't place the second vote on Mysterio back then.

Kirby: Yes, I understand that one vote or two on a person isn't dangerous. I still think that one should have a good reason to vote outside of RVS.

[Kirbyoshi]

Two votes, even in a 9-person game, isn't exactly a wagon, Brod, and more often than not in a Newbie game, there is 3 votes on the same person just from RVS. Absolutely nothing wrong with it.

[Mysterio]

Now we're starting to argue about theory again, which has been pointed out before as not all that helpful. Vote or don't vote, but you should know that not voting means the game doesn't progress. So, at some point you should vote if for no other reason than to put pressure on that person. Depending on how they respond, you can keep your vote on them or unvote. Refraining from voting completely just makes the game stagnant.

Mysterio: That's because I didn't find you addressed my concerns. You didn't so much clarify as just repeat yourself. Are you not saying that pursuing leads (whether you call them "weak" or not) muddles the game, wastes time, and takes attention from others? We have been voicing other concerns and questions to people besides you and Leech. We are capable of pursuing multiple leads. I don't think any concerns were just dropped dead because of a lead on you.

So, let's go ahead and clear this up once and for all. No, I am NOT saying that pursuing leads in general hurts town. What I've been saying all along is that bringing the game to a screeching halt by incessantly badgering someone on a weak point does hurt town, because it hinders scumhunting and allows scum to fly under the radar by either not posting or simply jumping on a bandwagon. The proper thing to do, in my opinion, is to pursue leads while also acknowledging when a certain lead has hit a dead end. That doesn't mean you should stop being suspicious, only that you should open the game up for more scumhunting at that point. This is getting into theory arguing again, but hopefully this post will put an end to this little back and forth.

@Thian #148

A lot of these are nitpicking things out of context, similar to what you've been doing to trachimbrod about his reluctance to bandwagon early. My vote on Hinduragi was explained in the same post that I voted in, where I said it was to pressure him. In my experience, the more pressure there is on someone, the more likely they are to slip if they're scum. As for me explaining why I was first, well considering I was being pressured by Leech with Incognito's theory (which I realize now has not actually been properly cited by Leech) and trachimbrod also expressed interest in voting for me because of it, I did feel the need to defend myself. Which I did, and then I moved on. Also, the overuse of AtE seems ridiculous, an an easy out for scum on the attack. Most defenses will contain some kind of AtE, consciously or unconsciously, which makes it a very weak scum tell, if at all. My use of the word "possibly" was to emphasis the very point I was making, which was the questionable nature of Leech's suspicion (hence my earlier mention about you taking things out of context, which has happened twice now in one post).

Anyway, your scumhunting here consists of pulling things out of context, misrepresenting them in a way that sounds scummy, and then incessantly harping on it even after the person has already responded to it. This looks to me like you're forcing things in an attempt to look pro-town.

[Trachimbrod]

Kirby: Seems like a wagon to me. I think in 39 Leech says it would be a wagon. Think Thian called it a wagon too, since I believe it's what he was referring to when asking about my hesitance to bandwagon. I've never seen three votes on the same person just for RVS, and I usually spectated larger games than this one. I'm sure you're exaggerating that three random votes on one person happens more often than not. I don't think a person is scum just because they vote without a good reason, but I do find it suspicious.

Mysterio: I can understand how some people would want to use their vote to pressure a response, but I expect people to respond to questions when asked even without being voted. I think as long as they do, the game doesn't stagnate.

I think the lead on you kept leading to more, which is why it kept going. I'll have to reread it now, but like I was saying, I don't think pursuing one lead closes the game to other scumhunting, nor are the lurkers truly flying under the radar. They've got some explaining to do when they get back (though they'll probably be replaced at this point).

[Mysterio]

They've got some explaining to do when they get back (though they'll probably be replaced at this point).

If they get replaced, then we get nothing out of it. We can't exactly pressure the replacements for something they didn't do. However, I will say that it wouldn't have come to this if our mod was actually here. He has disappeared again, and hasn't posted in the queue forum about needing replacements. Does anyone know if we have a backup mod?

[hohum]

10. Do not post small/invisible/encrypted text in this thread. Basically:

if I can't read it you can't post it.

This applies to spoiler tags as well. Please don't use them in game threads

Replacements are being sought so the game can progress.

Current vote count:

Mysterio(3): Hinduragi, Illume, Leech
Leech(1): Mysterio
Hinduragi(1): Kirbyoshi

Not Voting(4): steppenwolf, Trachimbrod, Thian, startransmission

With 9 alive it takes 5 to lynch.

[Hinduragi]

Alright, having read through what I missed, I see a lot of repeats. So, I'll be doing a bit of a drive-by on the repeat arguments.

The first quote was him saying you didn't have sufficient quotes backing your arguement.(You can link posts by right clicking the post number instead of quoting the entire thing btw) The second was more or less about you being a hypocrite in your points. The third was you misrepp'ing him. You should reread the post where I took those excerpts from. You're largely ignoring the entirety of my argument while defending yourself.

Firstly, it's not actually your argument. This is just something you're piggy-backing off of. Second, I've already responded to these points. Go back and read my full replies to Leech where I quote exactly what I'm accusing him of doing. I didn't type up those WoT's in response to Leech just to have to type them up again. Post's #79 and #87 are the posts you should refer to. Notice that I quote him and then argue how that particular quote is scummy.

I don't want you to repeat yourself. He responded again with an argument that proved your former statements wrong. It's your case against him. Not mine. Don't try to direct your response to me. Direct them to Leech. My point is you aren't letting him defend himself. You dropped his case. And, yes, it is my argument. You ignored all of my points but one when you mentioned "Again, to avoid more walls of text (was getting tiresome), I'm just going to respond to Hinduragi's main contention". I don't want you to ignore everthing and pick the one thing you can defend yourself against. That's a nice way to lurk past my questions but I'm not going to let it happen.

[Leech]

Mod: I never unvoted, I am still voting Mysterio

fixed. -mod

@KirbYoshi: Is there a reason you didn't answer my question in post 155?

However, I will say that it wouldn't have come to this if our mod was actually here.

Your disrespect for the players and mod in this game is really starting to strike a nerve with me. Your generally insulting tone in your arguments and now blatant disrespect towards the mod, really should be avoided. This is supposed to be a fun game and your constant insulting disrespectful tone is really hurting that aspect of the game. So, again, I'm asking you to stop it. Especially when your activity can be summed up as "active lurking" at best, and even you have admit that you forgot the game was going. Lack of participation is hurting this game, not lack of modding. If everyone was active the mod wouldn't have to find replacements in the first place.

You dropped his case. And, yes, it is my argument. You ignored all of my points but one when you mentioned "Again, to avoid more walls of text (was getting tiresome), I'm just going to respond to Hinduragi's main contention". I don't want you to ignore everthing and pick the one thing you can defend yourself against.

This. Mysterio is selectively choosing what points to defend and ignoring others. He has still yet to provide a single quote where I have been requesting that players blindly follow me, or show desire for a quick lynch where he has explicitly stated to have been the case. I've repeatedly requested this, and he's ignored it.

What I've been saying all along is that bringing the game to a screeching halt by incessantly badgering someone on a weak point does hurt town, because it hinders scumhunting and allows scum to fly under the radar by either not posting or simply jumping on a bandwagon.

Just by calling a point doesn't make it so. You are so intentionally vague in everything that you say, that it cannot be anything other than intentional at this point. None of my points have been weak, and you repeatedly ignore my requests to back up a single word you say. This is beyond scummy. Remember when I said at the beginning that I start off a game with a weak-reasoned vote and only vote again when I believe someone to be scum?

Unvote: Mysterio
Vote: Mysterio

Let there be no mistake about it, I am not voting Mysterio for Incog theory at this point. I believe he is scum for his actions. Fluffy posts, accusing me of distancing before an exchange even took place, refusal to back up his words, active lurking, mod bashing... it's all so scummy that I am comfortable with his lynch.

[Kirbyoshi]

@Leech: My answer is that Hinduragi was the first person that struck me as scummy. This game is hard to get reads on, since

nearly

everyone has been lurking at some point or another. Therefore, I haven't been able to deduce a better reason to vote anyone. I'm not pushing for Hindu's lynch because I don't have enough on him yet to call him scum, just that he's the most suspicious one so far.

@Leech as well: Is disrespect scummy?

[startransmission]

I apologize for not responding to the question I was asked. My RL is a lot more hectic than I anticipated it being, but things are thinning out. I'll respond to the question I was asked, but moreover I'll do an Iso of everybody. It'll help me get back into the stride of the game as well as offer y'all my opinions. And I'll likely cast a vote.

[Leech]

@Leech as well: Is disrespect scummy?

Being condescending to other players can be scummy though. It's a method that I have seen scum use to try to hurt the cases of others, by trying to make the rest of the players feel stupid for taking what that player is saying seriously. Town players can be obnoxious so it's not a scum tell on it's own, but when paired with everything else it can be, and is in this case.

Disrespect to the mod isn't as much, I just hate seeing it. The mod has a life outside of the game just like everyone else. If we can excuse a player that had something come up to prevent them from posting, the mod should be no different. I hate seeing mod disrespect more than player disrespect, mainly because players typically do something to warrant it. The mod is running the game for us, so it's completely uncalled for. It's null in terms of a player's alignment, it's just bad form.

[hohum]

Chimp Pants replaces Illume effective immediately.

drmyshottyizsik replaces steppenwolf effective immediately.

if I've missed anyone else who hasn't been posting please let me know; however, as far as I can tell your game is full again with plenty of time to go until deadline.. so GOGO GADGET POST!

[Chimp Pants]

Doing a read through. Will post content after.

[Thian]

Trachimbrod: I'm going off of you being hesitant to put the second vote on Mysterio.

The following statment You thought it was still RVS at that time.
"I was gonna vote for Mysterio for being first as well, but I didn't want to pile votes on during RVS"

During RVS there is no threat to a mislynch unless 3 people blindly jump onto one person within the first
two or three pages and 2 scum quick vote and hammer.

you stated during RVS, which you thought it was at the time, was ok
to vote someone ((in this case mysterio)) for being first. the risk of a potential mislynch/quick lynch was so low

your caution came across as an unnatural fear when there was no threat in a lynch by putting 2 votes on someone.

Being cautious to vote tends to look pro town because mislynches are undesireable. being cautious while there is no
true threat seems like a contrived ploy to make yourself look protown.

Not putting that second vote down on Mysterio after you said you were going to makes me think you did not want
to raise suspicion against you. You backed out of the vote with an excuse thats based on a scenario with no true threat
of a lynch at that time.




Mysterio: You pressured Hinduragi with a vote to gain a defense / response to Leech.
Hinduragi had not even been given the chance to respond yet, so how do you know
he would not have responded on his own accord or slipped up on his own? Did he really need that pressure?
What did Hinduragi do that was scummy when he pretty much only had one post?

Mysterio: Can you tell me where Leech has cited Incognito's theory incorrectly?


I am still wondering why Steppenwolf avoided Hinduragi's question and put Mysterio and Leech as probably town instead
of answering hinduragi's question upfront and his need to have written "In all honesty".

but probably will not get an answer to that seeing as they have been replaced.

Hi Chimp Pants, glad to be in another game with you.

Hello drmyshottyizsik

[Chimp Pants]

First, Illume had voted for Mysterio, and I'll confirm that I agree with that vote. Some of these points may have already been discussed.

In Post 26 Myst pressure votes Hindu while suggesting Leech is distancing his scum-buddy. He confirms this idea in Post 30 ("I'm really leaning toward the idea that you and Hinduragi are simply attempting to distance yourselves early, so that the rest of us will find it hard to believe that you are scum buddies.") Note that the alleged buddying was committed by Leech, yet Myst follows the buddy accusation to the buddied Hindu. Myst either voted Hindu for pressure while simultaneously suggesting a more scummy lean for Leech or he voted Hindu for being allegedly buddied by Leech. Neither way makes sense.

Myst eventually seems to back of the scum buddy theory in Post 35...

Myst shifts the blame for his vote to Leech in Post 35 ("My leanings have nothing to do with him. Your post was sufficient enough for me to join you in pointing the FoS at Hinduragi"). Notice that Myst's vote is based on Leech's post, not Hindu's actions.

Myst either threatens Myst or suggests blending into the whims of the town in Post 55 ("So, unless your goal here is to make yourself look suspicious (which, ironically, you now are), then I'm not sure why you have a problem with me moving on?"). Neither action is helpful to the town. Both using your vote to limit discussion about yourself and hiding in popular opinion serve scum goals.

My notes on Myst's Post 57 simply reads, "OMGUS threat??? Huh???" I'll quote the entire post this time:

Thoughts on Hinduragi's post later, but I just want to point out that Leech had managed to remove himself from my radar by answering my objections, only to give me new reason to cast my FoS at him. This type of schizophrenic play is something I have seen from scum before. I have to ask, why would you care if I stopped being suspicious of you? Unless your goal is to use my suspicion as some kind of shield against accusations of flying under the radar, or better yet using it as an opportunity to cast suspicion back on me and possibly getting a townie lynched. I must then ask, what possible town motive would cause you to overzealously bring suspicion back onto yourself?

Very questionable behavior by Leech. And I'm off to work. Will certainly be back on later tonight to fully digest and respond to Hinduragi's post.

The issue

isn't

the characterization of Leech's play as "schizophrenic" or whatever later term Myst decided to use. Myst is citing his own actions as reasons for Leech being scummy- more blame shifting. He doesn't cite specific actions of Leech. This read's more like Myst using the threat of a vote to stop lines of questioning. Additionally, the logic of Leech bringing suspicion on himself to "sheild against accusations of flying under the radar" seems quite strained. Myst also drifts into AtE by blaming Leech for "possibly getting a townie lynched."

Post 78 may be stepping into an irrelevant discussion between Myst and Leech that is marred by different opinions of the nuances of English. In general though, town shouldn't try to avoid mislynches. They should try to lynch scum. There's a difference.

Post 79 reads more like trying to win an argument than find scum. There's a difference. As long as I can get suggestions of a player's alignment, I don't care who's right or wrong. Granted, rightness and wrongness are factors in determining a player's alignment, but they're less important than whether or not a player is genuinely scum hunting. There is a difference.