Newbie 1001 - Game Over

[Banana Stickers]

Wooah. Okay first of all there's no reason that you should be calling my reasoning weird because this is my first game and you should be respecting what I do or say.

First off, dude - and I know you're a female, I am too - let me just say the following, completely out of the game...

So, you know video games, like Halo, or Mortal Kombat - pick yer generation - they're fighting games, right. You fight against other players. And when you kill the other players, it's nothing personal. It's not that you don't respect them. It's just...that's the game.

Similarly, mafia is a fighting game, well, kind of, played with words instead of guns. Anything I say in game has nothing to do with you

personally,

it is within context of the game. As a person, I respect you. As a potential mafia member trying to kill me, well, that's another story, and that's the

game.

There's no reason you should be attacking me like that.

Back to the game! That being said, your immediate defensiveness strikes me as

really

weird along with everything I'd pointed out before.

I've read everyone's post like twice, and overall, what Ragna has said seem like attacks at others while defending herself.

Yeah, but I asked you to give me a specific example of attacking strongly and you came up with nada.

So...flimsy reasoning, incredibly defensive, not able to provide specific examples...here's my problem...are you just a really new newbie, or are you

scum?

Would like to hear what others think.

[skn27]

Yeah, but I asked you to give me a specific example of attacking strongly and you came up with nada.

So...flimsy reasoning, incredibly defensive, not able to provide specific examples...here's my problem...are you just a really new newbie, or are you

scum?

Would like to hear what others think.

I just find it extremely surprising that people take this game so seriously (I'm not trying to insult anybody by saying that by the way) and everybody is just so serious about it. I wasn't expecting that so I wasn't prepared to be attacked like that. I already said that I wasn't able to give you a specific example because it's a "gut feeling".

I would also like to know what others think.

[Pizzaplate]

There are some who play seriously and others who don't treat this game as seriously.
Personally, I don't see the point in entering a game if you're not going to play it with all you've got, but that's just me.
You should know, skn27, that you WILL be suspected of being scum sometime in your life here, if you continue playing. It's nearly unavoidable.

Also if you can't provide an example (evidence), then your attack will most likely be treated as invalid. We don't lynch based on gut feelings here.

[KoreanWonderBoy]

Sorry if I was a bit confusing in my post. What I meant was if you posted a lot of information on one person, it seems to me that you are more scummy than someone who gives a wide overview of the playing field. I think.
And with skn27, honestly, I think you are innocent. As of now. Sort of like you, I didn't realize that the whole game (heck, even the first day phase) was going to go into this much detail. Wow. Especially because this is a newbie game, I think you are a townie just trying to defend yourself and I think you are surprised (just like me, sort of) that people are analyzing your every movements and thoroughly going over everything you say.
(by the way, this long post is because I'm on a different computer. I'll try to do this for all my posts, but it's not guaranteed)

[skn27]

Thank you very much for understanding KWB.

[skn27]

Also if you can't provide an example (evidence), then your attack will most likely be treated as invalid. We don't lynch based on gut feelings here.

I'm not saying you should lynch and I also hadn't voted based on gut feeling. I was just telling everybody what I think right now which is what I thought we

should

be doing. I'm not saying a "matter-of-factly" that I am right and that that person should be lynched. I was only trying to communicate with everybody so that everyone knows what I am thinking so we can work everything out together.

[CallMeLiam]

Vote Count

ManInTrenchcoat

- 2 - Memnon, Pizzaplate

Ragnarokio

- 1 - ManInTrenchcoat

Equinox

- 1 - Substrike22

Substrike22

- 1 - Ragnarokio

Not Voting

- 3 - Banana Stickers, Equinox, KoreanWonderboy, skn27

Five votes lynches, Deadline is 9am Friday the 21st of September GMT. A countdown is

here

[Equinox]

I apologize about the absence, everyone. I'm almost caught up with my load in general, so my activity should improve.

Also, catching up means less walls. Sorry about the length of this post.

@ Equinox. By confused, I mean how people deduct so much out of so little. I sort of get it, but then again, for me to completely get it, I should be able to make those deductions (or at least some of them) by myself. And occasionally the abbreviations. Which I can check on the other website thingy.

We read people's statements and then think about the motivations behind each one. Is this person saying this to be helpful or to look like they're being helpful? Does this benefit town, or does this benefit mafia? Do these conclusions follow logic?

@ Equinox - I'd say it's more likely that one of you or the other is a mafia, not both, at this point. Though, in my humble opinion, t's hard to determine "scum teams" until the town has a little more info.

Well, that is interesting. Your previous posts were pushing both of us as mafia, yet now that I've asked, you seem to think it's only one of us. Are you trying to set up a chain lynch here?

SO WHY IS IT THAT: When I did so, it's automatically scummy? Seems like a null tell to me.

It's not automatically scummy, but the preceding behavior (missing the question) will affect how people view the following behavior (answering).

@ Equinox, I'm not saying you should be pointing out everything, Equinox, I'm saying you should probably be more willing to allow people a "noob" card, since this -is- after all a newbie game, on day 1.

I probably should be, but I'm not.

Since it's so early in the game, "newbieness" should be a given. That seems to be your premise here. Why would it be necessary to point this out for every single attack, then? I do not use it because that is akin to giving scum an escape pass. I'm not going to assume everyone is experienced, but I'm not going to hold back if something seems scummy.

Over time the whole thing becomes very strawman, and Trenchcoat is turned into the innocent good guy (Substrike initially found him scummy, and i don't recall him ever saying he didn't anymore), and Equinox the evil mafiate battering on easy to lynch noobs.

I could say the same thing about your representation of the Equinox versus Substrike22 argument... but anyway, what makes you think straw men have been involved?

I firmly believe bandwagons help scum 75% of the time.

Why?

Can you explain what you mean by "strawman"? Never heard that before.

A straw man argument is one where one takes one's opponent's position, make it look like a similar but weaker argument, and then attack it.

Wooah. Okay first of all there's no reason that you should be calling my reasoning weird because this is my first game and you should be respecting what I do or say. There's no reason you should be attacking me like that. I haven't had any experience with this, so what I say or do right now in my first game is really based on gut feeling instead of strategy because I really have no strategy.

There's really no strategy in the beginning of the game (unless you're mafia, but even they are fairly random on Day 1). You look for something that doesn't look or feel right, and then you examine it. That's all there is. Some of that is gut, some of that is looking for gaps in logic.

I think people here have multiple definitions of noob card, Equinox is saying that he won't ignore something Trenchcoat has done that is scummy just because he is a new player, he won't cut him any slack.

This sums up my position.

Banana- I feel like you're a townie because in Post 74 you were glad that we were all moving along which meant that you wanted us to get closer to figuring out who the scum(s) is/are. If you were scum, you wouldn't want us to be moving along and figuring out that you were scum.

On the other hand, scum will say that just to appear more townie. Banana Stickers's comment was just an afterthought; why do you feel this statement was telling of town alignment? (Blah. Double ninja'd by the SEs.)

My next opinions of people could be totally wrong: I just want people to know that I am trying to do something here that explains where I stand.

Why are you already pre-empting your stances? Are you afraid that someone will point you out and say you're wrong?

I was only trying to communicate with everybody so that everyone knows what I am thinking so we can work everything out together.

...which is good. However, since we don't know for sure what your motivations are, you're going to be scrutinized as much as the rest of them.

---

The tl;dr Section

• Familiarize yourself with these logical fallacies, and learn to avoid them. I'm of the belief that emotion and instinct play a role in scum hunting, but logic is the way to convince people to lynch the person you believe is mafia. If all you've got is gut, question them either until you get a logical basis for your suspicion, or until you're no longer suspicious of them.
• "He seems to be town, but he may be mafia." Do not fall into this trap. Both are always possibilities, until that person flips a role. Examine both possibilities and determine which one is likelier. Take stances.
• If you're unsure what alignment someone is, ask them questions. Apply pressure if you feel it's necessary.

Stances!

I'm worried about KoreanWonderBoy's and skn27's waffling with their reads. They listed their opinions of each player, but they fell into the WIFOM trap described above. Of the two, KoreanWonderBoy is probably the worse offender, since he took the effort of pre-empting his own positions.

VOTE: KoreanWonderBoy

I have some very strong town reads and a few weak town reads, which is pretty good for Day 1.

I am up in the air about ManInTrenchcoat, given Substrike22's borderline-chainsaw. He needs to come in and give his opinions on what has transpired thus far (and focus less on self-defense).

[KoreanWonderBoy]

Mm. I guess I'm too open to things. Even in debates, I find it hard to take a side. But really, that sentence I said (next could be totally wrong) was really an afterthought. All of what I said in my post makes up my true feelings, it's just that I always have that sinking doubt, or second thoughts. But they are still insignificant compared to what I actually said. I just wanted to be completely open to other thoughts. Maybe I shouldn't be so open anymore.
P.S. Waffling, and pre-empting. Huh?
pre-empting = saying that they're wrong before saying them?
waffling = beating around the bush?

@ skn Your welcome.

[Memnon]

@KoreanWonderBoy: Pre-empting, in the mafia sense, means you defend yourself from something that no one has accused you of yet, but you are expecting them to. (Equinox, would this be in the logical fallacies category that you linked?) It is scum mentality because you are looking too closely at how other people will react to your position, instead of how your target reacts. Scum don't really care what their target does, they just want them lynched. They don't want to look bad while doing that though, thus the pre-empting. Town look for reactions from their target to either confirm their opinion or clear that person.

Also, skn and KoreanWonderBoy, this is pretty typical play, even for newbie games.

I find it interesting that ManInTrenchcoat has flaked once pressure has come upon him.

[Ragnarokio]

I'm also concerned about Trenchcoat's recent loss in activity.

I think worrying about what other people think of you is something that most new players do, regardless of alignment.

[Equinox]

Maybe I shouldn't be so open anymore.

Oh, no. Keep an open mind; you don't want to become stuck in tunnel vision. Just don't walk yourself in a circle. It's sort of a delicate balance where you hold a stance but are willing to consider other viable options.

Kind of like choosing a meal. You know the roast chicken is excellent, but you know their salads are also excellent. Which one do you pick?

@KoreanWonderBoy: Pre-empting, in the mafia sense, means you defend yourself from something that no one has accused you of yet, but you are expecting them to. (Equinox, would this be in the logical fallacies category that you linked?) It is scum mentality because you are looking too closely at how other people will react to your position, instead of how your target reacts. Scum don't really care what their target does, they just want them lynched. They don't want to look bad while doing that though, thus the pre-empting. Town look for reactions from their target to either confirm their opinion or clear that person.

I endorse this.

I think worrying about what other people think of you is something that most new players do, regardless of alignment.

I've seen some new players do this, yes, but I'm not one to encourage it.

Memnon makes a good point in 159. Only scum should worry about pre-empting attacks. Townies get it drilled into their heads that they don't need to worry about what other players think of them (as much).

I'm also concerned about Trenchcoat's recent loss in activity.

I had it chalked up to just plain not logging in, but just now I looked at his userpage and noticed that he had logged in on Monday.

'sup, ManInTrenchcoat?

[Pizzaplate]

Still keeping my vote on MITC. Interesting how he's lurking now, when he's been so active before. Anyone else want to vote him, squeeze him a little?

As for the newbies, fencesitting is never a good idea. We don't get anything accomplished and it makes you look scummy. Don't do it. It is far better to outright accuse and attack the person you think is the scummiest, even if you're the only person who thinks so, than to provide some weak opinions on who is scum, and retract them by saying they're "probably invalid".

[KoreanWonderBoy]

If MiTC was indeed logged in on Monday, that concerns me. Quite. But I want to make sure, how do you check this?

[Equinox]

If MiTC was indeed logged in on Monday, that concerns me. Quite. But I want to make sure, how do you check this?

You can look at anyone's user page by clicking on their username.

[KoreanWonderBoy]

Definitely suspicious of MiTC. Especially that he's not trying to defend his lack of activity. I want to see how he responds when he finally posts again.

[Ragnarokio]

People could have reasons to log on without posting. I'm not keen on the idea of attacking someone if they haven't had time to post, but its also too easy to lie about it, so i'm not sure how i'd go about handling that.

[Pizzaplate]

Well, rag, I sometimes do that, log on, look at stuff, go away without posting. Is this lurking? One time, I'll say no. Two times in a day, probably can still be explained. But if you're not posting for days, and it shows you've been online in those days, I'd say it's lurking.
The newbie card can be applied here until the lurker's advice is given. So ahem.

Please don't lurk, as it is not helpful for the town and will probably call you out as scum. Thank you very much.

[Equinox]

While we're on the subject of lurking, there's another form of lurking you need to watch out for.

The mafia do not like to incriminate themselves, so often they will refrain from taking stances and opinions. They can't just lurk forever; either the moderator prods them or we policy lynch them. Therefore, the solution is to post what is commonly termed as "fluff" to give the appearance of being active while not actually contributing. The key characteristic of a fluff post is that it does not move the game forward. It doesn't offer any insight into the player (except that s/he is not contributing), the game, or any of the other players.

Since these guys are not really lurking -- but they're as good as every other lurker (i.e., useless) -- it's "active lurking." Lurking may be a null tell, but active lurking is usually considered scummy.

The problem is that I've seen both town and scum do it for any number of reasons, so if you see a case of active lurking, use your discretion.

[skn27]

Banana Stickers's comment was just an afterthought; why do you feel this statement was telling of town alignment?

Now that I think about it, I'm not really sure. I mean this is only Banana's second ish game and I feel like only SE's or IC'S would "appreciate" continuation, at least more so than newbies. After thinking about it, it doesn't really make much sense for her to say something like that unless she is scum.

Also, I'm not sure if I should vote for MITC right now due to his inactivity which means that he is probably lurking around and trying to not say/do anything that would make him look suspicious. Which is obviously not working. I don't know if I should be putting him in the L2 level right now or should I just wait?

[KoreanWonderBoy]

skn, that's exactly what I'm thinking. He HAS logged on on Monday. So I really want to see what's going on. But I think it'll be easier to judge his scumminess on his reaction when he finally posts. Or what he posts.

[Pizzaplate]

Skn27, why would you read so far into a side comment anyway is what I was saying, it seems almost irrelevant to me. There's also the thing abotu saying only SE's and IC's would appreciate continuation... No. That is not true one bit. Usually, all pro-town roles will appreciate continuation. That doesn't prevent scum from stating they would too, however. I really don't like how you're wavering between Banana being townie and scum.

You look scummy in my eyes.

You accuse people, and then back off for random reasons. This has been shown to happen in ISO post 6 on Sub and Banana, and multiple people on 9, as well as returning to your attack on banana post 15.
What I'm trying to figure out is, what was your original attack on banana in the first place? You're making a really confusing case on her. Look, first, it looks like an RVS vote places her on the vote list. Okay, that seems fine until... Post 9. Why would you need a reason to refute a random vote? A random vote HAS no reason, so you wouldn't have thought Banana was scummy in the first place.

[Banana Stickers]

Now that I think about it, I'm not really sure. I mean this is only Banana's second ish game and I feel like only SE's or IC'S would "appreciate" continuation, at least more so than newbies. After thinking about it, it doesn't really make much sense for her to say something like that unless she is scum.

I will say that I do have extensive off-site, in person mafia experience, including modding. I used to play this game at band camp all the time. I will also say this: that "I'm happy the game is moving along" bit was just an afterthought and I would have said that whether I was town or mafia.

I've just read you in iso, skn. Here's a summation of your activity so far in terms of voting, suspicions, etc:

Post 53: random vote on MiTC
Post 57: unvoting MiTC since Ragna pointed out MiTC already had 2 votes on him and it was early in the game. Vote for Banana Stickers, no reason given.
Post 116: Suspicion on MiTC based on "gut feeling"
Post 118: Suspicion on Ragna due to "attacking strongly" (no examples given when I asked for this). Not sure about Banana Stickers & Substrike. Puts her 2 main suspects as Ragna & MiTC.
Post 119: Also suspects Equinox based on "his defending himself".
Post 130: Reaffirms suspicion on Ragna.
Post 134: Unvotes Banana Stickers. Townie call on me, Equinox, Memnon, Ragna, Substrike. Suspicious of MiTC & KWB. Minor suspicion on Pizza.
Post 169: Suspicion on me. Thinking about voting for MiTC.

So, we've had scum calls on MiTC, Ragna, myself, Equinox, KWB, and minorly on Pizza as well.

I know you're a newbie, and that's why it's taken so long for me to vote for you. I've been trying to discern the newbie play from the scum play...not always easy. But looking at your voting patterns, the way you're flitting from person to person but staying on the popular bandwagon (MiTC)...not putting any pressure on those you suspect, just letting it drop...the defensiveness when you get called out...not able to provide examples. It's enough for me.

vote: skn27

[Equinox]

UNVOTE:

It has done the job I originally gave it. I will follow up as soon as I've had a chance to sleep (properly) on it as well as run through the old stuff again. This will most likely be done this weekend, as I'm busy up 'til Friday afternoon.

Now that I think about it, I'm not really sure. I mean this is only Banana's second ish game and I feel like only SE's or IC'S would "appreciate" continuation, at least more so than newbies. After thinking about it,

it doesn't really make much sense for her to say something like that unless she is scum

.

Wow, talk about backpedaling. What changed your mind?

[Substrike22]

In the order the questions were asked, Equinox:

1. No chain lynch, just saying the way you're attacking MiTC doesn't make a lot of sense if you were both scum. This would be the -hardest- day 1 bus-ing I've read on this site, bar none.

2. In terms of bandwagons, if people just vote without a reason it can lead to easy lynches for the scum, where they don't have to reveal any information. Essentially we give them a free kill. If votes are thought out, fine, but those provide us information and don't fall under the "mindless bandwagon" clause.

3. I'm honestly starting to suspect your less, MiTC is looking really scummy now. His absence and active lurking after falling under pressure strikes as more than a noob thing to me.