Mini 1148 -- Spare Me Mafia (Game Over)

[chesskid3]

Basically.

Though we can use the safety threshold to avoid that

I mean...we want more than one lynch today anyway so

[Internet Stranger]

Oh thats wonderful news Chesskid. Since youre SO special, why dont you get to decide who lives or dies then! Hell, screw that, I want multiple votes too! If Chesskid wants two votes, then I want two votes too. Its only fair, right Chesskid?

Clearly Chesskid is in the camp of maximum death and destruction. If we keep Chesskid alive, it means an extra person gets to die EACH DAY just to keep him alive. Sounds like a bargain to me!

[Duplicity]

Internet Stranger, there's obviously more than one anti-town alligned role in the game, therefore there's no reason to be complaining about having more than one player die at the end of the day phase. You're attemping to attack Chesskid for claiming a role he claims to be given, do you really not see the problem in that?

[Internet Stranger]

Thats not what im saying at all. Im fact im all for maximum carnage and chaos. The first night we can kill three people off.
What im pointing out is that Chesskid is being coy about the fact that he wants more spare votes but doesnt happen to mention what the ramifications of that request are. THATS scummy.

What I dont want this to become is some mass claim pollyanna where we hold hands and cry as we scuttle off righteous volunteers down to their deaths.
I dont intend to simply do as im told by anyone, including Chesskid. Call it scummy if you will, but I intend to find out who the scum are my way.

[Duplicity]

You're not exactly making sense InternetStranger, his claim states he needs an extra vote to survive therefore one less person gets a vote, that's basic logic and therefore shouldn't need to be something he would have to point out himself.

No one stated anything about it becoming a mass-claim style game, but those people who have very different roles actually need to claim in order to survive, thus what Chesskid seemed to have done. There's nothing scummy about it, there's nothing chaotic about it, you're merely misrepresenting the situation.

R. (Sorry I didn't tag my previous post).

[RedCoyote]

"Alright, ladies and gentlemen, I hope you've had time to introduce yourselves to one another. A majority of our contestants have indicated they're ready to get started. If I could just remind everyone again how the rules work, as simply as possible. In normal Mafia games, you vote for the player you'd like to see lynched...

boring!

"

"We thought we'd twist it up a little bit here with Spare Me Mafia. Here you use your vote for who you want to keep. Sounds fair enough, right? Well not so fast. Remember, you can't vote yourself, so there's definitely an element of teamwork needed to get the town in order. There's still an uninformed majority and still an informed minority. Watch for patterns. Be skeptical of claims. And, for goodness sakes, keep an eye out for your own self too, eh?"

"Enough chit chat, let's get this game started! Here's the game's first vote count... we've officially begun."

---

Vote Count 1.0

• Not Voting

  (13) (chesskid3 - Apokalyptika - Fate - vezokpiraka - TonyMontana - Internet Stranger - Umbrage - Freewill - Nachomamma8 - Klazam - The Mask - FishytheFish - Duplicity)
  
  
  No Safe Votes
  (13) (chesskid3 - Apokalyptika - Fate - vezokpiraka - TonyMontana - Internet Stranger - Umbrage - Freewill - Nachomamma8 - Klazam - The Mask - FishytheFish - Duplicity)

Percentage Safe:

0%

of 75% necessary

With thirteen alive, it takes twelve safe to end the day before the deadline.
Current Deadline: Apr. 17th, 2011 at 3:00 PM (CST)

[Umbrage]

I know it's only page 3, but I am getting really strong scum vibes from Duplicity. Look at his ISO:

On top of that 'The QTs are all' implies more then one, multiple scum-allignments?

Who'd be the most concerned over multiple scum factions? Scum. He's guessing at the set-up, but instead of trying to figure out the abilities of scum, he's trying to figure out if there's another scum faction. Scum's biggest problem is always an opposing scum faction.

Ultimately the only way to play this setup seems to be that as the day progresses each player keeps a list of players they don't/do want saved and we work from there.

This was posted just after Fate started doing just that. Either they're two players who can communicate with each other or Duplicity was basing his suggestion off of what Fate started. Either way, it doesn't look good for him.

Given the situation being Umbrage wasn't given a role PM intially I'm going to assume the likelyhood that he's mafia is dropped significantly. I also do currently have a town-read on him and Chesskid, though I need to discuss this with my other head later.

R said this. Which is interesting because earlier G wrote this:

I honestly don't think voting every player is likely to reveal anything, however,

R thinks chesskid is probably town

for suggesting it regardless. I'm inclined to agree.

G.

So G clearly knew about R's read on chesskid3. And if R had been reading G's posts, he would've known G agreed. But he still said that he needs to talk with him about it.

Either G and R have a serious communication problem, or R said he needed to discuss chesskid3 with his other head to avoid giving a definite read. Scum like to leave wagons open. R could say that G found chesskid3 scummy, and the two could then bandwagon him if needed.

Internet Stranger, there's obviously more than one anti-town alligned role in the game, therefore there's no reason to be complaining about having more than one player die at the end of the day phase.

Again with the multiple scum factions.

It benefits scum to have more than one person die per day if there are multiple scum factions. Scum will be looking to lynch scum.

You're attemping to attack Chesskid for claiming a role he claims to be given, do you really not see the problem in that?

This statement makes no sense. "Claiming a role he claims to be given"? As opposed to claiming a role he claims not to have been given? Scum fakeclaim all the time. When confronted with a claim, some skepticism is necessary. It's a perfectly valid line of inquiry, and I don't understand why you're against it. Have you never encountered a fakeclaim before?

You're not exactly making sense InternetStranger, his claim states he needs an extra vote to survive therefore one less person gets a vote, that's basic logic and therefore shouldn't need to be something he would have to point out himself.

No one stated anything about it becoming a mass-claim style game, but those people who have very different roles actually need to claim in order to survive, thus what Chesskid seemed to have done. There's nothing scummy about it, there's nothing chaotic about it, you're merely misrepresenting the situation.

I have no idea what this means. If what CK3 is saying is true, then it's possible that someone else would need to die for him to live. And it's entirely possible this is a scum plot to get someone else to die. I doubt it, but it's possible.

SUMMARY:

I see clear scum motives in Duplicity's behaviour by speculating on multiple scum factions, parroting/buddying, and launching unfounded attacks. There is a clear breakdown in communication between the heads that should not happen if both are paying proper attention to the game. Considering we're only on page 3, I have a shitload of reasons to think they are scum.

FoS: Duplicity

[Fate]

SPARE: THE MASK
SPARE: NACHOMMAMAMA
SPARE: INTERNET TUNNEL
SPARE: TONYMONTANA
SPARE: FISHYFISHY
SPARE: KLAZAM

FREE WILL

LETS SEE IF YOURE WORTH SAVING.

IVE ALWAYS WONDERED WHAT IT WOULD BE LIKE TO NOT BE A PUPPET ON A STRING.

IS IT POSSIBLE? OR ARE YOU JUST A FALSE HOAX FOR THOSE FOOLISH ENOUGH TO BELIEVE


WHY AM I MADE TO REPEAT MYSELF?

[Fate]

Spare: Umbrage

For apparently actually trying at this game. The "MASONS OR SCUMZ" pre-planned bullshit suggestion is a huge ass stretch though, given that GREAT MINDS MIGHT JUST FUCKIN THINK ALIKE

[Apokalyptika]

Even if chess' claim is real, it's too much of a liability to keep him alive. Today it might be fine, but the later it gets, the worse killing unnecessary numbers of people would be.

[Duplicity]

Umbrage - I detest the idea of quote wars so I'm going to attempt to address your concerns in bullet points related to your paragraphs and quotes.
* The questioning of multiple QT's was due to the fact that I had taken a look at a few other games that RC had hosted and the inclusion and mention of it was something he hadn't done before, thus why I wanted speculation about it.

* It indeed was Fates post that sparked that thought process, the inclusion of multiple reads this early in the game is something that needs to be organized otherwise chaos ensues.

* I had spoken with G earlier about my town-read on Chesskid, though our conversation only revolved around his suggestion in post #7 whereas the reasoning behind wanting to talk with G had to do with Chesskids claim.

* The post has nothing to do with nor does it mention multiple scum factions, I'm attempting to point out having two people lynched if anything benefits us due to the fact there's more then one mafia.

* You've misread this entire situation, InternetStranger was attacking the idea of having to keep one less person safe rather then attacking the claim or Chesskid. In other words - InternetStrangers response towards the claim was not one of questioning and concern over whether it's real or not, it was one of concern over the repucussions over having two votes on one person thus what I was pointing out.

R.

Apokalyptika - You seem to misunderstand as well. The idea of having multiple people not saved and thus lynched if anything is something we would want. There's clearly more then one mafia, therefore multiple lynchings gives us a higher chance of lynching mafia. On top of that, it increases the ratio of Lynchees vs Nightkills which benefits us in the long run.

[The Mask]

Masons or scum?

Were you directing this question at anyone in particular?

boring!

I know, right? Where the hell is Freewill? I didn't put my referee tee on for nothing.

[TonyMontana]

Spare CK3

I say we test it.

If she floats, she's a witch. If she drowns, god will have mercy on her soul.

[Fishythefish]

I see chesskid as likely scum here. Scum are

powerful

in this game - the voting mechanic is a lot easier for them to manipulate than the usual one - and so I'd expect that to be compensated with weaknesses. Someone who needs two votes to spare on the scumteam would be perfect here - it would also mean they can't just crossvote and save each other while he is alive. I say we let him die.

Same goes for Duplicity. Umbrage's case is pretty good, really. The R/G interaction over chesskid read is unconvincing. Whatever sparked the multiscum speculation, it's still scummy - even if it pops into your head, scum would be more likely to talk about it than town.

Spare: Fate

Spare: TonyMontana

Spare: IS

Spare: chesskid

to confirm that I have no vote today.

[Internet Stranger]

Thanks Fishy that theory is exactly what I wanted to hear. I couldn't figure out why Chesskid was pulling the scum strings right from the start, but what you're saying makes sense. It sounds like ChesskidScum saw his scummy "needs two votes" requirement and panicked.
Its possible that Duplicity is trying to fan his flames in order to help him. Either way, what chesskid is doing is guaranteeing a second kill each day, how is that no manipulative?

I'm all for this, we can let 3 people die if we want. Duplicity wants a fast moving death and chaos game (so does Chesskid actually), so let's give it to them. If for some reason we are really wrong (I doubt it, odds are good that at minimum 1 is scum), we can slow down the game tomorrow.

[Duplicity]

I see chesskid as likely scum here. Scum are powerful in this game - the voting mechanic is a lot easier for them to manipulate than the usual one - and so I'd expect that to be compensated with weaknesses. Someone who needs two votes to spare on the scumteam would be perfect here - it would also mean they can't just crossvote and save each other while he is alive.

If this were to be the case, when the player who needs two votes gets lynched, couldn't mafia still just spare each other to the win? On top of that, you claim that you yourself have no spare vote - Wouldn't that in itself be a counter to mafia sparing each other. That being mafia can't spare each other since one of them don't have a spare vote. Therefore you're attempting to push your suspicions of Chesskid for something you yourself are guilty of.

Whatever sparked the multiscum speculation, it's still scummy - even if it pops into your head, scum would be more likely to talk about it than town.

So you're saying - Noticing that the only difference between this game and past games that RC has hosted being that this one includes the suggestion of multiple quicktopics is scummy?

I'm all for this, we can let 3 people die if we want. Duplicity wants a fast moving death and chaos game (so does Chesskid actually), so let's give it to them. If for some reason we are really wrong (I doubt it, odds are good that at minimum 1 is scum), we can slow down the game tomorrow.

Never did I say I want a fast moving chaotic game, you're attempting to misrepresent what I've said it's blatantly obvious that you're doing so. I've stated there isn't that big a downside to having the possibilty of lynching two people in one day - Your reaction to Chesskids claim was a massive overreaction.

R.

[Fishythefish]

If this were to be the case, when the player who needs two votes gets lynched, couldn't mafia still just spare each other to the win?

On top of that, you claim that you yourself have no spare vote - Wouldn't that in itself be a counter to mafia sparing each other. That being mafia can't spare each other since one of them don't have a spare vote.

Therefore you're attempting to push your suspicions of Chesskid for something you yourself are guilty of.

Italicised: sure, this can't be the only counter to scum circle voting. But it would be a bloody good counter.
Bolded: it is true that voteless scum would be another good counter to circle voting. That's possibly a good argument that makes me (wrongly) look like scum, but it's not very relevant to what I think of chesskid. I'm not saying that having a role such as his is an infallible scumtell, but I do think it's a scumtell.

So you're saying - Noticing that the only difference between this game and past games that RC has hosted being that this one includes the suggestion of multiple quicktopics is scummy?

For sure. Scum is much more likely to go through the process:
1. I see RC has mentioned multiple QTs. I wonder if we're in multiscum?
2. Oh look, he hasn't done that before.
3. That's interesting, I'll post it.
Because curiosity about multiscum is a natural scum sentiment, but, at this stage, not a natural town sentiment.

[Duplicity]

Fishy, you've stated Chesskid should die soley due to his claim, therefore you do think that his claim is a strong enough scum-tell to have him lynched.
At the same time you recognize that your claim bears strong resemblence to his, if you expect us to believe or consider your claim and not hang you for it shouldn't your attitude be the same in regards to other similar claims.

Basic human instinct is to attempt to work out what you're up against, therefore the strive towards finding information is in no way a scum-tell nor a town-tell. Personally (I can't speak for G) I prefer to start of any given setup with discussion based around setup speculation, this is strengthened by paying close attention to the detail of the rules and mechanics in the setup to see if there is any indication of what we're playing - thus the noticing of 'QTs'.

R.

[Fishythefish]

1) No, not at all. I don't want to die, despite my claim - but I'm not going to lie about how I feel about other people's claims to make mine look better. chesskid's claim is scummy as hell. He may redeem himself through his play, but for now he's a great lynch.
2) I disagree. I think scum, having more information, have both more to gain and more they can achieve by thinking about the setup early on, particularly in regards to multiscum. Everything you say is something town sometimes do, and scum do much more.

[vezokpiraka]

Where is nacho and freewill?

Come here and post something useful.

[Umbrage]

You've misread this entire situation, InternetStranger was attacking the idea of having to keep one less person safe rather then attacking the claim or Chesskid. In other words - InternetStrangers response towards the claim was not one of questioning and concern over whether it's real or not, it was one of concern over the repucussions over having two votes on one person thus what I was pointing out.

The two are related. Obviously, it's no big deal to give CK3 an extra vote if he's town, in fact it's a really good thing. But if he's scum, this could be a ploy to get a two-for-one mislynch. So his concerns about the extra vote are tied with CK3's alignment.

CK3 has claimed an anti-town role, unless he has some sort of superpower to make up for his weakness, he is anti-town. No question about that. The only question is whether or not he is scum.

* The post has nothing to do with nor does it mention multiple scum factions, I'm attempting to point out having two people lynched if anything benefits us due to the fact there's more then one mafia.

And what if CK3 is mafia? It doubles our losses.

Basic human instinct is to attempt to work out what you're up against, therefore the strive towards finding information is in no way a scum-tell nor a town-tell. Personally (I can't speak for G) I prefer to start of any given setup with discussion based around setup speculation, this is strengthened by paying close attention to the detail of the rules and mechanics in the setup to see if there is any indication of what we're playing - thus the noticing of 'QTs'.

This is bullshit. There is NO reason why any town player should be concerned with multiple scum factions at this point.

[chesskid3]

Before this mummer's farce continues any longer


how many lynches is optimal for today?

If the answer is anything OTHER THAN ONE, my role does not hurt at the moment. I probably need to die before endgame, but think about that for a second, eh?

[Duplicity]

Fishy, I'm still not understanding your FoS on him based around his claim. Since you seem to still be of the opinion that his role claim is something put in place to prevent mafia from just cross-sparing lets speculate. Sridicilous. Assume Chesskid is mafia and gets lynched, what's preventing his partners from just cross-sparing in future days? The fact that his role claim doesn't prevent mafia from abusing game mechanics and winning via doing so means that it likely isn't what was put in place for prevention purposes. This means that the fact he claims to need two votes on him would be considered a null-tell to some degree.

Umbrage, you're essentially saying if he's town we want to save him if he's mafia he might be pulling a ploy so we don't, that's basic logic meaning and leads to no real conclusion. His claim means nothing unless you beleive it's entirely fake. So I'm just going to outright say this - Umbrage do you believe Chesskid and Fishys claims, yes or no?

Chesskid, I would say two, possibly three three lynches would be optimal, depending on the strength of the reads I have later today.

R.

[Internet Stranger]

Hey Duplicity, dont you think it would become kinda obvious if a pair is continually sparing themselves every day?
Im quite certain RC has thought this through and has something in place to prevent it. Maybe extra vigs or something.

Do you know something we dont Duplicity?

The choice is simple, how many lives is Chesskid worth? 2? 4? or 6? Duplicity, you want to keep Chesskid alive. So whos the extra person that gets to die then? Care to volunteer?

[Umbrage]

Umbrage, you're essentially saying if he's town we want to save him if he's mafia he might be pulling a ploy so we don't, that's basic logic meaning and leads to no real conclusion. His claim means nothing unless you beleive it's entirely fake. So I'm just going to outright say this - Umbrage do you believe Chesskid and Fishys claims, yes or no?

I believe they likely have the restrictions they say they have. However, this doesn't mean they are scum or town. And I think skepticism of the claims is healthy. Questioning things is pro-town. Trying to shut up people who question things is anti-town.