Mini 277 - Webcomic Mafia - Game Over!

[TSAGod]

I beat Fuldu!

It's a good thing, because

my

third victory condition is not to be the last person to post in a day. Ever.

[TSAGod]

I beat Fuldu!

It's a good thing, because

my

third victory condition is not to be the last person to post in a day. Ever.

Yes, because being involved in the all-important "random voting" portion of the day is valuable, nay, vital to the health of the game.

Dude. That sarcasm is worthless. Did you see my third victory condition?

um...yeah.

[TSAGod]

vote Tyfo

Random bandwagoning is the only way to get a game started, unless there's some sort of stupid scum. Seeing how people will act is the entire point, so why vote over it.

[TSAGod]

Good job people on the pie is good bandwagon.

Actually, this is mostly Akonas, because your vote is not random. It is for pie for voting for somebody with votes.

We have yet to get halfway to a lynch. That's not bandwagoning right now.

[TSAGod]

Good job people on the pie is good bandwagon.

Why good job? Why if you like the bandwagon so much are you voting for someone with 0 other votes?

In fact the whole post doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

Good job people on the pie is good bandwagon.
Actually, this is mostly Akonas, because your vote is not random. It is for pie for voting for somebody with votes.
We have yet to get halfway to a lynch. That's not bandwagoning right now.

A couple of small things, the first I've mentioned, The second is you praise Akonas for doing exactly what Pie did... The only difference is the momentum is now against Pie when before there was hardly any momentum.

Unvote. Vote TSAGod.

It's so early that a post that that sticks out a lot more than adding a vote that wasn't intended to make a difference, the vote was an early thing to get the discussion going and everyone just overreacted... Now you are in favour of the new bandwagon which you havn't voted on and praise someone for doing the exact same thing someone is being bandwagoned for.

Your sarcasm detector is broken.

It seems to me that the people flipping out over Pie's vote seem to be relatively inexperienced. I think they are wrong for to be voting for Pie, but it's unclear that they are scummy.

However, I agree that the TSAGod post that Nemesis quoted is actively scummy.

unvote, vote TSAGod

See previous statement.

If you read my posts, they all are against the people voting for pie is good. If you read my post, it obviously has horrible logic. I'll have to use [sarcasm][/sarcasm] tags from now on. [sarcasm]Thanks a lot.[/sarcasm]

[TSAGod]

In all my posts here, there's probably an emoticon in about ten of them, and most of them are used to mock those who use them.

In the context of my post, did you really think I was serious when you were reading it? I'm all for a bandwagon, but this is pretty rediculous. I'd rather be random bandwagoned.

[TSAGod]

Vote: TSAGod

- you confuse me.

I think that random bandwagoning can be a great tool, as long as it doesn't go too far. People aren't likely to respond to one random vote.

unvote, vote Akonas

This is rediculous. I was commenting on how stupid it was for "randomly" bandwagoning on Pie because he put a third vote on somebody. That's not random. Pie did something to cause that action.

I could have sworn the sarcasm was forming a puddle under my post.

Anyway - what is too far for a bandwagon. You decided that three was too far for Bertrand? If you like random bandwagoning, like it all the way. Don't pile on the anti-bandwagon bandwagon because you think it is cool.

[TSAGod]

I never said that bertrand had too many votes; he just doesn't seem scummy at all to me at the moment.

I was asking why a vote for Pie is Good instead of Bertrand. That's what I was trying to ask.

And as for bandwagons, I'm for them as long as they don't have an obvious cause as done by the bandwagon. Officially scumminess is okay, though, but a mildly scummy thing that very likely isn't a real tell angers me.

[TSAGod]

In my experience, there aren't many, if any, solid scum tells, but there are lots and lots of weak ones. So my approach is to look for players who've committed several of them and place my vote there.

And all of those add up to a solid scum tell. What annoys me is when something I do that I don't consider scummy makes me scummy.

i.e. Making an assumption that is or is not possible is a bad reason to be labeled as scummy. Refusing to vote for a person identified as scum by a cop, with out reason is a good reason. Consistantly starting arguements and being very troll-ish is a good reason. Starting one heated argument that lasts for less then a page is a bad reason to be scummy.

[TSAGod]

Making an assumption can help you decide who you think is scum - for example, if x really doesn't look scummy at all to me, I take them out of my figuring who is scum, at least for the moment. You don't know who is cop- they're just claimed cop, you can't be sure they really are cop. Constantly stating arguments gets you heard and helps get people thinking, though trolling sucks. Starting a heated argument gets people talking, giving you something to go back and analyze. In my experience, people don't look up a list of standard scum tells to check you- they look at what you said, and if something irks them or rubs the wrong way, then they yell at you. I'm going to keep my vote on TSAGod because what he has said is confusing. If he just rephrased things a little more clearly, that would help a lot.

We do have to consider the possibility of a post restriction, though. I'm not sure what kind of restriction he would have to have to sound like that, but...

My list was just a set of tells that was designed to get the general feel. If something is considered (usually) to be good, then it's a bad reason to be labled scummy. Everything needs to be done in moderation, and when moderation gets exaggerated in the form of a vote, that's when it starts to be ungood. That's where it's been.

[TSAGod]

Actually, this is mostly Akonas, because your vote is not random. It is for pie for voting for somebody with votes.

The point of the post was to comment how Akonas was being pro-bandwagon (random-ish), but bandwagoning on the person who supports bandwagons, even though my opinion has changed since I made it.

[TSAGod]

On that note, FoS: Thok, for a logical hole in that last post. Even if TSAGod is scum, that doesn't invalidate his reasons for the bandwagon. Scum are perfectly capable of posting logical attacks on others, you know.

Total Crap. If scum starts a bandwagon, it's NOT ON OTHER SCUM.

FoS pie, part OMGUS

It can be. Scum casts suspicion on spread-out day, thinking there's an already stronger wagon and will create a separation between the players. Town acts quickly on the scum, for the reasons given by the scum.

There we have it. Scum bandwagons scum.

[TSAGod]

When you claim, if you have a role action, that makes it worthwhile. We can then test you with information. Simple rolenames do nothing.

[TSAGod]

I'm basically a lame-o townie...

That's all the claim we were getting.

[TSAGod]

Curious. I wonder if we have a cult-that would explain the lack of nightkills so far.

Wouldn't just having a cult be completely rediculous though?

If there isn't a nightkill element, then what's to stop us from no lynching everyday so we all become cult members and win?

[TSAGod]

If a roleblocker did stop it, would it make sense to out themselves for the scum? The doctor may have done it instead, but it could net us a quick scum.

[TSAGod]

Also, I think Thok's point was that we might have a cult instead of an SK to partially explain the lack of nightkills. Again, speculation is a bit useless. We need solid evidence, people!

Okay...I'll claim then. I'm the cult leader....[/sarcasm]

um...

vote Thok

for getting us off of lynching scum and instead getting us to figure the setup out, based on one lynch and a lack of kills.

[TSAGod]

The Thok wagon seems to be based on his first two posts Day 2. Other than that, I noticed his hammer vote on Akonas Day 1 and his TSAGod vote strikes me as a bit strange. Although I think this is enough for some suspicion, is there anything else? I am not sure this really sets him apart from some other players.

I'll agree with this, that Thok doesn't really have a strong wagon against him. My vote was only on cheap suspicion, and never meant to get more votes. With the time limit, however, the only thing he can really do to save himself is to claim, though, if he's a power role.

[TSAGod]

unvote, vote bertrand

This should put him at four...and seeing as the cop is confused, at least its something more than a feeling of cult existance.

[TSAGod]

I would prefer to be given a chance to clear someone before they are lynched and I'd also prefer not to give up both my innocents in one day because that would seriously reduce our chances of having a comfortable win.

How does that work? If you die tonight because of a sucky doc, then we know nothing?

[TSAGod]

What kind of reasoning is that? You want to him to claim results because our doc might be an incompetent player? I'd like to think our doc has reading skills.

Vote: TSAGod

1. A doc is no guarantee.

2. I still don't understand how claiming two innocents guarantees the town a loss, even including a three person mafia with godfather, and the two innocents being the gf and a doctor, quite possible the worst case scenario. I also am unsure how the town has a guaranteed win, as well. We still have to find all the scum.

[TSAGod]

Sure, and that's the difference between "might mean lynch-or-lose tomorrow" and "does indeed mean lynch-or-lose tomorrow."

I understand that the certainty was probably not justified, but do you genuinely feel this is enough to build a case around?

I like to work around a few basic assumptions as town. It gives me some certainty in an uncertain situation and a method of putting things into perspective.

I don't have anything against working around a few basic assumptions. But a) treating those assumptions like facts is dangerous, and b) scum, who don't have to make assumptions about such things, are far more likely to post statements treating them as fact than townies are. I'm by no means

certain

you're scum on the basis of this one thing, but yes, I'm quite happy to build a case around this.

I don't know...I think I'd rather build the case around PIG, especially because he seems to have stopped checking his info with what Thok gave and is now role fishing, or at least appearing to be.

[TSAGod]

I'm a partial cop/roleblocker. Each night I must submit a persons name; I find out if they are male or female, and if they are female I roleblock them. (Flavor, I am irresistable to women who all want to sleep with me). My minor victory condition is to win with town, my major victory condition is to never target a female character (I'm trying to change my ways).

Yes I realize I should have asked earlier for everybody to claim male/female, but I was worried that that info would help scum. I targetted Fuldu night 1, and TSAGod night's 2 and 3. TSAGod isn't a woman; I obviously don't have results for the other nights.

I don't quite understand this logic...could you explain the cop mechanic...better? This seems pretty random and complex so as you don't get any resistance. Also, is it possible, if Fuldu is a girl, that you've already lost your major?

[TSAGod]

Well, looks like the Thok thing is done. He can be let off with an IGMEOY.

...although I'll say that he might be a decent target for our cop, provided the cop doesn't already have an innocent there.

So the IGMEOY = a vote from you?

IGMEOY

...I'm still here.

[TSAGod]

Mod: votecount?

I'm not liking Vitamin R, but I see no reason to vote for him, unless doing so is inevitable or more information arises.

[TSAGod]

Hmm...I'm not sure. We may need to mass claim, but if we do lynch a mafia today, that might not be good later. But, if it seems like that's the only thing we can do to catch a scum, then we should. It's probably Lynch or Lose.

How is not lynching a mafia good? Or how is lynching mafia bad? WTF?