Mini 1404 - Monopoly Mafia - Game Over

[Jake from State Farm]

oh you know what I confused UN with someone else, nevermind. I'm good

[Lurker]

Why not just claim the two cards right away but not the power then?

Because It's A utility card.

There are only 2 Utility cards in monopoly: Water works and Electric company.

(Nearly) Everyone would know that those cards are very unique, and so would know that it was a power role.

[Mehdi2277]

@Mehdi

:

Since it sounds similar to the role pm I got and would just recommend you look at yours and compare it to how he claimed.

How does his claim sound similar tot he role pm you got?

In the sense of vanilla being separate with the cards being lower down. Mainly I don't think he'd claim vanilla + watcher as scum and would say watcher without considering that when fake claiming. Sure the claim might not be town itself, but the way he claimed was town.

Continuing watcher can be directed more for the purpose of protecting someone. Redirector isn't a common role and roleblocker can belong to someone town with the way this game was set up pretty easily. So make him watch someone so that scum won't target that player (or don't direct him and hope he correctly guesses who scum would kill when they have to consider the watcher which isn't likely for him to guess right).

Or the fact that he thinks everyone would guess pr from electricity company when I really don't see how it's obvious it has a nice role like watcher attached to it which just feels genuine.

Spice since you said Jal's reason for voting lurker was bad what about the people who sheeped her logic? Why weren't they as bad as her (or worse) for sheeping really bad reasoning?

[StrangerCoug]

So you don't believe that some cards give powers?

Whoa, whoa, whoa! Are you even on the same page? Read #460 one more time, then I'll get back to you.

[Mehdi2277]

Sc a good portion of my post also explains why I disagree with you that the way the claim was done isn't town. Response?

[Baby Spice]

Medhi please go look at #101 and #105.

[Mehdi2277]

K, how is sheeping/wagoning just slightly scummy when it's following bad reasoning? (that's the main argument on Sc)

[Jal]

Baby Spice, your lack of response to my post is encouraging.

Whoa, whoa, whoa! Are you even on the same page? Read #460 one more time, then I'll get back to you.

Nothing regarding any of your interactions with Lurker nor explanations make sense.

Your vote doesn't make sense.

Your explanation for not unvoting doesn't make sense. I can't even understand why you aren't unvoting given any variation of your explanations.

This does not make sense:

It is true that the way Lurker worded his claim is not giving me reason to unvote him, but that I found it strange is not why I'm not unvoting him; it's the fact that he claims it is card-based. The talk about "powers come from cards" is getting tiring.

[Baby Spice]

I'm sorry Jal, have you actually made a post worth responding to instead of ignoring me and ghen asking about things I've already said/addressed?

[Jal]

Are you actually trying to say you've been responding to what I've said and been asking you the entire game?

Saturday Dec 15 2012:

I'd like to see these stats compiled.

How many replies it takes Baby to respond with said statistics:

*

Post 1: post 145. Dec 16

*

Post 2: post 148. Dec 16

*

Post 3: post 151. Dec 16

*

Post 4: post 197 Dec 16

*

Post 5: post 199. Dec 16

*

Post 6: post 223. Dec 17

*

Post 7: post 252. Dec 17

*

Post 8: post 349. Dec 17

*

Post 9: post 363. Dec 18

*

Post 10: post 381. Dec 18

You took ten posts and approximately 2 1/2 days to answer my question which you admit took:

Five minutes for those four. Well a lot less actually,

.. to compile while also using your handy dandy note book which you claimed you just couldn't use or show use or show us at the time.

Oh, but

I

am the one ignoring things? Oh, okay.

[Jal]

Hey scum Baby, I made a big ass post addressing you in the last page

<==== That way.

How long will it take you to actually address it?

[Xisiqomelir]

@Lord Mhork

:

@Lord Mhork

: Was your #227 intended mainly as a defence against Lurker's #168, or was it primarily intended to be a demonstration of Lurker's scumminess? If it's some admixture of the two, what are the rough proportions?

Additionally, how do you feel about StrangerCoug's hop from you to Lurker in #257?

Yeah it was a little of Column A and a little of Column B. It began with me just being very irritated with lurker's poorly done case, but that last line where I accuse him of IIoA is enough for it to be a case as well. I'd say... 75-80/20-25? Somewhere in that ball park? I wasn't really trying to win votes with that post, if that's what you're asking.

I'd be willing to give StrangerCoug the benefit of the doubt for misreading, though I don't like how I had

just

said I had made a mistake. I don't really see the scum motivation here though to misunderstand a really, really obvious correction. I'd say it's more of a null tell/leaning slow player tell.

Well, I can appreciate that it wasn't purely defensive in nature. However, since it was mostly intended to be about Lurker's case and not your own, I don't consider #227 any kind of basis to sheep a vote after. It's especially peculiar since he moved his vote off you to sheep you.

I don't consider "too obvious" a suitable excuse for StrangerCoug's "sold" vote. Scum can and will slip in and get away with all sorts of things in a fast-moving game. I've caught scum D1 in a game fabricating things wholesale.

And I don't really know what to make of him hopping on lurker like that. If he thought my deconstruction of the terribad post revealed enough scum intent from lurker, more power to him. I'm more worried about his 263. That's where my bad feels are coming, not so much from 257. That hop can be neutral too, I guess.

Can you discuss this in further detail?

Spoiler: Not Mafia-related:

"Admixture"
Dat word...

This seems like the type of game where "apposite" will also get dropped. Maybe a "pseudonymity" too.
BBcode tag error fixed.

@Uberninja

: Yo. How long till you're fully read-up?

[Mehdi2277]

Hey scum Baby, I made a big ass post addressing you in the last page

<==== That way.

How long will it take you to actually address it?

Why are you voting Sc instead of her? If it's viability she's not unviable with the post you made before that to me at least.

[Jal]

I am already on a wagon of someone I believe is scum. What is the point of jumping over?

[Mehdi2277]

Since wouldn't getting a bigger suspicion lynched be better?

[Jal]

A bigger suspicion? How do you get that Baby Spice is a bigger suspicion?

[Mehdi2277]

From the way you sound when you attack her I thought you suspected her more then SC? If not then how much do you suspect the two?

[StrangerCoug]

Sc a good portion of my post also explains why I disagree with you that the way the claim was done isn't town. Response?

It's plausible, but based on information we do not know for sure right now. I think, if we got rid of all the cards, the game would become a mountainous; the opinions of others may vary.

Whoa, whoa, whoa! Are you even on the same page? Read #460 one more time, then I'll get back to you.

Nothing regarding any of your interactions with Lurker nor explanations make sense.

Your vote doesn't make sense.

Your explanation for not unvoting doesn't make sense. I can't even understand why you aren't unvoting given any variation of your explanations.

This does not make sense:

It is true that the way Lurker worded his claim is not giving me reason to unvote him, but that I found it strange is not why I'm not unvoting him; it's the fact that he claims it is card-based. The talk about "powers come from cards" is getting tiring.

Right now why I think you're not making sense of my post is because you understand my refusal to unvote Lurker incorrectly. Let's set the record straight: My vote is a basic sheep of Lord Mhork's defense/counterattack (he's established it's a bit of both) of Lurker in #227, which basically accuses him of not reading the game. Why I didn't unvote Lurker is because cards can end up with absolutely anyone regardless of alignment as far as I know. I never said anything to the effect of disbelieving that cards give powers, which is why I questioned your understanding of my Lurker read in #478.

Is there anything else that I need to clarify for you?

[Mehdi2277]

UNVOTE: SCVOTE: Spice post 484

[Jal]

I am also attacking SC. I am not ignoring one for the other. Only difference is, Baby Spice grates my nerves.

[Mehdi2277]

Well main point is I think you're argument for her is stronger then for sc and you've argued it for a while longer.

[StrangerCoug]

Is there anything else that I need to clarify for you?

I take it the answer to this question is no, Jal.

[Jal]

Right now why I think you're not making sense of my post is because you understand my refusal to unvote Lurker incorrectly. Let's set the record straight: My vote is a basic sheep of Lord Mhork's defense/counterattack (he's established it's a bit of both) of Lurker in #227, which basically accuses him of not reading the game. Why I didn't unvote Lurker is because cards can end up with absolutely anyone regardless of alignment as far as I know. I never said anything to the effect of disbelieving that cards give powers, which is why I questioned your understanding of my Lurker read in #478.

Let's head back to this post then:

The claim itself is not in question as far as I'm concerned, but the way it's worded, I don't think it warrants an unvote.

Which leads to:

It is true that the way Lurker worded his claim is not giving me reason to unvote him, but that I found it strange is not why I'm not unvoting him; it's the fact that he claims it is card-based. The talk about "powers come from cards" is getting tiring.

Post 2 seems to say you're not unvoting him because of the way it's worded. Post 3 you are saying although you found it strange, it's not why you are not unvoting him, which leads back to his claim which does depend on the cards.

Regardless of everything, how about the way it was worded makes you pause?

[Jal]

I'm just trying to get everything straight here.

[Jal]

English is my second language.

Canadian, my first.