Here is the result of my re-read on the people I said I would re-read. I skipped a lot of posts because I got tired half-way through, but I think it justifies my Mert post. Also, StallingChamp really hasn't posted much, but I feel convinced that CDB was scum after doing the re-read. I'm not reading the entire thread again because that was too much work.
StallingChamp/ChannelDelibird
I think I made my stance on CDB clear earlier. I was highly suspicious of CDB and StallingChamp hasn't exactly put my fears at ease.
pablito wrote:CDB has been all over any comment that ties any two players together. That's consistent and not so scummy. But it's that he's helped keep people consistent with it, and he's usually immediately jumping on the comment that ties people together. But after Thok's statement it's nothing. Personally, I think it's oversight, but I just wanted to point out that CDB has a clear theme.
Nonetheless, vote: ChannelDelibird. I find that both Mert and CDB are openly suspecting people because of themes (wacky voting or tying people together) and are failing to jump out of that box.
cardb0ardb0x
12 wrote:
Good luck all. Here's to one of my first games on this site.
While this early statement helped notify us that he was new and that some of his actions may just be from a newbie, it could also unintentionally effectively hide some of his more scummy behaviors.
38 wrote:
the first round is always kind of awkward
Yowch, I didn't catch this before. Then again, cbox has mentioned he's done FTF, but just new to MS.
58 wrote:
Here are some of my thoughts.
1) It’s possible that both pablito and glork are scum. The idea is that pablito is the over-eager mafia, trying to support his pal. Glork knows how to play, and therefore doesn’t want the obvious attention and association, whether he is scum or not.
Therefore, Vote: Pablito
2) MrBuddyLee has been voting for a lot of people with little or no reasoning. In the same vein, he has only asked for other people’s opinions (both yos’s and everyone’s in general) rather than expressing his own. This would also make sense if mrbuddylee, pablito, and glork were all mafia, because MBL also defended glork in a post.
Therefore, Vote: MrBuddyLee
3) ShadowLurker has similarly been voting with little to no explanation, but I just kind of want to bring it up, it’s not that big an issue. Specifically, he's voted for me, pablito, pooky, and twomz. The one where he votes for me doesn’t really count because it was a standard random vote in his first post, but whatever.
I’m not giving him a vote, though.
4) Also, I’m just generally suspicious of anyone who uses flattery. I forget who did it though.
So, overall, I would suggest executing pablito, and if he is confirmed scum (is their role revealed when they are killed?) i guess glork would be next. Obviously I'm not completely sure about any of them.
I think this post sums up cbox neatly. He had a sense of urgency, but his logic was poor but it put him out in the open. I called the urgency due to FTF game experience, but his suspicions are still fair game to attack. Nonetheless, that last statement makes me feel that this was a misguided pro-town post.
102 wrote:come on, guys. please read my explanation in post 84... not just the bold "vote" sign. *obviously* my little vote there wasn't going to get glork lynched, i had just been instructed that people were supposed to vote a lot in this game, to give the king an idea of what everyone's thinking.
There's really not much else I can say in my defense that i didn't say already, so I'll just be quiet for now. As long as I can. I know there are a lot of posts and theres huge flooding, but please read my entire post and think about it.
This is cbox's defense after the wagon starts up. The question is...would this be the tone and stance that a person would take in a FTF game more than a MS game? If so, then this defense makes sense. If not, then this is a scumtell. Well I've made a similar plea in scumchat games before, so I'm leaning toward "yes, it makes sense".
108 wrote:fine. lynch me. if, after you lynch me, i'm a townie, just please, like, examine mrbuddylee. he's kind of obnoxious. if town wins, i'll count it as a win for me even if i'm lynched in the first round.
honestly, i trust pj to make the right descision. and actually read what i write. i admit i made factual errors in my earlier posts. i know i'm easy to bandwagon. no self-respecting mafia player would NOT vote for me. Sorry for distracting everybody during the first round and wasting a lynch.
Usually this comes from scum giving up or extreme newbies. Considering his previous posts, I patch it up as being a bit inexperienced. Up until this point, his pleas sound inexperienced, his logic decent.
220 wrote:Hold on- I just had a flash of inspiration. I don't necessarily agree with this, but I thought of a potential advantage for the town to out the kingmaker. This is a little complicated and probably wouldn't work. The idea is that, as we all know, mafia cannot become kingmakers.
Mafia cannot become kingmakers. There is a way to exploit that fact. This would require several things. First, the kingmaker would have to declare who they are putting in line to become the next kingmaker should they be mafia'd. Second, those in line to become the next kingmaker would have to declare *who* they would choose to be king the next day should they become kingmaker, and each person's selection *must* be different.
Pre-Post Edit: The kingmaker would declare who they would make king the next day, to prevent a false claim. All of this would make more sense if it occurred after the king has pretty much made his/her decision, but before he/she actually posts the Execute command.
Under this system, let's say A is the current kingmaker, and declares B and C to be next in line as kingmakers. B declares he would make D king if B were made kingmaker. C declares that she would make E king if C were made kingmaker. That night, A is assassinated. The next morning, E is made king. Therefore, it can be deduced that B is mafia. Should D have been made king the next morning, it would confirm B as on the town's side. Am I being clear? I think I might have had a false epiphany...
Actually, now that I think about it, this really isn't a very good idea. It gives too much information to the mafia, and could totally screw up the game if a mafia declared kingmaker. It also gives the mafia some really obvious kill targets. This idea is so bad I probably shouldn't even post it. I'm just putting this out there as kingmaker theory- I'm not advocating its use at all.
Yeah, that's pretty pro-town. Scum would've ended up deleting that post or not posting at all instead of reversing the thought.
254 wrote:
Umm... 1 newbie question. How long are days/nights expected to take in an online mafia game? And yeah, FoSes and votes are kinda different, even though the rules of kingmaker don't specifically state so.
Another pro-town looking post. Also it adds to the newbie-card defense in response to the urgency.
384 wrote:
On the
On Pablito: I don't get it. In my eyes there's equal chance that pablito's acting scummy so he won't get mafia'd at night or that he's just plain old scum. I don't see how we're supposed to tell day 1. However, the deliberate nature of his actions-
pablito wrote:
But they're obviously intentional. How could anyone be that strange and natural?
(did he mean unnatural?) suggests a level of planning. I'm guessing that especially creative tactics are usually employed by the mafia rather than the town.
On the other hand, his behavior may be allocated towards a desire to simply take a big gamble and assume that any one particular player is on the town's side/ally, right off the bat. All things considored, the probability that one will end up randomly choosing another townie is very good. That may have been pab's original thinking, although it looks less and less like this is the case as time goes on..
Well here's a post I don't remember from before. I find this highly pro-town and he seems to have an incredible read on me. I drop all doubt I had on cbox before. Honestly, part of my behavior has been to not be NKed. Also to elicit actions...because you know when the town doesn't bother get its collective arse into action until minutes before deadline it helps to create reactions in people. Actions are often very intentional, reactions sometimes bring about interesting tells. The fact that cbox of all people brought this up first, wow, it astounds me.
Yes I find cbox pro-town now. Before I was just seeing him as not necessarily being anti-town, but I'm now convinced he's pro-town.
Yosarian2
59 wrote:
Mastermind of Sin wrote:
And now begins my masterful plan of finally playing through an entire game without voting. Unless I become king, lol.
vote:MOS
Not acceptable.
This demonstrates Yos' primary position.
115 wrote:Well, I won't "deal with" you not voting. The only thing voting does in this game is give pro-town people information. It gives both the king and the kingmaker direct, easy to find and interpret information about who most of the town finds scummy and who most of the town trusts at any given point in time, both of which are absolutly vital to the town's chances of winning the game. It gives us a clear, easy to follow record of what you think, have thought, and have done during the course of the game. It lets us see who voted for who, when, and why.
Voting gives the town information the town NEEDS to have, and without the normal risks of speedlynches or accidental hammers or such. So refusing to vote is actually an even MORE anti-town action in this game then it would be in a normal game, because in a normal game scum have some solid reasons to vote; here, they have less.
So I think at this point I'm going to continue voting for you, MOS, until you make at least one vote.
Looks and smells pro-town (I have that tendency when looking at Yos though), but that last sentence is either frustrated townie or scum setting up a future precedent.
139 wrote:Eh? Why would we "assume" anything like that?
I mean, it's obveously futile to bandwagon the king today, but if you think the king does something scummy you should say so. The king is just likely to be scum as anyone else.
Seems pro-town to me. I'm not understanding my vote that much on Yos right now.
426 wrote:Eh...with the deadline coming up, I figured I should vote for the person on the execution list I felt most suspicious of. I honestly don't have a very strong suspicion on anyone at this point, but out of the 4 people the king said he's thinking about executing, you're at the top of my list.
Basically, like I said in an earlier post, my general impression so far is that you've been mostly :nothelpfull:, and the one time you did contribute content it was to shamlessly bandwagon without good reasons.
Maybe that's why. That vote for Phoebus did feel off. Yosarian kept a strong vice grip on MoS and then suddenly came into the general discussion once the LoE came up. I'm still undecided on Yos2. I'll keep my vote on until I decide. But I always have a hard time reading Yos2, so it would take more time than this post alone.
Mert
42 wrote:
I'm not sure I'd say random voting is entirely pointless in this game, though it obviously means less in real terms than in a normal one. There is still the chance that someone will push for a wagon or that someone will react to having a few votes on them, which may lead to discussion.
I don't think it's the world's biggest deal if people don't want to but I'd certainly stop short of saying there's no point at all.
Talking of discussion, are people happy with the "List of Execution" system that was used in the last game? To those lucky people that were in the first one, do you feel that it worked sufficiently or would you change the mechanics? To those that weren't (myself included), I guess a more general question of whether you think there should be rules that the King must follow and if so, what (and how prescriptive) should they be?
Looks alright, but the timing was so off. We were previously on the good subject of MoS not voting and this came up. I really really don't like this vote anymore on retrospect. Here Mert talks about different voting systems and random voting and execution systems but never ever bothers to mention the elephant in the room. There's the possibility that the middle sentence in that quote mentions "not voting at all" rather than "not random voting" - but I think Mert completely failed to mention MoS. What's also interesting is that he's baiting a question and trying to set up a process for the town. Especially since he only waits 15 minutes to respond to the only response to the above post.
44 wrote:
Well I'm not personally sure if this makes things too prescriptive or not, but when I was reading Kingmaker before I was wondering over the possibility of having two King-nominated and two town-nominated candidates per day that go onto the LoE. Obviously the King still makes the final decision, but maybe the town-nominated players cannot be removed from the List without consensus (and carry over to the next day) whereas the King ones change daily and can be added/removed at will by the King.
But meh, I'm not sure if it'd cause more problems for the town than it'd solve to be honest. If anyone has any ideas on the above proposal, then I'd love to hear them. If you think it's rubbish then I won't be offended because I'm still undecided myself. Just thought I'd throw it out there as a possible alternative.
So after Twomz posted, this was Mert's reply. I feel that perhaps his response was genuine and that he really wanted to think about how the list of execution should go, but the timing was perfec to move people off of MoS and onto a new subject. Furthermore, it makes Mert look townie regardless of his alignment. I don't like how he portrays himself in this. To me, it seems fake, but I'm sure a lot of others would and should believe he's genuine in that above post.
73 wrote:
Well clearly the main purpose should be that the King is accountable to the town without having a fall-back of "well, the town told me to". It needs to be clear that the King's decision is his or her own, but they must also accept that the town has a right to disseminate their actions and that they have a responsibility to discuss how they came to their decision on who to execute. Since we don't have any cops in this game there should be no worry about outing themselves, so I see no reason not to say "I will execute so-and-so, for the reasons x, y and z."
Hmmm, having said that, there is a risk that someone could catch scum by using a particular method and we don't necessarily want to be announcing that method so that scum can change their tactics overnight. Now I'm confused. How about we suggest that each King may operate in their own way but must give some reasons for their actions (if not final reasons for execution, should it not be appropriate) and must give everybody the opportunity to defend themselves prior to execution? Maybe we could also say that Kings must announce at the beginning of their reign that they will be using the LoE or some other system of their choosing and must explain, if asked, why they have decided to use that system?
Again there was a lot to talk about and Mert came back to the rules. There was so much ammo but Mert keeps wanting to talk about the LoE. I cannot believe that Mert would have nothing to say up to this point about MoS or Twomz or Pooky or cbox or Glork-pablito. It just makes me wonder a lot.
104 wrote:...Sounds to me like you're setting up future plausible deniability when your voting trail doesn't check out. If you're found to be voting for a bunch of innocents you can say you were just voting a lot because you were told to. Conversely, if you're found to be not voting enough you can say "yeah, well everyone told me off for voting too eagerly before".
The only reason I'm not going to vote for you in this post is that I already randomly voted for you and now you've given me reason not to remove it.
While I'm on the subject, Vote: Mastermind of Sin; Vote: bird1111
All three are generally removing the effectiveness of an analysis of voting patterns in different ways. Cardb0ardb0x I've addressed above, MoS by refusing to vote at all and Bird by talking about how his votes were a joke and he doesn't see the point in votes in this game etc etc.
So Mert had every chance to comment on MoS or bird1111 before but only now he decides to comment? This is very interesting and alarming. By combining the votes into one catch all "these voting functions are weird and hey I was talking about that for a long time earlier today so these are justified votes" vote post, he's deafening the blow of one of these votes. If Mert's scum, he may have purposely not passed judgment on one of these two because one of these two is a scumbuddy. But still, Mert's posts are too focused and rigid. He has one set of mind and does not mention anything until it comes into focus. Either this is extreme tunnel vision and refusal to be flexible, or it's just plain scum thought process.
111 wrote:Man, I'm starting to hate the woe is me approach to these things. A protown move would be to explain your actions and play it cool. People make mistakes, it's human nature. But to just give up and say "well, fine. Lynch me if you want to" doesn't help the town and doesn't help you stay alive. You're never in a Catch 22 as there's always a counter-argument. And besides, if someone keeps pushing you into a Catch 22 type environment, that might help find scum in itself.
But yeah, move to make addition to PJ's list of things he doesn't want to see: woe is me posts.
As for Bird, I didn't say you didn't acknowledge the point of voting, I said you look like you're setting up plausible deniability for the future if someone calls you on your voting patterns. By making "joke" posts and trivialising the purpose of votes in this game, you could be setting up a mechanism whereby you can say "hey, I'm the sort of guy that makes joke votes! Don't look at my record in too much scrutiny!"
Sounds pro-town actually. I believe it. Mert looks very pro-town here. In fact, he hasn't looked very anti-town at all. I just believe that his thought process doesn't follow a pro-town flow.
155 wrote:So we have MoS saying he won't vote, but his suspicions will be laid out in full and we should take note of his words rather than his voting pattern. Then, on the other hand, we have Phoebus saying he plays by gut and may not bother making cases against people, leaving only his votes to indicate his thoughts.
That's quite a tag-team.
Mert has been very consistent, which makes me think he may be pro-town, but I still can't get over the fact that Mert makes three full posts about the stupid LoE and the rules before he mentions MoS and then decides to continue to attack thereafter.
250 wrote:Can you make another list, this time specifically of people who have gone to the effort of downgrading a vote to a FoS?
I think this post has influenced my thoughts on Mert a lot. If Mert is scum, I don't know if he'd be able to make this post so quickly. It's incredibly accurate. Hm, almost makes me want to unvote Mert now. But I think that Mert has to own up to his previous posts first before I would be able to do that.
Mert can be pro-town, and I'd believe it in a second. He puts in a lot of effort to his analyses. But if he's scum, he's spectacular scum and that would deserve a standing ovation. But I still can't get over how his thinking process went in early Day one.
Dead Rikimaru
I think I pretty much outlined everything possible when I talked about him before. I found only five posts. But here's his first just for good measure
56 wrote:
pablito wrote:
I will defend Glork today to the bone. He'll have some awesome moves (whether anti-town or pro-town) within time and even if he's scum, I will not vote him/suggest his execution because he'll have such an uphill battle to fight. He's going to try to live up to last Kingmaker so he's got a tough image to beat. Either he's going to have to look like a supremely pro-town townie or a supremely pro-town assassin. He's already so visible (ditto with petroleumjelly) that it'll be easier to sniff out pro-town and anti-town vibes from them later. I'd rather focus on sniffing out the less visible players this time even if it means everyone is going to vote and suspect me.
Glork wrote:
Vote: Pablito
I don't think anyone has even made any remotely legitimate case against me, and Pablito is already announcing that he'll staunchly defend me to the end of time*?
Buddying up, much? Setting an absurd standard of play just because of precedent?
Clearly this man is scum and needs to die.
pablito wrote:
heh, deja vu.
And Glork, no one's brought up a direct case against you, but before you even said a word, there was a heavy unspoken case against and for you. Until I know your alignment for certain, I'll advocate for your presence in the game simply because the pressure on you will make you work hard.
[i]Gork[/i] wrote:
Fuck that.
I'm not trying anymore, and you can't make me.
Looks like pablito is trying too hard to look scummy, while Glork looks more and more annoyed.
Is this an extreme distancing technique?
As I said before, read my previous post to see my position on Dead Rikimaru. It's taking a lot out of not much, but it's the best anyone's said on him so far. I think that even if you don't agree with my position on Dead Rikimaru, a little pressure on him is well worth it.
spectrumvoid
48 wrote:
Hi everyone. No point in random voting since the King is the only one right?
Like Mert before, spectrum is asking about random voting and its futility. pretty much useless, but it is her entrance into the game.
100 wrote:I'm leaning towards the side of box being scummy, because he added the vote after he was voted. However, I need to spend more time reading all the posts, so I'll decide tomorrow. Also nothing about Pab/Glork for now till I do the read.
Picking up on the main topics. spectrumvoid is choosing to only comment on the obvious topics. Although she is showing restraint in not passing judgment on pablito/Glork at that moment. Pro-town action.
141 wrote:
Box. I'm not buying the newbieness. Playing on emotion is a scum-tell. Claiming when not under pressure is a scum-tell. Giving up is a scum-tell. vote: cardb0ardb0x.
This vote is justified but the timing is perfect because it redirects the town back onto cbox when discussion had waned on cbox. possibly scummy.
216 wrote:Wow. I really should start learning from PJ. In most games, after page 10 or so I usually make some big mistake. I finally went to read Kingmaker I, and I admire his analysis.
MMOS: Everyone is assumed to be protown until he/she does something that makes him look scummy. That's the way mafia works. Or else I could jsut go around randomly accusing anyone for the entire game. So the onus is on you to explain why he's scummy, not for me to show why he's town.
Argh... I didn't realise Fritz was here. He's on my blacklist of weird players.
Reading the first game at this point is kinda odd. Don't know what to think. Otherwise post is decent.
236 wrote:My take on pab: his play is really weird. I've been in a couple of games with him too, and he didn't play like that.
PJ: can you maybe post a LOE for us? I know you mentioned Bird and Phoebus, but its better to get a list of people we should discuss than go around attacking everyone. (This is one of my first large games where I joined from the start because I replaced in most where fewer people were alive, so correct me if I'm wrong.)
So far this is spectrumvoid's key post. Requesting the LoE got flak. Also, yeah, my play is weird, thanks for acknowledging it. Hm, spectrum has stayed belong the radar but still contributes. Perfect position to be for scum. Then again, spectrum did post she was busy/away or whatever, so that theory is whack.
385 wrote:unvote box Sorry for leaving it for so long, I just forgot I was voting him.
My vote on Phoebus stays, for exactly the same reasons as before.
I can't get a read on bird and CDB, because bird has just not been contributing much, but so have other people in this game.
vote: pablito I read him as someone who made a mistake, and now is trying to pass it off as a deliberate attempt. It seems insincere to me.
I don't get her vote on me. Seems a bit opportunistic. But that unvote on me later was pretty justified and pro-town.
440 wrote:Why 'even Thok'?
Sorry about that, I meant to say you need good reasons for accusing someone. (My defence: vote counts are so confusing this game... I went by tone of posts instead of vote numbers Sad )
Well, yes, his play could be different. But different play does not = scum or = town, it's just a matter of playstyle, not alignment.
Hm, this was in the middle of the vote rush. I found spectrum to have been pushing the LoE suspects all way too much, but then this above post sounds smart.
I think spectrumvoid could easily be scum. The fact that she hasn't stood out to me is alarming enough.
Sup, later.
Your happiness is intertwined with your outlook on life.
