Mini 408 - EXiLE Mafia, MOD ABANDONED

[Raging Rabbit]

Morning, everyone!

I'm not sure if I got nominated for being dangerous, loud, stupid or a bunny. Probably just random. Anyway I'm sorta glad I did, in a way, since it makes it day a lot more interesting for me.

This is a rather sucky situation for the town to be in. Only slightly more than a third of the town eligible for a lynch, with the usual day one lack of info to boot. To top it off, we know scum would never nominate each other, so the nominated people actually have a slightly higher chance of being pro town than everyone else. I have no idea how to tackle this, and fear we'll have to resort to a random lynch.

I will say this, though - I'm gonna keep an eye open for any scummy behaviour from our non-nominees, and fully expect all of them to stay active despite not being in danger of a lynch.

[Raging Rabbit]

Also,

Vote : Ghyrt

Just noticed an error, swap out 'Ghyrt' with 'Skruffs.

OWNED, BIATCH!

[Raging Rabbit]

Eh, I wouldn't assume scum will never nominate each other. They probably won't but it's a dangerous assumption.

What reason could they possibly have to nominate each other? Nominations are secret, and it's not like nominees are ever gonna be confirmed innocents or something.

I'd vote you back on this, unfortunately I can't.

[Raging Rabbit]

Well, the day 1 nominations aren't based off of any suspicions. So the mafia could indeed ensure that none of the nominated were mafia. If we assume they did this then that would confirm 4 innocents. But it's entirely possible that they nominated one of their own--and you seemed to be pushing the idea that these were confirmed innocent, which makes me suspect that this is the case.

Huh? In a 12 player game, I'd assume a 3 player scum team. So we have 3 peole who'll never nominate each other and 9 others who are completely fair game (with 1 corpse).

That doesn't make the nominees confirmed innocents

, or anything close, and if you'll check back you'll see I never said that. It just gives them a

slightly

higher chance of being pro town compared to the non-nominees, which isn't gonna help them much since one of them's being lynched anyway. Scum have no reason to intentionally put one of their own in such a risk (possibly 50%), so I'm very reasonably assuming they'll never nominate each other. Certainly not on day 1, at least.

I actually think there's very good chance that at least one of nominees happens to be scum, the problem will be finding out which with no real information to go on other than possible investigations and all the nominees being extra careful not to fuck up.

Meaningless FOS: Jack

, for bad logic and misrepresenting my post.

[Raging Rabbit]

Thanks.

[Raging Rabbit]

I think if the mafia really wanted to avoid being nominated, they would have *All* voted for the same two people, in order to put three votes against them. Everyone else (save maybe for a mason group) would be voting randomly, so, assuming each of the people 'randomly' votes for two other people, the people who already had three would get 1 or 2 more each. It wouldn't have been a four way tie like it is today. With that in mind, I think the mafia voted randomly; maybe they didn't know if who everyone nominated would be made public the next day and didn't want to be seen voting en masse.

Good point, didn't think of this.

With that in mind, I think it's *possible* that a scum has been nominated today, so maybe we shouldn't just speedlynch. >.>

Of course it's possible, and of course we shouldn't.

Would there be any point in talking about who nominated who and why?

I would really think not, but just for the record - I nominated TCS and Firecoal because random.org said so.

I nominated Raging Rabbit for being alliterative...

How is that bad? Also, are you saying you nominated me

twice

?! Scum!

Meaningless OMGUS vote: JDodge

.

[Raging Rabbit]

Irrelevant as in that person didn't get nominated. Sorry for not being clear about that.

I feel that the only people who need to share their nominations are those who either nominated someone who's up for lynch, or got NK'd.

I was originally being sarcastic, but this is really quite weird.

I personally don't see any real use in sharing your nomination of

anyone

, since I don't think we can learn anything from it atm. However, I'm also sure sharing your nominations can't hurt the town in any way, so I'm willing to play along just for the heck of it. I really don't see what makes you think it's only useful to share your "popular" nominees, what sets them apart from the other ones?

I think you shouldn't be hiding information from the town, since even though it's a really neglectible it still makes you look a tiny bit scummy.[/i]

[Raging Rabbit]

I don't find Skruffs' earlier comments scummy in any way.

If there is scum up, and I think more than likely there is, than worse comes to worse we have a 1/4 chance of getting lucky. If we work together, maybe we can narrow it down to 50% or more.

I'm just having a hard time figuring out just how, assuming none of the other nominees screws up substentionally.

[Raging Rabbit]

Of course today's lynch matters. What I found suspicious was that you felt the need to say it. It's almost as if you were trying to set yourself up as helpful. I see this again in your saying "If we work together....". The phrase insists upon itself, as if we don't know we want to find scum.

Or

he really was trying to be helpful, and you're nitpicking on minor trends in his wording that aren't actual scumtells.

Not that I mind lynching him, of course, or anyone else who isn't me for the matter. I'm just inclined to point out what I consider faulty logic.

It is weird. And I have a theory. Skruffs mentioned the possibility that the scum all nominated the same people. Let's say they did. If we all post who we nominated, scum have to lie or be exposed. But if they lie, the numbers may not line up correctly, and they might be found out. By only listing one of his nominations he avoids that somewhat.

Vote:JDodge

Nah, I think it was a genuine mistake. If he posts his other nomination and explains his earlier logic, there won't be too much lingering suspicion on my part. Just like in our ealier debate.

Did EVERYONE vote for me

Apparantly your name starting with a C is an absolutely huge scumtell.

[Raging Rabbit]

I also nominated Maz Medias for the same reason as RR: alliteration.

You're pure evil.

[Raging Rabbit]

Cheez was nominated at least 4 times, and the other nominees were chosen at least 3 times. I say this because MM has two votes on them, and isn't nominated, so ergo there is either one person with the most votes and the other three are tied for second, or it is a four way tie for first.
So 13 out of 24 votes (or possibly 16 if a four way tie) were used to get the four nominees up here. We have 8 accounted for, out of 14 total votes.

Jack: Someone else suggested it, I added my thoughts to it, which were that mafia may not want to be seen voting en masse if there's some sort of public display of votes.

Ghyrt: in all your accusing me of being 'phony helpful', you forgot to reveal your nominations. Stop waiting to see what everyone else nominated and post

Ghyrt, Maz Medias, yellowbounder, we wait for you to reveal your results.

Sidenote: Considering we have a skunk, a dog, a bunny, and harry potter nominated, I'm wondering if this island is a refuge or an insane asylum. >.>

:goodposting:

It's real troubling you look the most pro town to me this far, since as a fellow nominee I'm supposed to try to lynch you...

You're going to have to help me on this one... I see a number of ways in which this could help the town and no ways in which it could hurt us.

What he said (though I don't see that many ways it'd help).

ARGH

Its NOT harry potter

Its John lennon

*breaks into tears*

I feel your pain, man. The fact that it's a drawing probably helps, though I don't get how people keep managing to miss the lack of a scar.

[Raging Rabbit]

If we don't find some kind of direct evidence worth going on today, or come to the conclusion that we are all townies, I'll take one for the team. I'd prefer to be civilized about it though..

This is either really kind and altruistic or a bit scummy, though I can't decide which.

Bunny, it helps in lots of ways. Let's wait until after everyone has revealed their nominations or explained why they aren't going to.

OK, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt for a while.

Everyone reveal your nominations or we'll kick you butt tomorrow!

Lennon rules more than Potter any day.

I might've debated this if it wasn't for stupid Radcliff hurting my love of Potter, anyway they both rule.

Which brings up the interesting question, "Do you think Harry I suppose to look like John Lennon?"

No.

[Raging Rabbit]

@RR: Kind of looks like an attempt to cast doubt on skruffs while looking as nice as possible.

That'd be because I have doubts about that sentence but am a nice perosn.

[Raging Rabbit]

I want to ask again what we gain from full revelation of nominations? All I see happening is the scum jumping on to any overlaps in voting and using that to maneuver us towards a mislynch.

I dunno, but why the fuck do you care? We've got absolutely nothing to lose...

IGMEOY: MM

.

.. who's 'us'?

Like I said before in defence of you, I dislike this kind of nitpicking.

[Raging Rabbit]

Wrong. Us, the nominated, have nothing to lose. Everyone else does.

What exactly would that be?

[Raging Rabbit]

Think about it.

There's nothing to lose for us because we've, in a way, already lost; the people who'll get nominated are those who have given a reason to be nominated.

We haven't "already lost", we've been randomly chosen. The 3 nominees who don't get lynched today are less likely to be nominated tomorrow, if anything.

And the only people who we need to get a lot of info out of are the ones who we can get rid of. So, with a lack of info on those who aren't in trouble at the moment, people will resort to others.

Disagree. We need to get roughly the same amount of info from everyone, but unfortunately have to lynch one of us four. There's no need to be so short sighted.

The town has everything to lose due to the simple fact that they could, even without noticing, play out a scenario in which the only who are in danger are those who start in danger.

I really don't see this ever happening, especially given the very high activity level we seem to have here.

This can be avoided by just playing normally, ignoring the special mechanics except for voting and nominations.

There's no need to ignore possible extra information. Also, the special mechanics

are

voting and nominations.

Listing the nominations probably won't help us today. But it will prevent the mafia from voting en mass. If there is a discrepancy today we can't show anything, but if there is one tomorrow we can ask everyone why they nominated who they did, which means the mafia have to lie even more and may be forced to take an unconvincing pose.

Agreed. Also, Skruffs seems to have a few tricks up his sleeve, so maybe it'll be helpful today as well.

Forgot to add, if we don't think any of the 4 are particularly suspicious, we should just pick one to lynch, not vote for him yet, and discuss who to nominate. That way the other 8 people don't get ignored.

I think we everyone should be discussing tommorow's nominations regardless of whether or not we random lynch, since forcing everyone to state their nominations in advance will make it significantly harder for scum to lie about them.

I don't understand this vote. What is skruffs supposed to be warning his scumbuddies not to fall for? Why would he suggest sharing nominations if he thought they would reveal something?

Not really getting it either.

The only people who are town who have reason be worried would be... maybe a mason group who voted together.

That is such a minor concern it shouldn't even be taken into account imo.

Game-breaking strategy (maybe): If we ever need to completely bypass the nomination process, we can decide everyone's nominations the day before so that everyone is on the block. I think that this can work for any number of people; everyone would get exactly two votes. Don't know if its useful, but it makes scum nominate who we want them to and gives us a way to turn this into a normal game.

If I understand you correctly, that's the same idea I had in my response to Jack. Wouldn't call it game-breaking though, it's very arrogant for us to assume the mod didn't think of it. Also the mafia can still lie about their nominations even if we do force them to state them in advance since we have no way of knowing who was being untruthful other than possible power roles. Forcing everyone to state nominations in advance just leaves them less space for lying and forces them to come up with good explanations for every false nomination.

Did you even read the second sentence of my post? Revealing nominations seems to me like a tool which scum could use to orchestrate a mislynch based on nominatory overlap. I'm pretty sure I made that really, really obvious.

I read it alright, it just didn't make any sense. Honestly, just how stupid do you think this town is? Scum could only ever do that if everyone else were a bunch of retards.

Besides, losing a townie is always something to lose, as is playing into scumgambits. Unvote, Vote: Raging Rabbit

Look who's talking about playing into the mafia's hands... Just tell us your nominations already,

it doesn't hurt the town in any way.

@Jack: I meant it in the sense that he was cueing his scumbuddies to distance so they could then implement what I mentioned above.

That's extremely far fetched.

Goodposting

Very bad posting, actually. Weren't you the one who just suggested forcing people to state

future

nominations? Why would you disagree with your own logic about

past

ones?

I see. But I give the town a bit more credit than that, it's not like we're going to jump on the first person to post a nomination that belies the results.

:goodposting:

Don't think so, the scum can nominate whoever and then claim they nominated the chosen two.

True, but but forcing them to say everything in advance would still annoy them considerably.

Yeah, I forgot to account for the fact that we would know who would have messed it up. Come to think of it, this wouldn't even work if there were only one scum becuase everyone has two nominations.

It's not gamebreaking, but still a good strategy imo.

In fact, if you look at this way, scum has a very high chance of making only townies get nominated. Looks like it makes sense to vote on nominations during the day

Must've misunderstood you somewhere, I thought "voting" on nominations was exactly your suggestion from before. If you were talking about intentional ties, that's indeed terribly easy for scum to fuck up.

As far as I can see, and for my own reasons that will remain suspiciously clandestine until I get roman and yellow's nominateoins, so far, everyone who's nominated today looks pretty clear. So I'll probably be offering myself up to be lynched But that can wait.

That's the second time you suggested sacrifising yourself for the town now. Normally I wouldn't mind that all that much, but you obviously have the best grasp of the game mechanic so far and are therefore somewhat of an asset to the town. Having yourself randomly lynched is generally downright stupid since you're only sure of your own innocence, but given the circumstaces it's even stupider. You're either being unnecessarily altruistic or trying to give us the illusion you're willing to sacrifice yourself for the town to further prove your innocence since you know we won't let that happen.

Seriously, people. Look at RR's posts closely; he's just not RIGHT.

I

strongly

dislike this kind of unexplained ad hominem. You are thus far clearly the scummiest person as far as I'm concerned and I sincerely regret not being able to vote you.

Confim IGMEOY: MM.

In other news, the so far very high level of activity and everyone's annoying tendency to keep saying interesting things are making it extremely difficult for me to keep up my habit of replying to anything I consider noteworthy. I may have to stop this in the future.

[Raging Rabbit]

Thanks for misrepresenting me again. I already told my nominations. Any other "oversights"?

I humbly apologize for not being perfect, and assuming you didn't post your nominations since it stands in complete contratiction with your logic.

[Raging Rabbit]

I also didn't misrepresent you in the past. I chose to ignore a sentence I considered useless, and actually still do.

[Raging Rabbit]

I don't like how RR is responding to this.

vote:Raging Rabbit

What don't you like?

[Raging Rabbit]

Is this the only response you have to that big post? For that matter, if you think naming our nominations will lead to mislynch why did you name yours?

:goodposting:

(This obvious contradiction is the reason I didn't apologize for my mistake or take back my attack, TCS, if that's what bothering you.)

[Raging Rabbit]

I should tell you it makes me uneasy when people :goodpost: me :p

:badposting:

[Raging Rabbit]

I think voting to make everybody tie is a bad ideal.

It is bad, but not for your reasons. It's bad because it'd be all too easy for scum to fuck up our math and basically force a two-nominees day, which is bad because we want as many people up for lynching as possible to keep our options open.

This nomination mechanic gives the town the abillity to only make eligible poeple that they believe are scumie. It makes it tougher for scum to divert attention to townies, because there are less townies to choose from.

You should give the town a bit more credit, we won't be distracted that easily. Also, they can still "divert attention" by throwing suspicion on townies who aren't up for a lynch (like I did with MM, only I'm not scum, he probably isn't a townie, and I have good reasons ).

It also puts a lot of pressure on scum to convince us they are town.

Puts

less

pressure, if anything. When you aren't eligible for a lynch, you can work a bit less on looking innocent and a bit more on making others look guilty.

Today the mechanic is a hindrince because the nominations were completly random from the town side. Tomorow the mechanic has the potential to be a huge advantage, assuming that the town scum reads are accurate. Put the whole group up exposes everyone and since everybody is up there is more chance for the scum to divert the lynch to townies.

Today it's obviously a huge pain in the ass, but it generally favors scum in the future as well imo. Good thing is, if we keep forcing them to state nominations in advance, than the more they'll try to manipulate the system the closer we get to pinpointing them through their manipulations.

I also think that the town should try to decide as a whole who is the scumiess before putting the final votes on and going to night.

I don't think we need to have a general conscious, just force everyone to say who they're gonna nominate so scum would have a harder time lying about it.

Fos: Maz Medias and Ghyrt I think both of their play has been very scumie and using very contradictoy logic. They say one thing and seem to half contradict it the next.

Out of the four poeple we can vote for I don't have any good reads, but I do think the Rabbit is town though.

Go you!

Oh and what does IGMEOY mean?

I Got My Eye On You. Basically telling him that even though I'm unable to lynch his butt atm, I don't plan on forgetting him anytime soon.

[Raging Rabbit]

FoS: Raging Rabbit for being angry with Maz for not sharing his nominations when he already did. You might try reading people's posts.

I've been doing that quite a lot if you haven't noticed how active I am, just didn't think it worth my time to doublecheck if he shared his nominations since his logic clearly implies he shouldn't have.

I actually suspect him more now that I've realized my mistake, since his course of action is ideal for scum - first he shares his nominations on the spot so he won't get any bad attention for not being helpful, than he uses lameass logic to try to convice others not to share theirs so the town won't be able to gain any information (the only way to possibly figure out who lied is to have everyone's nomination accounted for, except obviously poor Firecoal).

[Raging Rabbit]

Logic would imply that you would look at facts beforehand.

I'm unfortunately not infallible, and did make a mistake. It was mostly a cause of his contradiction, though.

Without all of the facts, anyone can manipulate the results to make it look like someone is scum. We would need to know exactly who everyone nominated.

But why would anyone pro town

want

to manipulate the results?

[Raging Rabbit]

We need to know who everyone nominated, including Fircoal, in order to come to a conclusion.

Anyone can allocate those two nominating votes that Fircoal had to where they wish in order to change any information we'd get out of it.

That indeed makes it a lot more difficult for us to gain information from this, but Skruffs seems to know how and again it just doesn't hurt us in any way.

I revealed my nominations before I really started railing against revelation of nominations. I'll be the first to admit that I sort of play by the seat of my pants; I didn't realize that it was a bad idea until after I'd already played in to it.

What attack me so hard for "misrepresenting" your play if you admit it was misleading and contradictory, then?

[Raging Rabbit]

I kind of agree with Maz Medias, on future dayas it will more likely than not be too easily manipulatable...

How so?

[Raging Rabbit]

I'm not claiming to know how, at all. I"m not infallible. I'm going to present what I think and then we can talk about it, and someone else can counterpresent what they think.

I personally think we should be giving ourselves a little credit here. Every day should end with everyone saying who they're gonna nominate tommorow, and if the resuts prove "too easy to manipulate" we simply won't lynch anyone because of them. Discounting possible extra information just for fear it can potentially be misleading isn't too smart, imo. Also, I still want to hear what made you go all martyr-y earlier.

Except for potentially set up an innocent for a lynch.

Only we're not stupid, see my earlier point.

Well of course revealing the nominations on future days would be a mistake...

No, it won't.

...which is why I don't mind being lynched today...

That's the 3rd time you're being martyr-y. Just doesn't sit right with me.

The reason I don't like everyone giving up nominations is for the simple fact that there might be a mason group or power role based on the nominations. Would you like to put a target on that person's back for the mafia?

I admit I didn't think of a nomination power role, but I trust them enough to avoid being obvious. Mason group is really neglectible, I think they'd know not to nominate the same people day 1. I still think our possible huge pros far outweigh the cons.

Blantantly misrepresenting somebody just because they've changed their minds on a topic is by no means permissable.

he forgot. Jaysus.

Err... :wellposting:

Fine, I nominated Raging Rabbit twice

Huh? Do you like, have a bunny vendetta or something?

Seriously though, huh?

He didn't bother to check, and then tried to excuse his laziness by attacking me further.

I didn't bother to check because I figured you wouldn't cotradict yourself this obviously without even saying you changed your mind, and when I realized you did do it made me suspect you that much more. You are

so

clutching at straws here.

[Raging Rabbit]

The really long rules that outline everything are below. Here's a quick summaray: everyone sends in two different players each night as nominations. These are added to a tally. The two players with the most votes will be eligible to be lynched the following day. Ties will change this, so if there's for example a three way tie for first, then all three will be on the block for the following day. You may be interested in reading the rules below to learn the 'special cases.'

And then later...

NOMINATION RULES

1- In addition to standard night actions, each player MUST select two different people to be voted for nomination the next day.
2- The two players with the most nominations votes will be eligible lynch candidates the next day. If there is a two-way tie for most votes, both tied will be on the block. If there’s a three or more way tie, all tied players are on the block, with an exception which I’ll add later. If there’s a leader, but then players tied for second, the leader and all tied for second players are added to the block.
3- The exception: no more than half of the town can be nominated. If 6 are alive, at max three can be nominated. Ditto for seven. If there’s more than the max people nominated in a tie scenario, nominees out of the tied players will be randomly selected. Only catch: with three alive, two is the maximum.

But then again...

10- And of course, the exceptions rule. There’s an exception to every rule, and these rules are included. Based on certain game mechanics and whatnot, there is a chance that there may be exceptions, additions, or exemptions to these rules. If something I say in thread or by PM conflicts with these rules, whatever I said will most likely be correct. These rules were designed to be uniform to most games I run and as such may not accurately represent all role mechanics, so read what I have to say in thread and in your role PM carefully. Your diligence will be rewarded.

Rule 10 makes me give him the benefit of the doubt for now, but if he could've avoided nominating the same guy twice he reallly should've.

[Raging Rabbit]

If you think I'm scummy for being martyry, than lynch me, problem solved but wait until we go through the numbers first. I'm good with numbers.

I can tell you're good with numbers, that's exactly why I want to keep you around. The general conseous (which I agree with) seems to be that you're the most valuable player atm, and no way are we going to lynch you in the case of a random lynch. That makes me wonder why you keep suggesting to sacrifice yourself when you know we'll never take you up on it, which could very well be a scummy attempt to further prove your innocence by showing us how willing you are to be lynched.

[Raging Rabbit]

A busing I sense. First you say he's scummy, then you contradict yourself by saying he's valuable. Looks like you tried to distance yourselves from each other then changed your plan. FoS: Raging Rabbit, Skruffs

I'm honestly impressed with how completely you managed to miss my point there.

IGM other EOY: Ghyrt

.

You're clutching at straws, too. Assumption is a fatal flaw in any arguement.

Dude

, I was too lazy to unnecessarily check after replying to everything for like half an hour. It made perfect sense, not stating nominations goes hand in hand with his stance.

I'm good with numbers too. That would be relevant if numbers actually mattered in this situation.

I'm ok with them too, and pretty sure Skruff's better than either of us. And of course numbers matter here. Like, duh...

[Raging Rabbit]

This setup is misleading; it's not about deducing information from nominations, it's about the town working as a collective towards a favorable outcome.

Ignoring information we could easily gain from nomination patterns and essentially turning this game into Limited Lynch Mafia would really make the scum's day.

I might also point out that The Town Working as a Collective Towards a Favorable Outcome, while certainly an admirable thing for any Communist party to say, isn't an actual strategy.

About numbers...it's addition and subtraction here. You don't need to be a genius to see that 2 <4.

Getting real tired of agreeing with you here.

(Skruffs does seem to have more complex ways of dealing with numbers up his sleeve, though.)

[Raging Rabbit]

So, by saying we shouldn't give out the nominations, then stating there might be a nomination-type power role, then coming out and pretty much telling you that I have a nomination-type power role, this is all evidence of being scummy.

Whatever.

And I used my ability in order to try and get us to as few people as possible nominated, I thought it would be better for the town with fewer nominations.

again

whatever

Right. That post does feel somewhat pro townish, but why

on earth

would you want us to have fewer nominees? (Also, why me?!?)

What exactly

is

your power role, btw? Are you just able to nominate the same guy twice?

[Raging Rabbit]

Information we could easily gain from nomination patterns is not always correct.

But

additional info doesn't hurt us in any way

. I'm getting tired of saying that.

Glad you think I'm a communist. I've been working hard on that.

That'd probably explain what you're doing on an abandoned island. Mod, do I get bonus points for revealing his secret?

Thanks bunny!

While I appreciate your politeness, I'd really like you to explain the logic behid you marty-ish tendencies, who look very scummy to me atm.

I'm going to take a gander and say that yellow bounder voted for me once, adn fircoal voted for me once.

This makes me think you might've nominated youself and are interested in getting lynched for some reason.

Mod

, seriously this time, are you allowed to nominate yourself?

Sorry for being suspicious of you romanus, but to be honest, you should have outright said it rather than phrasing things in such a way to sound like that... I thought you were scum who wasn't paying attentino to the rules and was lying.

Don't you find it suspicious he was aiming for fewer nominees, though?

[Raging Rabbit]

Additional info can be misleading.

This town isn't a bunch of idiots, and is perfectly capable of deciding whether or not certain info is misleading. It's rather easier to do that after actually having said info, though.

No, I think it was the extreme Libertarianism that caused that.

Don't you dare weasel your way out of this one, Commie scum!

[Raging Rabbit]

No, players may not nominate themselves.

I'll return to my martyr-ism=scummy theory, then.

[Raging Rabbit]

I've seen it done by both town and scum. I haven't played with skruffs before so I can't really say.

I don't think I've seen anyone offer themselves without a few votes on them though. Could be scumtactic, I'm certainly leaning to a cheesefan lynch for today (skruffs isn't risking much), but I don't think we should make too much out of it.

Not only was he under no pressure of votes, everyone seemed the find him the most pro town-ish.

I personally favor JDodge thus far, for a steady stream of not-too-logical plays. Skruffs may be scummier for the martyr thing alone but I prefer keeping him alive atm since he's gonna have to keep being an asset to the town if he wants to look consistent. Cheesefan's completely neutral in
my book.

Not gonna vote yet, though, no reason to start pushing for the day to end before we're all finished figuring out our nomination policy.

[Raging Rabbit]

@Raging Rabbit: What specifically do you find unlogical about JDodge? To me, his posts seem objective and non-commital.

My sincere apologies for not being bothered to check back right now. A not necessarily comprehensive list:

First of all, the "let's make this game Limited Lynch Mafia, we can't possibly risk mislynching" argument he's been pushing pretty hard sucks bad and hurts the town. Second, I strongly dislike his ad homini-cious "There's just obviously something

WRONG

about Raging Rabbit, can't you people see it?!" post. Third, I dislike the contradiciton between his earlier sharing his nominations to his current "no misleading info" BS - while it's certainly possible for people the change their minds, I just don't get why he never bothered to say he's changed his mind IIRC, and his earlier attack on me for missing his contradicition makes no sense.

Why are you asserting that there is a general consesus that Skruffs is useful?

Again I'm not gonna check back atm, but I seem to recall quite a few people other than me commenting on Skruffs' pro-townishness. Also, I just think that unless his way of discerning information from the nominations list proves a complete dud, he's pretty objectively the most useful player atm.

My head hearts with the rapid rate of posting.

You and me both, bud.

I think out of the four poeple we can vote for it should not be skruffs or RagingRabbit.

How can you possibly suspect the infallible RagingRabbit?! (Seriously though, why?)

So is the concensus we should or should discuss are nominations for tomorow?

That's certainly the bunny consensus, but I'd certainly like to hear some non-bunny opinions on this.

Raging Rabbit Can I get you to open up your third eye and put it on me?

Sorry, I'm having enough trouble dealing with the social stereotypes of being cross eyed as it is. A three eyed cross eye should seriously like never ever leave his house.

[Raging Rabbit]

I'm worried that people might use the information incorrectly. What we stand to lose from people manipulating the results to their favor outweighs what we can gain from having said info.

I changed my mind; is that illegal now?

Damn, I'm such an idiot.

My former list refers to MM, not JDodge

. I find it odd you didn't notice that yourself, though.

Ghyrt luv, about JDodge - it's just a stream of possibly-town-but-nonetheless-wrong stuff. He's not that much below neutral in my book, I just wanted to say which way I was leaning.

I can't agree that any player is any more useful than the other at the moment.

I would say the math whizz.

[Raging Rabbit]

I would say the same about everything you've said thus far.

I would say you should probably back that up somehow.

I would say that the math will be misleading and easily manipulated.

I would say you really need to reserve your judgment about said math until you actually have it.

[Raging Rabbit]

I'd say I already have.

[Raging Rabbit]

When have I made this the specific argument? The game's setup allows for the initial narrowing of the lynch candidates to made at night and with greater flexibility. It is, in practice, going to work out the same as putting everybody up on the block and then discussing the top two or three bandwagons, which is what almost always happens in a normal Day anyway.

Bull. In normal games, it's possible to switch the top lynch candidates in the process of a day. The mafia also has a much harder time manipulating said top candidates. Ignoring the option of gaining additional info from the nomination system is essentially choosing to play Limited Lynch Mafia.

Which was made immediately after I pointing out a pretty glaring bullshit post ("Why the fuck do you care?") that I wanted response to.

That doesn't make that post any less ad homin-icous. As I already explained, I ignored that sentence because it didn't make any sense.

Next time I'll just state all my positions on every issue at the start of every day, place my vote, and not check in again until night. Will that be more consistent?

Next time, if you change your mind this completely, it'll probably be worth it to actually bother to say that, so you won't be suspected for contradicting yourself. If you choose not to, you may want to be more understanding of people who don't continually check back for severe contradictions. Said people may have actually forgotten your earlier post and probably aren't trying to blatantly misrepresent you.

You realize he said it should NOT be you, right?

Oh, right. Yay me. I have this annoying tendency to sometimes miss important pesky little words such as "not".

Why are you getting so upset - or, to use your own words, why the fuck do you care?

Two fucking reasons:
1. I was fucking being fucking sarcastic.
2. I generally fucking prefer it for everyone to fucking explain every fucking play, especially when said fucking play specifically applies to me.

Hmmm RR I say you have a knak of getting into long and winding convos that dont lead anywhere.

It's not just a knack, it's somewhat intentional. I definitely disagree they don't lead anywhere, though. I think they make tons of information available to the careful reader, and give scum many and more chances to fuck up.

I do like to believe I'm capable of stopping said "winding convos" when they really aren't going anywhere, for example my current lack of reply to JDodge or the current situation in another game of ours with somone whose name rhymes with Magneto.

Also, don't you find me amusing anymore?!

[Raging Rabbit]

Hmmm RR I say you have a knak of getting into long and winding convos that dont lead anywhere.

You have a knack of not contributing.

While I rather like the guy, that's somewhat true.

[Raging Rabbit]

I still find you amusing

Yay me.

And by not going anywhere i mean that they usually end up exacly where they left off.

But i agree that they give information but just by the journey not by the destinaton

Sorry for making that unclear

I don't see exactly what "destination" you're talking about. What I'm attempting to do is just what you said - to give the town lots of info through the "journey". I never aim to make scum confess or vote themselves, if that's what you mean.

The first part is somewhat true.

Thanks.

Don't reference ongoing games.

Cheesefan's the only one who knows what I'm talking about, and he somewhat started it by mentioning my "knack".

I don't find you amusing anymore either.

You never claimed to in the first place.

[Raging Rabbit]

If we completely ignore the nominations I have a feeling we'll end up with our lynch candidates being chosen by the mafia most of the time.

Err... :terrible, terrible, really really bad posting:

(Seriously man, do you ever get tired of being right?)

Right the journey is making me very haggard, probably because I also need some sleep.

Very understandable, though I think it's worth the effort.

also agree that cheesefan should say more since he is the only nominee not posting a whole lot, but it is kinda hard to keep up with the pace of some other four legged critters.

I'll take that as a compliment. What exactly does "Skruffs" mean, incidentally?

I think there are more important things we could talk about. Cheesefan for example.

What about him? I'm in other games with him, he's acting more or less the same thus far.

[Raging Rabbit]

Im not getting many scummish vibes from any of the nominees ... yet

Do try to post more opinions, though, loverboy. This isn't looking too pro town-ish to the people who don't know you, and would probably be useful in general.

As for Romanus

I dont belive his claim.

It's perfectly consistent with his playstyle, and there's no reason for him to fake claim. I believe he nominated me twice all right, I just have my doubts he's also town. That role is way more powerful in the hands of scum anyways.

[Raging Rabbit]

So?

That's quite the scummy response.

IGM third freakish EOY: Romanus.

[Raging Rabbit]

Anyway lets get back to the matter at hand

I don't think we should only concentrate on the nominees unless we get deadlined or something. My top 3 suspects thus far aren't among the nominees, and there's know reason they shouldn't bother to defend themselves.

On that note,

Romanus

m'boy, exactly what made you want to make the nominees number smaller by abusing the poor little bunny?

Me, you, Skuffs or the dog?

Me. No, wait!

I'm leaning towards the dog atm, but am nowhere near coming to a decision.

But his power makes more sense as a pro town power than a mafia power, seems like it's supposed to counterbalance the mafia's coordination abilities.

Finally! I, like,

so

disagree with you it just can't be put into words. Logic? I call that flapdoodle. This post is more wrong than the average American is fat.

(In case anyone didn't get that, I agree with Cheesefan.)

[Raging Rabbit]

On a related matter why did you want to make a smaller amount of nominees at all

That's obviously what I meant, although the bunny part is a definite scumtell.

[Raging Rabbit]

I just noticed something

The rabbit in your avatar is holding a gun

RABBITS DONT HAVE THUMBS

They cant hold guns

Explain that

I'M SCUM!!1

(And if I had a Scarless Harry Potter avatar, I'd never ever critisize anyone else's).

[Raging Rabbit]

How bout now?

I

was gonna use Frankbunny eventually, and demand you to take him off at once! You should probably go with a real Lennon pic imo, prefarably a late-Beatles one.

[Raging Rabbit]

I'm personally ok with anything that isn't a bunny, and clowns are almost as scary. If I'm supposed to recognize said clown, though, I don't.

Now let's stop spamming the thread and get back to the actual game, shall we?

[Raging Rabbit]

I've never played in a game like this before, so I thought, without any experience, that having a fewer number on day one would be better. Not really sure why, but it was a judgment call. Now, since I am outed, the town can at least give me suggestions on how to use this power.

No real way to argue with that other than saying I'm not all that inclined to believe you, so whatever.

What

exactly

does your power role do, incidentally?

Silly Rabbit.

That is such a huge scumtell. Tricks aren't for kids, tricks can be dangerous and should only be attempted by responsible adults.

I kinda agree with Jack on this one. Romanus' supposed role would be more balanced in the hands of the town.

Well, that depends. If by balanced you mean "weak to the point of uselessness", I completely agree.

[Raging Rabbit]

I know, instead of playing mafia, or this version of it, let's play "Out-guess the mod." Cuz, that always works.

Please explain where I'm trying to out guess the mod, must've missed that part.

Are you too shy to tell us the full extent of your abilities or somethin'?

[Raging Rabbit]

I believe he means where we're trying to figure out his alignment by figuring out whether or not his role would be more balanced as town or scum.

Oh. That's not outguessing anyone, then, it'd be much stronger in hands of mafia. Period. Quite a misrepresentation, too.

[Raging Rabbit]

I'm sorry, can you say that again? I can't see what you're saying.

Oh. That's not outguessing anyone, then, it'd be much stronger in hands of mafia. Period. Quite a misrepresentation, too.

It's not outguessing the mod because we're arguing which side it'd be stronger for, which is obviously mafia. That's not to say Romanus is 100% mafia our anything, just that it's a wierd role for pro town to have and I find it odd he chose both to use it to get fewer people nominated and now refuses to share his full abilities with us.

Your wild flailing attacks are stinking up the place.

You should generally back up strong statements such as that with, like, arguments and stuff.

You want to know the extant of my powers, why, so you know whether or not it is worth trying to kill me tonight?

No. I want to know what your full abilities are, since your current abilities make no sense for a pro town role, and you're a claimed power role and therefore preferred kill target if you really aren't scum anyways.

Fuck, can't vote: Romanus

[Raging Rabbit]

*is confused*

2nd guessing the mod means assuming the mod would have done something a particular way e.g. "there's a doc in this game so there must be a cop". Making assumptions about Romanus's role is 2nd guessing the mod, we have no way of knowing if the mod would have given it to a pro town player or to a scum player. You can't say for sure what the mod would do.

You're technically right, so I'll rephrase: I consider "outguessing the mod" a type of crap logic, which only applies to cases when you don't really have any idea what the mod would do. Saying Romanus' role is stronger in the hands of mafia is downright true. Saying that it's therefore more likely than otherwise to be a mafia role is technically also "2nd guessing", but it's a very informed guess backed up by common sense.

He could also be wondering whether to nominate you tonight, remember.

He should save the trouble of thinking about that 'till after we're finished with Skruffs' math and decided on today's lynch. I may also point out he won't be able to nominate me if he successfully gets me lyched, and that I'm really not afraid of being nominated twice a night of that's what it takes to lynch who I currently consider the scummiest player.

Although I will say he doesn't look as pro-town as he did earlier.

When did he ever look pro town?

[Raging Rabbit]

Those last two quotes were addressed to Romanus.

Oh. You're once again right, then. I don't see any point in limiting are discussion to the nominees in our current situation.

I don't see the "role is more powerful in hands of mafia-->therefore more likely to be mafia role" connection at all. Giving weak roles to the town is common. Giving the mafia extra powers is I believe less so.

But it's not unreasonably strong in the hands of mafia, just quite useful and makes perfect sense. It does very little to no good for town, though, and makes little sense flavorwise imo.

Also, his aiming for fewer candidates still really doens't sit well with me depite his claim of ignorance.

[Raging Rabbit]

But it's not unreasonably strong in the hands of mafia, just quite useful and makes perfect sense. It does very little to no good for town, though, and makes little sense flavorwise imo.

And if he can only vote for one person it is acually bad for the town

Actually, yes. But Romanus never treated his role as a drawback. He was all "Look at me, I'm a POWER ROLE!" IIRC.

[Raging Rabbit]

Why would Romanus claim the power as scum though?

Easy. He saw we were gonna get nominations from everyone regardless of his earlier efforts, and decided he'd look less scummy by just telling us the truth than by having to deal with a fair amount of the suspicion for the inconsistencies.

That'd also explain why he nominated

me

. Scum.

[Raging Rabbit]

Of course! That's like saying that because a roleblocker is more often a scum ability than a town ability, that said roleblocker

must

be scum!

It's somewhat like that, yes, only the difference is way, way bigger, Romanus treats himself as a power role rather than a drawback which it sorta is if he's really pro town, and I have other reasons for finding him suspicious if you'll bother reading back.

[Raging Rabbit]

Instances of RR OMGUSing today: 2.

Confirm Vote: RagingRabbit

, if it wasn't obvious already.

Depite this really stupid post, I still regret not being able to lynch Romanus more.

[Raging Rabbit]

Instances of unsubstantiated post dismissal: X+1, where X is a number I've lost track of

Intances of actual

logic

in said "dismissed" posts rather than stretchy empty statements: 0.

I think Romanus is exaggerating his importance, but his power does help us. As long as he makes good nomination choices. He can help make sure that the people we think are most suspicious get nominated.

While it can indeed be helpful in certain situations, the limitations involved may be slightly more severe if he really is always required to nominate the same guy twice (which his ignorance claim sorta implies he isn't, btw). My main point is that even if it is flexible it's definitely not the OMG POWER ROLE he seems to treat himself as in this post:

So, by saying we shouldn't give out the nominations, then stating there might be a nomination-type power role, then coming out and pretty much telling you that I have a nomination-type power role, this is all evidence of being scummy.

I'm also not loving his general "I don't really give a fuck" approach.

It's still an assumption. Just because something is more likely to be, doesn't mean it must be.

In a game of limited information, assumptions are somewhat necessary.

Just like you did with Maz's nominations earlier.

While I'm not sure exactly what you're talking about, MM's earlier logic sucked.

[Raging Rabbit]

Arguements based on assumption are unimportant.

You're making assumptions. That's what I mean.

In a game of limited information, educated guesses are somewhat necessary.

Your earlier logic sucked. Maz changed his mind, you ignored fact based on assumptions.

MM changed his mind without mentioning he did, I made the logical assumption he's following his own logic. It was a

mistake

. It doens't have any terrible consequences, I realized I mistook him and conceded the point. What I don't like is how MM (and now yourself) made such a big fucking deal about it. Even the Infallible RagingRabbit can make mistakes, y'know. I don't see what makes this a scumtell, are scum more likely to miss that kind of thing when it's blatantly obvious someone's gonna pick them out on it?

@Raging Rabbit: You're indeed aptly named... if rabbits had huge mouths and never shut up.

(While I wouldn't call it ad hominem, this attack has nothing to do with the actual game)

If rabbits had huge mouths they'd just eat everyone and take over the world.

Your run-ons and swear words are making your posts really annoying to read.

Jokes are fun. Curse words are useful to get you points across. Censorship sucks. Lighten up.

Why don't you try notarizing...

No idea what this word means.

...and summarizing your posts...

If you mean take out all the humor, no. Otherwise, how exactly should I summarize myself?

...instead of quoting everyone.

I quote whatever I consider interesting. Picking out the exact lines makes me a lot easier to read, imo.

[Raging Rabbit]

*Important Note*

Peole often seem to mistake my tone over the internet and find me offensive. Don't do the same mistake, I never ever try to insult anyone. I'm a really sarcastic guy, and you'll have to adjust your humor detectors if you want us to have fun together.

*/Important Note*

[Raging Rabbit]

hmm. I would like to post a link to an image of a chart I mad. Is that feasible? I think charts are more efefctive than lists.

I have heard in scumchat that RR is an ass and most people who play with him get very aggravated with him. That's why I've been taking him with a grain of salt.

Nice to now I'm a hot topic. Well, some scumchat people may find my uber activness annoying or be bothered by me forcing them to post content with all my pestering questions. I can also think of a few people who have a grudge against me simply for thinking them scum. Other than that, there's the issue of people not reading me right, which is addressed in my last post.

Do

you

find me an ass, though? If there's a general consensus in the town my attempts to make the game a little lighter are making people feel offended, I'll obviously cut it down a bit.

However, being an ass doesn't not clear you frlom being scum as well, so don't use that a defense.

I'm not intentionally being an "ass". Ghyrt's attack had nothing to do with the actual game, and neither does my "important note". It's important for me to know how people feel about my posting style, though, so I'll appreciate further input on this.[/wiki]

[Raging Rabbit]

Weird. About the chart - please do.

[Raging Rabbit]

Actually no, I don't think of you as an ass at all.. it's late, I had a big weekend, and I am feeling deliciously blunt.
I think you are doing pretty well.

I appreciate your good comments, and even moreso your honesty about scum chatter's opinion of me. This is really making me rethink my posting style, because I honestly don't wanna spoil the game for anyone.

[Raging Rabbit]

No, but ignoring the facts is.

Does the expression "honest mistake" mean anything to you? What could I possibly gain from doing something like that intenionally?

You have complained about me misrepresenting you; you have no qualms about doing the same to other people on assumptions.

No idea what you're basing this on.

[Raging Rabbit]

Meaningless FOS: Jack, for bad logic and misrepresenting my post.

Oh. That's not outguessing anyone, then, it'd be much stronger in hands of mafia. Period. Quite a misrepresentation, too.

So? They were misreading

recent

posts. You may have also noticed I never continued my initial suspicion of Jack after he admitted to misunderstanding.

[Raging Rabbit]

Sure thing.

[Raging Rabbit]

Sure thing

Confirm Vote: Raging Rabbit

[Raging Rabbit]

Our infallible mod is obviously trying to imply something...

[Raging Rabbit]

err, what?

That Ghyrt is scum. I was joking, though.

I'm sure it's just another hare-brained scheme based on what he thinks the mod would do.

It's actually probably just a typo-like thing.

If I was actually being serious there,

that

would've been outguessing the mod.

It could be that I'm trying to keep people from basing their entire case on nominations.

Why are you assuming everyone but you are idiots?

[Raging Rabbit]

*Blatant Advertising*

There's now a Mafia Strategy Thread discussing my game philosophy. Y'all may be interested in checking it out.

*/Blatant Advertising*

[Raging Rabbit]

The one thing that *Does* irk me about RR is that he tends to 'side up' with people in favor with town but is just as quick to chastize and be suspicious of them.

Nothing in this world is only black or white, not even bunnies. I personally think this kind of open mindedness is the pro town way to go - people who continually side up with one guy for no good reason are probably either stupid masons or scum.

...saying he knows I am good with numbers one post and then saying that I'm scummy for offering martyrism the next.

You still haven't explained the logic behind said martyrism, btw. Any particular reason for that?

it meanas I have to take extra care in reading his posts because I don't know what he's really saying, sometimes.

If by "irking" you I'm making you pay more attention to may posts, well, I'm sorta happy to be so irk-y.

Nominated:
*Dodge 5
*CheezFan 4
*RR 4
*skruffs 3 (+1)

Dead:
!FirCoal 2

Neither:
Maz 2
jack 1
CenScru 1
dean: 0
romanus: 0
yellowbounder 0
ghyrt 0

No idea what to make of this. You're the math whiz, though.

What's your opinion on our friend Romanus, incidentally?

And that is exactly why I was saying that this information could be misleading.

Glad someone gets it.

What

I

don't get is why you assumed you were the only one who'd ever take such an option into account.

[Raging Rabbit]

To Cheesefan: so I missed a plant, frankenberry...

Frank

BERRY

?!? This immediatly puts you on the top of my suspects list.

To Rabbit: I think your play style is fine and I don't care how much you cuss or attack poeple, because attacking poeple is what the game is about.

Right on! *disclaimer - never ever try to hurt anyone's feelings.*

2. Are we working as a group to figure out nominations or randomly vote hoping the scum looking poeple get up there?

I'd say definitely have everyone state their nominations in advance before going to sleep, after deciding on today's lynch.

I know that this is who the rabbit wants...

I'm actually less suspicions of Ghyrt atm and prefer Romanus to MM.

BTW: I totally wanted the third eye on me and got so dissed be the rabbit and you never did explain the whole thumb and gun thing.

Now that you messed with Frank, you definitely have like 12 eyes on you. Thumb/gun thing - I'm just a special bunny.

I personally think Romanus could have lied about his nominations and gotten away with it, if he was scum. Is that wifomy?

Yup.

This information is there to be examined by anyone; why does bringing it into the open more likely harm us?

QFT

Bunny, I always try to read everyone evenly - if someone is 'running distraction' I spend more time hopping after them and less time following more substantial clues that could possibly lead to more information.

I'm honestly not sure what you're getting at here.

as for the martyrism, meh, i'll discuss that when we are closer to lynching.

I think now that we're all finished tallying the nominations and have a few non-nominees targets it may be time to start discussing the lynch, and the longer you avoid explaining that the more suspicious it looks.

Note: By offering yourself for a random lynch, you're also almost claiming vanilla townie. How on earth is that good pro town play?

[Raging Rabbit]

Let's discuss what's likely vs not, discuss nominations...

We've been doing exactly that for the last 12 pages, and while I'm not saying we should stop by any means, I think it may be time to start getting a bit pragmatic as well.

Otherwise, why give mafia the chance to get role claims out of four people?

Now you sound like JDog. The town isn't stupid, we won't let that happen.

You have no idea what I am, Bunny - and why does it even really matter at this point?

You're kinda sorta 1 of the only 3 people available for me to lynch...

Also, what sort of a power role offers himself to be lynched out of his own free will?

Shouldn't you be happy that someone's offering to take 'the fall' so that you (And the other two) have more of a chance to make it to the morning?

If I was completely selfish, yes. I'm trying to look at the town's best interests here, though, and the respected math whiz almost encouraging the town to let him sacrifice himself makes absolutely no sense to me.

Instead of trying to paint me as scummy and get me lynched 'against my will', we can do what I suggested earlier and play civilized-like.

I can't shake the feeling you're trying to buy time to explain your earlier scummy play here.

[Raging Rabbit]

While I love how the graph looks, haven't read that post yet. Just commenting on the previous ones:

About the suggestion of information leading to mislynch. The way I see it is, everyone starts the game regarding the others as neutral. With discussion, sometimes scum convince you of their innocence and townies of their guilt. So, you could rightly say that discussion can lead to mislynch. But I think we all agree discussion benefits the town. It's the same way with nomination information. The town wins by making good use of information, more information is better.

QFT

Seriously, what the fuck else do you want?

I'd like to see some pro townish behavior other than generally unhelpful suggestion, if you wouldn't mind too much.

Alright Bunny, I'm gonna say this as politely as possible. Your long and frequent posts are starting to annoy me and lessen my enthusiasm for the game. In fact, the first thing that came to mind is that you're scum trying to make the town lazy and not read. For the sake of a more enjoyable (and more efficient) game, please stop quoting and analyzing every other post.

I'm currently discussing with mith what I'm suppossed to do in response to such blatant off-play attacks, so you'll have to be patient. In the meanwhile, you should try searching your soul for any hint of humour still left in you it and use it hard when reading my posts.

Cheesefan: Seems to take the game very lightly. Joke vote at this stage in the game? Don't see anything particularly scummy, but he's a possible lynch today for lack of contribution.

I agree. While his earlier playstyle was perfectly Cheesefan-ish, he's beginning to look a bit too causal. Last post in a great improvment, though, and he's probably my least prefarable cantidate atm.

Skruffs: I don't like martyrdom but he says he'll explain later.

I don't like he keeps saying that.

JDodge: I didn't like his early "only post one of my nominations" thing. Since then all he's done is pursue RR and talk about misinformation misleading the town. Not liking his play at all. Far too focussed on RR who I'm beginning to think is one of those "lynchable townies" if he is townie of course. He said he wanted to get back on track but he hasn't.

QFT

but for one who has argued so strenuously in favor of "information that helps the town" he hasn't done much to provide any.

You may want to back that up with, well, anything. I don't feel like making an "I'm Important!" list for no reason if you can't back that up.

I'll ignore your other assements for now, though I mostly agree with them.

[Raging Rabbit]

Right, the graph:

ROmanus, who is special, and is red.

Yes, he supports the dark side of the force.

I'm going to talk about Fircoal, first. Fircoal had two people voting against him, RR, and MM. (coincidentally enough, those are the people who Dodge voted against, but that's pointless to really go into). This is WIFOM, of course, but I will raise the point: Would scum nominate people that they were already going to kill? I don't think so. You might say they could because they wanted to seem innocent, but in effect they are cancelling out their own participation in who gets nominated, which means there's a higher chance of being nominated themselves.

While I'd like nothing better than to be cleared that easily, I'm not that sure that's the case. Clever scum can always claim to nominate the dead guy, and while the fact that I was the first (IIRC) to publish his nominations does go a bit towards clearing me since I'd be taking a risk to commit to false nominations and be caught in a lie. This is probably gonna take some more mathematical analyzing, but until either of us comes up with something like that I'm not gonna use this as a defence and neiher should MM.

I'm having some difficulties assessing the rest of your points, but my feelings that you're ignoring the option of people lying is similar to my own scenario. While I may choose to comment more on this in a future, more mathematical mood, this measly post would have to do atm. Ghyrt - I fully expect this to make your day.

[Raging Rabbit]

Another short reply for now, since I'm sorta incapable of proccessing all this extra data atm (seriously, this has to be the most active town eva) - I still have severe doubts about using the graph as actual evidence (I think Jack explained why that is better than I did in his initial post, but I was totally the first to diss the graph ). While I'm still generally happy to have it and disagree with the Dawg's "keep confusing info secret" logic, I think that said info is in this case a bit

too

confusing to be taken as anything other than extremely situational. I feel Skruffs' initial post was a bit too confident, and words like "probably" or "I think" are generally a bit too strong for such strech-y evidence. I'd have liked to see more of the words "slightly" or "itsy bitsy" in such a post, but maybe that's just me.

Sorry if I'm repeating anything here, I barely even skimmed page 13 thus far. I'd again like to urge Skruffs to explain his martyr-ish tendencies.


On another meta-note, Ghyrt, I'd like to ask you to silently withstand the severe problems you seem to have with my style and talk to me post-game. I really don't think you hating me personally should have anything to do with your opinion on my alignment. Thanks.

[Raging Rabbit]

While I'm still happy we have the garph since it didn't hurt the town in any way, I find it essentially useless atm. Too many ways it could've been fucked with, maybe after we know some people's alignment we'll have an easier time figuring things out. It shouldn't account for much in today's lynch choice imo.

Interesting (imho) suggestion

- after we're decided on today's lynch, but before pummeling the guy to death, we should also decide on

3

people for

everyone

to nominate. Everyone should be openly claim which of the 2 he's gonna nominate, so we can have a sure 7-7-6 split (11 people). That way, even if we lynch an innocent and all 3 (?) scum nominate the same guy, we're still pretty much guaranteed to have the chosen 3 nominated tommorow. If the mafia decides to NK one of tommorow's chosen nominess, we thank them for making our lynching choice that much easier by offing one of the most suspicious people.

[Raging Rabbit]

Also, while we should really start concentrating more on today's lynch, I personally don't think it's harmful to decide on a future nomination policy first.

[Raging Rabbit]

<snip>
On another meta-note, Ghyrt, I'd like to ask you to silently withstand the severe problems you seem to have with my style and talk to me post-game. I really don't think you hating me personally should have anything to do with your opinion on my alignment. Thanks.

First of all, I don't hate you and I don't think about this issue in a personal way (Think about it in terms of my character thinking yours talks too much). Second of all, I think your posting tendencies have everything to do with the game. I agree that we shouldn't discuss it much further, but I doubt I'm the only one who minds all the quotes. You've stopped quoting so much and I thank you for it.

Your earlier post were pure slander that had absolutely nothing to do with your opinion on my alignment. If you want to critisize my style, there are a 100 more pleasant ways to do so. I too do not wish to discuss this further atm, though.

[Raging Rabbit]

RR, your latest suggestion is once more blasted by the presence of power roles, or even simple mafia cunning. I'm standing by my position that revealing nominations is akin to planning night actions, which is always a bad plan in a normal game...

I think it's safe to say the balance of 7-6-6 is strong enough to be safe from any scum tampering it. I also think it's much safer than leaving everything to chance, which only goes to make it easier for the mafia to spoil our plans.

[Raging Rabbit]

How else could they interfere?

[Raging Rabbit]

JDawg, lets try using math here:

Lets assume we lynch an innocent, worst case scenario an' all. We still have 11 people, with a maximum of 3 in a single scum group. I was an idiot before, a total of 22 nominations means an 8-7-7 split. Please explain how the scum could ever possibly fuck up such a thing under anything but the most extreme circumstances. If you choose to assume such circustances, please explain how the 3 nominee system makes it easier for them to fuck up than just randomizing everything.

Please don't answer this with general statements, I really feel this warrants actual math.

[Raging Rabbit]

I will never agree to vote as others tell me or tell people who i am going to vote.

I will vote as i wish but provide logical reasons for doing so the next day.

My former post applies to you as well, bud.

[Raging Rabbit]

So we'll have 2 nominees out of the 3 most suspicious people. That's better than random in my book.


Other option I haven't thought through yet: We can we one "top" suspect at 7, and 3 other guys at 5 each or somethin'.

[Raging Rabbit]

EBDP: nah, second option is way too easy to fuck up. I still like the 3 nominees system, though.

[Raging Rabbit]

I thought that less nominees is bad for the town.

You should really try listening to what the other guy/bunny may have to say.

So the only way this works is if Townies also agree to be nominated.

I think good, mature townies should be willing to go along here. It's not like choosing

not

to nominate the two other most suspicious guys is gonna help them any, that'd just be screwing the town's plans to get back at us.

The best plan in this situation is to not have a plan. Any plan we have will not end well.

That is

never

the right line of thinking. Even if we choose to play it totally random, we should have a good rationale for doing so.

[Raging Rabbit]

The best plan in this situation is to not have a plan. Any plan we have will not end well.

You're not getting me here. Right now you and our Scottish friend here are basically saying "lets play it random because it's the simplest, probably also the most intuitive approach". I say, if we ever decide to play it random, it should

not

be done for these reasons but because we come to an informed decision that it

is

the best approach, not only the simplest. I personally think my 3 nominees system is the less dangerous course of action.

[Raging Rabbit]

You assume too much. I'm not saying play it random, I'm saying play it without a preset plan for who nominates who.

You're saying that because it's the simplest/most intuitive, not because you have some sort of mathematical proof that it's better than my plan.

[Raging Rabbit]

I'm saying that because a plan will corrupt too easily, and you'll end up with the scum steering the town around, that no plan would be better than not having one.

A'ight, please show me what makes "anarchy" less easily corrupted than my plan.

[Raging Rabbit]

Guys, please try to think this through here. By "random" I didn't mean meaningless, I meant "anarchy". We have no idea how easy we make life for the mafia, or how much they'll be able to fuck us up. It leaves too much to pure luck, basically.

My method, however, pretty much guarantees that

we get at least 2 out of our 3 most suspicious people up for lynching tomorrow.

And by choosing which of our 3 suspects to remove as an option, the mafia's basically giving us more free information. That's better than anarchy in my book. Yay institutions!

[Raging Rabbit]

I refuse to abide by someone telling me how to use my nominations.

You're thinking very anti-town, then.


Skruffs m'boy, just a friendly reminder that you'll eventually have to explain to us what makes you so very eager to get yourself lynched, and the sooner the better imho.

[Raging Rabbit]

I refuse to abide by someone telling me how to use my nominations.

You're thinking very anti-town, then.

You're thinking of ways to lead us into a trap.

Show me what makes me wrong, then, instead of making empty statements.

[Raging Rabbit]

Quote, please.

[Raging Rabbit]

My power is meaningless if I let someone else, who may be scum, dictate what is going to happen.

Your power is pretty meaningless anyway, assuming you're pro town. Also, I'm not asking for supreme power here or anything, I'm asking for the

town

to decide on 3 people.

Why nightkill someone who is up for Lynch tomorrow?

No real reason. Good for us. Yay.

There are other problems that I see in this as well

.

Empty statement.

but since there are at least a few people who are refusing to cooperate, it isn't going to work, and is now, a moot point. Arguing about it any further is a red herring that the scum can stay out of and let us rip each other apart with.

Appeal to Group. Truth isn't democratic.

[Raging Rabbit]

How is getting one of the more pro-town people NK'd "Good for us"?

Because the mafia doesn't want to kill any of the suspicious people up for a lynch and make our next day choice easier, they'd rather aim for the more innocent looking people.

He's right, and that isn't an Appeal to Group situation.

There are other problems that I see in this as well, but since there are at least a few people who are refusing to cooperate, it isn't going to work, and is now, a moot point. Arguing about it any further is a red herring that the scum can stay out of and let us rip each other apart with.

Classic Appeal to Group. "Well, I have tons of other valid points too, but since others don't seem to agree with you atm you're obviously wrong and should stfu". Conformist slut.

The idea being is if mafia don't know who's going to nominate who, they'll have to nominate people themselves.

Huh? They

want

to nominate people themselves. My system just makes it that much harder for them to fuck up our lynch options, and leaves a whole lot less to pure chance.

In the end, we will have to agree before we lynch who we are going to collectively, as a group, nominate.

So you do agree? Good.

Nothing said above is any different than any other mafia game.

If you want to just role the dice and basically choose to play Limited Lynch Mafia, sure.

We, the people of this town

You're basically shouthing "I'M PRO TOWN!" here. Why?

Deciding beforehand, making people nominate this or that person, that takes our power away.

That only takes the

randomness

away.

If we decide to nominate A B and C and let everyone know before hand, then the scum are not going to NK A B or C, especially if one of A B or C is scum. This lessens the town's power and give the scum more.

.

A, B and C probably look suspicious enough for scum not to NK them anyway. Also, it's by far the best worst case scenario.

Also,

I

would like to give the town power roles the opportunity to do what ever it is they do.

Why keep advertising your pro towniness, oh great self proclaimed power role guy?

Declaring beforehand and what not only takes away from the power roles we as a town have. What the hell good is a mason group if we just decide who to nominate before night?

Err.. Clearing people? I don't see how that changes much of anything.

nor will I obey what the "majority" tells me I should do.

If the town as a whole decides to go for that tactic and you choose to flat out refuse, all the more reason for us to want you dead first.

Truth may not be democratic and neither is my power or anybody else's.

[/egotrip]

Finally, there is no way for the entire town to consolidate power, because we know for a fact that part of the town is working to sabotage us. This automatically means that whatever system we seek to set up is flawed and only benefits those who wish to sabotage it.

1. Paranoid, much? Let the town judge what's good and what's not for ourselves rather than shout "SABOTAGE!"
2. "Anarchy" is just as much a chosen system as mine is, only more intuitive. Can't it also be set into place by evil anti town culprits?

I believe the same info can be gained from revealing our nominations in the morning without giving away ourselves the night before.

I you want the wrong people to get nominated and the scum to have an easier time lying, sure.


Romanus, try looking at it this way - If I would offer you the option of everyone voting for the guy they suspect the most during the night, than random lynch the following day based on who got the most votes, what would you say? Wouldn't you think that makes it much easier for the mafia to set up the wrong lynches?

[Raging Rabbit]

If we don't reveal anything till morning, the most suspicious people will be up for lynch. Just like in a normal game, the most suspicious people get lynched.

If we don't decide in advance on who the most suspicious people are, the mafia's gonna have a lot easier time in deciding that for us.

Oh, and namecalling and what not, does nobody any good. I had valid points throughout my post and you know it. I don't know what your problem is.

I'm just so fucking sick of people playing that trick with every second post of mine, I really don't feel like apologizing atm.

NONE OF MY POSTS IS INTENDED TO BE THE LEAST BIT INSULTING. SARCASM ISN'T NAMECALLING. STOP TAKING ME FOR SOME SORT OF PRETENIOUS ASSHOLE.

The person with the most votes gets randomly lynched?!?!?!?!??!?!?!?!??!??!?!

C'mon, you know what I meant. In a normal game, people can change their votes and compromise to make sure that the most suspicious person (the closest to a

consensus

) gets lynched. In Night Mafia, we can't do that and the mafia has an easier time manipulating majority.

Random is a roll of the dice.

"Anarchy" isn't purely random, true. It's (way)

more

random than what I'm trying to propose, though, and randomness is a big no no.

oh, and btw:

Are you a retard???

Yup, namecalling's bad. Wasn't any offense intended in my last post, though, but I'm not that sure about your response.

[Raging Rabbit]

It is amazing; You are amazing. The way you can take whatever you want out of context and turn it to say things that it didn't say in the first place.

I also love how you can emotionally attack someone, and after they respond in kind, you go all stoic.

What I still can't figure is why you said no one likes playing with you. I mean, I can't see any reason at all for not wanting you in a game.

Oh, that is sarcasm, which, by your standards, are not insults.

Wow.

1. Dear town -

AD HOMINEM

.
2. Dear Romanus - If you choose to think you know my intentions better than I do, that's your own problem. You'd still be wrong, though, and I never meant any offense.

[Raging Rabbit]

This whole post is interesting, I'll refer to my specific part later, but basically.. I notice you go through two phases... a helpful phase and a distracting phase.

You're basically talking about two "posting styles", which up to this point I considered equally helpful. More later.

It's interesting that you posted it right after ROmanus said that it's a red herring that scum will use to cause town to fight each other.

I had tons of posts like these in tons of other places, never thought it'd be difficult to read.

What I am saying is that mafia will have to 'choose themselves' who they want to nominate vs knowing what the town is doing and following along with them, and then hope that a few other people are also voting them.

ok, I see now.

Second quote : My sentence said that Town was going to have to agree on who they were going to nominate the next day.

That's exactly what I was saying before that post, and I was glad you agreed with me.

This is where your quotes fail, because you take only a bit out, which misinterprets what they are saying, and then when you reply, it looks like you are twisting wrods around, misconstruing what is said, or putting words in other people's mouths. You are more than welcome to do things your own way but if people get ruffled by it, you can't then tell them to stop, because that's them reacting to you. This is meant as helpful criticism.

A'ight, I see your point. I admit I never thought of it as difficult before, I thought it was the easiest to read and clearest way. Sorry if I distracted anyone.

So, everyone, I'm genuinely interested here -

what do you consider the most "readable" and least annoying way for me to pharse myself?

This has little to do with the game, but could help us all enjoy it more and help my future games as well. I'd appreciate anyone's input on this.

NOTE: I'm not gonna give up the harmless sarcasm. Anyone who chooses to take offense should look at my new sig/lighten up.

Except it doesn't, because those suspects and the mafia can coup it.

The suspects, if pro town, really shoudln't. The mafia can coup things anyway.

(Was this post built in a distracting/mispreseting manner? I honetly don't know here, so help the poor little bunny.)

[Raging Rabbit]

I agree with romanus.

For the same reasons?

[Raging Rabbit]

Also, Romanus (and Ghyrt?), if you wanna flame me further and argue off-play points, I'd advise you to take a look at the RR General Discussion thread.

[Raging Rabbit]

I want to note that an increase in randomness always helps the larger force.

Wrong. Just look at the odds for a town win in "back 2 basic" mafia. They're in the wiki. Town basically has like a 38% chance of winning in a 3 mafia/17 townies setting.

Also, the best Chess player in the world would beat the worst one more consitently then the best and worst Poker players (though I'm now talking about

quality

, not quantity).

[Raging Rabbit]

Romanus, you're trying to get back at me for something I never intended to do. Wanna discuss my "insulting" style? That has nothing to do with this game in particular, so go to the discussion thread. Wanna play mafia? Stop attacking my personality, I never intended to attack yours.

If you, or anyone else, want to comment on how I can make myself more readable, though, I'd very much appreciate that.

[Raging Rabbit]

Could you link to that rule, please, so we could all judge how relevant it is here?

[Raging Rabbit]

I think MAz is sayign what Romanus was sayign and I aws echoing as well;
if mafia doesn't know what plans to mess up, they'll have to devise their own.

Didn't you just say you support the 3 nominee system? 'Cause Romanus certainly doesn't, and I really don't think MM does either.

Since you're the one who complained, could you please tell me how to correct my ways - how should I phrase my posts (quote-wise)?

Ok I don't care how it comes up/ happens/ evolves into, I'm sick of coming back everyday to like a page's worth about RR's play style. I don't mind his style or anyone that takes offense to it, but can we stop getting into redundant arguments about it.

I totally understand your annoyance, but I

do

mind people who find me insulting. I personally don't want to hurt anyone's feelings, just to be able to take things a little lightly without insulting anyone.

The rest of DW's post is pure truth, and I especially like -

Im a townie, but if you want to put me and jack up and someone else I'll agree to do it

(jokejokejokenooffensecheers)

[Raging Rabbit]

I know see why RR pisses everyone off.

Don't you love me anymore??

Yep. I can also see someone getting lynched because they don't agree on a nominating procedure that everyone else lays down, so they "must be scum".

Nope, just not too pro town-ish. Look, we need to think this thing over and decide on the town's best course of action. Forcing us into anarchy just because you "won't have it any other way", since you won't give up your "freedom" or somethin', is not particularly helpful.

[Raging Rabbit]

1. Love is not limited to one game, you either do or don't mr. Poetic Scottsman.
2. Is it because I want to take away your "freedom" to nominate whoever you choose?

[Raging Rabbit]

All I said was that town would have to agree on WHO they were nominating.

How is this different from what I said?


I personally believe my plan is the best course of action. Disagree to the point you don't even want to debate? Sure. Do whatever you want. Do try to understand the advantages of what I'm suggesting first, though.

[Raging Rabbit]

I'll expalin my thinking one more time, and if people still disagree I'll give up. Please try to consider my idea, though.

Option 1 - Anarchy

- each townie votes for whichever two guys he considers the most suspicious.

Town nominations - mostly spread over the few most suspicous people, but quite a few get wasted on the guy only this one townie wants to lynch.

Mafia nominations - perfectly coordinated to get whoever they want nominated. The mafia has no knowledge on the town's exact nominations, but can guess well enough to have a good chance of getting the wrong person nominated.

Option 2 - Administration

- town decides on the 3

consensually

most suspicious guys to nominate a day in advance.

Town nominations - all go on the same 3 people, and said people will

always

be up for a lynch unless one gets NK'd (which still leaves 2 with decreased chance to lynch an innocent).

Mafia - since they can't change any of the 3 predetermined people (8-7-7 balance with only 3 mafia max), they're pretty much powerless. They have more information on what the town's gonna do, but that doens't help them fuck up the nominees at all.

[Raging Rabbit]

Dawg, if you and some other people disagree on the spot and flat out cannot be convinced, I'll stop arguing. Since you didn't reject it on the spot, I'm gonna try to explain my thinking again.

Let me give my interpretation:

Option 1 - Freedom - each townie votes for whichever two guys he considers the most suspicious.

Town nominations - Only placed on those whom people themselves feel are scummy.

Mafia nominations - No way of coordinating who's on the block.

Option 2 - Government - town decides on the 3 most suspicious guys as determined by whomever can talk the loudest to nominate a day in advance.

Town nominations - All go on the same 3 people, and said people will always be up for a lynch unless one gets NK'd (which still leaves 2 with chance to lynch an innocent based on who is right in the predetermination).

Agreed.

Mafia - Can help manipulate the nominations in a different way, by tricking the town into choosing the wrong three people.

Also true, but the mafia would have to manipulate the town to choose the wrong 3 people with

logic

, which is essentially the same as manipulating the town into a wrong lynch in a normal game. Forcing them to do that would also give us more chances to find the mafia, by inspecting everyone's logic. If we choose "freedom", however, they can just all nominate the same 2 innocents and have a fairly good chance to get them up for lynch, with no need to even explain themselves. IMHO, the town would be much better off with "government".

The way I look at it, 1 is true democracy. 2 is tyranny-by-majority.

How is this "tyranny-by-majority" different from the usual lynching system, though?

[Raging Rabbit]

Because nobody forces you to vote for someone.

But you eventually often have to

compromise

in order to have a majority.

Both sides have drawbacks. Both sides have oppurtunities. Doing it one way tonight doesn't mean we have to do it another way tommorrow night.

Sure. I'm just talking about

tonight

, we'll think about tommorow night when we get there. How can I build my posts in a way that would annoy you less, btw?


On a reasonably important note, I'll be a

whole lot

less active starting basically now. And I do mean a whole lot, though I'll try not to lurk. Rejoice!

[Raging Rabbit]

Hmm? Oh I'm not really annoyed by them, I just see what other people are saying.

I'm glad you're not annoyed. Do please explain just what it is you and others don't like in my posts, though, so I could change it and we could all start having a better time (note: not gonna stop being sarcastic, so anything but that).

I like you, bunny! (Disclaimer: Liking RR is not a scumtell)

Maybe it's not be a scumtell, dear, but it's quite possibly a modkillable offense.

[Raging Rabbit]

But nobody forces you to.

True, but the general idea that some people have to compromise is the same. Could you explain why you disagree with a recent post of mine you haven't fully answered?

Dawg wrote:
Mafia - Can help manipulate the nominations in a different way, by tricking the town into choosing the wrong three people.


Also true, but the mafia would have to manipulate the town to choose the wrong 3 people with logic, which is essentially the same as manipulating the town into a wrong lynch in a normal game. Forcing them to do that would also give us more chances to find the mafia, by inspecting everyone's logic. If we choose "freedom", however, they can just all nominate the same 2 innocents and have a fairly good chance to get them up for lynch, with no need to even explain themselves. IMHO, the town would be much better off with "government".

[Raging Rabbit]

I equate it to the arguement between Libertarianism and Authoritarianism.

I'm not gonna get into a political debate here. Try to think about this strategically, though, it's not about life philosophies. Do you also disagree it'd be the most efficient town strategy, or just don't want to have your "liberty" taken from you? If you also disagree, please explain why.

[Raging Rabbit]

So, because of the unknowns, and because of the myriad of ways the mafia could tamper with the nomation process, I feel that it's better to pursue this on an individual basis. Allowing mafia to know who to kill to narrow down the lynch board is very much a bad plan; allowing them to know it at all, in fact, is bad, because if one of their own is on the platform, they can intentionally BROADEN selections through their sabotage.

Keep in mind, though, that the mafia are able to coordinate their powers whether we choose to coordinate ours or not. "Goverment" gives them better knowledge of the best way to fuck us up, but also makes it

significantly

harder for them to fuck anything up since the town is

completely united

against them. I mean, scum would really need a whole bunch of power roles to fuck up an 8-7-7 balance (and that's assuming we mislynch today).

[Raging Rabbit]

I still don't like it. Like you said, this does not take into account any power roles, which we know that they are out there. You say a whole bunch, but I don't know about that. It would only take one, the right one, to mess stuff up.

I'd personally prefer to take that chance rather than give the mafia (IMHO) a whole lot more nomination control, but of course I can't help it if you don't agree.

[Raging Rabbit]

Okay so let's just leave it out in the open - if peole want to state cases on why some people should be nominated they are free to do so, but nobody is required to disclose who they are nominating, but in the morning we're going to try and figure out what's going on?

Not

a good idea. If we're not guaranteed to have everyone voting the same guy to prevent the mafia from fucking with our desicions, it's better to avoid stating nominations in advance. It's either "Goverment" or "Anarchy" imo, any compromise is lesser to the two.

[quote="Skruffs"|]Okay.
Vote Skruffs [/quote]

Dude, you totally have to explain that martyr thing.

[Raging Rabbit]

I'm here, still really busy.

Raging Rabbit still needs to die. :teach:

Yup, something's just

WRONG

about me. That's quite the case you've got there.

Bunny : I think being on the pedestal of being nominated is good for his gameplay.

If I understood correctly and you want to nominate me because you think it compliments my playstyle, that's not a very good reason.

And, in fact, talking about it, and giving out what your thoughts are is good for the town, and could be used to really foul up the scum.

The opposite is true. Stating our nominations in advance without working together to target the same people is giving the mafia information for free. Unity, however, is power.

Already explained, maybe a page back. Basically I don't think any of you are scummy, and I don't like the idea of townies voting against each other to save their own skin. It can just lead to distress/conflict in later days. You could say I'm being 'chivalrous".

Doesn't sit well with me at all.

1. Why didn't you say so the first 900 times I asked that?
2. You "know" you're innocent, but not any of the others. Why vote yourself? What gain does it possibly give you that simply not selfishly attacking the other nominees doesn't?

...certain four legged critters that seem to be leading in the vote count because of the general dislike, of this animal, amongst the players.

<3

That's alright, though, I've been getting more love from the real world recently and I don't mind as much. Still, I'd rather if you don't lynch me just because you dislike me.

MOD: I think we need a deadline because we're twenty pages in with discussion being mostly circular, irrelevant, and with no definitive progress in who to lynch. It would be nice for this day to end.

I strongly disagree.


(If this post is annoying to you, please tell me what I could've done to make it better. Thoughts on the other nominess coming up.)

[Raging Rabbit]

Dawg: His play is consistently not that great imo, but I don't find him all that scummy.


Cheesefan: I agree with everyone, something's very off-y about my Scottish friend here. It's mostly a general vibe, though I may be able to pick up more in a future pbpa I don't have time for right now. I strongly dislike his flat out refusal to Unite the World, though.


Skruffs: I'd call him the most pro town-ish (already did earlier in the day iirc), if it wasn't for the uber scummy martyr thing. I also think he played up the importance of his graph a bit, but that's understandable since he put up so much work into it. Still, townies really shouldn't vote themselves for no good reason.

[Raging Rabbit]

you say I am very pro-town and then suggest i'm being uber scummy (in more than one post), so I think you n eed to figure that out for yourself.

My Skruffscum scenario:

You saw you were being regarded as very pro town, and decided to push that further by offering yourself up for a lynch since you knew no one'd ever take you up on it. I just can't see any other good reason for you to do that, since preventing a nominee war could've been achieved just as well by simply not attacking any of the other 3 for no good reason.

RR, please stop misrepping me. My case is not "lol he's wrong!". I've outlined my reasons before.

I only rememeber "he's WRONG!" and "Bunny must die!", if there's an actual case I seem to have missed it. Please outline your reasons again.

[Raging Rabbit]

What's "quasi", other than a funny word?

[Raging Rabbit]

Rabbit -- if you really want advice, and I am starting to doubt that, drop the sarcasm. In this game, it just doesn't work. First, by definition, you are saying something you don't really mean. The other thing is that it is almost always directed at a person, and therefore taken as a personal attack. Even when not directed at me, I still think you are an asshole when you post sarcastic responses, which is almost every one. To conclude, when you are sarcastic, you are not really saying what you mean, and therefore your responses are open to interpretation, not the least of which being that you are just being an anti-town, scummy, asshole

No, see, I was asking about post structure (i.e quotes and stuff), not about sarcasm. Sarcasm is a part of who I am, a big part of how I have fun and a huge part of how I argue. Don't like it? That's honestly a pity, but you still shouldn't find me insulting since I never aim to insult anyone.

Also, you don't have to really think to be sarcastic, you don't actually site a case of your own, you just make fun of another idea or thought.

No, it's about the same as explaining why you disagree with somethin', only better.

It is like a fog is around him, and I don't like it. Honestly it wouldn't hurt my feelings a bit if he got lynched

I'm really not sure what you mean by "hurt my feelings", but if you really think 2 other nominees are scummier than me you should be opposed to my lynch imho.

Anyway, I still find you scummy. Just a friendly reminder.

Am I correct in hearing an inversion of the "ability =/= alignment" fallacy here? Because Romanus has an ability that 'may be' scummish, he should be on the table for a lynch? That's ridiculous, Dean.

I seem to recall you saying that your case on me is something more than "something's ROTTEN in the kingdom of RR". Well?

[Raging Rabbit]

I seem to recall you saying that your case on me is something more than "something's ROTTEN in the kingdom of RR". Well?

I'm fairly sure you're literate. It's my policy not to indulge laziness; reread the fucking thread.

I don't recall any fucking case whatsoever, fucking quote.

Other than that, still fucking busy atm. No time to even fucking read the thread. sorry.

[Raging Rabbit]

This town is just way too active considering the incredibly low amount of free time I have atm, but I'll try to catch up sometimes later today.

[Raging Rabbit]

Sorry for dissapearing. Life has honestly been busy as hell lately, and if I had an extra minute to spare atm I really would've been saying something a lot more substantial right now. Us Israelis have a two and a half week holiday starting this weekend, and I promise to be a whole lot more active. I'd really appreciate it if you won't replace me by then. Again, I'm extremely sorry.