Mini 416 - AM Mafia - Game Over D:

[Ripley]

Vote: massive_goonery

. Random.

[Ripley]

Vote: Nai

I think that not understanding is scummy.

Nai. You're not being wagoned cause you were scummy..

???

[Ripley]

Ripley, that was obviously a joke.....

Which one was the joke?

[Ripley]

-----CORRECTED Top of the Page Votecount-Edit!-------
“Night has brought to those who sleep, only dreams they can not keep.” ~ Enya


Thestatusquo - 3 - (Nai, IH, PBug)
Nai - 2 - (Thestatusquo, Panzerjager)
massive_goonery - 1 - (Ripley)

Not voting - 6 - (Sailor Jerry, trestain, bird1111, CoG888, massive_goonery, Elias_the_thief )

With 12 alive, it will take 7 votes to lynch someone!
-------------------------------------------------------

I think claims on Day 1 are far more likely to help scum than to expose them. When TSQ said that early claims were good I actually thought he must be joking, though with my record of detecting wit from that quarter, he was probably dead serious this time.

I'm keeping my original random vote on massive_goonery, for the reasons given by PBug in Post 46. Also, in most games I've played the high profile players over the first few pages - equivalent to TSQ and Nai in this game - have turned out to be town.

[Ripley]

https://www.mafiascum.net/cgi-bin/wiki. ... Definition

There's a lot of detail here about what can go in a Normal or Mini Normal and it doesn't mention post restrictions. It looks to be out of date though. Maybe there's a newer version somewhere? Though I got to this via the first post in the Mini Normal queue.

IH, you seem very certain of the fact that there cannot be a post restriction in this game, to the point of attacking someone just because they suggested it, which seems bizarre. Can you provide a source?

[Ripley]

I haven't really thought CoG was scummy, though I could see goonery/Panzer, both of whom have seemed a bit uncomfortable since the collapse of the Nai bandwagon soon after the two of them joined it. In post 41 Panzerjager is basically supportive of massive_goonery's post 31; although it's not correct to say, as m_g did, that Panzer just restated his own post in different terms, he is clearly of the same general opinion, votes the same way and repeats one of the ideas in it (the one about Nai maybe setting things up for a possible false role claim).

But then, post 93, Panzer says

I don't like MassGoon's posting and I really don't like IH's last post so FOS both of them.

... so now he doesn't like m_g's posting, a bit of a turnabout since m_g had only made one post in the meantime, and Panzerjager is as vague as possible, not even referencing the post, let alone the aspect he doesn't like. This could be distancing himself from m_g now it's become apparent which way the wind's blowing. (Note also: he

is

specific about the particular post by IH he doesn't like, and this is the FOS that subsequently gets upgraded to a vote.)

[Ripley]

I havent played in a game that had an SK before, but if we have one in this game I imagine it would belong to one of the "other alignments" we were told might exist. And so, neither Work nor Sleep, and I think a Cell Phone fits very well with that, the phone ringing could wake him (so Anti Sleep) and the information in the call could cause him to have to change his plans for the day (so Anti Work). And in addition PBug says he thinks it improbable that m_g would have the role he described, because of his own role. I'm inclined to believe PBug on this, and so on the whole I think there's a high chancd massive_goonery has lied about his role.

[Ripley]

*_*_*_* Vote Count - 6:10:01 AM *_*_*_*

“Thomas Edison invented the light bulb because he thought sleep was a waste of time. But he was a 10-hour sleeper -- six hours a night and two, two-hour naps during the day.”
~ Mark Rosekind "

Panzerjager -2- (PBuG, Fircoal)
Thestatusquo -2- (CoG888, Jingolaw)
Fircoal -1- (Thestatusquo)
Not voting -4- (Panzerjager, Elias_the_thief , bird1111, Ripley)

It takes a majority - or

5

, to lynch.

-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*

Thirdly, I never said I was staying away from the MG wagon I simply would have prefered a PBuG lynch. There was no one, myself included, wanted to spend the time to test MG's claim.

You did, say that you thought MG was town, and that's all you would say about it.

Vote: Panzerjager

er, i believe he actually said that he thought they were both nuetral. i dont think he said anything about him being town.

This is in danger of being buried by all the posts about tsq. I agree with Elias, I can't find where he said MG was town either. Fircoal, you put a fast third vote on here, can you please say where you got this from?

As for tsq - seems like he's demanding that people provide reasons why he would stage a post-restriction stunt as scum but not as town, while himself failing to offer any reason why he would do it as town but not as scum. Like the onus is all on us, and I don't see why that should be. He was the one who, at the very least, has wasted our time and needlessly cluttered the thread with strings of tiny posts, for no better reason than his own amusement. Once he has claimed that he would lie to us over a prolonged period, and with no possible benefit to us, why would we believe anything he says again? How do we know that he's not lying now? It's not hard to think of reasons why he could have been post restricted yesterday but not today.

[Ripley]

1) You know nothing about arguments. The onus IS on you, because you're the one making the positive assertion. That's how arguments work, the person making a positive claim has the burden of PROOVING it.

Since you are making the positive claim "TSQ is scum." YOU are the one that needs to provide reasons why that is true. If you can't, then the assertion falls.

THIS IS WIDELY ACCEPTED EVERYWHERE. Just look at wikipedia, ask anyone who does debate. Anything. It is logically impossible to prove a negative.

This sounds like a prerehearsed argument tsq had prepared in readiness for people claiming he was scum, and he didn't like to have it go to waste. I didn't claim anything of the sort. If anybody's making positive claims here, it's tsq, who is claiming "TSQ is innocent despite having lied to everybody all through Day 1". (If you're

not

claiming this, please clarify.) So, you are the one who needs to provide reasons why that is true. According to your own logic.

Your understanding is wrong. I made the PR completely up, I was not PRed yesterday at all.

No, your understanding is wrong. I know that's what you're

claiming

happened. My point was, why should we believe you? When a player has openly admitted to lying throughout Day 1, don't you think their subsequent credibility is damaged? Once you're established as a liar, it's just as likely that you were telling the truth yesterday and lying today (as opposed to the other way round). And for all we know, you'll pop up tomorrow and say that both yesterday's story and today's story were lies, and that the challenge you set yourself for Day 2 was to see if you could fool us two days running.