433: Dry, bland, generic mafia: Game Over

[Sweenytodd]

Vote: Superstring

Those numbers are suspicious = )

[Sweenytodd]

I have to agree with Dodgy on this one, while promoting discussion at this point is what we need to do, liberal use of the

FOS

would be my preference to willy-nilly bandwagonning, especially to put someone halfway to lynch before we have had any kind of discussion at all seems reckless. Though I see him in no danger I am also going to remove my random vote

Unvote: Superstring91

until we have more discussion.

[Sweenytodd]

Well guys, I just did a brief re-read (pretty brief in an early game like this...) and the only thing that stuck out as worth mentioning was that 4th vote by Dasquian, a little too eager and a little to early to be throwing votes around with nothing to go on. That and Thorgot and Gorckat have only made one post each, I know its too early to be calling people for lurking but I'd like to hear from them = ). Thats that.... Discussion may commence.

[Sweenytodd]

Strongly disagree. If there is no danger, then where is the harm in 'willy-nilly bandwagonning?' People don't tend to overreact to FOS in the same way, so they're less useful. Besides, what use would a basically random FOS be?

Here is what I meant... It is day 1 page 2... I understand we don't have much to go on at the moment but I have seen many times when a careless early bandwagon got out of control and the scum were able to mislynch and cover it up the next day... I have seen this from experienced players and inexperienced players so all I was saying is that we need to moderate the bandwagons and not let them get too big unintentionally. There is also a distinction between "random" FOS's and what I said "liberal" FOS's. A random FOS is picking a name out of the hat to FOS, whil Liberal use of FOS would entail placing lots of FOS's to get names in the mix while not actually putting someone in danger of being lynched accidentally by voting them. That said I would like to

FOS: The Fonz

for mis-representing my position.

[Sweenytodd]

That's crap. I haven't misrepresented you at all. My vote on Southpaw was essentially random, in that it had nothing at all to do with his behaviour (not random, in the sense that he had to have two votes on him in order for me to place it- but I'd have placed it on anyone with two votes at that point). Therefore, the alternative you suggested to my random vote was a random FOS. Which wouldn't have helped the town at all, see above for why.

Though I wouldn't say it is "crap", I said nothing about "random" (which, i'm sure you mean't arbitrary or something else since we can agree it had nothing to do with randomness) voting or FOS'ing. A controlled bandwagon is not a problem, but I wanted my opinion out there to ensure that it would not get out of control. I actually don't have a problem with your vote, my issue is you taking my post which urged caution more at Dasqian than yourself and saying I was advocating "random" FOS's when I did nothing of the sort. I have said that a FOS used liberally can spark discussion in a much easier to control manner than a vote. You see this discussion you and I are having? It arose from my FOS, and though I didn't mind your vote, you do seem rather defensive about it.

[Sweenytodd]

And secondly, What would you know about Classic scumtells?
Correct me if I'm wrong but you have only been playing for a couple of weeks and being privy to all members lists and their IP addresses, I can see that you havn't been a player before that date under a different name, so I ask again, are you really experienced enough to make such a statement?

On this point, I can only speak for my own experience which is very limited. I am new to this site and to this game in general, so if you'd like to direct comments on noobishness feel free to direct them to me. From the games that I have read on this site, the "classic scumtells" seem far from reliable. A person is scummy who acts too much like town or too little, a person who posts too much or not enough is considered scummy. I'm sure that there are real scumtells certain players exude but those are probably individual matters of meta-gaming. The most effective way of routing the scum seems to be creating discussion (which granted, this bandwagon has done) and examine the logic and the arguments put forward by individuals. That being said, the largest concern I have at the moment is with the discussion being primarily among 4-6 players with the majority of the members flying under the radar. I would recommend that instead of a post such as this,

I think the bandwagon was an excellent idea, in order to create some discussion about players. Which it did, including about myself.

Sorry I haven't been more active. I had lots of work this week, but I should be able to post more this week.

do not help us find scum. I realize that everyone had times when they cannot participate as much, this I will not hold against you. The issue that I have is posting 2 sentences agreeing with an idea rather than providing content does nothing but keeping your name outside of the "lurker" discussion. Everyone needs to participate, and I realize it has been a couple days since my last contribution which is why I am attempting to do my part to contribute now that I have some time. Please, to facilitate discussion, feel free to pose any questions to me which you feel need answering. Please, if you haven't posted in a couple days take the time to provide us some content to continue evaluating that we can weed out the scum presence in this town.

[Sweenytodd]

Ok guys... I apologize about my recent lack of posting, i have had connectivity issues which I recently resolved. In response to

I'd still like to hear a justification of the 'lynch -4 is scummy' argument from Sweenytodd- just because it now appears that Dodgy genuinely held that opinion, doesn't make it correct, so I'd like to hear based on what reasoning ST supported him.

It was the L -3 vote by Dasquien that caught my eye, not the L-4 which preceded it. As an admited noob I was hoping to procede cautiously, it may not be the best course to spark discussion, but well I guess Dodgy took care of that. I mean, whoa.. that is a meltdown the likes of which I haven't seen.

In re-reading,

My current feeling is that, actually, with Eletriar getting a little edgy when Southpaw went to two votes, and Dodgy doing similar when he went to four, there might be something in what was essentially a completely random bandwagon. Too early to say with any level of confidence, but worth noting.

stuck out at me. It seems that post #40 is a bit premature to be linking pairs of people for not hopping onto a bandwagon.

Also to the Fonz,

I think, given that Dodgy's replacement will be basically confirmed town

I didn't see the connection, was there some proof given to Dodgy's claim or is this a WIFOM mafia wouldn't do what he did kind of thing? I just re-read this section so please point me to where you got that because i missed it.

[Sweenytodd]

Okay in response to The Fonz who said...

You said you thought it was reckless, yet that you thought southpaw was in no danger. If it's not dangerous, how is it reckless? Oh look, Dasquian just recklessly put someone who might be town in no danger whatsoever!

I thought it was clear that I was advocating caution because i felt the pace at which 4 votes had piled up un-nerved me. I urged caution and nothing came of it so yes, in actuality i suppose Southpaw was in no danger of a lynch but I could easily have seen a 5th vote and maybe a 6th coming which would have been even more reckless and yes I suppose you could argue that scum wouldn't use that obvious head on tactic, I will even concede it would be strange, but I have seen opportunistic scum hammer early and try to talk their way out of it in the past, so rather than have that as a possibility i thought a Lynch -3 to be too fast. That being said, it isn't of any more consequence...

The issue at hand appears to be Dodgy's meltdown. So in the same post that Dodgy claims Doc, he also claims

I set this f***ing site up, co-wrote the "Wikki" that people keep refering to and thought that I would be in a game with players that had the intelligence to read between the lines.

I don't know, evil genius/site creator... So a bogus doc claim in the same post is out of the question? I think CES did exactly what he was supposed to do, told us that the claim ws worthless and if we want to LAL, we'd have to find Dodgy and string him up.

So Fonz... There are a couple of possibilities with CES:

1. Dodgy's claim was accurate and CES is lying, and we lynch our Doc.

2. Dodgy's claim was BS and CES is telling the truth and CES is Town and we mislynch D1.

3. Dodgy's claim was BS and CES is telling the truth and CES is Mafia and we lynch scum D1.

We do not want to discuss this further, role-fishing is baaad.... CES has retracted a bogus claim and if he acts scummy we can discuss that. I do not like trying to out a Doc D1 Fonz... that is bad play... In fact I am going to

Vote: The Fonz

for blatant Rolefishing and trying to push a lynch of CES for bogus reasoning. Lets not try and help the mafia with their NKs okay?

[Sweenytodd]

I'm sorry for the double post but I wanted to respond to this...

But he's marked himself out as a likely powerrole anyway. So if the scum don't kill him overnight, it's WIFOM central. I don't advocate lynching him today unless he claims townie. But I do think some kind of claim is absolutely in the interests of the town.

So you don't want to lynch him unless he claims vanilla... Yet you want him to claim... So if he IS the doc u want him to out himself? Or if he isn't the doc you want to lynch him? This is not a good move.

[Sweenytodd]

MOD EDIT.

Southpaw: 1 (thorgot)
gorckat: 1 ( superstring)
The fonz:2 (CES, sweenytod.)
thorgot: 1 (dasq)

Oh I get it now....

FFS, if he's not mafia, the scum already know he's likely powerrole! If he's not a powerrole, he's lying anyway and still needs lynching.

If he is a power role as Dodgy claimed then we ought to lynch him or out him? And if he is not a power role and simply trying to salvage the poor game he replaced into we ought to lynch him to save the Mafia a NK they could use for someone... God this discussion is frustrating... The point is not to out all of the targets for the mafia it is to FIND the mafia. There is no claim he could make to appease you nor should he... If he acts scummy, THEN we can lynch him but so far you are holding him accountable for a predacessor's insane actions as if this drama has ANYTHING to do with the game. Dodgy messed up... He shouldn't have claimed... That said CES definitely shouldn't claim.

If he is the doc, he's ALREADY outed himself!

If Dodgy's claim is in any way believeable... Which it isn't... And there is no good that can come from lynching CES in that position... You popose that CES is the Doc, who retracted a claim, and thus should be lynched if he claims vanilla... So best case scenario... We lose our Doc N1, bad play Dodgy. Otherwise, CES claims vanilla and we lynch him he turns up Doc.... Bad Play Fonz.... If CES claims vanilla and turns up mafia that would be one thing but I don't see it yet.

[Sweenytodd]

Well, I think that in moving away from this claim discussion here is what we should all do moving forward... I think we should put together a list of who we think are most likely to be town and most likely to be scum. This will help see what issues people have be they specific or more general "I don't get a good feeling from player X"


I am suspicious or (in no particular order)

1. Fonz (less so than when I voted him.. I think he sticks out because he posts the most and goes out on a limb for his points of view which while I disagree with him at times I think is wonderful.)

2. Killmenator (I was re-reading everyone's posts in isolation and I haven't liked her last couple posts, can't quite finger what it is specifically.)

I am getting "Townie" vibes from

1. Dasquian (I didn't like his early bandwagon but I think thats mostly my inexperience talking and I have REALLY liked his last couple pages)

2. Pete d (I definitely get good vibes from your logic)

PEOPLE WHO NEED TO POST MORE:

1. Gorckat
2. Thorgot
3. CES... you checked in and then disappeared...
4. Me... as a self-reminder = )