Mafia v. Wolves Redux: Finally Over!

[TBuG]

If I had three votes, I'd be voting Flay, Raffles, and DGB.

[Mastermind of Sin]

Why Raffles?

[TBuG]

In general, Raffles has had scummy play, especially during the XReyoX wagon Day 1. I've stated my case against him in detail previously, I believe.

[Mastermind of Sin]

Okay, let's try this:

Unvote; vote: Raffles

As individual players, regardless of the game's flow, Raffles has been exceptionally scummy through this entire game. He brilliantly distracted with the argument abou XReyoX's noobishness on Day 1, which became oh so much longer than it ever needed to be. When the discussion is not going his way, he attempts the change the subject. When things

still

don't go his way, he quotes his post in which he attempts to change the subject several times, bolding and enlarging various parts of it, using sledgehammer and wrecking ball analogies along the way. Then a metagame post, making assumptions about the number of scum, not at all considering the balance of the game in terms of pro-town power roles. He actively lurks when he isn't acting out, his vote on OTU floating along unnoticed without any ascertainable reasoning. Oh so often he appears to post because he

can

. Once he actually posts reasoning, there is the giant hypocrisy of 'I can't really extract any useful contribution to the town from him, despite the number of posts he may have made more than most.' His vote does come off next post, I'll give him that. He gets stuck on ESE for a little while. Then a very long period of no real contribution. He does make the stunning point against MoS that despite the long stall on OTU's wagon, OTu was town. Now some bickering with MoS. His more recent actions have content, but only because he's arguing against a particular player.

I don't find anything scummy about his interaction with XReyoX. If there's any connection between them, I think it's because they know each other IRL. His sledgehammer posts, while annoying, seemed genuine frustration and I somewhat agreed with them. I agree his voting on OTU wasn't the most protown. I'm not really seeing where you have a case for him being scum, though. Right now it looks like you're saying he's scum because he tried to change the subject and got frustrated when it didn't happen, made metagame posts, made a vote without reasoning, and did a bit of active lurking. That hardly seems like a strong enough case to want to vote him over it, PBuG.

[TBuG]

It does to me, but my vote isn't on him anyways.

[theopor_COD]

Hmm, honoustly Theo, I don't exactly remember. Could be that I hought someone else was scummier looking. Or because I forgot to put my vote on him. It's one of those two reasons.

Ok I'll stick that in the memory bank mind I'm not overly convinced.

Bird I'll echo what others have stated, if you don't want to be replaced please post something at least, as for the mysterious Flay dissapearance am I reading it right that it's due to Battle Mage's quotations?

Has he picked up his prod?

Yes.
And this has been a demonstration of the appropriate use of the quote tags.

If so that's pretty weird but at least I guess a reason for not posting. Although I tend to think Flay needs to answer the accusations levelled at him by DGB.

I'm printing pages 35 - 47 now so hopefully will get something more substantial down in the next few days, although BM's logic re - PbUG's vote on Flay makes no sense to me.

[Fuldu]

MoS, you didn't ask me, but my vote remains on Raffles because I still find his response to discussion of ESE to be highly suspect. Many of his posts at the beginning of today seem desperate to suggest that ESE isn't a cult (or, later, that it doesn't matter what ESE is) and a couple of them try in both direct and indirect ways to produce speculation on why there was only one kill last night, something that generally only serves to out power roles. All this subsequent noise with DGB and Flay has been interesting, but neither of them seems to me to have proven scummy enough to move me away from Raffles. DGB is perhaps worth pursuing if Raffles is scum and Flay is perhaps worth pursuing if Raffles isn't scum. But either way, I think Raffles is a better bet than either of them.

[XReyoX]

What will Raffle gain by convincing people that ESE isn't a cult? Even if someone can confirm that ESE is a cult, so what? There is hardly a link between al4x and raffles in Day1. I don't see why would raffles try to do that. If you care to look back, many people were discussing about the reason for only one night kill as well, not only him.

[mneme]

Reyox: presumably, he'd gain the ability to claim ESE/Mason later. Setting up a claim like that is fairly classic.

I don't think we have an explanation for why Flay hasn't responded. Certainly, Phoebus complaining about people top-posting isn't it, that's just complaining about top-posting. That said, I'm uncomfortable with lynching (pressuring, sure, but...) a player who's only suspicious thing so far is not posting. If Flay lives through tomorrow, I'd be very interested in questioning him then -- but a posting restriction seems all too likely at this point. (So is lurking, or faking a posting restriction. But Flay's silence has grown beyond lurking to actually drawing attention -- again, what does that serve?)

Reyox, I've gone at length into why wagon-breaking is scummy. It makes links, at this point (any, really) links and groups are more likely to be scum-links than town-links. Openly linking is less scummy, because it opens you up to risk (for scum, saying "IS is innocent" is a big risk since it ties your alignment to IS's and vice versa), but linking without claiming alignment is certainly scum-indicative. Mind, some of DGB's other play (ie, shifting, querying, staying in the public light today) is town-indicative. (but not the quasi-claim, as you point out. I asked for a negative claim (or its opposite), but I didn't ask for the extra info nor want it -- but it's very interesting.).

The MoS/Flay thing is interesting -- like I said, linking is (default) scummy.

Shamba's targeting of me isn't scummy -- it's not a correct conclusion, but Albert and Scarecrow were pretty useless. Mind, we've had worse than useless.

Shamba, if you think DGB is scum, and that scum is using her as a counter-wagon (er, from who? Me? Raffles? Flay?), why not vote her? Wouldn't that give useful info?

Shamba, my first post was a bandwagon jump onto someone scummy-looking (one I gave reasons for later, after I'd reread and could articulate my reasons). Wouldn't it have been more scummy if I'd waited a few days before posting, or posted something useless and tried to blend in? I'd rather bandwagon, truly. And yes, I think bandwagoning is (absent other info) pro-town, just as avoiding jumping onto bandwagons and being stingy with your vote is anti-town. OTOH, I like lots of bandwagons and analysis often being about the bandwagoning more than about what people say (not that that isn't also useful) or don't say -- votes are riskier for scum than speech; this, OTOH, is a very talky game.

I think it's obvious that there's a third scum group because we've got a dead apparent-scum who is neither Mafia nor Werewolves, and Daddy and Mommy and Baby makes three. That said, while I think killing,killing,recruiting (ie, two "mafias" and a cult) is the most likely scum configuration, I don't think we have enough info to draw any conclusions -- one night simply has too much variance. And, of course, there could be a SK in there too; yeah, that would mean a missed or skipped kill, but again, drawing too many conclusions from a single night is risky.

Shamba, if I am scum, any thoughts on who I could be scum with? (Assuming you're not assuming SK).
I can think of a few people who would be on my list were I analyzing things from across the table (mostly people I haven't interacted with much), but not that many.


Were I to have three votes (and had to use them), I'd probably be voting PBuG, Raffles, and DGB.

[DrippingGoofball]

Mind, some of DGB's other play (ie, shifting, querying, staying in the public light today) is town-indicative. (but not the quasi-claim, as you point out. I asked for a negative claim (or its opposite), but I didn't ask for the extra info nor want it -- but it's very interesting.).

Yeah... you want it hot, you want it cold, you want it non-cold, you want it non-hot... or its opposite, but quasi. Like, totally different, but exactly the same. You make no sense whatsoever.

As for your theory of Flay having a post restriction, I find that the mere suggestion makes you scummy. You are making excuses for him. Why would be have a sudden post restriction in the middle of the day? No one else has post restrictions. Does this game look like a post restriction type of game? It doesn't to me.

Mind, some of DGB's other play (ie, shifting, querying, staying in the public light today) is town-indicative. (but not the quasi-claim, as you point out. I asked for a negative claim (or its opposite), but I didn't ask for the extra info nor want it -- but it's very interesting.).

What you are saying, basically, is that the only reason you can find to vote for me, is that I did not blindly hop on the Raffles wagon with everyone else. I am just one single person and I cannot derail a wagon. I have but one vote. Ten are needed to lynch. Lynch him without me if you want. So - I find other players scummier than Raffles. I make my own judgment, I make my own mind.

Your post is a very wordy one, full of nonsense, and wishy-washiness. For reasons unknown, while declaring your top 3 players, you concentrate your questioning on a fourth, namely, Shanba. I find your strategy in this game most puzzling. I don't know what you hope to accomplish, but I have a tiny inkling that it's not something to help the town.

Looks to me like you are trying to derail the Flay wagon with bizarre made up excuses like a yet-unheard of post restiction. If YOU are derailing a wagon, does that make YOU scum? Please apply a consistent criterion, thank you.

[mneme]

My problem with a Flay lynch is that absent a post restriction or a fake of same, I don't see any good explanation for his silence -- he's been prodded, he's active across the site, and he can't fake idling or vacation at this point. I prefer to hear from people before they get lynched, but If he -is- faking a post restriction, he's -still- not going to talk today even if we put him at lynch-1 -- that would just make him -more- likely to get lynched. So while I'm very, very interested in lynching Flay tomorrow (or at least putting him under heavy questioning), I think it's a bad idea today. The fact that when there are post restrictions, they're usually on investigative roles makes this doubly important. Admitedly, with 13 posts today and 31 posts yesterday, it's kind of a long shot, but Phoebus does occasionally put wierd, one-character post restrictions into his game (and "you may not say you have a post restriction is kind of a good rule" if one uses them). For all I know, there may be a day-silencer (now -that- would be a nasty scum role).

I think your being personally sure that Raffles wasn't scum to the point of trying to find/build other, better bandwagons links you to him. Perhaps you can find a link in my thinking the Flay bandwagon spurious -- but in my mind, there's a huge difference here.

Re Shamba: Er. I was directly responding to his questions. Thus I named him. If someone else posted stuff about me that needed defense, I'd probably name them too. Shamba hasn't, however, done anything I've found all that scummy -- his attack on me was pretty well put together and pro-town. (So was yours.)

[Shanba]

Shamba's targeting of me isn't scummy -- it's not a correct conclusion, but Albert and Scarecrow were pretty useless. Mind, we've had worse than useless.

Shamba, if you think DGB is scum, and that scum is using her as a counter-wagon (er, from who? Me? Raffles? Flay?), why not vote her? Wouldn't that give useful info?

Good point. Though, from my perspective, it works either way. Hmm.

Shamba, my first post was a bandwagon jump onto someone scummy-looking (one I gave reasons for later, after I'd reread and could articulate my reasons). Wouldn't it have been more scummy if I'd waited a few days before posting, or posted something useless and tried to blend in? I'd rather bandwagon, truly. And yes, I think bandwagoning is (absent other info) pro-town, just as avoiding jumping onto bandwagons and being stingy with your vote is anti-town. OTOH, I like lots of bandwagons and analysis often being about the bandwagoning more than about what people say (not that that isn't also useful) or don't say -- votes are riskier for scum than speech; this, OTOH, is a very talky game.

That's fair enough, I guess. It's a playstyle thing.[/quote]
I think it's obvious that there's a third scum group because we've got a dead apparent-scum who is neither Mafia nor Werewolves, and Daddy and Mommy and Baby makes three. That said, while I think killing,killing,recruiting (ie, two "mafias" and a cult) is the most likely scum configuration, I don't think we have enough info to draw any conclusions -- one night simply has too much variance. And, of course, there could be a SK in there too; yeah, that would mean a missed or skipped kill, but again, drawing too many conclusions from a single night is risky.
[/quote] See, what bugs me is 2 scum groups and a cult would lead to a dangerously unpredictable game thats almist impossible to balance. Not to mention we'd be dealing with an enormous emount of scum. Finally, it would mean that cult had to recruit alex that night: there haven't been any other nights. The name screams Mafia to me. But the kill method doesnt fit wolves. Geh.

Shamba, if I am scum, any thoughts on who I could be scum with? (Assuming you're not assuming SK).
I can think of a few people who would be on my list were I analyzing things from across the table (mostly people I haven't interacted with much), but not that many.

Hmm... I haven't really thought about that. I could see you as scum with Flay, but I'm not sure who else at this juncture. I'll have to look back and see later.

[Shanba]

Re Shamba: Er. I was directly responding to his questions. Thus I named him. If someone else posted stuff about me that needed defense, I'd probably name them too. Shamba hasn't, however, done anything I've found all that scummy -- his attack on me was pretty well put together and pro-town. (So was yours.)

This wasnt the impression I was getting from your earlier posts, but I can't see anything that shows this so I'll let it be.

[XReyoX]

@DGB: What was the purpose of your claim?

[DrippingGoofball]

[sarcasm]To answer Scummememe's bizarrely worded request-non-request to claim non-claim but not quite quasi? He wanted an answer, but he didn't, but he did, so he did ask, but he wanted an non-answer, which I tried to provide, but failed to provide, while succeeding wildly.[/sarcasm]

[Mastermind of Sin]

DGB, what's your explanation for Flay's continued silence?

[Mastermind of Sin]

MoS, you didn't ask me, but my vote remains on Raffles because I still find his response to discussion of ESE to be highly suspect. Many of his posts at the beginning of today seem desperate to suggest that ESE isn't a cult (or, later, that it doesn't matter what ESE is) and a couple of them try in both direct and indirect ways to produce speculation on why there was only one kill last night, something that generally only serves to out power roles. All this subsequent noise with DGB and Flay has been interesting, but neither of them seems to me to have proven scummy enough to move me away from Raffles. DGB is perhaps worth pursuing if Raffles is scum and Flay is perhaps worth pursuing if Raffles isn't scum. But either way, I think Raffles is a better bet than either of them.

I was hoping to get an answer like this from PBuG, because these ARE reasons to vote for Raffles. However, the only reasons he was able to give me were pretty much crap.

You make a convincing argument, Fuldu, except that I think DGB is likely to be scum regardless of Raffles' alignment. Her actions can be both indicative of scumbuddy-ness, opposing scum, or scum playing off a townie, depending on the way you look at it. The last two are exactly the same from her end, because she wouldn't know if he was scum or not. It's true that lynching Raffles is likely to give us the most information at this point, but I'm hesitant to give up on lynching scum just to get more information. There is some information to be gained froma DGB lynch, but not nearly as much as a Raffles lynch. However, I believe her more likely to be scum than Raffles, so my vote is staying here for the time being. Were we to near deadline or the lynch of another player that I am less suspicious of, I would be willing to vote Raffles as a second-choice, but I would much prefer DGB right now.

[XReyoX]

[sarcasm]To answer Scummememe's bizarrely worded request-non-request to claim non-claim but not quite quasi? He wanted an answer, but he didn't, but he did, so he did ask, but he wanted an non-answer, which I tried to provide, but failed to provide, while succeeding wildly.[/sarcasm]

Nice one

[Raffles]

Mneme, you presume some of the most odd things. Me getting ability to claim an ESE later? Flay's sudden post restriction (rather post-bannage) midday? Why are you cooking up these reasons and turning a complete blind eye to more obvious ones?

[DrippingGoofball]

MoS, of all the players here, I would venture to say that you best know my playstyle. Therefore, your comment above is, too me, uber-scummy. I don't think the newbies players are going to see through it, unfortunately. You know what you're doing. You know that I am ALWAYS an easy lynch for the scum to orchestrate, and a desirable one, for two reasons; the first being that I am unpredictable and will shake every and any tree for rotten apples, and impossible to manipulate. Why don't you guys wait, and nightkill me? I am not going to be here tomorrow morning. I've attacked too many people, and some of these people ARE scum. And if none are... I will attack way more people tomorrow when the list is shorter. I will not be suffered to live.

Your question asking for me to speculate on Flay's disappearance is you making an excuse for Flay. That two players covering Flay. You (and you've been trying to save Flay's buttski a few times previously) and mememe. There is no excuse - he is absent on purpose.

Right now, my favorite scum candidates are Flay, MoS, and memne. You guys are making it too easy, like shooting fish in a barrel.

[DrippingGoofball]

MoS's attempt to tie his wagon to Fuldu is noted.

[mneme]

mneme. There is no excuse - he is absent on purpose.

*yawn*. Yes, that's one of the likely possibilities. But even in that case, I want to hear from him. Since if he -is- absent on purpose, he's not going to come back today, I therefore want to hear from him -tomorrow-.

Unless, of course, you know of games where Flay has pulled the "go away, don't come back for a while day" trick before -- that level of metagame being entirely relevant here.

The fact that I have to repeat this is one of the reasons my vote is where it (still) is.

[DrippingGoofball]

How do you KNOW he won't come back today?

And if he WON'T come back today, if he CHOOSES not to come back today, why do we need to hear his sorry excuse tomorrow? Do you fellows need to discuss the strategy tonight???

[mneme]

How do you KNOW he won't come back today?

I don't. But if he's scum, it seems likely to be his tactic. And if he's town, it seems likely at this point that he's not able to do so.

And if he WON'T come back today, if he CHOOSES not to come back today, why do we need to hear his sorry excuse tomorrow?

Because he might have something useful to say. Like, you know, cop results? So when we lynch him and find he's town, we've got something useful out of it. (and if he's scum, the extra day doesn't do us much harm).

Given a better option, getting to talk to someone before you lynch them is always better for the town than the alternative.

[mneme]

Given a better option,

(ie, time).