433: Dry, bland, generic mafia: Game Over

[Dasquian]

@InHim: Please put in order of most-least likely to be scum and why:

Me
Pete
OTM
Kilmenator

Eh, maybe if I feel it's justified.

Oh, come

on

. It's nearly always helpful to share suspicions and I can't see why, as a townie, you wouldn't be able and willing to do this. You don't even have to be voting the person you think most likely to be scum, since there are other considerations in placing your vote (how likely you are to get support, how close they are to a lynch, whether there is a particular angle of inquiry that needs pressing, etc).

If this is the case against me, you basically just called CES scum, because I am distancing from him... and you think I am scum... that doesnt make much sense at all...

This is bad logic, and worse, bad logic attributing intent to pete d.

There are reasons for scum distancing themselves from townie lynches too - the most obvious being to keep the pressure on but not be held culpable when the dust settles. And even if he

was

saying you were both scum, you are wrong to say it makes no sense - by keeping yourself distanced, you keep yourself flexible to backpeddle out of the bandwagon without being too obvious about it, if circumstances change.

[NanookTheWolf]

The only case I see against Kilm is that he's posted a total of 5 times since May 14th, all consisting of 2 sentences or less, and his last two posts both stated that he'd read the thread and get back to us .. One on May 30th, the other today.

I'm sure there are other reasons prior in the game, but from what I see of a quick glance of just his posts, that's what I got.

So how do we get any information from a crappy reason to lynch, with no useful interactions?

You wait for Kilm to post, which she has, and determine a not so crappy reason I suppose .. Even if such a player isn't lynched early on for lurking, it will come up again eventually if the activity continues, then more then likely they have to get voted or replaced.

[Off the Mark]

I thought kilm's post was good

unvote:

vote: inhimshallibe

[gorckat]

@kilm: I've gone over my vote record in my recent posts.

How do you mean the switch on CES' fate was not a switch? You first said he'd get NK'd, then that he wouldn't. What do you know about tonight's actions we don't?

Also:

He is either the doc, or scum, or townie, but being that he already claimed doc,

I find it extremely scummy

that the claim was retracted

What I meant was that

I find it semi-scummy

that CES retracted Dodgy's claim.

Quite different degrees of scumminess there.

[kilmenator]

@kilm: I've gone over my vote record in my recent posts.

How do you mean the switch on CES' fate was not a switch? You first said he'd get NK'd, then that he wouldn't. What do you know about tonight's actions we don't?

Also:

He is either the doc, or scum, or townie, but being that he already claimed doc,

I find it extremely scummy

that the claim was retracted

What I meant was that

I find it semi-scummy

that CES retracted Dodgy's claim.

Quite different degrees of scumminess there.

They are different degrees of scumminess, and I guess I had not really thought through the second post before I posted it, I find it scummy that he retracted to which degree, I guess I am not entirely sure, the retraction was scummy, but that isnt the only reason that I find him scummy, Dodgy's actions were scummy too.

Also, I find Gorkat very opportunistic, as if he finds any little thing and runs with it. This is day one, and I honestly have not had enough time or effort to put into this game, so me saying to which degree it was scummy isnt that huge of a deal, especially when you know that I have not put much time of effort into this game.

If CES is doc, he could or could not get NK'ed. Scum will play a mean game of WIFOM with us, and that is what the whole post was about... it was to say that if he was the doc he would probably be NK'ed, but maybe not, scum could set up their next lynch using WIFOM. I still think CES should claim... but that is besides the point I guess.

I am happy with my vote on Pete D and to respond to pete's question about why I wasnt voting CES if I found him scummy it's because I find pete more scummy and I only have one vote/

[Thestatusquo]

Off the mark: 1 (ces)

Kilmentator: 4 (Pete d, inhim, superstring gorckat)
inhim: 4 (Daquian IH fonz off the mark)

CES: 1 (Pie)
Pete d: 1 (Kilm)

[gorckat]

...I guess I am not entirely sure, the retraction was scummy, but that isnt the only reason that I find him scummy, Dodgy's actions were scummy too.

At first, you found Dodgy's claim believable:

At this point though, I think Dodgy was the doc, and we will find out tonight, because I am sure that scum will make him their target tonight if he is truly the doc, at this point we need to focus our attention elsewhere.

Fonz was the first to say 'no reason to disbelieve'. Once other people started to point it out and the claim was retracted by CES, you started to question it.

I find it likely that it could all be fluff being that Dodgy was an experienced player and I can not imagine him making such a silly move as doc.

You went from believing the claim and thinking we should look elsewhere to it being unimaginable...

[gorckat]

A(dd)BWOP:

So where in those first most relevant reactions did you find

Dodgy

to be suspect?

[Pie_is_good]

Could someone please explain to me why the Dodgy Wagon got derailed? I don't understand.

[gorckat]

Probably because his meltdown made it harder to decipher him. I've never seen anything like it (as Johnny Depp said "Pi-rate" say "Noo-oob" :p).

If we had more from CES, we could simply judge the role, not the player, if that makes any sense.

On the one hand, I get laying low like he has, but I also get what someone else had said about how they'd expect him to be pushing hard trying to help the town.

[Off the Mark]

The Dodgy/CES wagon would make more sense to me after he lived through night 1. THEN it makes sense to force a claim out of CES.

[The Fonz]

Could someone please explain to me why the Dodgy Wagon got derailed? I don't understand.

There were only ever a couple of votes on him. Then he claimed doc.

[kilmenator]

Numbered for efficiencey

...I guess I am not entirely sure, the retraction was scummy, but that isnt the only reason that I find him scummy, Dodgy's actions were scummy too.

1.

At first, you found Dodgy's claim believable:

At this point though, I think Dodgy was the doc, and we will find out tonight, because I am sure that scum will make him their target tonight if he is truly the doc, at this point we need to focus our attention elsewhere.

Fonz was the first to say 'no reason to disbelieve'.

2.

Once other people started to point it out and the claim was retracted by CES, you started to question it.

I find it likely that it could all be fluff being that Dodgy was an experienced player and I can not imagine him making such a silly move as doc.

3.

You went from believing the claim and thinking we should look elsewhere to it being unimaginable...

1. At first I found his claim believable because there was no reason not to believe him, but then CES retracted the claim, which made the claim questionable in my mind, therefore making it unbelievable...
2. Ummm yeah, doesnt it make it more questionable when a person lies?
3. Yeah, with the combination of realizing that Dodgy was not an inexperienced player and the fact that CES retracted the claim made it unimaginable that he would have claimed doc as early as he did, especially with like only 2 votes on him. Plus, I think I was to much in shock from the claim to disbelieve what he said...

[kilmenator]

A(dd)BWOP- plus, at this point, I am not saying that we should lynch CES, I am saying that he needs to make a real claim and we should move on, because IMO if CES is the doc, he is most likely to be a target tonight, then we will have whether or not he is doc tomorrow, so he needs to make a real claim, and depending on what he claims, we can work from there, I am not advocating a CES lynch, but I would like it if he would claim, because it will make the game less confusing for the town.

[Off the Mark]

The goal is not to make the game less confusing, the goal is to win. What is more straightforward is not always what is right.

[NanookTheWolf]

The Dodgy/CES wagon would make more sense to me after he lived through night 1. THEN it makes sense to force a claim out of CES.

Problem with this logic is that CES's predecessor already DID claim ... Whey are we waiting for CES to warrant it, when we already know that isn't going to happen. The dude has made that pretty apparant, and like I've said earlier, if the town is in agreement about waiting until tomorrow to push a lynch on him, well, then so be-it.

[Dasquian]

That's missing the point. We're all aware (I hope) of what Dodgy said and what CES hasn't. The point is that CES could claim afresh, and either contradict or confirm Dodgy's claim, or not, and that's something I think is much better left til tomorrow, WIFOM risks included.

I'd also like to say that although I strongly disagree with Kilmenator on this one, and think it somewhat suspicious of her to continue to try to get CES to claim, I haven't been getting continued scummy vibes from her over the last two pages and no longer particularly want to pressure her over anyone else.

[gorckat]

Thanks, Das, for making me a follower again :/

I wanted to dig as much as I could into all the little discrepancies I could to try and force more, but I think she covered her bases well.

I re-read OTM this morning and haven't gotten quite the same vibe as with thorgot, so I'll decide exactly who to vote later today.

unvote

[IH]

The goal is not to make the game less confusing, the goal is to win. What is more straightforward is not always what is right.

Wrong. The goal to win is to make things simpler, which is most commonly making it more straightforward.

Do I need to go into my "Town should not withhold information" rant?

[Off the Mark]

So I guess all power roles should just claim then? Give me a break.

[IH]

Clearly you haven't heard my town should not with hold information rant.

The game of mafia is an uninformed majority versus an informed minority. The scum win when the become the majority (Kill off enough town), the town wins when they become informed (Lynch the scum and figure out who is what).

Therefore you can deduce the goal of the game is for your group to become the informed majority correct?

Ok, so the only reason you should with hold information (such as suspicions, opinions, thoughts etc) is if it is related to your role. Anything else is just anti town play. Not necessarily scummy, but it is detrimental to the town.

So if the town's ability to win is based on becoming informed, then by correlation simplifying things should, in theory, make becoming informed easier.

[kilmenator]

Being informed is important, but I do not think it is wise to divulge so much information especially right now, even if the cop (if there is one) has one investigation, is it worth risking his life to get that information to the town? Wouldnt it benefit the town more to have the cop around to get a few more shots at who the scums are? Maybe I am misunderstanding this argument or something... but withholding information to save you skin and gain more information probably is wise... IMO...

[inHimshallibe]

Alright, so I feel the list is justified now. This is because my thoughts have changed with the new input from kilmenator.

Before, I was looking something like:
pete d
The Fonz
kilmenator
Off the Mark

NOW, I think my list is:
kilmenator, Off the Mark


pete d
The Fonz

As soon as

kilm makes a post of any substance, Off the Mark accepts it at face value and unvotes. He broke down several posts before, and just lets the one by kilm, who he had been suspecting, just pass? That's a quick change of play, and I find those two all the scummier for it. So, moving down the list, pete d still hasn't done anything to improve his standing with me, it's just that kilm and OtM have gotten worse. The Fonz's consistency is why I've got you listed on the bottom, even if I think you're being consistent scum.

[Dasquian]

Wrong. The goal to win is to make things simpler, which is most commonly making it more straightforward.

By your own implication ("commonly"), it sometimes is not. IMO, this is one of those times where clearing up confusion is not in the town's interests.

Your logic leads us to conclude that we should always mass-claim Day 1, because then the town would be more informed! Is this what you believe to be good town play?

You're saying that the mafia hold all the cards and that townies claiming information cannot benefit them and will benefit us. Neither of these are safe assumptions, and in this particular case I would strongly challenge both.

FOS: IH

The Fonz's consistency is why I've got you listed on the bottom, even if I think you're being consistent scum.

Huh? So you think The Fonz is consistent scum and you have him ranked as your fourth most likely suspect? How does

that

make sense?

I really did not like inHim's last post. He's once again trying to pair two people as being scum, and although I appreciate the value in looking for scum pairs, this time he's picked one person I get strong town vibes off of and another who is seeming less scummy with every post.

[The Fonz]

Wrong. The goal to win is to make things simpler, which is most commonly making it more straightforward.

By your own implication ("commonly"), it sometimes is not. IMO, this is one of those times where clearing up confusion is not in the town's interests.

Your logic leads us to conclude that we should always mass-claim Day 1, because then the town would be more informed! Is this what you believe to be good town play?

That's not what his logic suggests at all. He already said you should withhold information about your role. The logical conclusion, one I agree with, is: it is in the town's interests, in so far as it is possible, that the town have as much information as the scum have.

You're saying that the mafia hold all the cards and that townies claiming information cannot benefit them and will benefit us. Neither of these are safe assumptions, and in this particular case I would strongly challenge both.

FOS: IH

With regard to the CES claim, these assumptions are actually true. They know. We don't. Nonetheless, I believe there are four of us in the claim now camp, which obviously isn't enough.


[