Mini 1636: Mafialand Mayhem! - [Game Over]

[Aneninen]

Anen, I think what you missed was that Lapsa gave reasoning for his page 1 vote for you in 37 - he said he voted you based on fluff, but the example he gave came after his vote on you.

Oh damm it slipped my mind but yes, I had noticed it.

...I've checked Lapsa's meta. Only a couple of games, though. His townplay consists of a similar kind of posting style... but, it's not the same. He's changing his vote here much more frequently than in the games I've examined. I'm not sure what to think but I'll watch him closely.

As for Arenaut's catchup. It might have come from a town or from a scum mindset too. However, it's unlikely that he and Wake are scums together but absolutely not unlikely that he and Lapsa are scums together. (Yes, I know that partner analysis is bullshyt on Day1 but that's the first thing came into my mind having read that catchup.)

I'm not convinced Katie is scum at this point, but the wagon is pro-town to me. Therefore my vote stays at this point.

I didn't like this. Calling players pro-town on Page8? I know that I'm a slow starter but having pro-town reads that early is pigeon poop.

also

mod, have you prodded ollie?

Why did he ask that, I wonder. Why Ollie and why not the other two players?

[curiouskarmadog]

Ollie has not posted in the game at all (the others have), but is posting all over the site.

that being said, at this point if Ollie was scum lurking and waiting to see where wagons were going before committing to anything, I think he would have posted here by now especially after me calling him out for lurking.

[MonkeyMan576]

I'm not convinced Katie is scum at this point, but the wagon is pro-town to me. Therefore my vote stays at this point.

I didn't like this. Calling players pro-town on Page8? I know that I'm a slow starter but having pro-town reads that early is pigeon poop.

I didn't say the players were pro town, I said the wagon brought pro-town information because the discussion was good. Day 1 discussion is always good over a slow game where people don't post.

[Aeronaut]

You guys are taking my statement out of context. But I acknowledge some players play emotional and defensive as town. Katie's wagon has still brought a lot more day 1 information than is typical so I like my vote where it is for now.

Your entire case on Katie is that she's being overly emotional and defensive. So, if that isn't indicative alignment, why are you still voting her?

That's not my entire case at all. There's also the fact that Katie's wagon has generated discussion and brought about useful information the town can use later in the game.

I'm not convinced Katie is scum at this point, but the wagon is pro-town to me. Therefore my vote stays at this point.[/quote]

The Wagon is only you and Luca.

Why are you saying the wagon is pro-town instead of saying "I like Luca's reasoning"? Are you trying not to take hard stances?

at a certain point you're not changing anybody's opinion, just clouding up the thread.

@Aeronaut where is that point?

The point where people stop reading what you're saying, and you're just spewing out swearwords.

Page 4-5

That said, I don't think all fluffiness should be outlawed. Some fluff is alright, so long as it stays within reason.

what is an acceptable fluff to content ratio

on

Day 1

in the first 5 pages ?

which is more damning (in your opinion) in those first 5 pages, posting fluff or confirming but not posting in the game (but posting elsewhere on site)?

This seems like
"How much bullshit can I post without anyone suspecting me?"

so I am trying to figure out if you REALLY think that is what I am doing in this quote, were just skimming as you read, trying to be funny, or if you scum trying to paint a picture by taking a quote out of context? I know in catch up posts, people tend to not really read thoroughly, but I am curious.

please address this...for I will have follow up questions.

No, I am serious about this. The quote is not out of context at all, that's the whole quote. You could be scum asking how much fluff is acceptable, and then tread that line of having to give hard facts vs kitty pictures.

no... the button

4 8 15 16 23 42

Ollie has not posted in the game at all (the others have), but is posting all over the site.

that being said, at this point if Ollie was scum lurking and waiting to see where wagons were going before committing to anything, I think he would have posted here by now especially after me calling him out for lurking.

So you think that lurkers should be lynched?

[MonkeyMan576]

That's not my entire case at all. There's also the fact that Katie's wagon has generated discussion and brought about useful information the town can use later in the game.

I'm not convinced Katie is scum at this point, but the wagon is pro-town to me. Therefore my vote stays at this point.

The Wagon is only you and Luca.

Why are you saying the wagon is pro-town instead of saying "I like Luca's reasoning"? Are you trying not to take hard stances? [/Quote]

It's not that I'm avoiding taking hard stances, it's that I don't like my words being taken out of context.

However, I do think people tend to over generalize and jump to conclusions to quickly in day 1 in a rush to lynch, which leads to many day 1 mislynches.

[Riddleton]

Prodding Ollie, BP and Drake Crusader. They have 24 hours to post or else they will be replaced.

[KatieB]

I'm mobile, so details later.

Liked Aeronaut's entrance. Think the monkey wagon is functionally a policy lynch. Will have words for wake.
Would bet my car on one or two of the prods getting replaced.

[Drake Crusader]

Hello All! Got jammed up with holiday work schedule. This thread has exploded with quite a few fighters flying in hot. Several games under my belt I will say I suck. OMGIS is my title to be.
@Lapsa - I currently am unaware what my strength is at mafia. Ill have to play another game with you later on and let you know.
To Start.

VOTE: KatieB
The defensiveness is a little too tight. I seen emotional players and I at times get quite mad at these games. However, something doesn't sit well. This is not taking in the fact you lied to us and popped in with your main for a post.

Second Runner Up Scum Award - Luca Blight
Think this guy has ALOT of bullshit under his hood and see this cat fight between Luca and Katie as a scum team. Post 98 is a scummy post to me at this moment. The tone and the last sentence is where I feel the partnership shows. The fact that he calls out that kaite trying to discredit and dismiss everything I say seem to me like a potential tip off to show that the current tatic is working and to continue on with it.

I feel null on about everyone else atm. null scum would land with Wake88 and llll.
Wake on the early brag post about his scum game. Seems to be just too helpful. May be due to the fact he is that good?
llll got in this group just because I cant list him as town and I don't want him atm in this null only group.

Null - Everyone else

Town - At this time I don't have any confirmed town players other than myself. I will throw some up here as I find them.

[Wake1]

Theatrics aside, let's review.

Not sure what to think of

Lapsa

's behavior. Never played with this chap before, so from my perspective his somewhat dopey behavior isn't really indicative of alignment. Although I would say being difficult to read isn't pro-Town at all. Though I'm not at the point of committing my vote just yet, I do agree a bit with Luca's 64 on Lapsa being ironic regarding fluff. ...he cited his reason for voting Anen in 8 was because of fluff according to his 37. Lapsa's voting him for fluff, yet Lapsa continues to post fluff. That is hypocritical.

Why the hypocrisy? I'm asking you to clear this up for us once and for all Lapsa.

In 65,

curiouskarmadog

asked me which was more damning: posting fluff in the first five pages or not posting in the game but posting elsewhere. While it is a fascinating question to weigh, why exactly is he asking me it? What is the underlying intent of it all? It does, to me, feel as if he is trying to redirect my attention. Do you want me to turn my head and look at the player who isn't really posting here but elsewhere? Why?

Are you trying to help a bro out or are you wanting to shift my attention elsewhere?

CKD, I'd appreciate it if you made an effort to illuminate this maneuver of yours, please.

...back to

Lapsa

. You say in 69 that fluff wasn't your reason for voting Aneninen. Yet in 37 you did indeed vote on Anen because of fluff, and you linked to one of his posts as well. If you are trying to fool us, I can assure you it's not working. If people are misunderstanding your posts then that is your fault for not being transparent and understandable. And your counter-vote against Luca in 70 leaves me wondering what's up with that. Also, regarding your 73, from a Town standpoint, it is always best to assume the worst when it comes to what and how many enemies we will have... within reason. 10:3 is the worst reasonable possibility. No crosskills; three Scum. I'd rather assume we're looking at three enemies and feel relieved if there are only two, than assume there are two and then lose if it's revealed there's one more. Anyways, Luca is correct in 75.

As for

sthar8/KatieB

, do you only impersonate female alts, or do you take it further?

J/k

Your 78 leaves me wroth. It's the part where you say you'd wagon either me, Luca, or Anen. So, why? And does anyone else find it odd how he says Lapsa is probably Town in spite of his postings that really haven't been all that Townish to begin with? Guess I don't understand where KatieB is finding this confidence that Lapsa is probably Town, when it's so early into this game.

Up to 78

. Going to a party. HAPPY NEW YEARS!!!

[Lapsa]

4 8 15 16 23 42

what did you mean?

[Lapsa]

That is hypocritical.

Why the hypocrisy? I'm asking you to clear this up for us once and for all Lapsa.

If people are misunderstanding your posts then that is your fault for not being transparent and understandable

try defining reasoning. simple trade

[Lapsa]

You say in 69 that fluff wasn't your reason for voting Aneninen. Yet in 37 you did indeed vote on Anen because of fluff, and you linked to one of his posts as well.

*yawn*

VOTE: Wake88

[Luca Blight]

Second Runner Up Scum Award - Luca Blight
Think this guy has ALOT of bullshit under his hood and see this cat fight between Luca and Katie as a scum team. Post 98 is a scummy post to me at this moment. The tone and the last sentence is where I feel the partnership shows. The fact that he calls out that kaite trying to discredit and dismiss everything I say seem to me like a potential tip off to show that the current tatic is working and to continue on with it.

This makes no sense.

98 is not scummy at all if you take it in the context given; as a response to 96.

I don't get your last sentence at all - I don't see how you could interpret me saying she was discrediting me and being dismissive (which she was) as a scumteam tactic. In which way was it working? If me and Katie were scum partners, why would I want her to continue acting scummy? That doesn't make sense.

[Aneninen]

Ollie has not posted in the game at all (the others have), but is posting all over the site.

I know that he's posting all over the site but that tells me nothing. Because of the site rules I'm not discussing this topic anymore until he actually

does

something here.

I didn't say the players were pro town, I said the wagon brought pro-town information because the discussion was good. Day 1 discussion is always good over a slow game where people don't post.

Day1 discussions can lead to massive town-vs-town fights too. Unfortunately.

I'm not convinced Katie is scum at this point, but the wagon is pro-town to me. Therefore my vote stays at this point.

The Wagon is only you and Luca.

Why are you saying the wagon is pro-town instead of saying "I like Luca's reasoning"? Are you trying not to take hard stances?

Mmm-hmmm, how indeed!
By the way, Luca gives town-vibes. Yeah, I'm able to not taking hard stances too. ^_^

No, I am serious about this. The quote is not out of context at all, that's the whole quote. You could be scum asking how much fluff is acceptable, and then tread that line of having to give hard facts vs kitty pictures.

Do you have problems with my Kitty? If so, consider my vote on yourself! ^_^
Okay, let's not fluff. Where did CuriousKarmaDog talk about kitties?

4 8 15 16 23 42

That was very helpful. Let me give you a hand with another one:
11:18:25

Liked Aeronaut's entrance. Think the monkey wagon is functionally a policy lynch.

This sentence needs explaining.

vote: KatieB

The defensiveness is a little too tight. I seen emotional players and I at times get quite mad at these games. However, something doesn't sit well. This is not taking in the fact you lied to us and popped in with your main for a post.
Second Runner Up Scum Award - Luca Blight
Think this guy has ALOT of bullshit under his hood and see this cat fight between Luca and Katie as a scum team. Post 98 is a scummy post to me at this moment. The tone and the last sentence is where I feel the partnership shows. The fact that he calls out that kaite trying to discredit and dismiss everything I say seem to me like a potential tip off to show that the current tatic is working and to continue on with it.
I feel null on about everyone else atm. null scum would land with Wake88 and llll.
Wake on the early brag post about his scum game. Seems to be just too helpful. May be due to the fact he is that good?
llll got in this group just because I cant list him as town and I don't want him atm in this null only group.
Null - Everyone else
Town - At this time I don't have any confirmed town players other than myself. I will throw some up here as I find them.

Uhh. I didn't like this at all.
(1) Upon Katie, that's a kind of insufficient reasoning. You told us basicly nothing and slipping

her

his main is not an alignment tell. (By the way, Katie is unsorted for me, but I have other reasons, and I don't think I'll be able to change that read on Day1.)
(2) Your Luca-read is pigeon poop. I've re-read that 98 thrice and I'm unable to see any sign of a Katie-Luca partnership there.
(3) Also, your Wake-read is a kind of WTF too. Being too helpful is scummy?
(4) As for ||||, that's the cherry on the top of the pie. He's had two posts! No content at all!
(5) That's 4 possible scumreads and not a single lean town or something?
(6) The whole catchup seems to be fake. It seems as if he had chosen certain things randomly whilst ignoring players with a significant amount of posts and content, like Lapsa, CuriousKarmaDog and MonkeyMan.

TL;DR: Drake's a better one to vote for than my RVS vote (, which makes no sense right now at all).
UNVOTE:
VOTE: Drake Crusader

Wake, 208 – seems to be a nice summary, we should remember that later.

If people are misunderstanding your posts then that is your fault for not being transparent and understandable

try defining reasoning. simple trade

Whut?

You say in 69 that fluff wasn't your reason for voting Aneninen. Yet in 37 you did indeed vote on Anen because of fluff, and you linked to one of his posts as well.

*yawn*

vote: Wake88

*yawn*. Need you vote-hop every time when someone starts talking about you?

[Lapsa]

[1]

try defining reasoning. simple trade

Whut?

[2]*yawn*. Need you vote-hop every time when someone starts talking about you?

1: that's the part of conversation you are missing out on
2: no

[Luca Blight]

I mean, he voted Lapsa for 'fluffposting more than Anen' and 'poorly justifying his vote on Anen' which happened before Anen had even posted, and was pretty clearly a RVS vote. Even if Lapsa had done any of the things Luca was talking about, none of them would be alignment indicative.

No, Lapsa's vote on Anen

WASN'T

an RVS vote - how many times do I have to keep saying this? He said in 37 that he voted Anen 'because of fluff' - linking it to a specific example, which occurred after said vote.

Why are they not potentially alignment-indicative? You use that to write off any argument. What in your opinion is alignment-indicative? How do you plan to find scum this game when you automatically write anything that doesn't suit your agenda off as 'not alignment indicative'?

This is what I was talking about when I said she was being dismissive.

He's scumreading me for calling Lapsa probtown, but dollars to doughnuts if I hadn't clarified that my feelings are as strong as p5 allows, he'd be scumreading me for having feelings too strong for day 1.

Another blatant misrep. Is that alignment-indactive? Continually misrepping someone to suit your argument?

I scumread you (partly) because you couldn't justify your 'probtown' read, and later devalued it when questioned as a 'page 5 probtown read' - which I guess isn't much of a 'probtown' read at all, is it?

He's scumreading me for not hopping to answer him (which is not indicative of scum), scumreading me for a misunderstanding of my feelings on my suspects (even if his thoughts were accurate, this would not be indicative of scum), for 'not making any sense' (which is not indicative of scum), and for being dismissive of his reasons for scumreading me (which he hasn't yet presented.)

Deliberately avoiding questions can be indicative of alignment - you couldn't justify what you said - if you can't back it up, don't say it, otherwise I will scumread you for it if you keep dodging questions and being dismissive of everything I say.

Not making sense can also be indicative of being scum - because scum have to fabricate reads. For instance - your 'probtown' on Lapsa makes no sense - the only way it might make sense is if you were scum partners, or if you were scum and knew Lapsa was therefore Town.

Pretty obviously scum looking for a day1 mislynch that involves a lot of words but not reasons. As soon as everyone has posted, I'd be glad to turbolynch him.

p-edit: but not having any reasons for scumreading me totally doesn't make his vote OMGUS. Totally.

You can see the reasons, you just choose to ignore them when it suits you, and then dismiss them when that suits you.

I'm just looking over things more now, but I'm still happy with my Katie vote currently.

[Luca Blight]

and taking actions out of context.

Luca did the same thing, worse. I still think he's a better vote.

That is just a lie - where have I ever taken anything out of context this game?

[Riddleton]

Votecount 1.5

KatieB (3): Luca Blight, MonkeyMan576, Drake Crusader
MonkeyMan576 (2): curiouskarmadog, Aeronaut
Wake88 (1): Lapsa
Drake Crusader (1): Aneninen
evilpacman18 (1): KatieB
BP (1): llll

Not voting (4): evilpacman18, BP, Wake88, Ollie,

With 13 players alive, it takes 7 to lynch.

The deadline for Day 1 is in (expired on 2015-01-12 21:44:00).

[Riddleton]

evilpacman18 has been prodded.

[Luca Blight]

@ ckd- you're still on your randomvote for ollie. You might be pushing him for not posting, but I dont like the push and I dont see how it's relevant.

soooo...if you know where/why my vote is, why are you asking if everyone is here?

Just because you've voted someone doesn't mean they've posted, or are involved in the game yet. I'm not a fan of Day1 lurker pushes before the target has had a chance to engage in the game because it is possible if not probable that the notposting slot just flakes, wasting time and effort.

These posts seem odd, considering you are still sitting on your RVS vote yourself....

You seem to be scumreading me pretty strongly as well, yet are not voting me. You say you want me 'turbolynched' - so are you just waiting for someone else to start it off before you jump on?

[curiouskarmadog]

going to be gone until monday (work/family mini vaca) will catch up on mon.

[curiouskarmadog]

also for those who are curious as to why I have issues with lurkers (who are posting else where) check out the last game I was in...it is current, so cant say more than that. might shed some light.

[Drake Crusader]

V/LA till the 3rd

Have to drive my grandparents back to Florida

[Lapsa]

Anyways, Luca is correct in 75.

true

@Wake88

great colours btw. stealing it

[evilpacman18]

48 hours already? Wow