Mini #534 - Vegetable Mafia (Game Over!)

[Y]

First post!

I say scum should claim.

[Y]

Did Korran picked his PM and didn't confirm, or did he hadn't logged on since it was sent?

[Y]

I don't think a self-vote is scummy, but I'm happy to get a wagon going on Oman anyway. It's good for discussion. And fun.

So here's the discussion:
How is a growing random bandwagon with no info at all, fun?

[Y]

How are bandwagons not fun.

They're not if some townie gets lynched because of your stupid games.

[Y]

Um.........destructor isn't voting soupfly (as of Post 40)

Or ever did.

@ kravhen: You say destructor is right, and then you vote some one else?

[Y]

So you're saying bandwagon somebody that can't be here to defend themselves? That makes ZERO sense to me Phate. I am a believer that bandwagons on people get them talking and the more they talk the easier it is for them to slip up and give us information

While this is true, watching people as they hop on and off bandwagons gives you information too. Actually, the less a player talks, the harder for people to get on the bandwagon with no reason, so scum, which tend to join bandwagons, are more likely to mess up.

[Y]

Y: Actually that's why I think a bandwagon on an already shown silent player (who said they'd be gone) is rather useless. I'd rather bandwagon somebody active.

I do see your point as scum could pick this chance to hop on the bandwagon knowing that the person can't defend themselves.

Exactly. If the reason is something like "He's lurking", then you know it's some one who's just trying to lynch.

[Y]

Cool I hope this makes me the opportunistic 3rd vote?

vote:ryan

Vote Crub

. You actually did get the third vote. The way you joke about it seems like a way to get people attention off it. Like hiding in plain sight.

[Y]

We actually have a dangerous waggon here. Could every one voting ryan explain why are they doing so?

[Y]

Assuming that this game has three mafias, like most mini games, I'm guessing there were two on the waggon and one off.

Scum don't want to be the ones to hammer a wagon, just to get it close enough for some one else to do do it.
There's usually one off the wagon, in order to claim innocent in case it goes wrong.

If ryan is scum, then they're probably on the waggon to clear themselves.

[Y]

I believe destructor about the vote because of posts 83-84.
Although I believe that he didn't unvote on purpose, I think it was very probable that the mod wouldn't notice it, so it was a dangerous move.

I checked, and the vote count was wrong. Not only the mistake with destructor, but other stuff too.

@ kravhen: This is the second time your reaction is "Wow! We shouldn't lynch yet! Unvote", although your vote wasn't on any of the wagons, and the second has only three votes. Could you please explain why are you so over reactive?

Crub has only four posts, on which the only thing he added to the game was his vote on ryan (with no reason). I'll keep my vote on him.

[Y]

This is a newbie game, so im letting all ya newbs know how games usually roll here on mafiascum. Lynch on page 4-6: BAD, too quick. We should always make most of our days, IMO. Shed some light on the lurkers, try to get a clear image of EVERYONE, not just pick a couple of people who felt like they could be scum in some way, twist a little things to make it more convenient in our mind, lynch and go to sleep.

I know lynching for fun early isn't good idea, but that's not what I was saying. I didn't say you were wrong, I was commenting that you're over-reacting. Your posts are shouting "LOOK AT ME, I'M LOOKING FOR THE TOWN!!!". It gives me a bad vibe.

We had an L-2, which wasn't exactly what it seemed, and a three-person wagon. You were voting for neither of those people, but you responded to both with an unvote and expressed your concerns on how fast things are going. Most, if not all, your other posts were vote hopping.

[Y]

Just a thought... Are you thinking you're in a newb game? Because this one is a themed mini.

[Y]

You can't decide you have absolute proof that some one is scum on day one. You have nothing but words to base yourself on - You have no facts.

You can know the alignment of exactly one person, and that's you. Unless, of course, you have a partner. Do you?

So please, how did you come to decide there are two people you're certain enough of their alignment to tell us they're scum on D1, page 6, with no real proof?

About destructor's vote: Did you re-read the posts I mentioned? 83-84. Here's what I see in those posts:
destructor is questioning soupfly for voting him, so in 83 ryan quotes his vote and asks him why is he (destructor) voting him (ryan).
The answer is "I think you're over-reacting to that" (post 84).
At the time it seemed obvious. A vote that puts some one on L-3 is a big thing, but if you check it now, it is clear that destructor knew that it's not a real vote, therefore there's no real treat.
I'm not saying it's not scummy, but I do thing he wasn't lying about him knowing the vote is illegal.

So now I have three problems with this post:

You lied about your voting methods, and now you're gonna hang because of it scum man. (Notice how I'll give reasoning for voting, take a few lessons on that)

1. I believe destructor didn't lie, so there's no case there.
2. You're not giving real, concrete reasons. Just a vogue assumption.
3. You're too ready to lynch some one because of your failed reasoning.

[Y]

I think Oman started in a weird way to create conversation. His last post or two were well written, IIRC.

A player that plays in an anti-town manner isn't necessarily scum. He can just be an idiot.

[Y]

What page it is has nothing to do with lynching or no lynching, stop trying to steer the town in your direction to follow you.

Oman and destructor have both done enough to both be lynched at this moment

(asking to quote a PM? Not following the rules for unvote/voting?) Both can be used to throw off the town HENCE being anti town. I do have a problem with quick lynches but I DON'T have a problem applying pressure to two completely scummy people in this game. (is it strange Oman has become REAL quiet all of a sudden?)

I read this sentence as "I'm completely sure they're scum and I'm willing to lynch them right now for it".

4: When I feel as though I have found scum, than you are darn right I'm ready to lynch, are you saying if you were very certain about somebodies scum tendencies you wouldn't?

Exactly, I wouldn't. I'd state my reasons and wait to hear what other people have to say. I've seen a lot of cases on which the most scummy person turned out to be a power role or something like that (Most of the times it gets discovered when he gets the hammer).

I'm reading all the posts and I consider all opinions before saying what I have to say. In this case, I heard what you have to say, I don't agree with your reasoning, and therefore I don't agree with your conclusions.
It seems to me you're more into revenge than reason.

[Y]

I think "Truth" fits better to what I wanted to say than "Reason" in that last sentence.

Anyway,

could the non partisipants be prodded and Korran replaced?

[Y]

Northjayhawk, that was my point about him earlier.

[Y]

I'm not trying to get somebody lynched for a past game, that's complete crap posted by you to paint me as somebody trying to lynch somebody for no reason. B.S statement

E-x-a-m-p-l-e... And you were the one to say that other people should be open-minded...

You're taking this game too personally. If we all were against you, you'd be lynched already.

All this waste of time is anti-town, but it's not because you're scummy, just because you let your emotions react faster than your reason.

[Y]

Thank you Dr. Phil.

You're welcome. See you next week?

I don't think ryan is scum. I think he's just a townie that doesn't know what he's doing.

thinktank doesn't seem to understand the game either.

[Y]

@ Y - Are you scum?

No.

[Y]

I think people are reading Oman's actions in a wrong way. Reading his last few posts makes me pretty confident that he is a well thought player that wanted to create some chaos at the beginning of the game.

A self vote and asking for a PM isn't something a player would do seriously, so it's an obvious joke. Either some of you are reading too much into it, or you're trying to get him lynched in any way possible.

Anyhow, you're not helping.

[Y]

Who said all vanillas are lettuces? Thanks for helping scum.

If we do decide to name-claim, I think the best way is at random.

[Y]

And why did decide it's a closed setup?

[Y]

That totally doesn't help scum at all.

I just surreptiously claimed vanilla townie, and every other vanilla townie will know that I'm a confirmed vanilla townie.

It's a closed setup. That's a fact. That means we don't know what roles there are in the game. Which makes it easy for scum to lie.

Obviously you were wrong about the your first assumption. Can you, please, prove me the other one?

Did you just ruined the scum's safe claim?

FoS: Phate.

[Y]

I'm not completely sure if Phate is town or scum, but he's definitely a newbie.

Phate, whenever you say you

know

something, it means you have some information. If it isn't something publicly known, than it means you have information we don't.
Since the only players that have information about scum are the bad guys, by telling us that you know something about them that we don't, you're actually saying that you're part of them.

One can argue that he claimed they don't have a safe claim since he doesn't know the term, but I can easily believe that his thoughts were "Safe claim? The mod didn't tell me something like that...".

About the setup, I thought you were saying we have an open setup.

I'll leave my FoS as is while I'm deciding if you're scum, or just an inexperienced newbie.

gorckat, who did you replace?

[Y]

Phate: I still don't understand HOW you know what the scum got or didn't get as far as safe claims. Unless you were scum you wouldn't know that and I agree with WhoMe? you've slipped up twice now in this game and that's enough for me to drop a vote on you. You knowing what scum safeclaims are would make you scum wouldn't it? Why would a townie get a safeclaim? You are too inconsistent for me to feel good about you being town

Unvote/Vote: Phate

It was already explained that he meant something different than what is called in the game a "Safe Claim".
I'm getting the feeling that you're trying to get the pressure on some one just to get it off your back. I don't like it.

Could you please tell me what was the first slip-up WhoMe? was referring to? The one you say you're agreeing with.

FoS: ryan

too. I can't decide if one of them is scum, trying to get the other hanged, or are they both scum, trying to distance from each other.

Unvote.

My vote on Crub has no real meaning at the moment.

[Y]

About 100:
In page four we had a L-2 situation (Even if the count was wrong, that was my reality at the moment). I wrote that post in a hurry, since I had to leave for work, and by the time I logged in again, there were other things to consider (Destructor's "fake" vote, which made the vote count obsolete. There were also misplaced names).

Most of my games are themed minis, and usually there are three mafias. Since I have no idea how many mafiosos are there, I chose the most common number.

Phate and ryan: You look like two deaf people shouting at each other.

1st slip was using “safe claims” and acting like they were known to everyone when if there were safe claims only the mafia would know them (not townies)

2nd slip was saying that he didn’t know what safe claims were BUT yet he just used it in post 245 to attempt to explain himself

Also there were two votes on me, I don’t know how that is considered heat or pressure on me, care to explain?

Slip #1 was when he said scum know all vanillas are lettuces, when in fact no one knew (Unless he misunderstood the safe claim he was given).
Slip #2 was when he said that scum don't have safe claims, when the only ones to know that are scum.
Do you always agree with things you don't understand?

I don't need to vote you to put pressure on you (And that's not what I was trying to do anyway). I can just lure you to expose the inconsistencies between what you say and do, and then show them to everybody. Then I'll ask a question which will require an answer, that will probably create more difficult questions.

So, ryan, why do you keep using other people's logic for your votes, when it is obvious you don't really share it (or understand it)? Is it too hard to create an original accusation when you know the one you're accusing is town?

[Y]

I re-read my post followed by ryan's and I misunderstood his last sentence. I thought that he meant that my post didn't put pressure on him, while he really meant that there was no pressure on him to avoid by voting some one else.

[Y]

I was asking more specifically about these:

I mean, its okay speculation, but it doesn't give a few things:

1. who is/isn't scum on the wagon in your opinion. 2. is ryan town or scum.

Both of which are ratehr imporatant in my eyes.

As I said: Some of the people written in the vote count aren't really the ones voting, so there's no point in speculating about things not really done.

Ryan? I'm starting to think he's scum, at the moment.

[Y]

I'd like to know where's ryan and why isn't he answering my question.

[Y]

That's a completely false statement hence why I did not answer it. Just because I see other people's point of view and agree doesn't make me scummy. Quote one spot where I screwed up a point made by somebody else and used it as mine. So basically what Y is saying is that if I see something that somebody else saw and agree with it that I'm scummy? That's completely bogus.

Reading is tech:

1st slip was using “safe claims” and acting like they were known to everyone when if there were safe claims only the mafia would know them (not townies)

2nd slip was saying that he didn’t know what safe claims were BUT yet he just used it in post 245 to attempt to explain himself

Also there were two votes on me, I don’t know how that is considered heat or pressure on me, care to explain?

Slip #1 was when he said scum know all vanillas are lettuces, when in fact no one knew (Unless he misunderstood the safe claim he was given).
Slip #2 was when he said that scum don't have safe claims, when the only ones to know that are scum.
Do you always agree with things you don't understand?

So, ryan, why do you keep using other people's logic for your votes, when it is obvious you don't really share it (or understand it)? Is it too hard to create an original accusation when you know the one you're accusing is town?

[Y]

Ryan's understanding of the second slip is "He said that he didn't know a game term after he used it", while the real slip was Phate saying "The mafia doesn't have safe claims" (How do you know that?).
Ryan just made up a second slip.

I believe that there's a possibility that Phate got a role PM saying "You have a safe claim, it is lettuce", and by understanding that a safe claim means that all vanillas have the same role, it would be safe to claim lettuce.

But I was the one mentioning that, insinuating he might be scum, to check Phate's actions after he slipped, and ryan missed it completely in his explanation.
Phate didn't use the words "Safe Claim" until I did, and that was as a response to the first slip. That's also wrong in ryan's post.

Are the differences easier to find now?

[Y]

Safe claims IS a game term! Come on Y, you're seriously reaching here.

I KNOW!!! But it's not the issue. I don't care if he knows how it's called or not.

[Y]

Assuming you really did understand it that way, do you really think it would be a good idea to clear yourself by letting the mafia fake their claims? Even if it did work like that, you'd probably be the first one to get NKed...

That's really anti-town.

[Y]

That exchange was difficult to follow and i'm left with a little confused feeling. Let me reread. I have one question though, forgive me if i missed this point, How would Phate know how to claim lettuce assuming that its was an actual role without actually being town? I still don't quite get what this entire argument was about..

That was what he was doing: He claimed vanilla lettuce. No one else had done so yet, so he couldn't have got it from any one else. All other lettuce-vanillas now know he's town and won't lynch him.

But in this game all vanillas are (Apparently) different and scum might have safe claims, so it didn't work.

[Y]

Why WhoMe?

Ryan failed to answer my questions.

[Y]

The part in which you provide an answer.

"You're wrong so I won't answer" isn't an answer, but dodging the question.

[Y]

I want to know why you're using bad excuses (Agreeing with something you don't even understand, for example) to vote people, and then avoid answering when asked about it.

[Y]

No, my personal thought is that a) one of them is lying (I shan't tell you which one and why, and if you push it I'm calling it rolefishing). b) there are two or three townie names spread out over the townies.

I'll take the chance of being accused of role-fishing, but your post is basically "I'm telling you this, I'm telling why, and if you ask - You're scum". You should give us some kind of reason to believe you.

[Y]

It was supposed to be "I'm

not

telling you why".

[Y]

Your post makes it very probable you're town, so it would really help you if you were scum. But I'll leave it as it is for the moment.

This day is not progressing.

Vote ryan.

You know my reasons.

[Y]

There are still inactive people...

[Y]

I hate you thinktank. Please die.

That's done by voting.

[Y]

I wasn't talking about the game.

But your point is made

Vote thinktank

I know what you meant. It was a joke.

[Y]

I wasn't talking about the game.

But your point is made

Vote thinktank

I know what you meant. It was a joke.

[Y]

What happened to this game?

[Y]

I'm fine with lynching ryan.

[Y]

One thing I can't seem to understand is WHY are you all saying I agree with Oman.

I was voting ryan before his comments and agreed with him getting lynched afterwards. Non of those posts has anything to do with Oman's reasons.

My reasons were that ryan keeps using whatever argument he finds easy to leech on, whether he understands it or not, just to have a reason for whatever he does. He proved me right when he used me as the second player to agree with Oman (As a response to Phate), after people said in-thread that that wasn't my reason for the vote.

Long story short, ryan just doesn't have a clue of what he's doing, as long as he thinks other people believe he does.

Phate, I understand you don't like carelessness, but there's a way to say it. Please don't ruin this game for us.

[Y]

I disagree with your term of "latched onto" there is no reason in mafia that opinions can't be agreed upon and that shouldn't be used as reasoning to vote me.

Agreeing with an opinion:
"I think his point is viable because I agree with points A, B and C in his arguments, which I noticed in cases X, Y and Z".

Leeching:
"He's right. I agree."

You're doing too much of the second and not enough of the first. You seem too agree with people because of reasons that aren't there.

I've stated my own thoughts in this game

I can't really recall that (as opposed to cases in which you did leeched onto opinions). Would you please help me with that?

if those are looked upon as scummy than at least call me out on that instead of just throwing votes on me without giving me a chance to respond.

We called it out a few pages ago, which were written more than a RL week ago. You had plenty of time, on which your response was "Your wrong, so I won't answer your questions" and "You're scum for wanting me to answer your questions, so I won't answer them for you, scum".

[Y]

That's a completely false statement hence why I did not answer it. Just because I see other people's point of view and agree doesn't make me scummy. Quote one spot where I screwed up a point made by somebody else and used it as mine. So basically what Y is saying is that if I see something that somebody else saw and agree with it that I'm scummy? That's completely bogus.

I then quote the post on which I already pointed out what I was referring to, to which his answer is:

Y: I don't know what you are trying to do but you've quoted something we've already discussed. If you have a new question you'd like answered, please just ask it.

and

He's trying to get me to slip up and say something scummy, yet I've clarified myself as much as I can to him. If he doesn't understand, not much more I can do.

But he never clarified, because "it's wrong".

[Y]

What makes you think I'm not?

He wasn't speaking to you.

[Y]

I'm terribly sorry, but I can't seem to remember having you in the game...

ryan, when asked questions - You ignore them. When not, you answer.
When you get accused - You say the accusations are false. When you're not, you get defensive.
I think you have no problem understanding the game, but understanding English.

[Y]

I thought I wouldn't survive the night... Go-go town!

[Y]

OR a valid question

You're dead. You shouldn't post.

[Y]

I got you the godfather D1 and that's how you thank me?

I actually told soupfly I don't think I'll survive the night.
I told you Crub was scum D1!

[Y]

I wonder if you (Mafia) had other candidates for the N1 kill...

[Y]

I asked Patrick for the roles after I died and it was interesting to read the game, knowing who's who.

[Y]

It was funny, because at the time I knew that you weren't the cop and that Crub is scum.