Open 57 - Quack Mafia (Game Over) before 545

[shaft.ed]

This game is going nowhere because people have dragged it into endless mafia theory.

Can we just hunt scum?

Um there really hasn't been that much mafia theory as of late. It's going nowhere because noone's posting. And I'm not liking the request to hunt scum while not hunting scum yourself.

[kuribo]

Um there really hasn't been that much mafia theory as of late. It's going nowhere because noone's posting. And I'm not liking the request to hunt scum while not hunting scum yourself.

Yes, there has been. I replaced into this thread at a point where day 1 completely consisted of mafia theory, Day 2 was headed down that same road, and even on the previous page was still going on. "Which plan is best for us?" is pointless--- if you guys had been looking for the scum on day one instead of formulating game-breaking strategies, we woudn't be having as many problems.

Unvote, Vote: MastermindOfSin

for seemingly starting and furthering this mess.

[Crub]

Vote Count:

Mastermind of Sin (3):

shaft.ed, Oman, Kuribo

TylerJ (1) :

Lulubelle

shaft.ed (1) :

Tarhalindur

Not Voting : Mastermind of Sin, TylerJ, Phate, LutenitPowwel

With 9 alive, it takes 5 to lynch.

No luck on replacing LutenitPowwel, who has flaked.

Deadline impending unless things pick up ladies and gents.

[shaft.ed]

Yeah some posting would be good folks.

Tarhalindur, what say you Re:Phate's argument?

[Crub]

farside22 replaces LutenitPowell immediately

Sorry about the lack of prodding guys, I'm onto it now. CPU error has been baaaad lately.

[Tarhalindur]

2) I was checking to see if anyone stepped out of their way to either further my seemingly poorly-reasoned attack (scum attacking an apparently vulnerable townie) or defend you (scumbuddy defense).

So if someone furthered your attack, they're scum, and if someone defended me, they're scum? It looks like the only way here to not be branded scum is to ignore the issue altogether - of course, then one would be called out for lurking.

Craplogic, for two reasons. First, your assessment that the ignoring option will inevitably lead to accusations of lurking is incorrect - a player can ignore my attack and continue to post his own analysis of the game, Second, there is a fourth possible reaction, and one that is clearly pro-town to boot:

ask for the reasoning (if my vote was unnexplained) or for clarification about my reasoning (if my vote was poorly reasoned)

.

As for why I decided to ignore kuribo's attack: In my experience, defense via voting for the attacker is much scummier than attacking the player who I am attacking. This is especially true when there are both players defending and players attacking, and ESPECIALLY true when the player I was attacking and the player that attacked me for attacking seem to suddenly get on the same wavelength IMMEDIATELY after my reaction-test.

I already found Phate to be the most likely scum candidate among the claimed quacks (since I have a town read on Oman and I know that I am town); now I see Phate and shaft.ed start ganging up on me after my vote. To me, that reeks of scumbuddy interactions.

Confirm Vote: shaft.ed
HoS: Phate

Note that at this point I am willing to switch between these two (as they are my top two scum candidates), but at this point I think that we should lynch either Phate or shaft.ed today.

[shaft.ed]

Wow, Tar lots of problems with your last post.

First you start by attacking the weak point of Phate's argument that someone not responding to you could be called out for lurking. That was obviously incorrect. However, you barely even address that fact that you could call someone scum for agreeing with you or for disagreeing with you. You just say "in your experience" that is the way it is. Conveniently if you get both the one that's the attacker is more likely scum, but what happens if you only get people agreeing with you, you said they are scummy so how does that work?

This leads me to the next point. You have one "tell" which I would argue is incredibly weak, and you are expanding this to the point were it must always catch scum. I've never seen a scum trap that works so well, yet you're ready to lynch based on a single "tell."

we should lynch either Phate or shaft.ed today

I would like to point out to you that the last few pages consists of very little dialog from about half of the players in the game. We also have a replacement that hasn't even posted the entire day, yet you're already willing to move to a lynch. That is quite hasty and meshes well with your glaring glossing over of MoS's breaking strategy yesterday that basically put the seal of approval on the whole thing while completely debunking it.

You also are basing your entire tell on the fact that I was attacking you. Yet when you first voted for me you said:

attacks kuribo and myself

almost as an afterthoughts

.

So how does a weak attack fit into your experience. I would hardly call my earlier post an attack.

I didn't think Phate's post was considerably scummy and I think the votes could be seen as opprotunistic.

That's merely an observation. Yet you're basing your entire scum read of two players off of it.

You haven't given any other substantiating evidence that I am scum. You also keep stating:

I already found Phate to be the most likely scum candidate among the claimed quacks (since I have a town read on Oman and I know that I am town);

So the only reason you think Phate is scum is because Oman is giving you a town read? You haven't made a single point to substantiate your case on Phate either.

In my experience, I've found that when someone is having trouble fitting scum into their scenario it's because they are in fact themselves scum.

unvote vote Tarlahindur

[Lulubelle]

Wow, Tar lots of problems with your last post.

Sheesh, no kidding. I could have seen Tar's original vote for Phate as simply a snappy response to an ugly idea from Phate, but I can't say I feel good about all the after-the-fact twisting Tal is putting into it. Not to mention that that's an incredibly weaksauce justification to suggest who should be lynched today.

Unvote
Vote: Talhalindur

[Oman]

MoS is getting away with his last plan.

[farside22]

Hi all I have to do a read. So give me a day and hopefully if the CPU screen of death doesnt hit I will have my thoughts by tomorrow.

[Phate]

Someone sum this up for me: Is it true that one of the quacks have to be scum? Or is it only that no more than one of the quacks are scum?

[Lulubelle]

Is it true that one of the quacks have to be scum? Or is it only that no more than one of the quacks are scum?

The latter. It is entirely possible that all three quacks are quacks. However, no more than one quack can be scum.

MoS is getting away with his last plan.

Would you mind elaborating? My vote on Tal right now is a pressure vote, not a lynch vote.

[Mastermind of Sin]

What last plan? The plan that was proven wrong and abandoned?

[Mastermind of Sin]

Notice: I will be leaving Mafiascum in the near future. As a result, I will be cutting back on games where possible. I'm going to try not to be replaced if I can, but this is an advance notice that my activity WILL decrease.

[farside22]

Sorry to hear you will be leaving MOS. Hope all is well in real life.

Now on with scum hunting. My top 3 suspects are as follows:

lulubelle post 31 post 56 - read both and yes it did seem you were just going through, but that just sounds like a blow off. Almost like saying hey I didn't agree with it, but went with the flow. Post 60 seeming to agree because it is easier then trying to stop a dumb idea? Blaming the person who came up with said idea. Fought the idea that scum would be to smart to vote no lynch with shaft.ed theory. Follows Shaft.ed idea a little too much.

Tarhalindur quiet. Not much offered in any way. Post 143 claims trap set up with no good answer. Votes for the most rationale player thus far. WTF trap was he claiming? Just thought he was trying to point something out that was irrationale and acted like it was a trap. I just don't see it.

Tyler J. Nothing offered in the discuss. Looking for someone to show him instead of looking at everything posted himself. Post 112. Nothing, nothing, nothing. Lots of it.

I found a couple of things questionable about shaft.ed, but after the first few post he makes some valid points.

Shaft.ed post 59 is completely opposite of what you stated in post 35 post 39. Agreed with post 70. Post 73 had many good points except I go back to his two post were he agreed with it but didn't vote no lynch. After this his logic and comments made me lean town.

Vote: lulubelle

Other then that not too much really said. MOS idea that got followed and his FOS was really unnecessary. His second idea was terrible and had many flaws in it. I'm not sure about MOS either, but feel more strongly toward my top 3.

[Lulubelle]

post 31 post 56 - read both and yes it did seem you were just going through, but that just sounds like a blow off. Almost like saying hey I didn't agree with it, but went with the flow. Post 60 seeming to agree because it is easier then trying to stop a dumb idea? Blaming the person who came up with said idea.

I'm not going to defend it. It was a mistake and I admit it. I failed to consider what consequences my vote would have after night one, and I certainly never could have predicted that I would be one of the only lynchable people on the wagon that would make it through the night.

Fought the idea that scum would be to smart to vote no lynch with shaft.ed theory.

I think you're incorrect here. I never said that scum wouldn't be smart to have pushed the plan. I said that scum might have seen the plan as a dangerous pro-town move the same way the townies on the no lynch bandwagon seem to have seen it and that we shouldn't just assume from our position of hindsight that they would have tried to push it through.

Follows Shaft.ed idea a little too much.

Honestly, I'm not entirely sure what to make of him. I have no problem agreeing with someone that I believe is correct, though. I came to reconsider my original vote on MoS on my own, and Tal's claim that his vote for Phate was an elaborate trap just doesn't fly with me.

[Crub]

Ok 24 hours without posting, so this game is now under a retractable deadline for 12:30am (GMT) on the 5 February (2 weeks exactly from this post).

[05] If I impose a day deadline, lynching will require at least half of the regular majority at deadline. In case of a tie, first come first served. In the endgame (six players or fewer) only lynches with a regular majority will occur.
[06] When I set a day deadline, the deadline lasts until I actually lock the thread.

[farside22]

Follows Shaft.ed idea a little too much.

Honestly, I'm not entirely sure what to make of him. I have no problem agreeing with someone that I believe is correct, though. I came to reconsider my original vote on MoS on my own, and Tal's claim that his vote for Phate was an elaborate trap just doesn't fly with me.

I just notice there were a few times were you were one step behind Shaft.ed saying about the same thing. It just an odd thing I saw about 3 different times on my read. I'm not sure if you agree with him or if you are following him to make yourself look town.

[TylerJ]

Okay, while I do agree about the fact that Mos made some weak ideas, voting for him seems to much of an opportunistic piece.

And the little bit about Tarhalindurs post was a mess of confusion. What I did catch was his really weak reason for voting Shaft.ed.

I am going to do another reread and try to find some more info.

[TylerJ]

Okay, most of the game has been game theory. I couldn't get anything new and started to loose comprehension two pages ago. I should also state that I wont do a night action tonight either for the same reason kuribo isn't.

And Hello Farside. Nice to see ya.

[shaft.ed]

Okay, most of the game has been game theory. I couldn't get anything new and started to loose comprehension two pages ago. I should also state that I wont do a night action tonight either for the same reason kuribo isn't.

Wait are you saying that you suspect one if the "Quacks" is scum and thus you

may

be a Quack, or that you didn't get a night action in and just now decided to tell us about it?

This game is getting painful.

Oman I don't think you ever answered Lulu's question about which MoS plan.

And farside, welcome to the game. I do think Lulu has be agreeing with me a bit more than an average player, but I guess I can't fault her for that Seriously I have noticed it, but wanted to see how far it could go.

[Lulubelle]

Wait are you saying that you suspect one if the "Quacks" is scum and thus you

may

be a Quack, or that you didn't get a night action in and just now decided to tell us about it?

Actually, he told us about that a while ago.

[kuribo]

Okay, while I do agree about the fact that Mos made some weak ideas, voting for him seems to much of an opportunistic piece.

I disagree, Tyler, I think MoS is a big part of the reason the town has been sidetracked for two days.

[shaft.ed]

Wait are you saying that you suspect one if the "Quacks" is scum and thus you

may

be a Quack, or that you didn't get a night action in and just now decided to tell us about it?

Actually, he told us about that a while ago.

Man I need to pay more attention. I totally forgot about/missed that point.

kurib, care to comment on Tarlahindur?

[shaft.ed]

So yeah that game of mafia we were playing?