Newbie 689 - Game Over - Town Wins

[idea]

apologies for the length of this post -- one of the problems with whole game PBPAs is that they take a lot of answering
so scum sometimes use them cos they rely on town not having enough time or being too busy to go through them in detail

I didnt misquote anybody. The stuff between quotation marks arent paraphrasing, they are more my reading on things.

quotation marks ("...") are the standard way of representing a direct quote
in your post 267 you're sometimes using them for that purpose and sometimes not -- this is confusing

looking in more detail at the use of quotation marks in your PBPA post 267 -

What about all the good things I suggested town before that moment of lapse in my judgment. No one was suggesting them so why would I suggest them, if I was mafia would I just sit back and let no one suggest them so it would be easier for me.

91 by TAX: "ok I did scummy things, but what about the no scummy things I did?"

there's a difference between TAX admitting to a "moment of lapse" in judgement and him admitting to doing "scummy things"
one is singular; the other is plural - this makes TAX looks like he's incriminating himself

95 by mafiaSSK "bandwagonning is good"

I may have misjudged that sentence, but saying "bandwagonning gets us out of RVS" seems to me to be an argument FOR bandwagonning, instead of against it.

MSSK says "Bandwagoning is horrible!" (83)
Hoopla asks MafiaSSK "Why exactly are you opposed to bandwagoning" (89)
MSSK says "Bandwagoning gets us out of the RVS" (95)
and your reading on this is that MSSK thinks bandwagoning is good? (267) it doesn't seem to be the most obvious interpretation

171 by over -> "TAX plese dont backpedal" +1 scumpoints for both. I read this as the more experienced scum guiding the less experienced scum to go along . +1 SP

this is not what TAX said or implied (covered in my post 357)

I should have answered this question by LightWolf. "I have a question about being cleared..." ...
179 by idea: "speaking as one who perhaps posts excessively..." ...
182 by hoopla: "If a day goes on for dozens and dozens of pages..." ...
196 by over: "who casts a vote toward the lynchee..." ...
200 by over: "I also find it a bit strange that you choose my one weak reason..." ...
204 by over: "I'm not even the one being targeted..." ...
245 by LightWolf: "Wait a second! He is an IC..."
249 by TAX: " I'm thinking they did not want to NK someone..." ...
250 by hoopla: "IF you were mafia..." ...
253 by Hoopla: "This is a useless hypothetical..." ...
254 by LW: "And while yes it's WIFOM..." ...
258 by LW: "What you say means we accept..." ...
259 by ideas: "a post on another mafia board..."

these are all direct quotes

you see the problem?
the 3 oldest posts using quotation marks are the ones least likely to be remembered
and these are the 3 posts where you have used quotation marks for your "reading on things"
and for all 3, your "reading on things" is open to criticism
and there's no way of telling the difference between what people posted and your interpretation of what they posted
in the context of giving reasons for voting on someone, this surely can't be right

(sorry to have gone on at length about this, but it does seem to be a case of 'putting words into people's mouths')

another thing about your post 267 i don't understand is your argument on meteor -

MMM answers that point by point +1 towniepoints...
214 by MMM: good reasoning...
Hooplas questions: ...
3) Did you find it suspicious makemeameteor had a vote on nobody at day end?
No...

Scummy list:

1. over
2. TAX
3. mmm

as your scummy list was based on your PBPA, why is meteor on your scummy list?

and then there's the the conclusion of post 267 -

Im 90% sure over and TAX are our mafia.
I propose to lynch one, and if he turns up scum, lymch the other. If he turns up town, and this is very important, still lynch the other too.

90% is near certainty and needs stronger evidence than scummy posts and bad logic (which presumably are fairly common in newbie games?)
and the only evidence of alignment given is a blatant misquote
if town had followed your proposals, then i think town would have lost

PS

I dont find [Hoopla] "Saying that hell reason later" overly scummy.

if over9K or TAX had voted on you saying they'd give their reasons later i'm pretty sure you'd have said it was scummy

[idea]

(EBWOP)

rereading the following i think i misunderstood your explanation in post 391

MSSK says "Bandwagoning is horrible!" (83)
Hoopla asks MafiaSSK "Why exactly are you opposed to bandwagoning" (89)
MSSK says "Bandwagoning gets us out of the RVS" (95)
and your reading on this is that MSSK thinks bandwagoning is good? (267) it doesn't seem to be the most obvious interpretation

are you saying the stuff in quotes in your post 267 about Mafia's post 95 is in fact what

you

think, and not your understanding of what Mafia thinks?

[idea]

I don't think anyone has been more anti-MafiaSSK than I.

are you sure?
before MSSK voted on you (345), HOOPLA and VM had both voted on MSSK, and LW and myself had both FOS'd him
whereas your total anti-Mafia content in 4 weeks of posting was basically agreeing with Hoopla's post 298 -

Sorry. Was lurking on purpose this time. I just wanted to see how you scumhunted with littler IC help.

You're saying your help on day 1 was much more signifigant?
I don't buy it.

Agreed.

How come?

Because it just seems too easy to say "Oh, I'm going to let you guys figure out what to do" particularly when your help as an IC on Day One wasn't particularly helpful. Your statement today felt more like scum being pressured into posting before the heat really turned on them instead of keeping with a strategy of lying low.

and shortly after that you were actually defending MSSK -

I do think MafiaSSK is just treading the waters to see how to best be an IC, but it could always be a scum tactic. I would also like to see his PBPA.

This seems like you're trying to slide onto an easy wagon.

Unvote, vote MMAM

Excuse me? I actually defended you there. But okay!

[makemeameteor]

You're also neglecting every post after MafiaSSK voted for me, which is when I quickly cemented my suspicion that he was scum.

[idea]

 
attacking Mafia four weeks into the game, when he's already well on his way to being lynched, is not evidence that no one has been more anti-MafiaSSK then yourself

[makemeameteor]

 
attacking Mafia four weeks into the game, when he's already well on his way to being lynched, is not evidence that no one has been more anti-MafiaSSK then yourself

He was not "well on his way to being lynched" until Hoopla revealed his guilty result. And my original statement was meant to express that I didn't feel anyone was more sure of his guilt than I was, with the obvious exception of Hoopla.

If you still feel I'm his scum partner, I welcome Hoopla's investigation tonight. The result will be innocent.

[idea]

[MafiaSSK] was not "well on his way to being lynched" until Hoopla revealed his guilty result.

WHAT?????? when Hoopla claimed MSSK had 2 votes on him (Hoopla and TAX) and 4 FOS's (LightWolf, VM, yours and mine)

this post is from you

before

Hoopla claimed -

It feels like we've started to reach a consensus. Obviously we don't want to rush a lynch, but I really feel confident about this. If we all agree, I'll vote for him.

If you still feel I'm his scum partner, I welcome Hoopla's investigation tonight. The result will be innocent.

that doesn't make sense -- we're not looking for town -- we're looking for scum
if you're innocent, then Hoopla should be investigating someone else

@Hoopla - while on the subject of your claim, maybe it's now ok to answer the last question you asked a while ago

One last question for everyone:

IF you were mafia, who would you have attempted to kill last night?

i'd have attemped to kill whichever IC wasn't my scum partner

[makemeameteor]

[MafiaSSK] was not "well on his way to being lynched" until Hoopla revealed his guilty result.

WHAT?????? when Hoopla claimed MSSK had 2 votes on him (Hoopla and TAX) and 4 FOS's (LightWolf, VM, yours and mine)

this post is from you

before

Hoopla claimed -

It feels like we've started to reach a consensus. Obviously we don't want to rush a lynch, but I really feel confident about this. If we all agree, I'll vote for him.

I feel like having two people not willing to vote for him makes it not "well on his way". If he was well on his way, there would be no hesitancy from either of the two of us who put an FOS on him. That's my interpretation of your statement, which means this argument is all about semantics which doesn't help the game at all.

If you still feel I'm his scum partner, I welcome Hoopla's investigation tonight. The result will be innocent.

that doesn't make sense -- we're not looking for town -- we're looking for scum
if you're innocent, then Hoopla should be investigating someone else

Agreed, but if people are going to continue coming after me, possibly leading to a lynch, it will only hurt the town. But it's totally up to Hoopla tonight.

[_over9000]

Whoa! Hold up!


I'm only on right now for a minute or two, so I've only read up to Hoopla's cop claim. He's lying. I'm the cop. I checked LightWolf overnight and got an innocent verdict.

[Hoopla]

VisMaior, over9000 and LightWolf: Can you tell me who your top two suspects are at the moment to be SSK's buddy?

[Hoopla]

Whoa! Hold up!


I'm only on right now for a minute or two, so I've only read up to Hoopla's cop claim. He's lying. I'm the cop. I checked LightWolf overnight and got an innocent verdict.

Neat, you're couterclaiming. Before I reveal the consequences of what you've done, can I enquire why you thought counterclaiming me on cop was a good idea scum?

[_over9000]

Because I'm not scum, it's pretty clear you are. Why can't you "reveal the consequences" now instead of in your original post (410)?

[Hoopla]

Because I wanted to know if you knew the consequences. Because I've just broken the game for the town. I'm writing up a post now to explain what has happened.

[idea]

@over9K, Hoopla - what were the reaons for your choice of who to investigate N1

@over9K - who are your 2 scum suspects?

[Hoopla]

Here's the story. Last night I didn't investigate MafiaSSK, I actually investigated makemeameteor who I got a guilty verdict on.

I thought up a clever play where I had a decent chance of outing both members of the mafia, but it meant I did have to lie to the town. MafiaSSK was my second choice for scum, so I pretended I got a guilty on him in the hope he'd counterclaim me as cop which then I'd reveal I actually had a guilty on makemeameteor.

Now, in the case where MafiaSSK wasn't scum I knew this would be a very attractive chance for the real scum to make a counterclaim, because they would know I was lying about my results. In the process I have now uncovered _over9000 counterclaiming me.

There were a few more possible scenarios that could have happened, but this was the gist of my plan. The beauty of it is, even if you don't believe me and you decide to lynch me, when I turn up cop you'll then realize _over9000 is lying, and my original guilty verdict on makemeameteor must be true.

Does anyone have any questions?

[idea]

@ Hoopla - why did you investigate meteor N1 ?

[Hoopla]

I don't remember my exact reasons now, but there were one or two opportunistic posts I saw him make. He wasn't overly active, and for the times was he was I wasn't getting a town vibe. I can reread and find the things that led to my investigation if you wish though.

[TAX]

I want to know what people think of my speculation in post 386.

I'm having a hard time telling who is the real cop, I think Hoopla is.

[Hoopla]

Right, lets get this show on the road and finish the game.

vote: makemeameteor

[_over9000]

[quote="Hoopla]
but it meant I did have to lie to the town...


...


I don't remember my exact reasons now...
[/quote]



You lied to the town, changed your mind about who to claim you had a guilty verdict on. As scum, yo had set yourself up so that you could change what you would say to fit the circumstances. You aren't giving any reasoning because you haven't fabricated any yet.

I don't know how i forgot to do this my first post but

unvote
Vote: Hoopla

[idea]

I can reread and find the things that led to my investigation if you wish though.

yes please, if you have the time, i'd be interested to know

also if you are correct in your assumptions, then presumably MafiaSSK is town?
in which case if over9K is scum, what does he gain by claiming doc?
surely it is to his advantage to keep quiet and and allow MSSK to be lynched and then NK you N2?

PS it really

is

a bit scummy lying to town no matter how good the reason

[Hoopla]

That's fine. I'm cool with a lynch of either makemeameteor, over9000 or me.

So if you guys choose to lynch me and I turn up cop, makemeameteor and over9000 are your scum pair. Thanks everyone!

[idea]

I want to know what people think of my speculation in post 386.

@TAX - this is the answer i was waiting to post, after you'd acknowledged my last reply to you

I just thought of something, what if we have the setup were there is only doc. The doc saved the person the were going to kill D1. The mafia now knows there is no cop, so one of them can safely say there cop with no one counter claim. They can say a town is scum, town believes it they kill the innocent town. End of game. I know this is far fetched this is why I didn't unvote.

"if we have the setup were there is only doc."
ok
"The doc saved the person the were going to kill D1."
ok
"The mafia now knows there is no cop"
how? all they

know

is that there's a doc

[makemeameteor]

Ugh, shit.

Good job, Hoopla! And best of luck to my other scum partner.

[idea]

EBWOP

in which case if over9K is scum, what does he gain by claiming cop?