Newbie #1019 (Game Over)

[Thian]

Hi guys,

some of you have felt I was yelling. I assure you I was not. Caps locks is yelling, imo. I understand reading txt you can't hear fluctuation and I do understand some people are more sensitive when reading things. So if it has come across as yelling to you specifically I do apologize for it.

withnail what do you mean froth? is this an attempt to tell people to dismiss what I am saying?

Thanks mcgriddle for the compliment, I got my eye on you though, your buddy buddy up is making me leery. However, I do agree Ythan was a lot more abrasive and confrontational than what apparently I am being made out to be currently by Rikka and Withnail.

Since they have played minimal games and have not been introduced to more opinionated people, I can understand where they both are getting this from.

[Thian]

EBWOP:
I am at work. I will post better content later on. I just wanted to check in and see how the day is progressing.

Mcgriddle, is there anymore you can add to the conversations that are on going?

[Withnail]

withnail what do you mean froth? is this an attempt to tell people to dismiss what I am saying?

Not an attempt to tell anybody to do anything. As was very clear in what I wrote, I was expressing my opinion on your discussion with Reilster.

This is the second time you've asked me - somewhat combatively - to clarify something that was already perfectly clear.

Most of your points against Reilster seem (to me) to be very similar. That is what I mean by "froth".

-------

@thian and Mcgriddle: Your opinion on each others play?

This is a good player, I enjoy playing with Thian because Thian is intelligent. Just not when Ythan is around -.-*

Could you be a little more specific? (Thian was a lot more specific when describing your play, in post 30. Do you think his comments were fair?)

How would you describe Thian's style of play, in your last game? Was it similar to his style so far in this one?

[Thian]

I didn't understand what you meant by froth. The word froth led me to believe you were telling people to dismiss my conversation with Reilster. Perhaps it is used differently in your area so that is where the confusion may be.

You might be clear when you write, because you understand what you are getting at, but words may have different meanings when used. If I really wanted to be technical. Froth is just a type of foam.

[camn]

Nazgul: I thought about voting for you, for lurking (just 2 short posts so far). But that would put you at L-2 (two votes away from being lynched) because of your self-vote. Please would you remove it? It may hinder people voting for you ... which in itself makes it a reason to vote for you. If you see what I mean?

Dont let it stop you.
Firstly, Nazgul's post was scummy, and deserves votes.
Secondly, never suffer a lurker to live.
Thirdly, people often drop their tells on their first post.
It is like the truth is DYING to come out. . .
Last... I really think the best parts of this game of mafia come when someone is at L-1. Never be afraid of it. except in lylo

[Reilster]

Sorry for the late post, I'm at school all day, so will posting from 7-10 most nights.

@Thain

The main reason I believe people thought you were shouting was the fact that you have been defending yourself fairly aggressively. I questioned you about why you would protect Olinea, and before I knew it I was on the back foot, being questioned about everything (not bad in itself), but it was very one way traffic, meaning you didn't have to answer many questions. of course you'll say back (fairly) that I haven't asked you many questions, and you have answered any I have, but personally I'm finding it hard to think of any questions to ask you.

@People encouraging votes for nazgul.

Personally, I don't think lurkers should survive, but I don't like people trying to get people to vote against them. It seems to me that it would be a good way to avoid getting lynched on the 1st day, and also, if they are merely inactive, it's a good cover, as they won't question you back.

@McGriddle

I'm a little worried about you to be honest. You seem to be answering very shortly and not really trying to find anyone out. Could you tell me why you aren't posting any long replies, and trying to find anyone out? As you seem to be fairly active.

@ Rikka

'I don't like how Reilster put the L-2 on Olinea. Scum could put their votes for a hammer from their. Unlikely and stupid on their part, yes, but then I would think a newbie game would be the place where it would happen. And while I get that you're trying to get people talking, I think you're too quick to change votes.'

Bit confused by what this means (mainly as I don't know a lot of the mafia-specific terms, which I will highlight at the end), however I have/will justify my reason for vote changing.

I was never confident in Olinea, and I was going to always keep my vote on the scummiest person, to try and get them talking (however, not anymore, as it seems to make people nervous).

Then Thain was acting fairly oddly, chucking around a few accusations. Tbh I probably reacted to him voting me, and I felt like I needed to be defensive, so went on the offense.

Side notes:

Just wondering what some terms mean.
To hammer?
L 1/2/3/4?
RVS and RQS?

Cheers,
Reilster.

[Rikka]

To clarify, my comment about yelling wasn't directed at you, Thian. You're certainly more aggressive than me, but that can be chalked up to just a difference in experience and personality. It was the honest answer to your earlier question, what would help my goal of winning. I had no problems with your questioning of Reilster. It doesn't seem like you're trying to get a bandwagon going, you're just seeing if he'll slip up.

[Rikka]

Oh yeah.

Hammer: Put the final vote that lynches a player.
L-#: That many votes for a lynch. With five votes needed, and your vote being the third, two were needed for a lynch.
RVS: Random Voting Stage (I assume)
RQS: Random Question Stage (I assume)

[McGriddle]

I hate the beginning of these games, I try to get out of them as quick as possible so these stupid questions that hold no value to the game aren't worth more than a couple sentences.

[Olinea]

I hate the beginning of these games, I try to get out of them as quick as possible so these stupid questions that hold no value to the game aren't worth more than a couple sentences.

I'm pretty sure that those "stupid questions" landed me a vote from you.

[Thian]

Reilster:
You hit it on the nose. You really haven't engaged me with questions. i am the one engaging you in questions. If someone is going to direct comments to me who has put a vote on me who doesn't believe in the vote in the first place, then it should be questioned.

what is throwing me off on you Reilster, is when you have voted, you had stated you were unsure of where to put any votes, or even if your ideas were right. this appears slightly scummy. Taking a stance on what you believe to be true, is not wrong because you have to figure who scum are. If you are actively persuing people with genuine concerns, then you should have no problem.

what I have observed is you Second guessing your votes, where you are outright state you are unsure of your thought process on guilty or questionable acts seems to me of nervous scum trying not to ruffle feathers too much when placing votes. also to throw a vote towards me pretty much right after I voted you. This again can be looked at in two ways. 1. you are townie who has reacted defensively by casting your vote, or 2. you are scum reacting nervously because I am on to you. currently I believe that you are nervous mafia.

That is bottom line at this point, why my vote is on you. will it change? perhaps, because despite me continuosly questioning you, I am reading what other people have wrote. i too have questioned Razul regarding the self vote. I do find that off putting. I questioned Mcgriddle for the friendly comment / and do agree that more content from him is needed.

We are also only into 48 hours almost of game time, maybe a bit more so, there still needs to be a few people who need to step up to the plate and start participating in active scum hunting.

Camn: you had responded to Olinea's third question as a dumb move is to lurk, and that you would see to it that they are lynched. Would you consider that you support lynch all lurkers? would you also consider it the way you presented your stance, to be rallying people to jump on board with lynching lurkers?

[camn]

I am a firm, full-patch member of the lynch all lurkers gang.
They ruin games, and I will never shed a tear when they die.

PLUS, I have found that they are also more likely to be scum.
PLUS PLUS, when they are, I have found they are more dangerous than non lurking scum, in a town that wont lurkervote.

And as a bonus in this case, Nazgul dropped a scumtell then ran to hide when it caught my attention. Total lurkerscum behavior.

[Rikka]

So right now, would you have no problem with us taking Nazgul to the lynch?

[Olinea]

I sure as hell won't be helping hammer a guy on page 3.

[Thian]

Camn: Would you consider the way you presented your stance a way to rally support to lynch Nazgul?

[camn]

@ Rikka: That would entirely depend on Nazgul's response to pressure. But I am generally OK with lynches. I think it is a little EARLY this game to be lynching, but certainly not too early to be VOTING.
However.. if Naz suddenly got run up, I think we would get a ton of info out of that, and maybe a scumlynch on top of it.. so maybe it would be OK! Are

you

willing?

@ Thian: your phrasing is strange. I dont really know what you are getting at.
From what I can tell, you are asking if in POST 18, I was rallying people to lynch Nazgul. I hope that it is obvious that that is not the case. She hadn't even posted at the time, iirc.
But you will find that there is NOT much ambiguity in my play. When I am rallying people for a lynch, you will know it

[Jeffcole1]

Vote Count 1.3:

Nazgûl (2): Nazgûl, camn
Olinea (2): GPT, McGriddle
McGriddle (2): Withnail, Olinea
GPT (1): Rikka
Reilster (1): Thian
Thian (1): Reilster

With 9 players alive, it takes 5 votes to lynch, Deadline is Saturday, October 23, 2010, at 9:00 PM EST.

[Olinea]

Mind getting some thoughts in here, CPT and Nazgûl?

Also

unvote

since I don't see any reason for that random vote to remain right now. Griddle's talking, to some degree.

[Rikka]

I agree for sure that voting is fine. I tend to pace things out more, so I'm not comfortable with a lynch this early. Mostly just wanted your reaction to the question. And yeah, a quick run-up would be great information wise. But if only wishes could come true.

The first vote being a self-vote is a suspicious move for sure, and the lack of reaction is worth pushing.

[Thian]

Camn: What I am getting at.

your stance is to lynch lurkers.
benefit: Creates for a more active game, better for people to scum hunt with more active people and since Razgul already self voted, which is really weird especially after she mentioned a stupid move would be to self hammer. ((although it isn't self hammering, she pretty much put her one step closer to being hammered))

I do agree on the fact that that one post really is off putting enough to put a vote on her. However, I am going to propose how this could look.

lurking can be viewed as scum, and it really is not beneficial to town. lurking can also be viewed ((in a newbie game)) as newer people unsure of how to proceed to question. or it could also look like someone not able to get online ((haven't checked razgul's online status or activity)).

It is a simple lynch for sure, it doesn't do too much damage, since it is only day one. most games end up with a townie lynch first day anyway. would you want Razgul to be lynched as soon as possible?

[Olinea]

First off, it's Nazgûl.

Second, are we sure Naz has been lurking, or just hasn't logged in for a while?

[Thian]

Sorry, you are right, I spelt the name wrong.

we can't be sure. so automatically assuming that someone is lurking and deserves to be lynched based on that is not right. We don't know the circumstances regarding her being quiet, so advocating a lynch based on "lurking" is not right at this point.

its just way too easy to get everyone to jump on board with lynching Nazgul,. it targets someone who is least active and appeases everyone else because it doesn't put a target on their own backs.

Camn, would you agree that, sometimes the easiest lynch is not always the best?

[McGriddle]

I hate the beginning of these games, I try to get out of them as quick as possible so these stupid questions that hold no value to the game aren't worth more than a couple sentences.

I'm pretty sure that those "stupid questions" landed me a vote from you.

I'm pretty sure that's not true. Actually. I am sure.

[Olinea]

I'm pretty sure that those "stupid questions" landed me a vote from you.

I'm pretty sure that's not true. Actually. I am sure.

Then what did you mean by this?

Unvote, Vote: Olinea

with a real vote, you seem to be covering yourself a lot, so to apply some pressure and because that's the only slighty good read I've gotten on page 1, you get a real vote, congratz

Where'd the read come from?

[camn]

I would agree, thian. ANYONE would agree with that.
I would also agree that your questions are boring, elementary, and slightly insulting.

If I thought I should be pushing an 'easy' lynch, why wouldn't I vote Olinea or Mcgriddle? They both have actual real votes on them already. But no, I am essentially the only vote on Naz, and you are asking me, what, random theory questions? Or are they lightly veiled accusations?

Unless you are intentionally trying to muddy up the thread and ruin my townread on you, why don't you try asking me about stuff that has actually happened, mmm-Kay?

The real question is: what are you defending Naz from? Do you see a lurkerwagon? Do you see L-1?
I think you doth protest too much, my friend.
Maybe you are trying to fill the thread with nonsense to cover up the fact that your partner got busted on her first post?