Newbie 442 - Game Over

[LoudmouthLee]

1.If LML really thinks that he's a worse mafia player than I thought, but I seriously doubt he thinks his arguments are flawless on page 2. This is a personal judgement that you have assessed of him.

2.CES and Fritzler are players known for being extremely agressive. By extremely agressive I mean, they will generally join the largest wagon, and then tell everyone to vote said person.

There's a massive difference between the way I play and the way CES and Fritzler plays. I incorporate logic into my play

[MeMe]

Vote Count

:

White

(2):

IH, LoudmouthLee

Peter Venkman

(1):

cheeky-little-asian

IH

(1):

Snix

not voting

(3):

Chromagnum, Peter Venkman, White

Four'll do it.

[White]

I see. Well, I wasn't being hypocritical. I explained why and you ignored it.

Not only that but you still haven't addressed the "so many reasons" that there are to vote me.

What are the "so many reasons" to vote White???

Because of the fact that you could have answered this and added input to the game and asked some questions, perhaps given your opinion on some stuff. But instead you didn't, i'm going to vote you.

Vote: LoudmouthLee

[White]

EDWOPD: Correction, because of the aforementioned

and

my previous reasons that I chronicled on a former post, I am voting you.

[IH]

It may be fun for you to know what's going on but I think it's more fun to figure it out on your own.

Worst. Reasoning. Ever.

I mean if you don't want any tips and just kind of want to generally ignore experience, and the attempt to make you a slightly better player, then you can ignore me, and hurt your team either way.

But whatev.

No, I agree 100% with aggressiveness, as long as there is some foundation to it.

Even if foundationless can produce some gigantic results?

I'm unsure if I agree with the hypocritical scumtell in this sense myself LML. Normally I would agree with you, but this looks more to be the case of a newbie over reacting myself.

There's a massive difference between the way I play and the way CES and Fritzler plays. I incorporate logic into my play

Yeah, but they're the best examples of "Agressive" play.

Post 77 by White is an OMGUS vote.
I'm unsure if it indicates scum or town.

I think I'm going to

unvote, vote:Snix

At the moment, because I'm unsure where he's going with saying that I'm helping to much. I feel it's more scum trying to make something useful get downplayed, but perhaps I'm being vain.

[Snix]

I wasn't trying to downplay your helpfulness, IH. I was just trying to explain to you my previous post where I said it felt like you were too helpful, by all means continue being helpful I was just trying to explain my feelings..

[IH]

Yes, but I don't understand why you think being too helpful is scummy. Clearly voting for me means one thing. You think it's scummy, and that I should stop.

I'm also unsure what you mean by letting people figure it out. I would very much prefer this be a fun game and one that I win. So playing with players who know what they are doing is much more fun than playing with someone who knows nothing.

[LoudmouthLee]

I see. Well, I wasn't being hypocritical. I explained why and you ignored it.

Not only that but you still haven't addressed the "so many reasons" that there are to vote me.

What are the "so many reasons" to vote White???

Because of the fact that you could have answered this and added input to the game and asked some questions, perhaps given your opinion on some stuff. But instead you didn't, i'm going to vote you.

Vote: LoudmouthLee

White:

It's a pity you have made this a personal vendetta. I made a point on you, and you don't like it. I don't like your response. I don't like your play.

Jeez, you make it borderline impossible to like you! I play agressively. If you don't like it, I suggest you avoid me in all future games.

You have done nothing but used logical fallacies (IE: Appeal to Emotion) and failed to alleviate my feelings of "Whitescum"

[IH]

Hmm Apparently I didn't post what I thought I did.

LML, do you think that perhaps this is just an oversensitive newbie? I've been seeing them all over the place, and what Thok seems to be calling "the Raging Rabbit syndrome".

It mostly stems from day 1 of Board games mafia.

In other words, these look like candid reactions of what is really going through his head, not a calculated move as a way to get someone lynched.

That is one reason why I moved my vote to Snix.

[LoudmouthLee]

Well... Oversenitive newbie showing scumtells. Do we just ignore blatant tells?

[IH]

Well at one time I would agree that appeal to emotion is a scumtell, but the last few times I've seen it used were by town players....

I would say for newbies they are null tells. The personal vendetta bit would point towards town most. At the moment I would say White was townier than most.

Now experienced players using appeal to emotion I would be more wary of. Newbies not so much.

In other words Logical Fallacy=/=Scumtell automatically.

[Snix]

Yes, but I don't understand why you think being too helpful is scummy. Clearly voting for me means one thing. You think it's scummy, and that I should stop.

Actually, I never said it was scummy. I said it felt off, (post 42) And I voted for you because you were, in my opinion, failing to bring sufficient evidence against white. It stays there because you didn't truly answer my question, but your change in vote solidifies what I felt to begin with. So,

unvote

. It was more of a pressure vote then anything.

[quote"IH"]
I'm also unsure what you mean by letting people figure it out. I would very much prefer this be a fun game and one that I win. So playing with players who know what they are doing is much more fun than playing with someone who knows nothing.
[/quote]

I just, personally, think it is more fun to figure it out on my own, that's all. So, for it to be fun to me I'd like not to know everything. I understand your want for a fun game too, and that to you it's fun if you win. We just have different opinions about fun that's all.

[IH]

Well obviously I can't give you everything. Thats what the game of Mafia is about, unknowns.

If I'm town, it's impossible because all I have to go off on is my alignemnt.

If I'm scum, I don't WANT you to figure it all out.

What I'm trying to do is show you the way to figure it out.

[Peter Venkman]

If I'm scum, I don't WANT you to figure it all out.

This has alerted my sensibilities.

IH, surely you can realize how playing the role of "useful adviser" is a great scum cover.

I appreciate your involvement in this game, and I appreciate the knowledge you have shared. However, don't assume that because you are talking game theory it exempts you from suspicion.

-Peter

[Chromagnum]

If it was a pressure vote... why did you unvote him? Doesn't look like there was much pressure applied to be honest with you.

And I voted for you because you were, in my opinion, failing to bring sufficient evidence against white. It stays there because you didn't truly answer my question, but your change in vote solidifies what I felt to begin with. So, unvote. It was more of a pressure vote then anything.

[Chromagnum]

EDBWOP - I know you mentioned you unvoted because he changed his vote... but the fact that he didn't answer your question to your satisfaction is a different reason to unvote...

Or am I missing the point of your pressure vote?

[White]

Post 77 by White is an OMGUS vote.

I disagree. I said I was voting for him because he hasn't dealt with any of the points I brought up against him and thereby draws my suspicion.

If you don't like it, I suggest you avoid me in all future games.

This is exactly what i'm going to do. I find it very hard to see your points and deal with you rationally.

IH, surely you can realize how playing the role of "useful adviser" is a great scum cover.

I completely agree with this point. It's a great cover especially when playing with newbies.

[Snix]

EDBWOP - I know you mentioned you unvoted because he changed his vote... but the fact that he didn't answer your question to your satisfaction is a different reason to unvote...

Or am I missing the point of your pressure vote?

He did, in a sense, by unvoting. He's also, if I interpret what he said correctly, stated that his attacks were foundationless; or at least that the foundation was for knowledge and answers of his own. So I did get answers, in one form or another.

[IH]

This has alerted my sensibilities.

IH, surely you can realize how playing the role of "useful adviser" is a great scum cover.

I appreciate your involvement in this game, and I appreciate the knowledge you have shared. However, don't assume that because you are talking game theory it exempts you from suspicion.

Good, glad I have alerted you. I know I'm not exempt from suspicion, BUT using "Hey he's helpful, he could be scum!" is wifom. Of course it doesn't clear me.

"Hey he could be scum trying to look helpful!"
"Hey he could be town, trying to be helpful!"

Which is why that argument is very bad.

If you don't think it is a null tell, feel free to go over my other newbie games where I have done this regardless of alignment ^_^

I disagree. I said I was voting for him because he hasn't dealt with any of the points I brought up against him and thereby draws my suspicion.

Yes I know, but I think your main motivation is that he's attacking you. While I have in fact shown you that these points are moot, you did not vote him until LML posted again confirming his suspicion against you.

He did, in a sense, by unvoting. He's also, if I interpret what he said correctly, stated that his attacks were foundationless; or at least that the foundation was for knowledge and answers of his own. So I did get answers, in one form or another.

No, untrue. My vote was not a reaction vote, I moved my voted because White's action's look townie-er to me.

The fact that you unvoted me when I unvoted white makes me slightly more suspicious of you, and when I called you out, you seemed to backpedal more than to reaffirm anything.

[White]

I voted LML after he posted because I was giving him time to respond to my arguments brought against him. I thought it would be unfair to simply vote him without giving him a chance to defend himself. He didn't defend himself so I voted for him.

IH, I think Peter is just trying to bring it to attention for the rest of us Newbs to think about....I could of course be wrong but when he said it, that's what I thought.

[IH]

No I know what he was saying, but I was actually talking about Snitch's arguments.

Also I had already covered the things about LML I think, as I was unsure you would listen to him anyways.

[Snix]

[quote"IH"]
My vote was not a reaction vote, I moved my voted because White's action's look townie-er to me.

[/quote]
I was talking about your vote on white.. if that wasn't for reaction than I'm pretty sure I've lost my ability to read.

[IH]

Snix you lost your ability to read.

I really don't like how you came off as joking with your racist comment, than when I joked back you attacked me for acting weird and making strange deductions. Your whole "I'd vote on you, but... that's putting somone at -2, and that is bad even though IH just said it isn't..." rubbed me the wrong way.

If you sincerely feel my behavior has been scummy I would encourage you to vote. If you are town, you shouldn't worry about posturing. The only tool you have to find scum is your vote, use it to the fullest. I find your hesitance confusing.

I would find the first comment enough for slightly better than a random vote

unvote, vote:White

the second part I would say would just suggest he is not reading (or just not reading long posts)

Post 26. I had no other better place to move my vote until you, and I moved my vote from white for aforementioned reasons.

= )

[Snix]

My mistake I was going off of your insistence that being aggressive was good for reactions, even if that aggressiveness was unfounded. I just figured your vote on White was part of that aggressiveness. And since aggressiveness = good for reactions I figured your vote was for reactions.

Glad to learn I'm illiterate though.. That'll be fun to work through.

[LoudmouthLee]

White, I will give you a few options here, because I'm getting a sinking suspicion that we are, indeed, two pro-town players fighting with each other. I have had these types of arguments before (Generally with Thok or PJ, but nonetheless), we get so wrapped up in our own arguments, we fail to see the other side of them.

If you deem it appropriate, I would like for us to "start again" and give each other a chance to make cases on others. If you are pro-town (as I know that I am), I think we're both probably doing the town a major disservice here.

If you disagree and you still want to attack me for the simple reason that I was attacking you, then I can't stop you. Your arguments towards me were scummy by nature. IH's point about your overdefensiveness could be indicative of a few things, and for D1, I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt.

So, wanna start over?

Unvote, White

I need a fresh reread of this game.