Mini 765 - Welcome to Hambargarville GAME OVER!!

[burfy]

Not what i saw with the watch topic but a good spot. I was thinking, surely he would be reminded about this game by the PM he gets and then would go confirm. Why would you possibly need to be watching the thread to know/remember when to confirm. Of course what you said works too, what if when he gets the PM he is distracted by another idea and his first thought isn't to confirm but to do something else, like pm another player.....

But what you said actually makes some sense too. Two inconsistencies?

Not sure if it adds to anything and i don't want to make a mountain out of a mole hill. I'd like to hear an explanation from someone

[burfy]

And having seen the vote count and having some reason to do this

unvote

[CUBAREY]

In my experience, random voting is necessary for REAL discussion to take place. So I "go with the flow" to avoid the aforementioned problem. I will, however, immediately stop as soon as something real happens. Something real has happened, so I am quite done now. Natural impulse is screaming for me to start calling X scum and say that he's trying to get me in trouble on baseless evidence. Again, though, that's natural impulse, there's no reasoning behind it. I'm going to go ahead and assume that witchhunting is kind of required when there's no evidence, and I just pulled the short straw with my Wiccan magicks.

QFT.

That said, did anyone's response to this seem scummy to you?

Hmm, X put Idiotking in a Catch 22 to see if he would squirm. Idiotking immediately says X is trying to get him in trouble on baseless claims instead of seeing the point was to see his reaction.

At this point its enough for me to

unvote, VOTE idiotking

[Kreriov]

So you'd rather I hadn't defended myself, then? Just let the thing slide?

No, or course not. Its just that as Cubarey says you do seem to squirm (overreact) a bit in your defense.

I am more interested in the Wall-E thing. The game rules clearly state that scum can only talk at night and this was a day start. Is there some sort of implied N0?

[Ojanen]

Not what i saw with the watch topic but a good spot. I was thinking, surely he would be reminded about this game by the PM he gets and then would go confirm. Why would you possibly need to be watching the thread to know/remember when to confirm. Of course what you said works too, what if when he gets the PM he is distracted by another idea and his first thought isn't to confirm but to do something else, like pm another player.....

But what you said actually makes some sense too. Two inconsistencies?

Not sure if it adds to anything and i don't want to make a mountain out of a mole hill. I'd like to hear an explanation from someone

Well I checked the beginning and hambargarz posted there that all roles had been sent out 45 minutes after posting the first message. After this I thought that most people were probably offline and saw the thread first only after getting the PM. But also I checked Wall-E's profile and he sent a message to Mish Mash one minute before hambargarz opened this thread. So he might have actually seen the thread right away and forgotten to push the button. But in that case also must have gotten the PM.
So it is a bit inconsistent with his excuse!

[Ojanen]

I am more interested in the Wall-E thing. The game rules clearly state that scum can only talk at night and this was a day start. Is there some sort of implied N0?

I thought the confirmation stage is always N0, but this assumption comes from previous games on other forums. Do the mafiascum -experienced players know the standard here?

Mod, can you answer if there was a N0 phase during confirmation when scum were allowed to talk?

[X]

wow, this is confusing. there are like multiple cases going on independent of each other.

Can we get a vote count

so it's clear who are the targets, please?

Is this your first mafia game?

Yes! You've gotta go to the thread first to push the button. If you go there why not confirm at the same time? It's only one word.

Yes, but he didn't do either. So I'm gonna ignore that and chalk it up to Hanlon's Razor. Why are you making a big deal out of this?

And having seen the vote count and having some reason to do this

unvote

What reason did you have to do this?

Unvote: Idiotking

,

Vote: burfy

.

[qwints]

The clear implication of Wall-E's post was that he had had the opportunity to press the button to watch the topic, i.e., he was in the thread. It would be a reasonable explanation if had confirmed in thread and not posted again until he was prodded. It would also be a reasonable explanation if he had arrived at the thread and the thread had been locked because the mod was taking pm confirmations. Neither applies in this case. I'm interested to see where this leads:

unvote, vote Wall-E

[Lleu]

Hm... think I'll focus on one person at a time here.

The question was rhetorical, and not meant seriously. Seriously, what are you doing?

Do you really think this is going to get us anywhere?

Who knows? I guess it's just his personality rubbing me the wrong way. As I said, his expressive reactions strike me as odd.

A lot of people dislike random voting, this can't be the first time he heard of such a dislike.

It's the first time I've heard someone put it like "I hate random voting. With an undying, ridiculously malevolent passion." Again, I think this is probably just your personality and not scummy, but I'll do some meta later to make sure.

even if he was at L-2 it wouldn't matter, if we stopped random voting people because they already have votes on them it wouldn't be random voting any more, it'll be lets spread out the votes evenly so there's no pressure what so ever.

Fair enough.

[Idiotking]

No. I expressed myself badly here. We need to talk, I really don't like the stereotype that defending yourself is scummy.
I was just referring to your line in the original vote message: "It's a random vote, why should I bother coming up with a fake excuse?".

Oh. That wasn't the original vote message. I voted, then unvoted, then re-voted when someone told me to random vote. So I did to avoid the problem we have apparently run into anyway. The absolute FIRST vote I made had a "real" random vote reason. The second was just for the sake of random voting, as requested.

Hmm, X put Idiotking in a Catch 22 to see if he would squirm. Idiotking immediately says X is trying to get him in trouble on baseless claims instead of seeing the point was to see his reaction.

At this point its enough for me to unvote, VOTE idiotking

Um... no? Actually read what I said. I said that was NATURAL IMPULSE. I also said I would assume that he did that to start the discussion, which worked. Did you honestly just read what you wanted to?

No, or course not. Its just that as Cubarey says you do seem to squirm (overreact) a bit in your defense.

I don't think CUBAREY said anything worthwhile, actually. I didn't squirm. It's a normal thing for me to put down my thoughts in my posts like that. I said it was natural impulse. This was true. This is what makes for OMGUS votes. Note, I did not OMGUS vote. Nor will I. Not just because X didn't vote for me, but because I assumed he was trying to get the discussion going. It succeeded, and so I move on.

[yellowbunny]

Oh. That wasn't the original vote message. I voted, then unvoted, then re-voted when someone told me to random vote. So I did to avoid the problem we have apparently run into anyway. The absolute FIRST vote I made had a "real" random vote reason. The second was just for the sake of random voting, as requested.

Okay I have some issues with this statement. Firstly, you said that "someone" said you should random vote. If you are *really* interested in scum hunting...shouldn't you take the time to figure out who told you what? How else are you going to find scum other than by analyzing what people say to one another?

But I will make your job easy for you this time and point out *I* was the one who raised that question. Secondly, I asked you WHY YOU DIDN'T REVOTE...I did not say you SHOULD randomly revote. You never answered my question; you simply made up some random vote. This not answering the question seems odd to me...so:

unvote; fos: idiotking

[hambargarz]

Mod, can you answer if there was a N0 phase during confirmation when scum were allowed to talk?

During confirmation stage private communication was allowed and stopped the moment the game was started. I wouldn't technically call it Night 0 though because no night actions were allowed.

[burfy]

wow, this is confusing. there are like multiple cases going on independent of each other.

Can we get a vote count

so it's clear who are the targets, please?

Is this your first mafia game?

Yes! You've gotta go to the thread first to push the button. If you go there why not confirm at the same time? It's only one word.

Yes, but he didn't do either. So I'm gonna ignore that and chalk it up to Hanlon's Razor. Why are you making a big deal out of this?

And having seen the vote count and having some reason to do this

unvote

What reason did you have to do this?

Unvote: Idiotking

,

Vote: burfy

.

What are you doing?

Ok, no, this isn't my first mafia game. If it was my first i would be playing a newbie game. Not sure if you were trying to accuse me of something with that questions or what so i'll leave it at that unless you elaborate.

Next, the reason i unvoted i thought was fairly obvious. My standing vote was random, the reason was because his name was too long(???). Clearly an insignificant random vote. However, we were heading out of the random stage and i had some suspicions of someone for a genuine reason, hence i acted on that. If i had been convinced of Wall-E's guilt, i would have voted but i wasn't certain and wanted to give him time to answer, so i simply unvoted to show i was taking my voting more seriously now.

Let me reverse your question on you, What reason did you have for voting me? The reason you provide for your vote isn't a reason, its a question: What reason did you have....
My only assumption is that you were concerned about my stance against WallE. Is that it? Because if so, you voted for the wrong person. I merely unvoted and was waiting to hear something from wallE, while Ojanen had already jumped in and voted. I'm not placing blame on Ojanen here, i'm just stating that you reason can't have been that i was making a case against WallE because i was the more mild/reserved of the two people campaigning against him.


All in all, your post in question seems odd to me. You ask me one question, and then vote me for not specifying a reason that was fairly obvious for

unvoting

and not re-voting.

I'll be frank with you. What i draw from this is that you and WallE are most likely scum together. You've suddenly seen your partner draw suspicion that maybe rings truer with you than with the rest of us. our partner also isn't responding in this thread so you decide to jump in and defend him/draw away the fire. That's what i see. Not sure if its true and i want to hear from WallE about the confirming thing. But this seems logical

FOS: Wall-E, X

And you might have blown it too. Not sure if Wall-E intends to return to this game but if he hadn't and had been replaced and no one had spoken up, the whole case would have collapsed because the replacement wouldn't be able to answer about the confirming stage and there would be no other leads. At least now, even if Wall-E does get replaced we have a lead and a good idea of who to focus on.


Better get talking son

[Idiotking]

Okay I have some issues with this statement. Firstly, you said that "someone" said you should random vote. If you are *really* interested in scum hunting...shouldn't you take the time to figure out who told you what? How else are you going to find scum other than by analyzing what people say to one another?

But I will make your job easy for you this time and point out *I* was the one who raised that question. Secondly, I asked you WHY YOU DIDN'T REVOTE...I did not say you SHOULD randomly revote. You never answered my question; you simply made up some random vote. This not answering the question seems odd to me...so:

unvote; fos: idiotking

Ah, my apologies. The reason I didn't revote was simply because it didn't cross my mind. I was busy and had to go somewhere, thus I unvoted real quick so my improperly-placed random vote (improperly placed because even my fake "reasoning" for voting was off the mark) wouldn't remain an eyesore. It was merely human error, if you must see error in it at all.


And I agree with you when you say:

"If you are *really* interested in scum hunting...shouldn't you take the time to figure out who told you what? How else are you going to find scum other than by analyzing what people say to one another?"

However, again, discussion hadn't started yet and I'm no good at getting it started (unless I'm the one examined, of course). And again, I have said this before and I'll say it again: I revoted to avoid the problem of a lot of aimless discussion as to WHY I did not revote. Clearly I have failed in this endeavor. Nevertheless, to me it does not matter who tells me what during the RVS. The fact was that SOMEONE, admittedly you if you say it was you, pointed out that error, and so I strove to amend it. I attempted to fix the problem, failed, and here we are, drifting along in that discussion I was so anxious about. Oh well.

[yellowbunny]

@Idiotking: Okay, I accept your answer for now, but do not be suprised if I have follow up questions

---------------------

And on Wall-e...I initially accepted that his explanation, thinking along the same lines as:

Yes, but he didn't do either. So I'm gonna ignore that and chalk it up to Hanlon's Razor. Why are you making a big deal out of this?

But the fact that Wall-e *STILL* isn't responding at all sort of undermines this. I'm willing to believe that he forgot about the thread once. But to forget about it twice so soon...smells awfully fishy to me.

[CUBAREY]

Idiotking you phrased your reply to X quite strangely:

"Natural impulse is screaming for me to start calling X scum and say that he's trying to get me in trouble on baseless evidence. Again, though, that's natural impulse, there's no reasoning behind it. I'm going to go ahead and assume that witchhunting is kind of required when there's no evidence, and I just pulled the short straw with my Wiccan magicks."

Why would the Natural impulse be to call him scum? He was not accusing you he was asking for you to explain your vote. Moreover, such a question is not a witchhunt its a request for information. Any innocent player would have viewed it as such. A guilty player however would have the "Natural impulse" to cover his own guiltiness by calling the request for information an attempt " to get me in trouble on baseless evidence".

The only other plausible explaination is that you are an innocent townie but are paranoid about anyone questioning your motives. Since I do not believe that you are paranoid I must assume that you are a Mafioso.

[Idiotking]

The natural impulse would be to find fault in those who find fault in you. I can hardly believe that you believe me to be scum over the phrasing of ONE SINGLE QUOTE. Do you have any other "evidence"?

Of course he wasn't accusing me, it's too early in the game for that (oh, wait,

you

are accusing me, right?). I say it was NATURAL IMPULSE. Have you never heard of OMGUS? Do you not think townies are capable of it? Oh, wait, I didn't OMGUS. I think you're grasping at straws here, to be honest, and calling me "a Mafioso" after you made only two posts regarding a single statement I made is somewhat frightening.

[Kreriov]

Hmm, well idiotking you make a very good point, while I do think you overreacted a bit, it was only 1 vote. That is almost the problem in the early game, until votes start stacking up on someone, there is very little to go on and thinking you are scum from one post, well, its almost as good an excuse as any so maybe just keep being levelheaded like your last post.

Anyway, on to more important things, IMO. I am getting more and more curious about Wall-E not posting. The 'he might be scum because he might have been PMing' is WILDLY speculative. The possible X / Wall-E connection is a bit speculative and Wall-E's failure to participate is NOT speculative. Also, at some point we have to stack a few votes on people to get em to talk.

Therefore....

unvote

Vote: Wall-E

[Ojanen]

Yes! You've gotta go to the thread first to push the button. If you go there why not confirm at the same time? It's only one word.

Yes, but he didn't do either. So I'm gonna ignore that and chalk it up to Hanlon's Razor. Why are you making a big deal out of this?

It's day 1, X, it's not like we have much material gathered go on about. The nature of the game in the beginning is to pick up nuances and be vocal about them to get reactions. I see you have done the same to other messages in this game.
Anyway, I dislike like the silence.

[yellowbunny]

@Cubarey: I agree with Idiot and Krer...calling Idiot scum for saying that his was a natural response is really weak.

The only other plausible explaination is that you are an innocent townie but are paranoid about anyone questioning your motives. Since I do not believe that you are paranoid I must assume that you are a Mafioso.

Um..you know this how? What evidence do you have AGAINST him being paranoid? If you have something, I'm missing it. While Idiot has said things which are noteworthy, I think you are grasping at straws on this one. Maybe I should call you a Mafioso for making such a strongly worded accusation on such flimsy evidence?

[X]

Do you really think this is going to get us anywhere?

Who knows?

Bad answer. You should be trying to find scum.

FoS: Lleu

.

Next, the reason i unvoted i thought was fairly obvious. My standing vote was random, the reason was because his name was too long(???). Clearly an insignificant random vote. However, we were heading out of the random stage and i had some suspicions of someone for a genuine reason, hence i acted on that. If i had been convinced of Wall-E's guilt, i would have voted but i wasn't certain and wanted to give him time to answer, so i simply unvoted to show i was taking my voting more seriously now.

I didn't think the reason you unvoted was obvious. I could tell that it was a random vote, but you said you were unvoting because of the vote count. W1N had two votes, though - hardly a reason to unvote. Combined with how you wanted to see who the "targets" were, that makes me think you were looking to get on a wagon inconspicuously. Having seen no real wagon, you unvoted without revoting, so that you'd be uncommitted to any position when opportunity (a townie wagon) arose. That's how I thought it was suspicious. Your explanation is possible, but I'm still somewhat suspicious.

My only assumption is that you were concerned about my stance against WallE.

That's a bad assumption. The things that I voted you for, I quoted. I thought that the Wall-E thing was not really a valid point. Now that he's lurking again, I can see that there's something to it. But no, it had nothing to do with your position on Wall-E.

Cubarey, I agrey with Idiotking, Kreriov, and YB.

It's day 1, X, it's not like we have much material gathered go on about. The nature of the game in the beginning is to pick up nuances and be vocal about them to get reactions. I see you have done the same to other messages in this game.
Anyway, I dislike like the silence.

Yes, I agree that it's worth getting reactions. It just looked like you were trying to make a serious accusation. By now, there's enough evidence to say that you might be onto something, though.

[yellowbunny]

I am getting extremely annoyed that Wall-E isn't posting. It screams scum...yet, I keep thinking that as an experienced player, he would know better and not do that. (I had a similar situation in the last game I was in...we lynched an inactive IC townie...) I've been going over this in my head (is he more or less likely to be lurking cuz he's scum if he's an IC?) but I think I'm getting to a WIFOM situation. So lets throw a little more fuel on the fire and...

vote: Wall-e

Also...we haven't heard from Jase or Noob in the past 2 days. I'd like to hear what you two have to say on the situation, and Jase...I'm still waiting for a response to my question...

[Idiotking]

unvote

I don't think Jase has done anything to deserve the vote thusfar, so I'll remove it. CUBAREY and Wall-E, I'm looking at you two. I don't think Wall-E's lack of posting is scummy, just lazy, but that doesn't change the fact that it looks bad. CUBAREY, I'd like for you to better explain your standing toward me. Do you have any further evidence? Or rather, any evidence at all? Why so few posts before calling me scum? Hmm? Answer me or I'll end up voting for you, because really, grasping at straws like that is pretty suspicious.

[qwints]

Wall-E is fast approaching prod-time. (Last post was on March 28th.) That should tell us whether he's lurking or inactive.

[Jase]

I am getting extremely annoyed that Wall-E isn't posting. It screams scum...yet, I keep thinking that as an experienced player, he would know better and not do that. (I had a similar situation in the last game I was in...we lynched an inactive IC townie...) I've been going over this in my head (is he more or less likely to be lurking cuz he's scum if he's an IC?) but I think I'm getting to a WIFOM situation. So lets throw a little more fuel on the fire and...

vote: Wall-e

Also...we haven't heard from Jase or Noob in the past 2 days. I'd like to hear what you two have to say on the situation, and Jase...I'm still waiting for a response to my question...

I'm still here I'll post my thoughts later.

Also what question are you referring to? I've been watching but I don't remember.