Mini 889 - Shopping Frenzy (Over)

[Debonair Danny DiPietro]

Town are more likely to flake than play a game they’re cold on, scum is more likely to smother a game in non-participation even if they’re cold on the game. Torquez opened the game making pre-emptive excuses for lazy scum behavior, instead of waiting for it to happen and damaging the game we should lynch them instead.

~~~~~

[

Do you think people are less likely to replace out as power roles as well? Or just scum. Either way, I think this part of the case on Torquez is reading into null-tells too much.

My dataset doesn't speak to that issue. From a psychological perspective I'd agree that it's reasonable, but I simply don't have the experience to make such a claim.

[nhammen]

Vote Count

Debonair Danny DiPietro (3): Sweep, muh316, el simo
muh316 (2): Wulfy, julienvonwolfe
Torqez (1): Debonair Danny DiPietro
julienvonwolfe (1): PaltryExcuse
eleven knives in a throat (1): Scott Brosius
Josh Lyman (1): eleven knives in a throat
Chinaman (1): Torqez

Not voting

(1): Chinaman, Josh Lyman

with 12 players remaining, it takes 7 to lynch

[Torqez]

@ DDD

JL, what are your own opinions of your activity in this game?

I will admit I'm not playing this game as well as I could be. I attribute this to inertia -- the game got going pretty quickly and I meant to come and post, and then there was more to reply to, and the longer I waited the more there was to reply to, and so on. Like a snowball.

I know I have to do some heavy lifting to redeem myself, and that (hopefully) will come real quick.

Why not the same policy @ Josh that you attribute to me? Double standards?

[julienvonwolfe]

This game is so boring. The only interesting thing is DDD vs Torqez, and I don't have any reads on them either way.

The other players need to chime in.

[eleven knives in a throat]

Town are more likely to flake than play a game they’re cold on, scum is more likely to smother a game in non-participation even if they’re cold on the game.

Do you have any numbers to back this up? I doubt flaking rates are noticeably different between town and scum.

Torquez opened the game making pre-emptive excuses for lazy scum behavior, instead of waiting for it to happen and damaging the game we should lynch them instead.

We should lynch him now instead of waiting for scum behavior? How can that possibly be a good idea?

[Scott Brosius]

There is a ton of lurking in this game. I don't 100% agree with the LAL philosophy, but in my experience especially lately, I have been finding that a lot of lurkers are scum. I don't like a lurker lynch D1 as there are not enough interactions to go on and there is less information if the lurker flips town.

[nhammen]

Prodding muh316

[muh316]

There is a ton of lurking in this game. I don't 100% agree with the LAL philosophy, but in my experience especially lately, I have been finding that a lot of lurkers are scum. I don't like a lurker lynch D1 as there are not enough interactions to go on and there is less information if the lurker flips town.

Theres not much to discuss about in a slow game like this, thats why everybody is lurking. And DDD you have no reasons for torqez then why would you bother to bring the discussion forward

[Scott Brosius]

What do you mean there is not much to discuss? How is this different from other games?

[Debonair Danny DiPietro]

@ DDD

JL, what are your own opinions of your activity in this game?

I will admit I'm not playing this game as well as I could be. I attribute this to inertia -- the game got going pretty quickly and I meant to come and post, and then there was more to reply to, and the longer I waited the more there was to reply to, and so on. Like a snowball.

I know I have to do some heavy lifting to redeem myself, and that (hopefully) will come real quick.

Why not the same policy @ Josh that you attribute to me? Double standards?

He acknowledges a current problem that needs to be fixed, you're making excuses for ones that haven't even happened yet. Now if he doesn't address the problems then I will be all over him for the same reason as I am on you for merely doing enough to remain in the game. By preemptively justifying your behavior I can only assume you intend to follow through with it and thus I must respond appropriately.

[Torqez]

Except your inconsistent in the fact that you give him allowance to " Now if he doesn't address the problems then I will be all over him" whereas you haven't given me the same justice.

Double standards, like I say. I honestly don't know what your motivation is as I totally see your behaviour as Antitown.

[el simo]

He acknowledges a current problem that needs to be fixed, you're making excuses for ones that haven't even happened yet. Now if he doesn't address the problems then I will be all over him for the same reason as I am on you for merely doing enough to remain in the game. By preemptively justifying your behavior I can only assume you intend to follow through with it and thus I must respond appropriately.

Normally I wouldn't have a problem with this kind of logic, but I think taking what Torqez said and saying it's to fall back on is a huge stretch. Even if that was his plan, it's incredibly weak, no one would let a scummy action pass because the player claimed, "oh but look I was bored and even said so here."

This whole thing is stupid.

[muh316]

What do you mean there is not much to discuss? How is this different from other games?

In my other games, a strong discussion usually began with one person talking about no lynch(which i did) after in one human day we would put in about 4 pages a day.

[Debonair Danny DiPietro]

He acknowledges a current problem that needs to be fixed, you're making excuses for ones that haven't even happened yet. Now if he doesn't address the problems then I will be all over him for the same reason as I am on you for merely doing enough to remain in the game. By preemptively justifying your behavior I can only assume you intend to follow through with it and thus I must respond appropriately.

Normally I wouldn't have a problem with this kind of logic, but I think taking what Torqez said and saying it's to fall back on is a huge stretch. Even if that was his plan, it's incredibly weak, no one would let a scummy action pass because the player claimed, "oh but look I was bored and even said so here."

This whole thing is stupid.

Uh no, I've used that excuse before quite capably. I basically told the town as scum that I was going to lurk and if they had any questions feel free to ask. Never lynched, never even pressured that heavily, scum won.

[Josh Lyman]

Town are more likely to flake than play a game they’re cold on, scum is more likely to smother a game in non-participation even if they’re cold on the game.

Do you have any numbers to back this up? I doubt flaking rates are noticeably different between town and scum.

Torquez opened the game making pre-emptive excuses for lazy scum behavior, instead of waiting for it to happen and damaging the game we should lynch them instead.

We should lynch him now instead of waiting for scum behavior? How can that possibly be a good idea?

We are not exactly waiting for scummy behavior from Torq. He's admitted he's bored with Mafia, and if he's

that

bored, why enter a game? Why stay in a game? Why admit it in-thread? This is just too unusual to be pro-town.

I know I said he's been more active, so I moved my vote, but --

Wait. Just had a thought.

eleven,

why are defending Torq so vehemently?

vote: eleven

[nhammen]

Vote Count

Debonair Danny DiPietro (3): Sweep, muh316, el simo
muh316 (2): Wulfy, julienvonwolfe
eleven knives in a throat (2): Scott Brosius, Josh Lyman
Torqez (1): Debonair Danny DiPietro
julienvonwolfe (1): PaltryExcuse
Josh Lyman (1): eleven knives in a throat
Chinaman (1): Torqez

Not voting

(1): Chinaman

with 12 players remaining, it takes 7 to lynch

Edit: Hahaha! I thought this would start a new page. but it's 115 not 125...

[Debonair Danny DiPietro]

Except your inconsistent in the fact that you give him allowance to " Now if he doesn't address the problems then I will be all over him" whereas you haven't given me the same justice.

Double standards, like I say. I honestly don't know what your motivation is as I totally see your behaviour as Antitown.

There's a clear difference between your pre-emptive excuses and his ex post facto acknowledgment of error. His indicates a willingness to play the game properly, yours would've merely provided you with cover for your poor behavior.

[el simo]

Uh no, I've used that excuse before quite capably. I basically told the town as scum that I was going to lurk and if they had any questions feel free to ask. Never lynched, never even pressured that heavily, scum won.

Then you played with a poor town because I would have never let that pass.

[Debonair Danny DiPietro]

Uh no, I've used that excuse before quite capably. I basically told the town as scum that I was going to lurk and if they had any questions feel free to ask. Never lynched, never even pressured that heavily, scum won.

Then you played with a poor town because I would have never let that pass.

Uh no, I was playing with some players I respect pretty highly in that game. Town basically broke their own will and scum did nothing to stop it and then played under the radar the entire game.

Of course that game has the combination problem of folding under it's own massive size and severe lurker problems. This game has only dealt with the second issue, but untreated such an issue can absolutely cripple a town.

[eleven knives in a throat]

We are not exactly waiting for scummy behavior from Torq. He's admitted he's bored with Mafia, and if he's

that

bored, why enter a game? Why stay in a game? Why admit it in-thread? This is just too unusual to be pro-town.

I guess it is illogical for Torqez to decide to play a game if he finds it boring. But I still have no idea how in the hell that's an alignment-influenced decision, seeing as how he made it before he had an alignment.

As to why he would admit he's bored if he was town, that's a no brainer. He supported the no-kill plan, and felt it necessary to give the reason he supported it, and that reason happened to be because he's bored. I find that infinitely more believable than the idea that he thought claiming to be bored would somehow give him a get out of noose free card.

I mean really, when have you ever seen a townie say "Unvote: So-and-so, he probably just committed those scum tells because he was bored"?

eleven,

why are defending Torq so vehemently?

I'm not defending him. I'm questioning the guy who's attacking him.

And since that guy's brushing me off, let's see if I can't get his attention the hard way.

Unvote
Vote: DDD

[julienvonwolfe]

Well, partly to see what comes of it and partly to try and inject some life into this game:

unvote, vote: Torqez

[Chinaman]

Paltry, and I say this since I'd rather let the JL play out before commenting on it, I think Chinaman's statement of "I don't think

scum-DDD

" indicates previously playing with a DDD before.
However, I would like to know that if you do have meta or previous experience, did his play then seem like it was toward his alignment's favor in hindsight? (Actively saving partners in his argument, casting doubt (chainsaw), remaining unattached or pursuing the lynch of his partners?)

If gut feeling what about his play initiated your gut read?

I do not remember playing with DDD before. My read is primarily gut on him. I would be getting more into WIFOM if I tried to explain it which I don't really have a problem doing. I just don't see scum going headlong full blast on someone this early in the game. It's too risky and from my experience scum, no matter how experienced, don't go that risky so early. Hell, I have seen townies lynched for less (I am often one of them) so yeah, that plays into my gut read on him.

He acknowledges a current problem that needs to be fixed, you're making excuses for ones that haven't even happened yet. Now if he doesn't address the problems then I will be all over him for the same reason as I am on you for merely doing enough to remain in the game. By preemptively justifying your behavior I can only assume you intend to follow through with it and thus I must respond appropriately.

Normally I wouldn't have a problem with this kind of logic, but I think taking what Torqez said and saying it's to fall back on is a huge stretch. Even if that was his plan, it's incredibly weak, no one would let a scummy action pass because the player claimed, "oh but look I was bored and even said so here."

This whole thing is stupid.

^This

So, now that we are obviously out of RVS, I have a few questions:

@Torque: Do you think your vote is a powerful tool and if so, do you think keeping track of it is important?

@PaltryExcuse: Same question to you as to Torque.

@Scotty B: Same question to you as to Torq and PE.

@Torqez: I get the sense you are letting DDD's pressure get to you a little bit. You seem rational in your defense, but why are you only defending at this point? The only vote on you is from DDD and it seems as though you have defended yourself well, but where is the pro-town behavior? Where are your questions that you need answered to pursue your scumhunt?

@Sweep:

I DDD's arguement to lynch Torqez is very weak and only consists of the fact that he did not post content on the first three posts.

I think that DDD is the most likely to be scum at this stage, So far he has been trying to get Torqes lynched but with no reasoning as stated above.

Care to elaborate? Where exactly did you find DDD's argument that he was voting Torq due to his lack of content in the first 3 posts? Where do you think this game is headed? If you had to lynch someone and deadline was tomorrow, who would you push for?

@Josh L: You start your last post looking as though you were going to get behind a Torque lynch, yet in the same post, you switch it around and Vote eleven after asking him a question. I would like you to explain why you voted eleven in this instance. What does voting him accomplish at this point? Basically, the same question I had for Torq and others above. Also, if you just had a thought in the middle of a post, why not erase the thought before it? What was your strategy in posting one thought but casting your vote on another thought (which is a question you didn't wait to be answered)?

JVW: Just saw your last post. Same question to you as to Torque and others above. If you do think it's a powerful tool, do you think casting it out just to see what happens weakens the threat behind your vote?

I think that's all the questions I have. I pretty much think the rest of you have explained yourselves in your actions thus far (for me at least).

[el simo]

Uh a poor town because I would have never let that pass.

Uh no, I was playing with some players I respect pretty highly in that game. Town basically broke their own will and scum did nothing to stop it and then played under the radar the entire game.

Of course that game has the combination problem of folding under it's own massive size and severe lurker problems. This game has only dealt with the second issue, but untreated such an issue can absolutely cripple a town.[/quote]

Also, no, because there is a difference between what you did and what Torqez said.

From what I understand you told the town you were going to lurk and if they had any questions they should ask you and you would answer them.

What I would like to know is how does this resemble what Torqez said in any way? And how does claiming to be going through a phase of boredom set him up to say "see I was just bored, it doesn't count as scummy," AND how does that even make sense? I don't see how being bored equates to an excuse to cover scummy moves with, and I don't see how it even relates to your example.

[Chinaman]

Alright, this DDD vs Torq thing is getting a little....silly. I personally don't feel DDD is justified in his vote on Torq, but I honestly see him as catching onto something small in the RVS, jumping on it (thus breaking us out of RVS), and not being able to let it go. I don't see this as a scum move but more of a town move. The more and more it goes on, the more of a tunneling town he has become (in my eyes). I say this because it is very obvious at this point that NOBODY is being swayed by DDD's case on Torq yet he is still pushing the issue. Where is the motivation for that if he's scum?

[Josh Lyman]

@Chinaman: Please explain to me what good a tool is if it isn't used. Also, can you tell me what events would have to fall into place in order for you to cast a vote?

Also, please tell me your thoughts on RVS and potential reasons for avoiding same.