Newbie 993 - Game Over!

[Thian]

Well this is certainly interesting WIFOM

1. If the mod hands out PM's First for Mafia then this would be true.
2. If the mod hands out townie roles first, this would be false.

This isn't WIFOM either. Wifom is circular logic based of "This isn't true, so this has to be, unless of course this is true, which means this has to be, so the other can't be" or in a game sense: "He'd do this, as this alignment, for this reason; so we think he'd be this alignment, for this reason."

Also, the topic of what time the mod sent PM's needs to stop. Trying to out-guess the mod is considered against the "spirit of the game" and has actually resulted in games getting restarted. Use the tools you have in the game, not the ones that are based around how the mod may have done things.

to point out the WIFOM - to me it came off as it being so. but maybe my idea of what exactly WIFOM is it is is wrong and that is my newbness coming into play so thanks for clearing that up. However, that will be enough from me on that subject.

[Thian]

EBWOP
The WIFOM was the quote that Trachimbrod brought up.

It's modgamery, I'd guess that the mafia might get PMs first.

but again I won't go after it to keep the game intact.

[Thian]

and FYI: started my wiki, I really don't know what I am doing with it, so if anyone can help or add a suggestion on what I am doing on that. It would be helpful.

[Mysterio]

Really? I have seen plenty of town mislynches that are then followed by "Hey, he was on the bandwagon, let's lynch him" or "Hey, he started the entire case, let's lynch him" which results in a second mislynch. Once someone flips scum, you get to look for affiliaitions and links to the other players that scum had. Town mislynches have confused townies and scum(Though I've seen instances where it was just townies alone) on them, in most cases.

In the games that I've played, mislynches have yielded invaluable information. Just by looking at which players where gung-ho about the lynch, you can glean a lot of information in ISO. Obviously, your point about a second mislynch is well taken. And anyone who tries to go for an immediate second lynch based on who may have started the bandwagon also falls under suspicion, giving us multiple leads off one mislynch. However, I agree wholeheartedly that making light of a mislynch is a detriment to town, which is one of my main contentions with Leech. He may not mean for it, but his posts do come off as being extremely cavalier about town mislynches.

Yeah, it probably wasn't clear what I was thinking so let me be straightforward about it. The IC immediately said he was going to be gone for most of the day. I figured it would be a much easier way to start the day off by explaining why we just voted for what could be described as the shittiest reasons they've seen. It seemed better than waiting for him to come back and explain why we just voted off of seemingly nothing.

Yes, but why you felt it necessary to mention mislynches at that particular point in the game is what threw us off, not to mention the fact that

nobody really asked for clarification

. Naturally, this made us question your motives. I would like to know why you felt it necessary to point out a somewhat obvious game tip, without anyone actually asking for help?

Also, you asked...

Myst-
What do you think of Brod?

I assume you're referring to Trachimbrod. As of now, I'm not picking up any scummie behavior from him. He seems to be bringing up legitimate issues that I'm more than happy to address. My main suspicions now are with you and Leech. With Leech seeming the most scummie to me.

And I would just like to reiterate what you said earlier that the other players should stop lurking. This game is a lot more fun when everyone participates. Hopefully, the lack of activity from the other players was due to it being the weekend. So far, three players have been pretty much non-existent from the game: Illume, startransmission, and Kirbyoshi.

[Mysterio]

Could you please explain exactly what makes you so suspicious Leech again? I'm having trouble seeing your reason.

Blech, I meant to say "Could you please explain exactly what makes you so suspicious

of

Leech again? I'm having trouble seeing your reason."
Directed at Mysterio.

My main suspicion of Leech is due to the fact that scum tend to misdirect or confuse players as much as possible. The fact that Leech's play so far has been so sporadic (I used schizophrenic earlier, but perhaps that was too harsh of a term) is what makes me suspicious. His cavalier attitude about town mislynches is also questionable. His point about gleaning information from mislynches is certainly true, but his posts come off as if town mislynches are no sweat off his back. It seems to me if you are town, then town lives are important even if you can glean information from their deaths. As for his sporadic play, just look at his responses. He often responds to points made arguing both sides of the issue, which contradict his other responses. For example, he argued in one post that you should never vote someone for ridiculous reasons. But then in a later post, he acknowledges that his vote on me was "pretty ridiculous". He tries to squirm his way out of this obvious contradiction by bringing up Incognito's theory, but he had already stated that his reason was ridiculous. And yet he still voted. Just a few reasons why I'm currently suspicious of Leech.

Yes, he asked which of the two muddles things up more. You could have just answered, but you went into a defensive mode about it

No, I went into an explanation mode about it. What you thought was defensive, was me explaining my positions. I realize that my insights may help other town figure things out, so it seems beneficial for all of us to fully explain my reasoning for something. My clarification about backing off my particular line of argument against you was to make it clear to all other town (especially Thian who asked the question) that I

thought

you were clean for now. That way we could possibly move on to someone else in the interim. However, your reaction was unexpected and gave us a lot of information about your role in this game.

Are you suggesting that because this is day 1, our minds work less effectively than they will in future phases?

No, I'm suggesting that because this is Day 1, our information is limited. By going off on weak threads without the proper insight and ability to back off when necessary leads to unhelpful mislynch days. That fact that you seem

eager

for it is yet another tell you've let slip.

Who's suggesting otherwise? You're defending a case that was never made.

You've suggested on numerous occasions. Your thinly veiled argument about gleaning information from mislynches tells us all we need to know about your leanings on the matter.

What you need to realize is that while I'd rather we actually lynch scum, I know that it doesn't really matter if I die in this game. My own survival is not crucial to a win.

This is just pure scum nonsense. A town mislynch can certainly be helpful

sometimes

, but to argue that your survival is not crucial is so beyond the pale as to be a huge slip up on your part. With townie dead, we have one less possible power, one less vote, one less pair of eyes to help investigate, one less person to pressure someone else who we suspect to be scum. Town deaths

can

be helpful, but for the most part they are

unhelpful

. There is a reason why scum tend to push for mislynches, because even if it may cause them to look suspicious, they have other ways of deflecting that suspicion away, which means that a town mislynch simply brings them closer to a win. I honestly cannot fathom why you would make such a ridiculous argument.

[Mysterio]

Sorry for the triple post, but forgot to add this to my last post.

UNVOTE: Hinduragi
VOTE: Leech

[Hinduragi]

Okay, that is the reason why you wrote it, but why did you feel the need to write it?

Some newbies tend to think of bandwagons as good.(And they can be) While this may not seem particularly harmful, either 1.) A VI jumps the gun and hammers or 2.) Mafia jumps on and hammers - It's not common, but it's happened to me before.

While you say you forgot to unvote, the question I have is: Why are you unvoting in the first place? Unvoting for the sake of unvoting is pointless. If your vote is on someone that might get lynched, and you don't believe in the lynch, then you have a reason. Not having your vote out there, anywhere, is pointless.

The answer is simply that I planned to switch my votes. I just didn't have the time to build a case on said suspect, so I didn't vote on the spot.

Also, how is it WIFOM?

"Hey, those two guys are tunneling on each other. Obvious scum team" "No, they aren't. They're scumhunting but they're obviously confused townie" "Dude, I don't know what you're talking about. It's obvious they're just trying to distance each other" "No, that's legitimate scumhunting" etc etc...

I would like to know why you felt it necessary to point out a somewhat obvious game tip, without anyone actually asking for help?

I mentioned the tip to get the game started.

Vote: Mysterio

I'll explain my case later. I'm going to try and sleep for now.

[Leech]

Please, even though you may quote the same player every time, put the name in the quote. That makes it easier to see who you're replying to. While it's easy to see when someone's replying to something you said, it's harder to keep track of others you are replying to.

However, I agree wholeheartedly that making light of a mislynch is a detriment to town, which is one of my main contentions with Leech. He may not mean for it, but his posts do come off as being extremely cavalier about town mislynches.

Who's making light of mislynches? I said it's not the end of the world, and that mislynches can lead to catching scum. This is precisely why you never no-lynch on day 1. Any information gained from a lynch can lead to catching scum. Mislynching is not the end of the world, and can in many cases be more beneficial as far as information gathered.

My main suspicions now are with you and Leech. With Leech seeming the most scummie to me.

Baseless accusations don't help. If it's a gut instinct you should say it's gut, or if you read something you find particularly scummy, you should quote it. What you are doing, right now is considered fluff: "Adding content to the conversation that can neither be proven/disproven." This is normally done an attempt to further a case without providing any additional reasoning.

My main suspicion of Leech is due to the fact that scum tend to misdirect or confuse players as much as possible.

Quote it, or it didn't happen.

The fact that Leech's play so far has been so sporadic (I used schizophrenic earlier, but perhaps that was too harsh of a term) is what makes me suspicious.

Show us where I've been "sporadic" please. It's easy to say that I've been playing a certain way, but why don't you actually use the quote feature to back your words? At the moment they are baseless and empty.

For example, he argued in one post that you should never vote someone for ridiculous reasons. But then in a later post, he acknowledges that his vote on me was "pretty ridiculous".

Blatant misrep of events in this thread. I said you should never vote for someone for completely ridiculous reasons. The word "completely" means that your entire reason is nonsense. I said in not only the

same

post, but the same paragraph, that my reason, while ridiculous had some merit and I would defend it. I had a reason, I said I would defend that reason, and I have.

It was all in the same post, not spread out over multiple. He's trying to force contradictions in places they don't exist, while paying absolutely no detail to the actual events in this thread. This gives off the "I really don't care" vibe, as long as it makes his case sound probable.

He tries to squirm his way out of this obvious contradiction by bringing up Incognito's theory, but he had already stated that his reason was ridiculous. And yet he still voted. Just a few reasons why I'm currently suspicious of Leech.

You should pay more attention. Again, I said that the reason was ridiculous, and I have never really changed my view on that. I said that Incog's theory did hit scum 50% of the time, which does make more sense than a random vote. I've also said that I wouldn't let that reason, alone, be the reason for a lynch.

However, your reaction was unexpected and gave us a lot of information about your role in this game.

You said you were backing off, and the fact that I continued to question you and pursue leads, not only from myself, but others does, in fact, give a lot of information about my role in this game. The fact that you just assumed I'd stop because you were backing off, gives us a lot of information about yours, as well. You're trying to claim that pressuring someone is scummy, but it isn't.

No, I'm suggesting that because this is Day 1, our information is limited. By going off on weak threads without the proper insight and ability to back off when necessary leads to unhelpful mislynch days. That fact that you seem eager for it is yet another tell you've let slip.

Our information is only as limited as you decide to make it. We started this day on the right note, and it will carry us through the entire phase. Saying "it's day 1" has no meaning whatsoever. Scum can be lynched on day one as long as we work for it. I'm eager to get discussion going, and catch scum slipping. The fact that I constantly pursue discussion, and questioning is another scum tell? Hardly.

You've suggested on numerous occasions. Your thinly veiled argument about gleaning information from mislynches tells us all we need to know about your leanings on the matter.

Funny, you take no effort to actually explain why they are "thinly veiled" or even try to dispute my logic. You're just attempting to discredit me by hinting that my motives are scummy. Sorry but mislynches, while obviously not as good for the town as scum lynches, still provide crucial information that can, and will, lead to catching scum.

This is just pure scum nonsense. A town mislynch can certainly be helpful sometimes, but to argue that your survival is not crucial is so beyond the pale as to be a huge slip up on your part.

Wrong. The second town dies and gets confirmed, that means that every time they stated an opinion on a matter, that they were doing what they thought was best for the town. That means all of their previous arguments were legit arguments, and they actually felt the way they were claiming to. It makes their position in the game, and their accusations

real.

That means, that if I die, people can read over what I have said in this game, and that it could help lead to a town victory. My survival is not as important as town victory.

With townie dead, we have one less possible power, one less vote, one less pair of eyes to help investigate, one less person to pressure someone else who we suspect to be scum. Town deaths can be helpful, but for the most part they are

unhelpful

.

You are either completely off-base or intentionally missing the point. Statiscially in this phase we are more likely to lynch town than scum. This is a fact that can be verified by looking over all the completed games on this forum. Town, the majority of the time, will be lynched on the first day. The information learned from that lynch, and the following night phase, can go a long way in nailing the scum. To say town deaths, for the most part, are unhelpful is a completely false statement that I seriously hope no one agrees with. You are completely, 100%, wrong on this matter.

There is a reason why scum tend to push for mislynches, because even if it may cause them to look suspicious, they have other ways of deflecting that suspicion away, which means that a town mislynch simply brings them closer to a win.

Oh please, that is just absurd. You're seriously going to try and argue that scum, routinely push for mislynches? That is so blatantly false, that I don't really know what to say. Scum, tend to do whatever it takes to blend in. Most mislynches I've ever seen have come from town building a faulty case on town. The scum will take advantage of it, but they aren't in the habit of pushing mislynches, beacuse that gets their hands dirty in the process. That doesn't help them blend in, at all.

I honestly cannot fathom why you would make such a ridiculous argument.

Easy answer: I'm correct.

Now, why did you ignore everything in post 61? I asked you questions, and the fact that you chose to ignore them, is rather telling. Especially when I brought up counter points against your claims, and you just move right on trying to attack me, without even defending your current points. I'm going to request that you answer my questions.

[startransmission]

For the love of God, the wall o texts are ridiculous. Let me read up and I'll offer some opinions.

[Trachimbrod]

I'm not taking the post before the mod as a serious suspicion. There was nothing to go by at the very beginning, it did make me a little suspicious, so I was going to place a slightly-less-than-random vote on him for it. I agree that the strongest way to catch people is by behavior, and mod speculation is about as good as random.

I think Mysterio has had more scummy behavior than anyone else at this point, but like you said Thian, I'm basing it on his double backing off on posts 35 and 40. I think it has caused me to tunnelvision on Mysterio and Leech, and Hind and Thian have been out of focus in my reading. I'll have to take another look, I know there's content on Hind, didn't seem like much on Thian.

I think Leech's ridiculous vote was in the RVS, though he based it on a trend he'd heard about so it was less ridiculous to him. I'm starting to think I may be assuming too much and putting words into his mouth, though I think he addressed this point when steppen (I think it was steppen) brought it up, so I'll go look for that. It didn't look scummy to me either.

About the mislynch topic, it seems to me like everyone is trying to say the same thing, but the devil's in the details of how they say it. I'll read again and take a closer look at it.

Thian has posts in the topic, but I'm not getting any read. What do people think about Thian?
Thian, what do you think of the players that have been posting so far?

[Mysterio]

@Leech

Ugh, would it be possible for you to condense your arguments a bit in the future? I take your point about failing to add the name of the person I'm quoting, but that's mostly done to save time. The above post gives me 14 different points to quote, which is unnecessary.

[Leech]

"Hey, those two guys are tunneling on each other. Obvious scum team" "No, they aren't. They're scumhunting but they're obviously confused townie" "Dude, I don't know what you're talking about. It's obvious they're just trying to distance each other" "No, that's legitimate scumhunting" etc etc...

If you break it down to the extreme basics like that, you would be correct. However most arguments have a lot more depth than that, which can break free of the WIFOM. When you look at how people are reacting to other players, while looking at basic probability and overall attitude it's less WIFOM based and more dependent on logic. I do agree that it's easier to find individuals that are scummy, first, but you should still be looking for teams as well. That is just one more thing you can add to your scumhunting to help weed out the scum.

[Mysterio]

Who's making light of mislynches? I said it's not the end of the world, and that mislynches can lead to catching scum. This is precisely why you never no-lynch on day 1. Any information gained from a lynch can lead to catching scum. Mislynching is not the end of the world, and can in many cases be more beneficial as far as information gathered.

You seem to be under the impression that anyone disagrees with this basic point. As I have already acknowledged (and as others have acknowledged), mislynches can be helpful. The issue comes from (1) your seeming need to point this out in every other post and (2) your lack of acknowledgment that mislynching is a scum tactic. Both of these points leads me to suspect you as being perfectly fine with leading a mislynch, hence my argument that you are being scummie.

Baseless accusations don't help. If it's a gut instinct you should say it's gut, or if you read something you find particularly scummy, you should quote it. What you are doing, right now is considered fluff: "Adding content to the conversation that can neither be proven/disproven." This is normally done an attempt to further a case without providing any additional reasoning.

I have given walls of text with my reasoning. All of this quoting only serves to fracture my posts into a bunch of intelligible parts. You quote one small passage and accuse me of not including any reasoning, but then go on to quote the part of my post that includes the reasoning without so much as a "whoops" on your part.

For example

(I feel I need to bold it so you won't cut it off in future replies), you make the following argument below:

My main suspicion of Leech is due to the fact that scum tend to misdirect or confuse players as much as possible.

Quote it, or it didn't happen.

You lifted that passage out of context in order to try and make some ridiculous argument about me not explaining my reasoning (something you painted as me being in "defensive mode" about before...), but you then go on to actually quote my reasoning a bit further down:

For example, he argued in one post that you should never vote someone for ridiculous reasons. But then in a later post, he acknowledges that his vote on me was "pretty ridiculous".

Blatant misrep of events in this thread. I said you should never vote for someone for completely ridiculous reasons. The word "completely" means that your entire reason is nonsense. I said in not only the

same

post, but the same paragraph, that my reason, while ridiculous had some merit and I would defend it. I had a reason, I said I would defend that reason, and I have.

Showing that I did in fact include my reasoning, which you subsequently attempted to defend yourself against. However, you didn't bother to read this part of my post

before

you tried to paint it as "fluff". What this shows is that you're simply quoting bits and pieces of my post as you go along, without making any effort to honestly respond to my post as a whole. Not only is this annoying from a meta point of view (far too time consuming to respond to your posts), but is also fairly scummy.

My reasoning in 5...4...3...2...

By not actually responding honestly, and instead cluttering up this thread with unnecessary walls of text and accusations of "fluff", you are essentially derailing this Day and wasting time.

You should pay more attention.

Again, I said that the reason was ridiculous

, and I have never really changed my view on that. I said that Incog's theory did hit scum 50% of the time, which does make more sense than a random vote. I've also said that I wouldn't let that reason, alone, be the reason for a lynch.

Which is exactly my point. You made an unambiguous statement that one should

never

vote for ridiculous reasons. And yet, by your own admission,

you voted for a ridiculous reason.

Contradictions are rarely more blatant than that.

You said you were backing off, and the fact that I continued to question you and pursue leads, not only from myself, but others does, in fact, give a lot of information about my role in this game. The fact that you just assumed I'd stop because you were backing off, gives us a lot of information about yours, as well. You're trying to claim that pressuring someone is scummy, but it isn't.

Our information is only as limited as you decide to make it. We started this day on the right note, and it will carry us through the entire phase. Saying "it's day 1" has no meaning whatsoever. Scum can be lynched on day one as long as we work for it. I'm eager to get discussion going, and catch scum slipping. The fact that I constantly pursue discussion, and questioning is another scum tell? Hardly.

I condensed your two points here.

Your reaction to me backing off showed, which I elaborated on earlier, an overzealous need to continue down weak leads to muddle up our efforts. Information is naturally limited due to many unknown factors, including possible powers, player habits, player pairings, bandwagons, night actions, etc. As a result, your reaction made it clear that you were not taking any of those things into account, which can only be due to a few reasons, the major one being that you're scum.

Funny, you take no effort to actually explain why they are "thinly veiled" or even try to dispute my logic. You're just attempting to discredit me by hinting that my motives are scummy. Sorry but mislynches, while obviously not as good for the town as scum lynches, still provide crucial information that can, and will, lead to catching scum.

Again, you quote a passage out of context and then reiterate once again that mislynches can be helpful. Why do you feel the need to continue pointing this out as if it hasn't been acknowledged on multiple occasions? Do you feel that it should automatically exonerate you from the issues I've listed?

The second town dies and gets confirmed, that means that every time they stated an opinion on a matter, that they were doing what they thought was best for the town. That means all of their previous arguments were legit arguments, and they actually felt the way they were claiming to.

Again, reiterating the same point over and over again. You tried to paint my earlier explanations as being in "defensive mode", because I happen to mention the same thing twice. Yet, you've mentioned this same point about mislynches being helpful more times than I can count. What does this say about you?

You are either completely off-base or intentionally missing the point. Statiscially in this phase we are more likely to lynch town than scum.

Agreed, but that doesn't mean we should blindly go forward with a possible mislynch simply because we're statistically likely to do it anyway. I'd rather avoid a mislynch if possible and continue to suss out player reactions, playstyles, and possible pairings. You seem to be under the impression that doing so means I'm approaching the game from a "scum perspective", which is laughably transparent.

Oh please, that is just absurd. You're seriously going to try and argue that scum, routinely push for mislynches? That is so blatantly false, that I don't really know what to say. Scum, tend to do whatever it takes to blend in. Most mislynches I've ever seen have come from town building a faulty case on town. The scum will take advantage of it, but they aren't in the habit of pushing mislynches, beacuse that gets their hands dirty in the process. That doesn't help them blend in, at all.

On this point, I am willing to admit that my limited experience may have led me astray. In the two games that I played, scum did make every effort to push for mislynches. I have no idea how games are played on this forum, as this is my first game here.

Now, why did you ignore everything in post 61?

I did not ignore that post. If you couldn't tell, some of the replies I responded to in my previous two-parter was from that post. I felt it adequately answered your objections, but if there are specific parts that you want me to elaborate on, then point them out.

[steppenwolf]

For the love of God, the wall o texts are ridiculous. Let me read up and I'll offer some opinions.

Agreed. I'm falling way behind. I'm not even sure what you people could possibly be discussing that would warrant such lengthy posts. It's only day 1, for god's sake.

[Mysterio]

It's only day 1, for god's sake.

Funny, that's pretty much what I said.

[Leech]

I'm really trying to keep these posts as short as possible. My posts are always wordy, but I usually don't have WoT's this size until the end of the game. So, I'm trying... lol

You seem to be under the impression that anyone disagrees with this basic point. As I have already acknowledged (and as others have acknowledged), mislynches can be helpful. The issue comes from (1) your seeming need to point this out in every other post and (2) your lack of acknowledgment that mislynching is a scum tactic. Both of these points leads me to suspect you as being perfectly fine with leading a mislynch, hence my argument that you are being scummie.

You have been disagreeing with this point. In fact you called it a "thinly veiled argument" to be exact. I find it rather amusing when you actually mention that I mention this in every other post, when it's always in response to someone else. If it wasn't being continually brought up, I wouldn't be continually talking about it. As far as point 2, actively seeking mislynches isn't as widely used by scum as you are seeming to imply. Adding to suspicions and fueling the fire so the town mislynch eachother is a much more common tactic. Both of your points aren't entirely valid due to your misconception on how scum plays the majority of the time.

I have given walls of text with my reasoning. All of this quoting only serves to fracture my posts into a bunch of intelligible parts. You quote one small passage and accuse me of not including any reasoning, but then go on to quote the part of my post that includes the reasoning without so much as a "whoops" on your part.

I think you misunderstood me. I'm not saying you aren't posting "reasoning" I'm saying you aren't quoting situations that back your reasons. You can say "I find ____ scummy for ____ reason, and that he's acting in _____ way" but if you don't quote someone acting in that way, your words have absolutely no weight to them. You've made some bold claims about me intentionally trying to confuse the town, and have yet to quote me doing it a single time. Your walls of text are full of accusations and "reasons" but devoid of substance, that is my point.

Showing that I did in fact include my reasoning, which you subsequently attempted to defend yourself against. However, you didn't bother to read this part of my post before you tried to paint it as "fluff". What this shows is that you're simply quoting bits and pieces of my post as you go along, without making any effort to honestly respond to my post as a whole. Not only is this annoying from a meta point of view (far too time consuming to respond to your posts), but is also fairly scummy.
My reasoning in 5...4...3...2... By not actually responding honestly, and instead cluttering up this thread with unnecessary walls of text and accusations of "fluff", you are essentially derailing this Day and wasting time.

I made the "fluff comment" about a statement where you just plainly said "I find these two people scum" when there was no reasoning for it. This was in your first post out of the three in a row. It was a fluff statement with no backing. The fact that you're trying to systematically apply that comment to other areas, where I said no such thing, is taking what I said entirely out of context.

As for your reasoning, that's BS. Yes, my posts are wordy, they are in every single game I play in. What does it say about you, in retrospect? You're posting some pretty large WoT's yourself. I ignored it, the first time, when you requested that I shorten my posts because it's hypocritical, but the fact you're using it against me? It's laughable. 2 shorter WoT's in a row is the same thing as one longer one. Why is it, exactly, that you are allowed to splice up my posts, but I'm not allowed to do the same in response?

Which is exactly my point. You made an unambiguous statement that one should never vote for ridiculous reasons.

And yet, by your own admission, you voted for a ridiculous reason. Contradictions are rarely more blatant than that.

Again, I never said that. I took the time to post, in the original post you are quoting, the word "completely" before "ridiculous" to clearly specifiy that your entire reason for voting shouldn't be ridiculous. I also said, in the original post you are quoting, that you should vote for a reason that you can defend. I said my point was "pretty ridiculous" but that I could, and would defend it, because it was still a point. This is, for the last time, not a contradiction. If you could understand basic fundamentals of the english language, you would see this.

Your reaction to me backing off showed, which I elaborated on earlier, an overzealous need to

continue down weak leads to muddle up our efforts. Information is naturally limited due to many unknown factors, including possible powers, player habits, player pairings, bandwagons, night actions, etc.

As a result, your reaction made it clear that you were not taking any of those things into account, which can only be due to a few reasons, the major one being that you're scum.

I don't care about power roles, that is not something that is actively on my mind, and if you are town it shouldn't be on your's either. We don't know which, if any, PR's are in the game and we shouldn't make efforts to figure that out. We should be opperating under the "worst case scenario" assuming there are no PR's, as their goals in this game should be to remain hidden. As far as player habits, pairings, bandwagons and the like I have stated multiple times that we get information from deaths, and have even broken it down to voting patterns, bandwagons and such. You just choose to ignore that. I am taking all things into account, you're just too busy looking for things to use against me.

Also, I hope you see how that bold part contradicts itself. You're actually saying that I'm overlooking how our information is limited, while chastising me for pursuing "weak leads". If we have hunches and see things we find scummy, naturally we are going to pursue them. You can say it's "muddling up 'our' efforts" if you'd like, but I find it scummy to have a suspicion and not pursue it.

Again, you quote a passage out of context and then reiterate once again that mislynches can be helpful. Why do you feel the need to continue pointing this out as if it hasn't been acknowledged on multiple occasions? Do you feel that it should automatically exonerate you from the issues I've listed?

Maybe one of these times what I'm saying will sink in, and you won't have to keep bringing it up. You keep trying to find "clever" ways to dispute it. Also, it wasn't out of context. That was your entire response to something you quoted.

Agreed, but that doesn't mean we should blindly go forward with a possible mislynch simply because we're statistically likely to do it anyway. I'd rather avoid a mislynch if possible and continue to suss out player reactions, playstyles, and possible pairings. You seem to be under the impression that doing so means I'm approaching the game from a "scum perspective", which is laughably transparent.

Why do you seem to be under the impression that I've ever suggested we do anything "blindly"? You seem to be taking simple things and twisting them to try and force a scummy feel. Find where I have even attempted to quick lynch in this phase. Where have I encouraged anyone to vote for you? I'm not concerned with this day ending any time soon, and I'm completely baffled why you'd even come to that conclusion. Also, when I said you had a scum perspective it was in no way linked to this subject. The fact that you are using pieces of an argument in places they were never argued shows me that you are trying to manipulate this into something it isn't, and never was.

It's only day 1, for god's sake.

I'd love for anyone to explain to me how that's relevant. I have never seen such resistance to actually having discussion before this game. Yes, it's day 1, it doesn't have to be wasted. We don't have to have a RVS/RQS. Get this guys...we can jump right into the game! Imagine that. I find it odd how most people hate the RVS/RQS and look for ways around it, so we have game that leaves the RVS at the end of the first page, and people apparently don't want to discuss on day 1. Very, very strange phenomena.

[Mysterio]

Yeah, in the interests of avoiding another wall of text, which seems to be killing this game, I'll just let you have the last word on this particular discussion. The others can decide if there's anything more to elaborate on.

Still have a few sleepers, with Illume and Kirbyoshi being the most quiet.

[Illume]

Chill Mysterio, I'm not lurking. I just saw hohum's PM this morning before I left for work confirming that I got the spot, and just got home from work now.

Give me a bit to read the last couple pages and I'll make a post.

[Illume]

After skimming the thread, and reading Mysterio in iso, I'm gonna go ahead and

Vote: Mysterio

. None of his reasons for voting Leech make any sense to me, and most of them are either twisted words/selective quoting, or don't have any evidence to back them up, in my opinion.. I'd quote everything I find scummy, but I had a long day at work, I'm really tired, and am about to pass out at the computer. I'll do a more detailed post tomorrow, pinky swear.

[Hinduragi]

...You guys have GOT to be more terse. It's great that you guys want to post content but, when it comes down to it, alot of it is irrelevant fluff. I should not have to kill my index finger scrolling down pages. Good luck, Illume. You're going to love the WoT's so far. Also, I'm personally tired of seeing the bs being thrown around. "He's suspicious because of this and this" etc etc...For all I care, it's nothing but a cover to hide yourself. I have seen plenty of "Well, this is interesting"...My main point: It won't mean shit because your vote isn't backing it. Seriously, half the players here haven't used the power they've been given to the fullest capability it has: a vote. I don't care where it is. I'd just like to see something in concrete that can actually have some reflection on wtf's going on in your head. It's like some of you are afraid of putting a vote out there.(Literally, Myst and I are the only ones voting) This entire game has been one big failure of a discussion on game mechanics which doesn't yield many reads. What I want to see is suspicions, opinions, and votes. Not "Mislynches may or may not be harmful because...".

Steppenwolf

-
Go to the last page and answer my questions.

Onto my reasons for voting:

Spoiler: WoT(Spoilered to reduce clutter)

vote: Hinduragi to pressure you for a defense from Leech's suspicions.

I really didn't get this. You're voting/pressuring for someone else's suspicions?

I'm really leaning toward the idea that you and Hinduragi are simply attempting to distance yourselves early, so that the rest of us will find it hard to believe that you are scum buddies.

Cool but I hadn't even replied to him by the time that you said this. This reads to me as an attempt at false scumhunting.

Oh, and just so no one accuses me of dodging, I just happen to be lurking the forums when I saw the thread.

All in all, this reeks,

reeks

with an air of nervousness that has you qualifying and re-qualifying yourself in an attempt to make sure suspicion doesn't fall onto yourself.

Currently, my only suspicion lies with Hinduragi, but depending on his response, that could change to a total "I have no clue" status for me.

You said they were Leech's suspicions earlier and now they're yours. Again, I don't get it.

but I just want to point out that Leech had managed to remove himself from my radar by answering my objections

This is either poor town play or scum with poor scumhunting.

Yeah, in the interests of avoiding another wall of text, which seems to be killing this game, I'll just let you have the last word on this particular discussion. The others can decide if there's anything more to elaborate on.

If you aren't going to argue your case against him(I'll admit, though, that horribly clogged the game up), then why is your vote still on him? That's like saying "He's scum for this, this, and this". Then, after he responds and gives some reasoning as to defend himself, you ignore him.

[steppenwolf]

It's only day 1, for god's sake.

I'd love for anyone to explain to me how that's relevant. I have never seen such resistance to actually having discussion before this game. Yes, it's day 1, it doesn't have to be wasted. We don't have to have a RVS/RQS. Get this guys...we can jump right into the game! Imagine that. I find it odd how most people hate the RVS/RQS and look for ways around it, so we have game that leaves the RVS at the end of the first page, and people apparently don't want to discuss on day 1. Very, very strange phenomena.

It's relevant because not all days are created equal. I assume the depth and vigor of a day's discussion is predicated on the available information. On day 1 we have virtually zero information. With each passing day (and death), we'll have more information and thus much more to discuss. All we can really do today is force people to post often and observe their interactions. I'm sure that'll be useful to analyze after we've had a lynch and/or nightkill.

Steppen -
What's your opinion on things so far? Who do you think seems scummiest? I find it odd that you posted one short reply and then left us.

Well, umm, I think we can conclude that Mysterio and Leech probably aren't both scum. I don't think two scum would pick apart each other's posts like that. That's my gut feeling.

To be honest, I've skimmed through most of Mysterio's/Leech's posts. I've paid a bit more attention to Leech because he and I had a few direct exchanges. His approach is fairly aggressive--sometimes it felt like he was just being contrarian. I honestly think this stems from a sincere attempt to encourage discussion, though.

[Hinduragi]

Well, umm, I think we can conclude that Mysterio and Leech probably aren't both scum. I don't think two scum would pick apart each other's posts like that. That's my gut feeling.

I get where your gut feeling comes into play here because I "sorta" felt the same way. But there's a decent chance that scum is hiding within the game mechanics lynch because he can fully discuss that without any proof as to his alliance. The lengthy posts are indeed unnecessary as they discuss these game mechanics. Game mechanics can be discussed in the mafia discussion section. I'm here to lynch some scum. Another question for you: Who is particularly jumping out at you so far in the game and why?

Leech

-
What about you? Have any suspicions?

Thian

-
I haven't seen much to judge you on. Where do you stand? Why isn't your vote on anyone if you've been asking so many questions?

but again I won't go after it to keep the game intact.

I think you should explain how it was WIFOM. I want to see what's going on in your head. Keeping the game intact involves discussing players' actions in the game and you were doing that earlier. Don't back down on it. It may not be WIFOM but explain it, please.

[Leech]

What about you? Have any suspicions?

Nothing even remotely concrete. It seems that in this game too much conversation could have spawned too early. I do realize that the WoT's this early can be detrimental and make it so the scum don't have to blend in as hard, which is not something I was considering during my exchanges.

Game mechanics can be discussed in the mafia discussion section. I'm here to lynch some scum.

You have played in multiple games here, not everyone else has. Discussing game mechanics can help total newbies, which is what this game is for. So I do disagree with that comment.

[Trachimbrod]

What is a "WoT"? I can't find it on http://mafiascum.net/wiki/index.php?tit ... reviations.

The problem for me is that some of the walls of text could be much more concise. Like Leech said, it's not very helpful to say that you find someone scummy because such a behavior is scummy, however it is very helpful when you can provide the specific example.

Mysterio's posts are in this nature. In 79, he takes a while to bring up an example (the ridiculous vote issue), and I didn't find the example compelling. I'm about ready to vote for Mysterio (with a compromised voting standard to my previous idealistic one), but I'd like a votecount first. I believe he's at L-2 right now (Leech, Hind, and Illume voting)? The day has moved fairly quickly so far.

I'd still like to know what you think about people, Thian. And hopefully Kirby and startransmission will check in soon. I don't want to put anyone at L-1 before two people have posted at all.

@mod: Votecount, please?

[startransmission]

I would like to hear other peoples experience.. thanks.

This is my 23rd game here on MS. I played several games on another site, and modded a few over there as well. I play exclusively here now though. Never played in RL, though it sounds intriguing.

hohum was good enough to link you to the good IC article, and that should cover everything about what I'm here to do. Provide new players with the benefit of my experience while at the same time playing to win. Part of being a good IC is having good activity, and I've failed at that in the past two days. The game started at an awkward time for me and I haven't been as present as I need to be. My plate is pretty clean for the next few days, so I'll be posting much more frequently.

Ok, posting my game thoughts separately.