Mini 1159 - Powerrox93's Mini Normal I (Game Over)

[Surprise_Carcinogen]

vote:jase

I'm not liking the sarcasm, or the "I'm a good player" line. It's akin to "I'm town", which is not something good town say. Bad town and Bad mafia do in equal quantities, which in my o pinion makes him, either way, a decent choice for d1, at least at the moment.

[Powerrox93]

Votecount 1.5

Updated as of post #50

yabbaguy (3) - StefanB, Zdenek, Jase
Jase (3) - imaginality, Uncle Pain, Surprise_Carcinogen
tarsonisocelot (2) - andrew94, [L]
[L] (2) - tarsonisocelot, crazypianist1116
StefanB (1) - yabbaguy

Not voting (2) - Me=Weird, GroupThink

If there's a mistake let me know.
13 Alive == 7 to Lynch && 7 to No-Lynch

yabbaguy

will be lynched at deadline if votes doesn't change

V/LA:
Me=Weird: until April 25th
StefanB: April 30 - May 1

Deadline: May 14 06:00 CEST

[yabbaguy]

No, I'm very wrong. Stefan is tunneling Town.

Unvote

Your reactionfishing: You should know that people on RVS try to analyze everythink in the beginning of a game, and your posting was strange. So acting strange will drove reaction from town or mafia both.
Your second post: Newsflash by your own reasoning your are scum.
The most confrontational isn't me, it's you. I didn't call someone a VI (altough indirectly) in my second post.
I never called you a VI. If I had thought you were this, than I would have checked how bad a VI you were and then acting accordenly. (there are VIs, who are very good at loosing the game for town, they are in my opinion a good lynch if you haven't found scum on day 1)
But the Best ICsign is normaly a good sign that you are a better player. So your first post was just strange, so I tryed to get a reaction from you.
You reacted, your reaction doesn't read town, it reads scum, liking my vote.
Of course we are on page 2 so I am not 100% sure to have found scum, I am not complete rational (called VI) and I know of the danger of tunneling, but I like my vote on you.

You still fail to grasp the concept of why I made that first post. Trying to see how people react to a post that we now realize is clearly not mine is a way of polarizing the field. My hypothesis is that someone who is scum would jump on that and opportunistically try to call me defensive scum. It is such an easy post to pick on, and that's very much intentional.

Stefan, I lied and fished for reactions with Town intent. Such a concept exists.

Likelihood at the moment is that scum is either Jase or a lurker laughing at the fact that there are two Townwagons right now. I wish more would at least attempt to shed light on my attempt to polarize the game and make meaning of it.

[Surprise_Carcinogen]

Who has failed to post thus far, and how long does one really have to wait before they're a d1 lurker? I can understand a couple days, but I'd think by the end of the second day people can no longer have excuses for not posting yet. It's important when you say "A lurker" to make a list of who those might be. It makes it more clear where your suspicions lie, and clarity can only(in most cases) help the town.

[Uncle Pain]

yabbaguy: You realize that you’re giving us a bucket of WIFOM here? Of course you could have done this all with your stated intention… but no one but you

really

knows. You did something controversial and now you get what you deserve. No offence meant, just mentioning. I myself am rather neutral about that move of yours.

andrew94: I’d be happy if I could stick around here without an avatar.

Surprise_Carcinogen: From those who haven’t posted so far, Me=Weird is V/LA and GroupThink hasn’t even confirmed yet, so lurking would be a false assumption. Zdenek and crazypianist1116 have each posted once and both more than one day ago, these two are best qualified to count as lurkers but I think we should wait with accusations until Tuesday when Easter is over.

[Zdenek]

Imaginality: I don't exspect him to answer that he is mafia, but do you exspect him to answere he is a bad player? Since he now has 2 votes on him, I exspect him to answer why he did it, which gives imformation on yabbaguy, so I don't think that was completly usless, beside it was part of my reason for voting yabba so for me not completly usless

I don't like that Stefan is trying to justify asking rhetorical questions. The fact that he asked one early is not a big deal (if it happened later in the game, I'd find it scummier), but his defense of it seems to be active lurking - contributing, but not scum hunting.

I thought that [L]'s vote on Ocelot was essentially a random vote (even though [L] tried to give some sort of reasoning for it), so I find Tarson's response to it:

I've played in games with 2 and 19 sides, but not three to my knowledge[could change by the time this game ends]. Is there any reason that not accounting for all of these and other possibilities in a throwaway comment at the start of RVS is suspicious or is this just because I stole a piece of candy from you?

to be overly defensive. It feels like he is trying to determine how serious the vote actually is.

Jase, why is Yabba's reaction testing scummy?

Who has failed to post thus far, and how long does one really have to wait before they're a d1 lurker? I can understand a couple days, but I'd think by the end of the second day people can no longer have excuses for not posting yet. It's important when you say "A lurker" to make a list of who those might be. It makes it more clear where your suspicions lie, and clarity can only(in most cases) help the town.

This post is active lurking. He asks a question he could easily find the answer to himself and then pads the rest of the post with pro-town fluff.

Unvote
Vote Surprise Carcinogen

[Jase]

Unvote
Vote: Uncle Pain

Obvious omgus and vote hopping on top of it all, godamn, this is almost too easy.

Seriously though...do you actually have a reason for voting me or am I just getting on your nerves?

You also misrepresent what I said about you. I don't mind you asking questions that aren't game relevant, but that's the only thing you did. ANYTHING relevant to the game with that post and there wouldn't have been a problem. Hell, even the lack of contribution wasn't a huge deal, but now you're all "You think I should contribute?! VOTE". That strikes me as more than a little...touchy I guess. Also of interest. You accuse me of throwing around random accusations, but the only two I've accused of anything include you and yabba.

SC: Realize that "WTF" is not a real question. Or at least not one that deserves a response.

Zed: Isn't my reasoning on yabba clear?

Anyways this may or may not be my last post today. Easter and whatnot.

[yabbaguy]

Of course WTF is a question that can be responded to. I told you why I was confused.

Uncle Pain, this is extraordinary now. You have to at least realize that there us Town intent in that post. Don't call the post itself anything but that, or you've sorely missed the point.

Carcinogen is who I am looking at right now. I am not going to vote as recklessly for a bit now, but active lurking can start very early in my opinion. Looking holistically, I reckon he is that sort that is being generically useless.

[Surprise_Carcinogen]

WTF is, to my mind, a request to justify your actions. Honestly, it was 2 am when I wrote that and I had just barely skimmed. I recognize and accept your point completely.

Zdenek, you cannot possibly d ecide "active lurking" from one post. It's overly offensive, and honestly kind of silly. I asked a question requiring someone to clarify their point of view. I know that I could have gotten my OWN conclusion from that, but I wanted to know who HE meant when HE mentioned lurkers.

To that end, I pretty well agree about needing to wait for it to not be easter to tell.


More to the point, Zed, you have posted twice, and have barely done any scum-hunting yourself, going so far as to have a two-word reasoning for your vote, as well as a column of meaningless fluff, essentially just accusing two people of post-padding without actually saying much yourself, except for recasting a vote.


Yabba, why exactly are your eyes on me at the moment?

[crazypianist1116]

I think we should be passive aggressive and not explicitly say who we're suspicious of. Or not.

Very Suspicious:
Uncle Pain
Jase
Carcinogen

Somewhat suspicious:
StefanB


Uncle Pain: First post voting me=weird was off. Me=Weird had yet to post at that point (and still hasn't) but Uncle Pain didn't comment on anything about the first page and is probably trying to deflect attention away from his scum buddies.
Second post, when has attitude ever been a reason to vote for somebody? Again no content. Probably bussing Jase.
Third post, no useful content. Trying to deflect onto lurkers. Yabba was actual being useful with his original post unlike somebody I know.

VOTE: Uncle Pain

Jase:

Imaginality: Oh sorry should I be voting Yabba?

I'll set this right with a quick
Unvote
vote: Yabba

I'm so glad you're watching out for me!

READ: Oh sorry I'm being scummy? Let me sheep this vote so I look better in everyone's eyes without explaining my actions at all!
The Uncle Pain vote makes looks like he's just trying to get off of the yabbaguy case and attack an easy target.

Carcinogen: The Jase vote looks opportunistic. By his logic, bad players say they're good. Thus Jase saying he's a good player is neither a scumtell nor nulltell, but a bad player tell. Further he hasn't don't much in terms of content. His defense against zdenek calling him lurkish is more lack of content and trying to say zdenek has not done any scum hunting when he has.

StefanB: No reason to believe someone is town just because they are labeled "Best IC." The case for yabbaguy makes no sense whatsoever. I'm not seeing how the reactionfishing is supposed to be scummy at all. It moves the game forward out of RVS and gives everyone reads.

Zdenek's first post looks suspicious for the same reason as Uncle Pain's.

Me=Weird needs to get in the game.

[andrew94]

@uncle pain, an avatar makes it easier to recognise that you posted that particular post.

@crazypianist when you say uncle pain is prob bussing jase, but you said hes first post was to deflect attention away from his scum buddies?
wtf

[crazypianist1116]

Andrew94, your question is not a sentence and that makes it difficult to understand.
I believe you're trying to say the fact that I called Uncle Pain on bussing and also said he was trying to deflect attention on the first is contradictory? The two aren't mutually exclusive. He didn't comment on anything that happened on the first page, and it's possible for there to be more than two scum.
Your sig bothers me.

[Surprise_Carcinogen]

What scumhunting has he done? He has two whole posts, none of which contained very much scum-hunting. Your defence of him is suspicious in my mind.

And, no, my reasoning is, good players don't feel the need to outright say "I'm a good player." I don't consider it a sign of scum, but bad play in general, and at the moment, as I don't really have a strong scum-read on anyone, aside from perhaps Zed(and I'd hesitate to try and make anything against him for fear of being called out for omgus), I have to follow what I do have.

Also, I encourage you to drop disliking andrew's point in his sig. I can link you to the last game I played with him in which we wasted a good deal of time talking about it, but it's currently ongoing and I don't think i can reference ongoing games without being banned(I think. If I can then I'll happily link)

[Jase]

WTF is, to my mind, a request to justify your actions. Honestly, it was 2 am when I wrote that and I had just barely skimmed. I recognize and accept your point completely.

Wait, this sounds sarcastic in my head, but it's so obvious that I'm right that it's hard to believe that this is the case.

WC: Clarify that post.

Fos: Crazypianist

For stealing my shtick.

[Jase]

EBWOP: Also Pianist I could not possibly have sheeped imaginalitys vote for yabba. No such vote has ever existed.

[Surprise_Carcinogen]

WTF is, to my mind, a request to justify your actions. Honestly, it was 2 am when I wrote that and I had just barely skimmed. I recognize and accept your point completely.

Wait, this sounds sarcastic in my head, but it's so obvious that I'm right that it's hard to believe that this is the case.

WC: Clarify that post.

Fos: Crazypianist

For stealing my shtick.

No, I honestly agree. No sarcasm at all. I tend to plainly state when I realize my point was silly or wrong and take agree with a person.

[Powerrox93]

Votecount 1.6

Updated as of post #65

Jase (3) - imaginality, Uncle Pain, Surprise_Carcinogen
tarsonisocelot (2) - andrew94, [L]
Uncle Pain (2) - Jase, crazypianist1116
[L] (1) - tarsonisocelot
yabbaguy (1) - StefanB
Surprise_Carcinogen (1) - Zdenek

Not voting (3) - Me=Weird, GroupThink, yabbaguy

If there's a mistake let me know.
13 Alive == 7 to Lynch && 7 to No-Lynch

Jase

will be lynched at deadline if votes doesn't change

V/LA:
Me=Weird: until April 25th.
StefanB: April 30 - May 1

Deadline: May 14 06:00 CEST

[GroupThink]

VOTE: Uncle Pain

[Jase]

No, I honestly agree. No sarcasm at all. I tend to plainly state when I realize my point was silly or wrong and take agree with a person.

You're killing me here. Whatever I'm gonna take you at face value.

[Surprise_Carcinogen]

No, I honestly agree. No sarcasm at all. I tend to plainly state when I realize my point was silly or wrong and take agree with a person.

You're killing me here. Whatever I'm gonna take you at face value.

Yes, you should, that's what I'm telling y ou to do. Damnit, we are wasting time and space here.

GroupThink, you need to explain yourself. A person doesn't make their first post on page three and make it a completely blank, wordless vote. That's just not groovy.

[StefanB]

Unvote

Yes I have gotten over emotion.

andrew94: I’d be happy if I could stick around here without an avatar.

Surprise_Carcinogen: From those who haven’t posted so far, Me=Weird is V/LA and GroupThink hasn’t even confirmed yet, so lurking would be a false assumption. Zdenek and crazypianist1116 have each posted once and both more than one day ago, these two are best qualified to count as lurkers but I think we should wait with accusations until Tuesday when Easter is over.

Uncle Pain: Why don't you want an avatar?
I think it's to early to call out active lurking, exspecially since the beggining of a game is the most difficult of it.

I don't like that Stefan is trying to justify asking rhetorical questions. The fact that he asked one early is not a big deal (if it happened later in the game, I'd find it scummier), but his defense of it seems to be active lurking - contributing, but not scum hunting.

Zdenek: Why are rhetorical questions scummy? They are a perhaps not the nicest form of doing thinks but scummy? I can see that normaly rhetorical questions alone do not help because they bring nothink new to the game. And of course I did defend them. Called useless by imaginality and inderectly called a VI by yabbaguy did make me react. Normally I try to react to people who say somethink about me, if I think its important. Active yes, lurking(?) I would bet that I have more content than you, much more.
Also don't like that active lurking from one post. You don't active lurk from one post. Active lurking is trying to be active but not contributing much. If a player post an usseless post (in your opinion) thats not enough. Active lurking on page 3 is to early to determine, if the player is not very obvios.


Crazypianist: I don't belive that someone is town for laballed "Best IC". Normally that means good player and starting the game like he did, is a very WTF moment. I went after the strange comment, he made his comments and I found them scummy. (Yes more scummy than his first post) I don't think he is sure town, no, but there are people who are more suspicios.
Me=Weird is at the moment VLA, so he will probably post after easter.

SurpriseCarcinogen: Don't link to ongoing games. Be careful even talking about them. That will probably not getting you banned (at last not normally) but getting you modkilled (if you are also a player in the second game in both games), which is also bad. Let's making my mistake on page 1 and a few prods the worst that happens to our poor mod this game okay?

EBWOP: Also Pianist I could not possibly have sheeped imaginalitys vote for yabba. No such vote has ever existed.

What do you mean with this? At the moment you voted yabba, he had 2 votes on him, from me and Zdenek? They were no imaginality. They existed. And you voted him after presure from Imaginality.

Hello GroupThink, care to say more?

[Uncle Pain]

Ah, now things are getting interesting, the cases evolve around me… let’s address them.

Uncle Pain: First post voting me=weird was off. Me=Weird had yet to post at that point (and still hasn't) but Uncle Pain didn't comment on anything about the first page and is probably trying to deflect attention away from his scum buddies.
Second post, when has attitude ever been a reason to vote for somebody? Again no content. Probably bussing Jase.
Third post, no useful content. Trying to deflect onto lurkers. Yabba was actual being useful with his original post unlike somebody I know.

My first post was an RVS vote. I felt at that time that the discussion hasn’t become too serious. As I mentioned above, I stand rather neutral about yabbaguy’s attempt to create discussion (and yes yabbaguy, I do see the townie aspect in there, I’m just not sure if it’s the best way to start Day 1) and please don’t get me started about the rather ridiculous “case” against tarsonisocelot because of her welcome post. Hence my reluctance to step into these two discussion threads; my initial intent was to watch and get the whole picture. By the way, my RVS choice was made by skimming the nickname list and picking a name that struck me in any way and well, “Me=Weird” just did that. I didn’t know back then that she was V/LA (the mod only wrote this in #27), otherwise I surely would have picked another player for RVS voting.

My second post (third post actually) was meant to be provocative (hooray it worked), yet has actually three reasons behind it:

1. His first post starts a small case against yabbaguy and then he turns around and votes StefanB. I honestly fail to see the logic behind that, calling someone scummy and yet voting someone else
   without giving any reason whatsoever
   . RVS was definitely over at that point so either he failed to see this or he wanted to provoke and/or attract attention.
   
2. In his second post he just bows down to imaginality’s and [L]’s reactions and votes who
   they
   are suspecting, with some sarcasm being the icing. Now I may not be a big fan of sarcasm in Mafia Scum, hence my “don’t like the attitude”. But my real problem with this post is that he looks opportunistic, already early in the game. Opportunism is always scummy.
   
3. In this fourth post he accuses me of not participating much (a fact I accept) and implies that I should be watched more. And indeed some OMGUS moment arose in me then (if you prefer to call it “touchy”, go ahead), I mean, this guy has hit my scumdar twice in three posts and then he accuses
   me
   of being anti-town by not participating? This was the last straw so I voted him.

I disagree with my third post being useless. I confronted yabbaguy with my point of view on his honey pot in order to clarify my stand on him. I think you went a bit too far by implying that stating my opinion and expecting a reaction is not useful. Regarding the lurkers part, I wanted to rectify Surprise_Carcinogen’s misconception. I mean, he stated it, I checked it and found it false – why should I not call him out on this?

So crazypianist1116, please elaborate what about my statements you actually found scummy.

Obvious omgus and vote hopping on top of it all, godamn, this is almost too easy.

Seriously though...do you actually have a reason for voting me or am I just getting on your nerves?

First, for the voting reasons, see above; this should take care of your OMGUS argument. Second, up until now, I fail to see myself vote hopping, especially compared to you. While I have RVS-voted Me=Weird and then switched to you for the reasons above, you have switched your vote from StefanB (which you, by the way, never gave a reason for) to yabbaguy (which you, by the way, never gave a reason for) to me (which you finally did give a reason for); this should take care of your vote hopping argument. Now what was your case against me again?

Uncle Pain, this is extraordinary now. You have to at least realize that there us Town intent in that post. Don't call the post itself anything but that, or you've sorely missed the point.

Yes I realize this. But as I said, I argue that it’s not the best way to start Day 1 in a pro-town way. It just looks forced and you inflict a small stain on your clean slate. I don’t say it’s scummy. I just say it’s unusual to me.

VOTE: Uncle Pain

Come on, what is that supposed to mean? We’re on page 3 and in the middle of a discussion, you can’t just hop on the bandwagon and not tell us why.

Uncle Pain: Why don't you want an avatar?

It’s a personal matter, nothing rational… it feels kind of neutral and unbiased when I encounter players without avatars. I sometimes tend to interpret avatars and try to correlate this with my findings from their posts. These things distract me. I simply feel better without an avatar that people may use to define me in one way or another.

[Me=Weird]

Hi yabba. Thoughts as I read:
I think imaginality and andrew are reading to much into TIO's post.

hate this please don't lynch me today. Are you so bad that you are often lynched as town on day 1, or are you scum, so are afraid to be lynched?

Dislike this. He's taking what yabba said seriously, something that scum would tend to do. Also, the question is dumb. "yes, I'm scum, don't lynch me"
stefan#21: Hard to comprehend, but it seems as though he expects yabba to answer something entirely different?
zdenek#23: Same as stefan 16 minus the question.
UP#24: Nothing to comment on? That's the best you can do?
[L]#28: Hopping a bandwagon.
stefan#31: He did give a reason, you just didn't pay attention to his sig.
Jase#33: Bad. You think yabba's scummy, but you vote someone else for "no adequately explained reason"? I could maybe see it if the unexplained reason was stronger, but you admitted to ignoring the yabba thing.
Jase#37: Badder. Not only are you bandwagonning, but it's like "oh shoot! I did something scummy. does jumping a wagon make it better?".
carcinogens posts are feeling off. Wanting people to take you at face value is something scum would want.
stefana#70: Completely misses zde's point, which wasn't that rhetorical questions are scummy, but that the defending was scummy. Also, you say that there are more suspicious people, but you remain unvoting.

scum:

Jase
StefanB
Surprise_Carcinogen

null/undecided

crazypianist
Groupthink
[L]
TIO
yabbaguy
zdenek

town

andrew
imaginality
Uncle Pain
M=W

The farther up you are, the scummier you are.

Vote: Jase

[Powerrox93]

Votecount 1.7

Updated as of post #72

Jase (4) - imaginality, Uncle Pain, Surprise_Carcinogen,Me=Weird
Uncle Pain (3) - Jase, crazypianist1116, GroupThink
tarsonisocelot (2) - andrew94, [L]
[L] (1) - tarsonisocelot
Surprise_Carcinogen (1) - Zdenek


Not voting (2) - yabbaguy, StefanB

If there's a mistake let me know.
13 Alive == 7 to Lynch && 7 to No-Lynch

Jase

will be lynched at deadline if votes doesn't change

V/LA:
StefanB: April 30 - May 1

Deadline: May 14 06:00 CEST

[Surprise_Carcinogen]

Me=Weird. You are confusing me here. Only scum would want people to believe they are sincere. So...your list of scum suspects. Those are actualy your town reads. And every discussion and scum hunt should be read in complete reverese. That is g enuinely a stupid thing to say. When I say "Okay, you're right, your argument has swayed me" I actually mean that, and wanting you to read that as sincerity is not, spoiler alert, scummy. I also dislike being thrown on your scum-team list when all I've done is tell people that I don't generally resort to a good deal of sarcasm(above post being an exception.

Basically, what I'm asking is, if scum are the only ones who would want people to think they're being sincere, how is this game supposed to progress? I want some clarification on "Wanting people to take you at face value is something scum would want." or I'm going to start finding it an opportunistic reach.