Newbie 442 - Game Over

[MeMe]

Vote Count

:

White

(2):

IH, LoudmouthLee

LoudmouthLee

(1):

White

Peter Venkman

(1):

cheeky-little-asian

IH

(1):

Snix

not voting

(2):

Chromagnum, Peter Venkman

Four!

[IH]

No, it just seems that you're trying to hard to be helpful, maybe. I'm very skeptical of people being nice.

Why?
Also take a look at my other newbie games and see if they are any different please.

Well you as an IC should know there's no blanket answer for so broad a question. I personally feel however that it depends on the individual. If you're asking for how I feel about you and LML, yes I do feel there is some scumminess there. There is a level of agression that is indeed scummy. I think that level is different depending on the person and you've got to feel out the person before you make a judgement call.

Wrong. Aggressiveness is not scummy. Not inherently. Aggressiveness is a good way of producing reactions.

if you can tell me why you disagree in a logical way it would be nice.

Well IH, first off this dismisses completely the possibility of both IC's being scum. It's entirely possible even though not probable. Do you deny that both IC's can be scum? I think I read someone there's a 30-ish percent chance of it being just that. But again, dont' take my word because my memory is very selective.

I did not say that, and was not dismissing it, but I found it interesting. It was something of note for later.

In the above 5 lines of your post I found it very difficult to find this point that you mention. Please restate it for me and i'll be glad to refute.

Top of page 2, better than a random vote comment, bottom of the post.

Well, I think he believes atleast some of what he's saying because not only is he acting on it but he is also seemingly indignant when confronted which suggests a deep seated belief in what he's saying. But remember, i'm not him so I don't know for sure, these are only my thoughts on the matter.

But clearly it is irriational indignation. Look at it, it even looked like you had a "wtf" attitude at one point. That is the point of that type of play.
Similar playstyles are Cogito Ergo Sum and The fritzler.

I can see where you would feel this way because you only read the part of me saying he practically called me mafia. However if you looked alittle harder you would have seen me mention crap in the same sentence. I simply stated it as crap because didn't want to go into a post by post analysis of this crap.

Ok then. Why do you think he's scum if it's not because he's attacking you?

I am sorry you feel that way. I did not suggest he played wrong, I suggested simply that anyone can learn anything at all from anywhere. That's not rude but rather informative for those that have forgotten. For you to point out that you feel this is pointless is strange to me though, if you just felt it was so pointless why did you feel the need to comment on it? Why not just ignore it as White's longwinded fluff?

If you don't understand what he's doing, then it's going to be hard for him to learn something from you.

Where can I find this mafia wiki?

Well, I guess I don't understand. If you discredit someone, then the town won't take them seriously and if they're mafia they are powerless...isn't that the goal? I know that it's really effective. What's wrong with refuting their arguments and discrediting them as a whole?

Mafia wiki link is in the top of the page, around the log in thing. Click the word wiki.
Also, no not at all. When you discredit someone, and not refute their argument you are Attacking the person
It's only effective in you looking scummy, as that is considered a very scummy play here. It means you have no answer to their argument, so you're only going to discredit them as a whole. Town would be foolish to listen as such.

Now, if I misunderstand you, and you mean discredit his arguments instead of just generally discrediting him, then that is correct, but you should not just undermine his argument. You need to respond to it head on.

This gives the town the most information. It helps the town get a better read of you, and clearly this will only incite more discussion.
For some reason I feel like i've gone off on a tangent.

Technically you are inhibited by work but I was just wanting to know the particular circumstances of my fellow players. You gave a perfectly valid reason and i'm happy. I wasn't trying to criticize you at all and i'm sorry for helping you to think that.

IH, overall your post strikes me as very confrontational and quite anti-White. You said yourself to refute the arguments but then you make a post that has an unkind overtone to it.

I'd also like to know why you are voting for me because you have yet to tell me and i'd like to know so I can get to refuting.

= | I don't understand how I come off unkind. Clearly you've not been in a heated argument on this site. (If I'm being unking I'll call you a moron, or something)

Yes, it's a general rule of thumb that most players will post once a day. Hopefully they will post more, but players like me can only post after a certain period of time.

Confrontation is the most direct and best way I find as town. If someone is going to attack me, and bring anything into question, I am more than likely the one to either have you try to bring it more into light (so I actually know why you're voting me, and your motives behind it, so I can therefore respond to your arguments).

Also you don't get to say "you have yet to tell me" when your question is in the same post :Teach:

Mafia is a game of reactions and analyzing. Producing reactions are generally helpful. I find the most helpful reactions come from asking tougher questions.

I think before you continue your line of thought that anything strange=scum, as it appears you are doing, what is the win condition of scum? The win condition of scum is to be the majority, or to stay hidden. Now this is extremely WIFOM, so don't even use it in this game, use it for future reference, but why would scum draw attention to themselves? They win by staying hidden and out of sight.

So, some of the biggest things you need to look for when hunting for scum (When not based on pure gut) someone following another, someone just going along with general town consensus, someone who do not take a stance (maybe he's scum, maybe he's not)


I'm unsure if I was clear in that post or not, so please alert me if something is unclear.

[Snix]

Why?
Also take a look at my other newbie games and see if they are any different please.

Because there is no reason for it really, if someone asks you about it then yes but otherwise you don't have to. And I really could care less if in each game you've ever played you posted the entire wiki in the game, I still wouldn't trust you because that was that and this is this game. Different games, different roles maybe.

Wrong. Aggressiveness is not scummy. Not inherently. Aggressiveness is a good way of producing reactions.

Yes, like torturing people. It gets them to talk, and mildly violates them. And maybe it's good for the greater good of say the 'town' but not for the person being grilled. Maybe your attacks would seem more founded if you gave real reasons, i think the only one you gave that didn't stem off of your own attacks was the fact that instead of voting for Peter he just threatened him, i guess. Which yes seems evil, but he was going off the fact that if he were wrong and some newb Maifa speed lynched we'd be in a pickle. (mmm pickle)

Also you don't get to say "you have yet to tell me" when your question is in the same post :Teach:

I think he's going off the fact that I asked you the same question:

You also seem to have gotten it into your head that White is scum from what? A few jokey comments at the beginning of the game? So what are your real motivations?

And you didn't answer that either..

[Chromagnum]

Okay... through all the reasoning I carried along with you... but you're last comment has me completely on edge with you.

Did you really mean suggesting the town lynch LML??? At this early stage... where most haven't had the opportunity to really dig into the weeds... that's about as scummy a tell as you can get.

unvote
FoS: White

Oh... OMGUS = Oh My God U Suck (the Wiki is a great reference tool).

FoS:Chromagnum

So.... if you trule believed this statement you wouldn't have unvoted LML, as he stated the same thing about white, signifying it with lynch minus one.

Umm... I did Unvote LML. You might have just missed that... see in my quote above. I currently don't have a vote on anyone... but an FoS on White.

[IH]

wouldn't have. I'll respond to the rest later but my batter is dying.
Reading ftw.

[Chromagnum]

Maybe I'm missing your point IH... so apologies if I'm misunderstanding the direction you're going.

My vote on LML was a purely random, first page vote. I held onto the vote with LML due to a later comment he made... but it was more of a pressure vote. Nothing substantiated.

I changed my stripes when White made his comment about lynching (quoted above) That was an extremely scummy request. "Hey everyone... let's lynch LML"

I would suggest lynching LML and seeing how he turns up because i'm innocent.

His response to my FoS (along with Peter's challenge of this comment) was:

You're right, don't lynch him after i'm gone. Just, be wary. I'd hate for him to bring another innocent down and win the game if he's mafia. If he's not mafia then gee, something's wrong in my mind.

"rolling over" isn't exactly a strong defense.

[White]

Wrong. Aggressiveness is not scummy. Not inherently. Aggressiveness is a good way of producing reactions. if you can tell me why you disagree in a logical way it would be nice.

Well, i've seen both sides, I've seen the Mafia be very agressive and confrontational. To say if you're agressive you're not mafia seems, wrong to me. Perhaps I misunderstand, do you mean to say that if you're agressive, you're

not

mafia?

If the mafia is very agressive they can actually look very pro-town because they look like they are combing the desert and the seas for the mafia when in reality the scum are just Hiding in Plain Sight. I'll explain this later on.

I did not say that, and was not dismissing it, but I found it interesting. It was something of note for later.

It certainly looked like a dismissal to me. If nothing more it was atleast an attempt to discredit the possibility of both IC's being scum.

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

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

I dealt with this already in post 40. Do you have any new stuff? You also said it was worthy of slightly more than a random vote. Do you still think this or no or what?

But clearly it is irriational indignation. Look at it, it even looked like you had a "wtf" attitude at one point. That is the point of that type of play.
Similar playstyles are Cogito Ergo Sum and The fritzler.

Ok, first off i'm not tooooo sure I understand this so correct me if i'm wrong. Are you saying his indignation is irrational? Because it's not, he feels his arguments are flawless and when someone confronts them he takes it as a personal affront to his ability to think logically. It did make me think "wth" because it's very loud and bombastic (imo) and can be quote overwhelming to try and deal with. I have no idea who Cognito Ergo Sum and The fritzler are.....

Ok then. Why do you think he's scum if it's not because he's attacking you?

-017-

Makes a nonrandom vote half way through page 1. Seems absurd as though he knows first off who is scum and who isn't and isn't afraid to lynch those he knows aren't scum. He also makes a plea for authority with his reasoning but doesn't explain which I think he should have done if he were trying to help the town because then the town can agree but the town consists mainly of newbs who don't know the lingo.

-028-

He first off insults my intelligence and prides himself. When in reality everyone should be cautious of everyone at all times, not just in select situations. That and we should also be more cautious of people that know what they're doing such as a self proclaimed "Smooth Operator". He says I don't want the town to believe what he says but that's because of my flawed playstyle which i'm trying to correct. But again is a "i'm a fellow townie and i'm going to find you out" statement. Finally with his 4th line be makes a 3rd "i'm a townie" statement. Seems very overdone to me.

-032-

Insults me as a person rather than refutes my argument. Not trying to find scum but rather attacking me as a person, you accuse me of looking scummy when I do it, I think he looks scummy when he does it. Then says he's got many reasons to vote me but doesn't list more than one which happens to be an attack on me as a person rather than my arguments. So imo, he lies.

If you don't understand what he's doing, then it's going to be hard for him to learn something from you.

Just because I don't understand him that well doesn't mean he doesn't understand me (which it seems he thinks he does). He can learn plenty from other people and to say otherwise is just BS.

Now, if I misunderstand you, and you mean discredit his arguments instead of just generally discrediting him, then that is correct, but you should not just undermine his argument. You need to respond to it head on.

No, i'm talking discredit him as a person

and

refute his arguments.

I don't understand how I come off unkind. Clearly you've not been in a heated argument on this site. (If I'm being unking I'll call you a moron, or something)

No no no, that would be openly unkind. I said it had an unkind overtone which means there isn't any exact evidence that can be pointed out and said, "Look HERE and you can see that he called me an moron, therefore he was unkind". But rather that the whole post overall came off with an (intended or not) zing at me. But I think i'll let this one drop as i've been known to be hypersensitive to this sort of thing. Besides, it's not something anyone can use as evidence to one side or the other.

"rolling over" isn't exactly a strong defense.

Help me out here but I did make a mistake, there really is no defence for what I did. I messed up. I actually stated that I didn't think I would be able to live that down for the rest of this game. Chroma, are you reading my posts? I can't defend my action, however if that's all you're going to go off of to vote me then I would be concerned about your innocence. Seems to me like you're beating a dead horse, but maybe i'm wrong.

IH, I have noticed one other thing, why are you defending LML? I think he's a very capable person of defending himself, he may even enjoy it.

[Peter Venkman]

@White>

Lets see if I can break this down easily.

1) As town, the only way we can win is to hunt scum. Part of hunting scum is making accusations.

2) When an accusation is made, the receiving player feels as if he is being "aggressively" attacked.

Thus, someone is bound to perceive an action as "aggressive." Yet, by the nature of this game, players

HAVE

to play that way. Remember how incredibly defensive you got from the very first post in this game?

---

I also find it very interesting that you insist upon evidence. Twice now you've asked for specific reasons why we find your behavior so scummy. Yet... nearly every post has that information.

Day One is mostly hunches and reading other players.

So far you have claimed to be "calm, patient, and non-agressive." You appear to be hot tempered, vote quickly as a reaction, and content to press other players. While none of those traits are necessarily scummy, the disconnect between how you want us to perceive you and your actions is unsettling.

You have given me reason to doubt your words.

-Peter

[White]

Thus, someone is bound to perceive an action as "aggressive." Yet, by the nature of this game, players HAVE to play that way. Remember how incredibly defensive you got from the very first post in this game?

I do believe I was pretty lighthearted at the beginning actually. But nevertheless I did get defensive. I do think i've said i'm a pretty defensive person by nature but isn't that the standard reaction? Someone is agressive and then the receiving party then get's defensive? Isn't the goal to be able to walk the line of too defensive and not defensive at all? If someone isnt' defensive at all isn't that scummy because they assume they're safe because they've got a scum buddy that won't vote them?

I also find it very interesting that you insist upon evidence. Twice now you've asked for specific reasons why we find your behavior so scummy. Yet... nearly every post has that information.

Yes, I believe it's got evidence against me because i've been asking for it. I feel as though everyone is really on edge with me and if I make one more mistake i'll be lynched. I am really looking for why you guys feel this way. When I am asking for evidence i'm asking for

more

evidence. Because I still feel as though you guys are waiting for me to slip up so you can lynch me and I'm innocent, I want to find the bad guys just as much as all of you but you guys are focusing in the wrong direction if you're thinking i'm mafia.

So far you have claimed to be "calm, patient, and non-agressive." You appear to be hot tempered, vote quickly as a reaction, and content to press other players.

Gee....I don't remember saying all of those in any sentence nor do I remember saying I was non-agressive. Can you point out where you quoted that from? I do realize I can by hot tempered but generally I only get that way when I feel there is some unjustice being dealt to me. I understand your suspicions on me because of my suggestion to lynch LML but if that's all you're got then...why are you guys all so suspicious of me? I actually held off my vote on you because I didn't want to put you in risk of being quicklynched until I was sure. I only voted for LML after two of his three posts that I mentioned in -056-. I don't think that's "vot[ing] quickly as a reaction". I am content to press others because I know that's what's got to be done. This isn't my first game ever. In fact if you're

not

content to press others I think there's a problem.

Help me out where i'm messing up though as it seems i'm messing up somewhere and something isn't getting dealt with. What is it?

[Peter Venkman]

@White>

In a single quote I think I can summarize my feelings on you.

I feel as though everyone is really on edge with me and if I make one more mistake i'll be lynched.

This has been your attitude since I put my first random vote on you. Instantly you freaked out and demand everyone justify their suspicion.

Isn't the goal to be able to walk the line of too defensive and not defensive at all? If someone isnt' defensive at all isn't that scummy because they assume they're safe because they've got a scum buddy that won't vote them?

I don't think town players worry about "walking the line." Posting with sincerity will alleviate all those problems. You've already demonstrated a willingness to undermine another player. I perceived your defense as: "my role is town and therefor I am the arbitrator of truth. An attack on me means the aggressor is a liar."

---

Your monologuing has become a distraction to actually hunting scum. I grow weary of reading it and my suspicion of you grows deeper. There are other players I would like to question, yet the topic of discussion cannot seem to move away from you.

You don't have to respond to every word from every player. Pick the few pieces you feel are important and respond only to those. In fact, you do not have to respond to this post at all, I will assume you have read it.

Finally, if you are interesting in hunting scum, mount an argument that is more than a smear campaign.

Massive FoS White

-Peter

[White]

Hm, well alright. I'd like to thank mainly Peter and IH for a lot of help in improving my playstyle. Now i'm going to try and start anew and go from there.

UnFoS: All
Unvote: LML

Well since random vote-ness is the call of the night... I've never been one for noise... sooooo.,,,

Vote: Loudmouth

This strikes me a tad here, if you don't like the noise of random voting...why do you vote randomly? Or do you have a reason for voting someone that's not spoken in the thread yet?

unvote
FoS: White

In your previous post you say you see LML as scummy but then for no reason you unvote him,

don't even

FoS

him and FoS me, I can understand that FoS.

FoS: Chromagnum

can we vote against moderators?

This stuck out to my on my third read through. Reading http://mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.ph ... c&&start=0 and LML jumps huge on the case of GameShark for making a joke similar to what asian did. I'm not sure if this just slipped past the radar or what but this is also something that a scum in another game of mine did. Vote for the Mod.

Something that also sticks out to me is that that's his/her only post on this thread total. It's been over 65 hours since they've posted and i'd personally like an explaination. I do recall that it's a rule to express on the thread that if you'll be absent for over 48 hours you should tell the other players.

This to me may just me laziness as there is an extreme lack of substance to go off of so I won't even give a FoS.

Something about your opening posts strike me as

Mafia Buddying Up

to the town.

This here serves (in my mind) two purposes. It discredits the intent of any helpful advice from an IC as it makes me believe LML will jump on you and call you out to being scum when the intent of the IC in a newbie game is to win but also to

help

the newbies.

Unvote, Vote: White

This and all of post 28 serve no purpose other than White bashing. He votes me but gives no reason and attacks me as a person. He then unvotes me next post which leads me to believe he wasn't researching what he was saying but rather just saying what comes to mind, which turned out to be nothing of substance.

Yet you just voted me at the end of your post, huh? That's called hypocritical.

Another personal jab with no meaning to it. He also doesn't refute what I say but rather just insults me.

This to me seems worthy of a heavy FoS but nothing more. I would still like to see some of the "so many reasons to vote" me. That's asking LML, the others of you have helped me out just fine.

Massive FoS: LoudmouthLee

Better?

[Chromagnum]

Well since random vote-ness is the call of the night... I've never been one for noise... sooooo.,,,

Vote: Loudmouth

This strikes me a tad here, if you don't like the noise of random voting...why do you vote randomly? Or do you have a reason for voting someone that's not spoken in the thread yet?

unvote
FoS: White

In your previous post you say you see LML as scummy but then for no reason you unvote him,

don't even

FoS

him and FoS me, I can understand that FoS.

FoS: Chromagnum

Okay... you're missing the jest in my random vote on LML... Noise... LoudMouthLee... get it? Hence the random vote and joke about noise. Doesn't matter either way... I removed my vote from him.

I also explained my unvote act and subsequent FoS on you in post 36.

Did you really mean suggesting the town lynch LML??? At this early stage... where most haven't had the opportunity to really dig into the weeds... that's about as scummy a tell as you can get.

So... want to try again?

[Chromagnum]

@White...

Oh... and I think you've just about FoS'd everyone in the game within three pages... that's got to be a record.

[White]

Uh...thanks?

Did you really mean suggesting the town lynch LML??? At this early stage... where most haven't had the opportunity to really dig into the weeds... that's about as scummy a tell as you can get.

When I said that I meant just that, that the town lynch LML after I was lynched. I understand now that that was scummy and have apologized. I fully expect it to be brought up again and again though.

However I fail to see how that's an argument for why you shouldn't vote LML....I see that's an argument for not hammering him but...when that was said he was only at -2. He was fine. I guess i'm just having a hard time seeing it so please explain to me how this is a reason to aquit him of suspicion.

EPWODP, I said earlier that LML's post about buddying up served two purposes but only listed one, the other purpose is a reason for voting.

[Chromagnum]

Well... I'm not voting for anyone right now. I've just got my FoS on you... so if you're asking me why I'm not voting for LML... same reason I haven't voted for you yet.

You've both made some scummy comments... but I'm not convinced one way or another between the two of you. You're consistent defensive stance along with the specific comments you've made (lynch LML... but after you were lynched... weird pair of statements) and subsequently apologized for continue to read scummy to me. Again... my vote hasn't been cast quite yet because there hasn't been enough dialog from others... you've basically monopolized the conversation to date.

Now... to be honest... you're statement below rings scummy as well.

However I fail to see how that's an argument for why you shouldn't vote LML

I'm not sure why you're pushing so hard for everyone to focus on LML...

[White]

No, you misunderstand. First off I want others to look in his direction because I think he's scum and want his actions to be brought to light so others can make their own decisions.

Secondly, that part of the conversation was focusing on why you unvoted LML and didn't even FoS him. You said you gave an explaination but when I asked for clarification you dont' give it. Please show me how your statement,

"Did you really mean suggesting the town lynch LML??? At this early stage... where most haven't had the opportunity to really dig into the weeds... that's about as scummy a tell as you can get."

aquits LML of suspicion.

[Chromagnum]

It doesn't aquit LML of suspicion... but your comments alarm me much more than LML... so my focus shifts to you. Not sure what other line of reasoning you are looking for.

Apologies for not shifting my eyes to LML based on your request.

[White]

Well, you said he seemed scummy but again and again pass up the oppurtunity to show this with a simply FoS.

I'm going to be VERY busy (10a-11p) for the next 5 days but i'll try and get on in the mornings to see what's going on. If I miss a day or two, it's because i'm at college.

[IH]

Because there is no reason for it really, if someone asks you about it then yes but otherwise you don't have to. And I really could care less if in each game you've ever played you posted the entire wiki in the game, I still wouldn't trust you because that was that and this is this game. Different games, different roles maybe.

No. Every newbie game for the past... well very many games. Scum and Town.
First of all, it's a null tell at most.
Second of all, it's my

Job and duty

to teach in this game.
THird of all, it's funner when people know what they're doing.

Yes, like torturing people. It gets them to talk, and mildly violates them. And maybe it's good for the greater good of say the 'town' but not for the person being grilled. Maybe your attacks would seem more founded if you gave real reasons, i think the only one you gave that didn't stem off of your own attacks was the fact that instead of voting for Peter he just threatened him, i guess. Which yes seems evil, but he was going off the fact that if he were wrong and some newb Maifa speed lynched we'd be in a pickle. (mmm pickle)

So you disagree? Also, if some new mafia had speed lynched, we would not be in a pickle. We'd have one dead scum, because speedlynching is a 0 tolerance policy. You lynch the people who speedlynch/hammer, so therefore scum will not do it.

And you didn't answer that either..

Reading ftw. I already directed you towards the post.

Maybe I'm missing your point IH... so apologies if I'm misunderstanding the direction you're going.

My vote on LML was a purely random, first page vote. I held onto the vote with LML due to a later comment he made... but it was more of a pressure vote. Nothing substantiated.

Excuse me, I seem to have confused you for someone else. I thought you had voted LML for wanting someone at lynch minus 1, and then unvoted and FoSed white.

Clearly I was wrong.

Well, i've seen both sides, I've seen the Mafia be very agressive and confrontational. To say if you're agressive you're not mafia seems, wrong to me. Perhaps I misunderstand, do you mean to say that if you're agressive, you're not mafia?

No, you're misunderstanding.

Being agressive is a "null tell", or a tell that doesn't indicate anything. Town are agressive. Scum are agressive. So attacking LML for being Agressive is a bad case.

It certainly looked like a dismissal to me. If nothing more it was atleast an attempt to discredit the possibility of both IC's being scum.

White it means nothing unless the IC's become confirmed. That is the point for which it should be noted.

I dealt with this already in post 40. Do you have any new stuff? You also said it was worthy of slightly more than a random vote. Do you still think this or no or what?

For the moment. I haven't seen anything overly scummy at the moment myself.

Ok, first off i'm not tooooo sure I understand this so correct me if i'm wrong. Are you saying his indignation is irrational? Because it's not, he feels his arguments are flawless and when someone confronts them he takes it as a personal affront to his ability to think logically. It did make me think "wth" because it's very loud and bombastic (imo) and can be quote overwhelming to try and deal with. I have no idea who Cognito Ergo Sum and The fritzler are.....

Ok.

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

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

-017- Makes a nonrandom vote half way through page 1. Seems absurd as though he knows first off who is scum and who isn't and isn't afraid to lynch those he knows aren't scum. He also makes a plea for authority with his reasoning but doesn't explain which I think he should have done if he were trying to help the town because then the town can agree but the town consists mainly of newbs who don't know the lingo.

How is a nonrandom vote on page 1 scummy (other than supposed to much info)? There are plenty of people who will try to just get the game started by sparking something.

Your second sentence confuses me... do you mean he made an appeal to authority, and he shouldn't have done that? He should have explained.... something if he wanted to help the town, because the town doesn't know what they're agreeing too?

What is that something?

-028- He first off insults my intelligence and prides himself. When in reality everyone should be cautious of everyone at all times, not just in select situations. That and we should also be more cautious of people that know what they're doing such as a self proclaimed "Smooth Operator". He says I don't want the town to believe what he says but that's because of my flawed playstyle which i'm trying to correct. But again is a "i'm a fellow townie and i'm going to find you out" statement. Finally with his 4th line be makes a 3rd "i'm a townie" statement. Seems very overdone to me.

Pretty much the cautiousness statement was a joke I believe. It was closer to bragging.

"If you're scum you need to be cautious of me, cause I'm gonna catch you"
He also said, in a roundabout way, that you're just refusing to listen to him.

-032- Insults me as a person rather than refutes my argument. Not trying to find scum but rather attacking me as a person, you accuse me of looking scummy when I do it, I think he looks scummy when he does it. Then says he's got many reasons to vote me but doesn't list more than one which happens to be an attack on me as a person rather than my arguments. So imo, he lies.

Errr, I don't see how he insulted you as a person in this post. I don't understand.
He voted you for voting as an OMgus vote, he also said there were a bunch of reasons to vote for you, which he had documented in that post. I don't see how he's voted you for being cautious, as you claimed....
White I think you're blowing things out of proportion in your head, or else you just don't understand how to read this type of post.

Just because I don't understand him that well doesn't mean he doesn't understand me (which it seems he thinks he does). He can learn plenty from other people and to say otherwise is just BS.

Not in the context you mean. You mean that he can learn something like "cautiousness" (which isn't that great of a trait. It's scummy. Being cautious is being indecisive, which lets you play both sides of the fence, and defensive, which indicates you have something to hide)
But if you misunderstand him, then you're not going to teach him anything like you think you are. He could hypothetically learn something, but I'm unsure if he will from posts like these. (no offense)

No, i'm talking discredit him as a person and refute his arguments.

You do not discredit someone as a person ever. That is a logical fallacy (as I stated)

No no no, that would be openly unkind. I said it had an unkind overtone which means there isn't any exact evidence that can be pointed out and said, "Look HERE and you can see that he called me an moron, therefore he was unkind". But rather that the whole post overall came off with an (intended or not) zing at me. But I think i'll let this one drop as i've been known to be hypersensitive to this sort of thing. Besides, it's not something anyone can use as evidence to one side or the other.

Yeah I think you just have a horrible sense of tone, or are over offensive.

IH, I have noticed one other thing, why are you defending LML? I think he's a very capable person of defending himself, he may even enjoy it.

Because if you continue to look at the game kind of like you have, I fear you will take things out of context. Sometimes you have to look for subtle things in the posts, but you just seem to look at the overtones, and then make conclusions from that.
You don't have to answer any of this White, btw, other than what that "something" was.
We need an LML post I think, before I respond to anything else I see.

[Peter Venkman]

Hm, well alright. I'd like to thank mainly Peter and IH for a lot of help in improving my playstyle. Now i'm going to try and start anew and go from there.

Thank you. While my tone may have sounded harsh, I do admire your devotion to this game.

I don't agree with the majority of your analysis. However, you do sound like you are now sincerely hunting scum. I might suggest you try not to read everything so

literally

.

..this is also something that a scum in another game of mine did. Vote for the Mod...

Something that also sticks out to me is that that's his/her only post on this thread total. It's been over 65 hours since they've posted and i'd personally like an explaination.

Cheeky does need a prod, although I don't think your meta-gaming is giving you good returns.

Better?

Much, thanks for digging in and putting out some legitimate challenges. I'll step aside here and let the posters you directly asked questions respond.

-Peter

[LoudmouthLee]

Will post tonight, RL got in the way.

[White]

Being agressive is a "null tell", or a tell that doesn't indicate anything. Town are agressive. Scum are agressive. So attacking LML for being Agressive is a bad case.

Ah ok, thank you for clarifying that. Noted and i'll try to not do that again.

White it means nothing unless the IC's become confirmed. That is the point for which it should be noted.

There's no way to confirm fully unless that person dies. Isn't this a game of speculation?

White it means nothing unless the IC's become confirmed. That is the point for which it should be noted.

Then i'm going to politely ask you to change your vote to a FoS. I believe i've got 2 Massive FoS's and 2 votes and the other person is absent from the thread.

This is a personal judgement that you have assessed of him.

You're right, my bad. Sorry LML.

I'll bet CES and Fritzler got lynched alot in their beginning games. Is that play style really even that effective?

How is a nonrandom vote on page 1 scummy (other than supposed to much info)?

I guess in pretty much every game i've read, page 1 is for random votes as there's really no way to learn enough to substantiate a real relevant vote on page 1. I was just going off of what he had and that struck me.

do you mean he made an appeal to authority, and he shouldn't have done that? He should have explained.... something if he wanted to help the town, because the town doesn't know what they're agreeing too?

He made an appeal to authority and should've explained the reference. It seemed to me as though it were an attempt to start an early bandwagon because THIS one had evidence behind it. He seems to want to start a bandwagon but doesn't really give what's needed for others to jump on board with him because he doesn't explain what Mafia Buddying Up is. Thinking about it now seems that perhaps he started a wagon intending for no one to follow because he was just distancing.

"If you're scum you need to be cautious of me, cause I'm gonna catch you"
He also said, in a roundabout way, that you're just refusing to listen to him.

Yeah, that just strikes me as trying too hard to be protown. I highly doubt the validity of it because that assumes (here I am assuming again, so correct me if i'm wrong) that he catches all the mafia when he's town in all his newbie games. That's just impossible so it looks to me like an overt lie. I do acknowledge that I have been quite unresponsive to his methods of teaching though.

Errr, I don't see how he insulted you as a person in this post.

He said I was hypocritical. I don't see what this has to do with finding scum, nor do I see where it refutes any arguments nor do I even see how this can be interpreted any other way other than a personal jab.

White I think you're blowing things out of proportion in your head, or else you just don't understand how to read this type of post.

Well, I would prefer for it to be the latter but as i've said, I am somewhat hypersensitive (erg, I hate that word) so perhaps it's all in my head. I doubt it though.

He could hypothetically learn something, but I'm unsure if he will from posts like these. (no offense)

None taken.

You do not discredit someone as a person ever. That is a logical fallacy (as I stated)

Actually you said why you shouldn't do it singularily. I actually remember asking why you can't discredit the person AND refute their arguments at the same time but you never replied. I would still like to know.

Glad to see you LML.

[IH]

There's no way to confirm fully unless that person dies. Isn't this a game of speculation?

Which is why it was noted for later.
Mafia is closer to a game of gauging reactions then speculation.

Then i'm going to politely ask you to change your vote to a FoS. I believe i've got 2 Massive FoS's and 2 votes and the other person is absent from the thread.

I believe I'm going to decline, because 2 votes is not dangerous, and I see no other better candidate at the moment.

Actually you said why you shouldn't do it singularily. I actually remember asking why you can't discredit the person AND refute their arguments at the same time but you never replied. I would still like to know.

Because discrediting someone as a person has nothing to do with alignment, you're just trying to make the town not believe them. Protown players should not want that. They should want the truth out, and the falsities revealed, not a truth they don't like hidden.
So it still falls under the attack the person fallacy.

[Snix]

No. Every newbie game for the past... well very many games. Scum and Town.
First of all, it's a null tell at most.
Second of all, it's my Job and duty to teach in this game.
THird of all, it's funner when people know what they're doing.

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

So you disagree? Also, if some new mafia had speed lynched, we would not be in a pickle. We'd have one dead scum, because speedlynching is a 0 tolerance policy. You lynch the people who speedlynch/hammer, so therefore scum will not do it.

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

Reading ftw. I already directed you towards the post.

Really? where and when? because honestly I looked through all of your posts and couldn't find it..

[LoudmouthLee]

He said I was hypocritical. I don't see what this has to do with finding scum, nor do I see where it refutes any arguments nor do I even see how this can be interpreted any other way other than a personal jab.

Do you really mean this? If so, mafia may not be the game for you. I hope you can toughen up from here. I never meant ANYTHING as a personal attack.

Scum is more likely to be hypocritical than a townie player. For Instance:

Mr. A is scum
Mr. B is town.

Mr. A yells at Mr. B. for making an illogical play (let's say... the straw man argument). Mr. B retracts, and Mr. A then sets up a straw-man argument on Mr. B.

It's hypocritical, and it's a scum tell. It makes me feel very good about voting you.