Mini 571 - Movie Mafia - (Game Over)

[Justin Playfair]

Just a couple other early things:

Avinashv,

Get used to having your name misspelled. Seriously. Just one question:

The Jester: I was being mildly sarcastic: of course not everybody had voted for everybody else, but the sooner the joke votes get over with the sooner D1 can end. Don't patronize me, don't call me a liar, and let this damn thing go.

Are you saying here that when you posted that everyone had voted you were aware not everyone had? If so why didn’t you say, perhaps, that “Now that everyone had weighed in” or something which would have communicated the same desire to move on without misrepresenting, even innocently, the actual events in thread?

The Jester,

I certainly don’t believe you were trying to be inoffensive or trying to fly under the radar, given your posts, but I am a bit curious about this:

@avinashv: I don't believe "everyone" has "voted" for everyone else yet. So you're giving false information.

Later, defending yourself you first post this:

How was I overreacting? You said everyone voted, and wasn't true; therefore false information. If I instead said something like, "Oh my god, he lied, lynch him! BANDWAGON NOW!" That would be overreacting. Please show me where I was overreacting before giving more empty information.

Then you post this:

Avin said I overreacted for saying he was lying? It was a statement, not a "Oh my god, what the hell have you done?" I said, no not everyone has voted. Being technical, does not make someone defensive.

The reason I find the above a bit curious is that in your first post you say “you're giving false information.”, which although not actually calling Avinashv a liar is certainly putting a particular spin on what, at that time, could certainly have been an innocent misstatement. You then point out you didn’t say something like: "Oh my god, he lied, lynch him!” which with the addition of calling for a lynch isn’t quite a denial of having called him a liar, but certainly seems to be shading. You then post: “Avin said I overreacted for saying he was lying?” which would seem to indicate that you were calling him a liar, as opposed to someone who had just made a mistake.

So a couple of questions:

Did you believe Avinashv was lying when you made your first post in response to him?

If so, why did you believe he was lying instead of simply mistaken?

If not was there a particular reason you posted so aggressively in response to what Avinashv had posted?

Thank you for your answers (when you return).

[The Jester]

Not lying, I had nothing else to really say, so I decided to correct him. Because I didn't vote for anyone, and everyone includes every player. Therefore, it was wrong, so I said it was, I like getting technical now and again.

Because his thinking I'm scummy for saying he said something that wasn't right, was a stupid reason.

[Jalathas]

Hi, everyone. Glad to be here.

Jalathas, just a couple of questions. About these posts:

You are being a bit defensive, The Jester. It seems kinda like you're trying really, really hard not to offend anyone, which is making you stand out a bit to me.

And,

I suppose what I should have said is that you're playing fairly defensively. Defensive has bad connotatons around here, it seems. Like I said, it seems like you're trying to post without offending anybody. That generally implies you've got something to worry about if you do make a blip on someone's scumdar.

Then,

EBWOP: By the way, when I say offend, what I mean is make someone suspicious.

Here’s my question. The Jester reacted in a very (nearly inexplicably) harsh fashion to Avinashv’s statement about everyone voting and his asking about how to proceed. And whether we go with your first phrase “without offending anybody” or your second, “make someone suspicious”, this seems hardly the way to do so. The Jester’s reaction to Avinashv’s post seemed to almost aim to both offend and arouse suspicion. So can you explain why you believe it was an attempt to do the opposite? Can you also explain how, logistically, it could have accomplished what you said you felt The Jester was trying to do?

He avoided the term lie, and later said he wasn't accusing avinashv of lying. Even his "walk on your own two feet" comment didn't seem particularly harsh to me.

This also applies to what may be an attempt on your part to suggest that The Jester’s initial refusal to make a random vote was an attempt not to offend or arouse suspicion. If eleven people are walking in one direction and one is walking in the other the other is more noticeable, I would think. But even if you sincerely believe that The Jester’s refusal to place an initial random vote was an attempt to avoid offending or arousing suspicion, how would that make sense given his immediate attack on Avinashv, which seemed certain to do both?

To use a variation on your metaphor, if everyone's pointing fingers, the one guy who doesn't seems to be more rational. Note that I never said his attempt was

working

, just that he was trying.

There is this, after Jex votes you for the admittedly not so great reason of over-explaining what a joke vote is:

You first vote Jex, which seems pretty pure OMGUS to me. You then put this face on it:

Gah! Clicked too soon.

For baiting me to look like a hypocrite.

Could you please explain how what Jex said would make you look like a hypocrite? Pendantic, sure, maybe. But why a hypocrite? And why would you consider this to be scummy, even if this is what he was doing?

Thank you for any answers.

I'd just defended my own pseudo-logical random vote. It seemed to me that he wanted me to argue that I hadn't over-explained, at which point he could claim, "My vote was no more serious than yours. How can you attack me for something you just defended yourself on?" Thus, hypocrite.

[OhGodMyLife]

Still liking my vote on avinashv, I need to hear something good from him before I'm switching it. He's trying to squirm his way out of the limelight without answering for the scummy things he's already done.

Springlullaby and Justin Playfair are both looking markedly pro-town to me. Everyone else I've got a generally neutral read on, but at some point I'll take a look at some peoples posts in isolation and see if anything can be illuminated by that.

[thinktank]

Less chat more splat.. Join the Avinashv wagon! or whatever wagon you may so choose but pressure is the only way this game is going to get going. People need to start using their power of vote to get this truck rolling again.

[Jex]

Still liking my vote on avinashv, I need to hear something good from him before I'm switching it. He's trying to squirm his way out of the limelight without answering for the scummy things he's already done.

This post wreaks of scum to me. First off, what's you case against avinashv? and what is it he is squirming from? You have put forth absolutely no case against avinashv, yet are perfectly set on keeping your vote there. I don't see how avinashv is squirming when there is a bunch of random votes for the most part on him due to events that happened on page 1 of the thread and have little to no relevence IMO.

Springlullaby and Justin Playfair are both looking markedly pro-town to me. Everyone else I've got a generally neutral read on, but at some point I'll take a look at some peoples posts in isolation and see if anything can be illuminated by that.

So in order to look protown in your eyes, one simply needs to put long post with lots of quotes? Does scum not ask questions and analyze as well?

unvote, vote OhGodMyLife

Less chat more splat.. Join the Avinashv wagon! or whatever wagon you may so choose but pressure is the only way this game is going to get going. People need to start using their power of vote to get this truck rolling again.

We're on page 4 and all you have done through the thread is say that we should bandwagon avinashv. Is there a reason, or do you mean to add nothing to the conversation?

FOS thinktank

[Deathguise]

Not liking thinktank's contributions much. Campaigning for a bandwagon so strongly isn't great, but the fact that you're suggesting we eschew conversation in favour of voting as fast as humanly possible doesn't put you as an especially viable townie in my eyes. Want people to vote more heavily on avishnashv? contribute a bit more to conversation than 'I'm voting for X! You should too!' I don't like it.

Unvote, Vote: thinktank.

Avishnashv, if we exclude his somewhat difficult to remember name, is indeed a bit off. His comments have been faulted frequently throughout this game, and he's been conspicuously absent since evidence has been gathered and held against him. I'd like to here something from him, because despite my reprimanding of thinktank, I'm still not liking the look of you.

The Jester, while I find your over-defensiveness a little bristling, I don't think its the end of the world, but it was certainly a bit more firey than necessary, especially considering it stemmed from such a trivial error.

Jalathas, personally I'm satisfied with your play and I can follow your reasoning. Therefore, I'm comfortable in unvoting you.

springlullaby, no massive qualms with you, though I can't follow your reasoning that a FOS over a vote in that situation was scummy, and I'd like to see your reasoning for that being so.

Justin Playfair, I like the fact you're promoting discussion, so I'm quite happy with you being town.

Several people need to post more, though I realise I haven't contributed a great deal myself, so I can hardly start throwing FOS's and votes at these people. If I haven't mentioned you explicitly, I have no particular view of you.

[thinktank]

Deathguise: this game is lacking participation. The point of utilizing the vote is to add pressure and increase participation. When participation is increased there is more evidence to read and more tells to analyze and therefore make a sound lynch. I am not calling for a quick lynch.

As for why I'm bandwagoning Avinashv, I'm doing precisely what I just said. My vote on Avinashv is more or less insignificant but its more meant to stir the pot because the pot needs stirring. And taking evidence from the last couple of posts I would think that its working. As for what I'm doing to help town, trying to gain more evidence seems like a good idea considering this game started a while back and we're barely past the random stage.

[springlullaby]

@Deathguise

When you FOSed The Jester your vote was on Jala. Considering that when you first voted Jala it was a random vote and you did not express any suspicion of him in meantime, FOSing The Jester instead of switching your vote made no sense.

Your 'I'm satisfied of Jala play so I'm okay to unvote' is too since you did not express any suspicion of him in the first place.

What do you think?

[Jennar]

Clayman has requested to be replaced.

farside22 has replaced Clayman. Thank you for replacing in farside22.

-Geoff

[farside22]

Hi all.
I will do my read through this weekend and chime in when done.

[OhGodMyLife]

Jex, my vote on avi (hope you don't mind that I'm giving you a nickname to make my life easier) was initially random, but given the case built against him by others and what I see as a failure to answer for it, my vote is doing the most to help by simply continuing to pressure him. If he doesn't come up with something soon I endorse further votes being placed on the bandwagon until he does.

Also, HAI FARSIDE!!!

[thinktank]

Mod, could we get a prod on Avinashv please?

P.S Farside..We meet again.

[farside22]

Man people know me here.

(hides)

Okay four pages and a deadline of March 23rd. I see some conversation got swayed between Jester and Avi.
As Jester said once you should say something more then how do we start this and claim you are starting a conversation. That simply is exactly how you should start a conversation.
Jester I would say overreacted to Avi's comments. I found the comments between you two over blown and feel for sure someone was a bit more defensive (Jester) then the other.
My biggest issue is thinktank. Promoting a BW for conversation and then saying this:

As for why I'm bandwagoning Avinashv, I'm doing precisely what I just said. My vote on Avinashv is more or less insignificant but its more meant to stir the pot because the pot needs stirring. And taking evidence from the last couple of posts I would think that its working. As for what I'm doing to help town, trying to gain more evidence seems like a good idea considering this game started a while back and we're barely past the random stage.

I haven't seen any you gaining more evidence with your post at all. You comments are most lynch, lynch, lynch and less about conversation.

unvote: vote: thinktank

[thinktank]

Not a lynch, lynch, lynch. My actions are meant to motivate conversation, which they have, not to promote a quick lynch. Besides, it seems as though Avinashv is lurking, he hasn't posted in like 6 days, pressure votes are precisely what gets lurkers back in the game. I beg to differ that there hasn't been any conversation started from my wagon, in fact there has been quite a lot of content, in fact you're comment is adding to that list .

[farside22]

Not a lynch, lynch, lynch. My actions are meant to motivate conversation, which they have, not to promote a quick lynch. Besides, it seems as though Avinashv is lurking, he hasn't posted in like 6 days, pressure votes are precisely what gets lurkers back in the game. I beg to differ that there hasn't been any conversation started from my wagon, in fact there has been quite a lot of content, in fact you're comment is adding to that list .

How does saying bw time and lets vote Avi promote more discussion looking for scum? All it does it make it look like a person looking to lynch someone without reason.

[thinktank]

Because pressure voting is a legitimate tactic and random controversial moves such as mine tend to get people talking and the more people talk the more posts are there analyze. And btw you're right on that it is meant to look like voting someone without reason, hence the stirring of the pot. Logcial moves don't tend to get people excited as much illogical ones, human behaviour. go figure,

[avinashv]

Sorry for the lack of input, I had a tough week. I should have posted to let you know I wasn't going to be active. For that, I apologize.

What is the meaning of this? Are you objecting to me voting you? If you do why don't you expound further on why you object instead of acting put upon and being patronizing?

Stop over-reacting. I made a comment that you made an effort to spell my name right, then I asked for a votecount. What's the big deal here?

Insidious, insidious, insidious, scum.

Because there was no activity? Wow.

Here’s my question. The Jester reacted in a very (nearly inexplicably) harsh fashion to Avinashv’s statement about everyone voting and his asking about how to proceed. And whether we go with your first phrase “without offending anybody” or your second, “make someone suspicious”, this seems hardly the way to do so. The Jester’s reaction to Avinashv’s post seemed to almost aim to both offend and arouse suspicion. So can you explain why you believe it was an attempt to do the opposite? Can you also explain how, logistically, it could have accomplished what you said you felt The Jester was trying to do?

This also applies to what may be an attempt on your part to suggest that The Jester’s initial refusal to make a random vote was an attempt not to offend or arouse suspicion. If eleven people are walking in one direction and one is walking in the other the other is more noticeable, I would think. But even if you sincerely believe that The Jester’s refusal to place an initial random vote was an attempt to avoid offending or arousing suspicion, how would that make sense given his immediate attack on Avinashv, which seemed certain to do both?

I like this analysis. I called Jester out on being overly harsh, yes, but I didn't connect that to his refusal to vote randomly. Tied together, I feel they make a stronger case. I particularly liked the "If eleven people are walking in one direction and one is walking in the other the other is more noticeable, I would think."

Are you saying here that when you posted that everyone had voted you were aware not everyone had? If so why didn’t you say, perhaps, that “Now that everyone had weighed in” or something which would have communicated the same desire to move on without misrepresenting, even innocently, the actual events in thread?

Yes, I was aware that not everybody had voted for everybody else. I was trying to convey something along the lines of, "now that the random votes are out of the way". I honestly didn't think to much of it, and I maintain that getting called a liar for this is unreasonable. As for why I didn't use something else; like I said, and in fact, like

you

said, it was an innocent remark that I really didn't think about too much.

As for why I'm bandwagoning Avinashv, I'm doing precisely what I just said. My vote on Avinashv is more or less insignificant but its more meant to stir the pot because the pot needs stirring. And taking evidence from the last couple of posts I would think that its working. As for what I'm doing to help town, trying to gain more evidence seems like a good idea considering this game started a while back and we're barely past the random stage.

Thinktank is looking like one of the scummiest players to me right now. Either that, or this is an idiotic pro-town play. I'd be lying if I said I don't have an issue with being the target of the BW; of course I am, but this would apply to anyone here. By his own admission this is a useless BW, and if it was to "stir the pot", he would have taken "evidence" and killed the BW.

Thinktank, if you're town, you're not playing this well. While I'll give you that I wasn't here, I haven't logged in to MS in days; check all my other games and you'll see that I haven't posted anywhere. Nevertheless, I should have properly notified the mod/game/players that I wasn't going to be able to post, and I've already apologized for that. What you're doing here is putting the attention on one person, me, and trying to justify that with calling it a "legitimate tactic". The attention is drawn away from scum and wasting time.

So, right now I have

FoS

thinktank, springlullaby.

Mod

Vote count please?

Jennar

Jex (1) - Jalathas
Thinktank (3) - the_cat_herder, Deathguise, Farside22
Avinshav (3) - Ohgodmylife, SpringLullaby, thinktank
The Jester (1) - Avinshav
Ohgodmylife (1) - Jex

[The Jester]

Avin, why do you ask for vote-counts so often?

Was it an over-reaction, or were you being over-defensive?

Vote: Avin

The explanation in your posts recently is unsatisfying and seem defensive but they feel more paranoid then innocent.

[avinashv]

Avin, why do you ask for vote-counts so often?

Because I like to see who's voted for who, and I like to see that updated often. Once a page isn't that big a deal, I don't think. Or at least something that is constantly updated. I currently don't have any idea about the vote situation and I shouldn't have to count that myself. That's the mod's job.

Was it an over-reaction, or were you being over-defensive?

It was an over-reaction. It seems like an opinion others share.

The explanation in your posts recently is unsatisfying and seem defensive but they feel more paranoid then innocent.

Care to explain where and why it was "unsatisfying" and "paranoid"? Your vote seems like a panic vote because people are agreeing with me.

[The Jester]

Asking for it like that seems (this is general) that someone is trying to throw off suspicion. That's partly why your posts feel paranoid.

Not much unvoting has happened, so go back to the bottom of page 2. It is the Mod's job, but asking for it so much seems unnecessary.

Whose agreed with that opinion, would you show me?

Panic Vote? Your response seems unsatisfying, if not paranoid as well.

[avinashv]

Sure:

The Jester, while I find your over-defensiveness a little bristling, I don't think its the end of the world, but it was certainly a bit more firey than necessary, especially considering it stemmed from such a trivial error.

The Jester reacted in a very (nearly inexplicably) harsh fashion to Avinashv’s statement about everyone voting and his asking about how to proceed.

You are being a bit defensive, The Jester. It seems kinda like you're trying really, really hard not to offend anyone, which is making you stand out a bit to me.

Overdefensiveness on The Jester's part...

I'm asking for a vote-count because the last one was on the 5th of March. That's a long time. I don't care if there hasn't been much activity--like I said, it's not my job to make that tally. Also, do you know how many times I have asked for a vote-count this game? Twice. Those were incidentally the times when the mod did the vote count (speaking of which

Mod

, thanks for getting on that really quickly this time around).

Again, why do you feel I am being paranoid? Unsatisfying? Give me detailed responses, please.

I'm going to go ahead and say that your poor fact-checking, inability to answer my questions straight-up and looking mighty paranoid yourself makes me pretty happy with my vote on you. I'll take a gander and say you're probably scum buddies with springlullaby; he seemed to be very quick to defend you and make similarly vague and brash comments on my posts. I'm not sure about thinktank--I've voiced my opinions about this already, but even if he is town, he's not playing well, and I think that especially with the amount of time he has been on MS (I have no idea how many games that has been) he shouldn't be prone to a newbie mistake, so yeah, I'll throw in that he probably rounds off the scum.

[avinashv]

Just thought of this as I hit submit: what's funny (to me, at least), is that this wouldn't have been a big deal if you had just let it go. By not realizing/accepting/understanding how your comment was perceived, you immediately got off on the wrong foot with--at least--me with an attack on a comment that wasn't trying to point fingers to anyone, but you got dragged through the mud by lots of people, and then your story seemed to shift, answers became vague and so on.

I find it strange that your new fixation is asking for vote-counts--if not a panic vote, is that why you voted for me? I see no other real reason.

Deathguise: I've not addressed you directly, but I hope what I've said in the last few posts clears up whatever misgivings you had. I'd like to add that, much like The Jester, you weren't very clear with what your problem was. Let me know.

[The Jester]

Yeah...I did give you a few reasons why I voted you.

Your jumping to conclusions and assuming I'm scum, then assuming a scum-buddy sounds odd coming from the guy whose defending himself from being paranoid and having unsatisfying posts.

I'll go ahead and ignore your hypocritical posts...you have fun with that.

I wonder, would mass-claiming be helpful here? Not like anyone will counter-claim, or they'd be like, "Oh hey, I'm scum, lynch me!" If we do that, we can lynch scum every-day until victory...I'm sure that vs. random lynch/humans being killed well I hope you guys can do the math and see who would win...

So, a mass-claim then for an easy victory?

[avinashv]

Again

you ignore my questions:

where

exactly do you think I am being paranoid/blah blah? Anyway, I stopped caring, I don't expect a reasonable answer from you. Let's just get past D1.

I don't know about a massclaim; why do we automatically know who is scum?