Mini 659: The Neighborhood- Game over on Day 6

[crywolf20084]

##unvote, vote tony

. His post is all over the map. He's trying to sow the seeds of doubt without having to take responsibility himself.

Yay for vague, unsubstantiated attacks.

I agree with Lowell, but not enough to put a third vote on your head yet.

All you seem to be doing is talking.

FOS Tony

User claimed miller which means he is (a) a miller telling the truth (b) a mobster lying or (c) another option that I'm not going to explain for now.

I am awfully interested in what you're thinking for option (c).

I've slept on your thoughts and I think I may know where you are going, but I'll keep my thoughts to myself for a little longer.

[Lowell]

There are so many people I want dead.

[crywolf20084]

There are so many people I want dead.

What the hell do you mean?

[Elias_the_thief]

Hmm. Well, might as well get my thoughts on the claim cleared up now that I've seen other peoples posts about it and checked the MD discussion thread. So, here are my thoughts:

As Miller:

Claiming Day One is probably the best play, as a claim right after a guilty result is revealed comes off as really contrived. Claiming day one, page one even, seems like the proper play as miller. Not only does it get the idea out there early, but it also provides a good basis for discussion early which is fairly protown.

As Scum:

Claiming Day One is probably the best play, as a claim right after a guilty result is revealed comes off as really contrived. So, if the scum wishes to claim miller, day one is definately the best time to do it as well. The claim, however, attracts a lot of attention to the scum. Many players as scum wouldnt be ballsy enough to pull the claim due to the increased scrutiny.

So the question to me is whether User is skilled enough, and ballsy enough, to pull this as scum. He only has two completed games as mafia, but theyre both wins. Definately worth checking out. So as of now, I'm undecided. I will say that the flavor makes a lot of sense, however.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Other random commentary/questions:

1)

Darox - In post 9, you subtley changed your vote to Username but provided no specific reasons for doing so. Was this on the basis of his claim? If so, why was the claim voteworthy? Oh, same goes for Rashiminos, though your post had less subtlety involved.

2)

fhqwhgads and crywolf - you both posted after usernames claim without making any mention of it, even though it was the only relevant issue to come up at that point. Why did you choose not to even mention the claim? This goes for Lowell as well, however he only initially ignored it and then chimed in after ythills post.

3)

bionicchop - in post 19, you mention that investigating username is useless. Couldnt the investigation be used to prove sanity of a cop, if there is one?

4)

Tony - You call lowells attack vague and unsubstantiated. Could you elaborate on why this is? It seemed like he had a decent point to me so I'd like to see where youre coming from.

[bionicchop2]

I will say that the flavor makes a lot of sense, however.

There was no 'flavor' in his claim. Flavor is the role info added by the mod which gives characters 'flavor' related to the context / intro of the game.

3)

bionicchop - in post 19, you mention that investigating username is useless. Couldnt the investigation be used to prove sanity of a cop, if there is one?

Someone already stated this would probably be a waste. I have not seen anything but a Sane cop in a mini-normal game although I do not have a ton of experience. Someone would have to provide some links to a large sample size of such games before that line of reasoning is even considered IMO.

[Elias_the_thief]

I will say that the flavor makes a lot of sense, however.

There was no 'flavor' in his claim. Flavor is the role info added by the mod which gives characters 'flavor' related to the context / intro of the game.

I've been on this site for two years longer than you, I know what flavour is. If you check post 35User clearly states his flavor.

3)

bionicchop - in post 19, you mention that investigating username is useless. Couldnt the investigation be used to prove sanity of a cop, if there is one?

Someone already stated this would probably be a waste. I have not seen anything but a Sane cop in a mini-normal game although I do not have a ton of experience. Someone would have to provide some links to a large sample size of such games before that line of reasoning is even considered IMO.

This is a very closeminded outlook. What mods have done in the past has little bearing on what our mod has done because every mod is different. A cops sanity should never be assumed.

[bionicchop2]

3)

bionicchop - in post 19, you mention that investigating username is useless. Couldnt the investigation be used to prove sanity of a cop, if there is one?

Someone already stated this would probably be a waste. I have not seen anything but a Sane cop in a mini-normal game although I do not have a ton of experience. Someone would have to provide some links to a large sample size of such games before that line of reasoning is even considered IMO.

This is a very closeminded outlook. What mods have done in the past has little bearing on what our mod has done because every mod is different. A cops sanity should never be assumed.

If you had your own answer, why bother asking me the question? The cop can do whatever they want. My opinion is - waste of time. These games last through very few nights and testing sanity is a waste of an investigation. They may as well investigate themselves.

[Elias_the_thief]

Why bother asking you the question when I know how I would answer? Because I already know my own opinion. Scumhunting usually works better when you get reads on other players, as opposed to yourself.

[Rashiminos]

Looking to make an in-depth post later today or tomorrow, but I have a couple of brief comments.

iamausername replied with his role name as anticipated and I'm willing to accept the claim for now as a I have seen a couple of things from other players I wanted a closer look at. So I will unvote iamausername.

1)

Darox - In post 9, you subtley changed your vote to Username but provided no specific reasons for doing so. Was this on the basis of his claim? If so, why was the claim voteworthy? Oh, same goes for Rashiminos, though your post had less subtlety involved.

Maybe I'm misreading the question, but it appears that you're implying I changed my intended vote when I didn't. My initial vote was on iamausername, and I saw no reason to change it when gorckat reminded us the votes were not official. I would like to hear why Darox changed his vote then, and also why he said that his recent vote on me was non-random, yet he failed to present the reason for doing so.

[Elias_the_thief]

Er, that was worded incorrectly actually. My real question was the second question, of why the claim was voteworthy. Sorry about that.

[Rashiminos]

EBWOP:

##Unvote: iamausername

[Rashiminos]

Yargh... not a good day with the voting format.

@Elias

The lack of role name made iamausername worth looking at as compared to making another random vote. Most people still had yet to post.

EBWOP:

##Unvote: iamausername

[TonyMontana]

All you seem to be doing is talking.

I wasn't aware that you could do much else than talk in internet mafia. ¬¬

Tony - You call lowells attack vague and unsubstantiated. Could you elaborate on why this is? It seemed like he had a decent point to me so I'd like to see where youre coming from.

I really think lowell is the one who needs to elaborate.
He said my post was all over the map. How so?
He said i was sowing seeds of doubt. How so?
And doing so without taking responsibility myself. Responsibility for what?

That's what I meant with vague (as in just general characterizations thrown my way) and unsubstantiated (some direct criticism on what I said would've been nice)

[Elias_the_thief]

All you seem to be doing is talking.

I wasn't aware that you could do much else than talk in internet mafia. ¬¬

Tony - You call lowells attack vague and unsubstantiated. Could you elaborate on why this is? It seemed like he had a decent point to me so I'd like to see where youre coming from.

I really think lowell is the one who needs to elaborate.
He said my post was all over the map. How so?
He said i was sowing seeds of doubt. How so?
And doing so without taking responsibility myself. Responsibility for what?

That's what I meant with vague (as in just general characterizations thrown my way) and unsubstantiated (some direct criticism on what I said would've been nice)

fair enough.

[Darox]

1)

Darox - In post 9, you subtley changed your vote to Username but provided no specific reasons for doing so. Was this on the basis of his claim? If so, why was the claim voteworthy?

I don't like miller claims. I don't really like any page one claims, but miller is the most headache inducing.

It was a better reason than why I was voting Ythill, who was lynched recently in another game with me.

@Rashiminos:
You did some things that I thought were a little suspicious, such as the push for flavour claim, but that has cleared up now.

##Unvote: Rashiminos

I want Lowell to respond to Tony's questions.

[crywolf20084]

All you seem to be doing is talking.

I wasn't aware that you could do much else than talk in internet mafia. ¬¬

Tony - You call lowells attack vague and unsubstantiated. Could you elaborate on why this is? It seemed like he had a decent point to me so I'd like to see where youre coming from.

I really think lowell is the one who needs to elaborate.
He said my post was all over the map. How so?
He said i was sowing seeds of doubt. How so?
And doing so without taking responsibility myself. Responsibility for what?

That's what I meant with vague (as in just general characterizations thrown my way) and unsubstantiated (some direct criticism on what I said would've been nice)

This post satisfies me, and now makes me wanna think about Lowell.

I'll have a nice post tomorrow when I'm not feeling so bad with allergies.

[Ythill]

Did my first readthrough...

In user's favor is the way he minimized the theory argument and redirected people to the MD thread. I'd expect most miller-claiming-scum to smokescreen with theory in a game that has auto deadlines.

@bionic: Elias made a good point about the flavor you missed, why didn’t you address it?

@wolf: If I thought it was pro-town to discuss option (c) I would have done so. Why are you nudging me to reveal more information?

@fhq: You were unsure if wolf had missed a point or was fishing. Has #50 helped to solidify your opinion?

@Rash: You mentioned that you wanted to look at a couple of other players, but you never said who or why. Who? Why?

@Tony: Your vote on Darox seemed to be too serious too soon. You’ve ignored him since then. Why?

[bionicchop2]

@bionic: Elias made a good point about the flavor you missed, why didn’t you address it?

What was there to address? It was pretty obvious I simply missed the post user made that included his flavor. He pointed me to the post. I didn't feel I needed to make a new post about. I try to minimize thread clutter by only posting when I have a point I want to make or a question is directed to me.

[Tommy]

I really think lowell is the one who needs to elaborate.

QFT

[gorckat]

Vote Count

TonyMontana (2):

Elias, Lowell

bionic:

iamausername

Darox:

TonyMontana

Not voting (8):

bionic, crywolf, Darox, fhqwhgads, Rashiminos, Tommy, Westbrook, Ythill

**Note- I have a tendency to shorten long names when I play. I see I'm doing it as I mod, as well. If it is a problem for anyone, PM me.**

EDIT: Corrected vote count (had not removed Lowell's vote on Elias)

[Rashiminos]

@Rash: You mentioned that you wanted to look at a couple of other players, but you never said who or why. Who? Why?

Perhaps if you had been reading closely you would have noticed this:

Looking to make an in-depth post later today or tomorrow, but I have a couple of brief comments.

I didn't propose names at the time because I wanted to double-check my notes with more recent activity, and I didn't have the time to do so for that post.

I'm currently looking at 4 people for several reasons.

Darox has delayed explaining the reasons for vote-changes until later posts. The first time (random vote phase) seemed innocuous, but he repeated this pattern in post 34.

crywolf20084 suggested the cop out himself or herself after testing sanity on iamausername. Her FoS in post 50 on Tony seems just as lousy to me as it did to Tony.

##unvote, vote tony

. His post is all over the map. He's trying to sow the seeds of doubt without having to take responsibility himself.

Yay for vague, unsubstantiated attacks.

I agree with Lowell, but not enough to put a third vote on your head yet.

All you seem to be doing is talking.

FOS Tony

Lowell said he believed in iamausername's claim 100% percent, which seems to be an unreasonable lack of doubt at this point. In post 47 he tries to convince more people to believe the claim, and suggests multiple scumgroups as a possible reason to believe the claim. Speculation on unknowns seems scummy IMO.

In addition:

There are so many people I want dead.

There's also Ythill...

@wolf: If I thought it was pro-town to discuss option (c) I would have done so. Why are you nudging me to reveal more information?

As crywolf brought up, Ythill mentioned there was a third possibility related to iamausername's claim. The possible implication in this quote that "option c" is not pro-town and Ythill stonewalling on the matter deserve more attention. Perhaps a vote will loosen his stiff lips.

So,

FoS: Lowell
##Vote: Ythill

[bionicchop2]

I didn't propose names at the time because I wanted to double-check my notes with more recent activity, and I didn't have the time to do so for that post.

3 pages in and you have that many notes? Seems a bit much this early, but whatever works for you.

[crywolf20084]

@wolf: If I thought it was pro-town to discuss option (c) I would have done so. Why are you nudging me to reveal more information?

I'm curious is all. If it's not pro town, why bring it up at all?

[Ythill]

What was there to address?

I don't know that there was anything to specifically address but reading the tone of a concession might have been helpful, so I wanted to ask you about it. Your answer was adequate, thanks.

Perhaps a vote will loosen his stiff lips.

Not going to happen.

If it's not pro town, why bring it up at all?

Two reasons. (1) It is a valid option that I (and probably others) have considered. Leaving it out entirely would have been a false dichotomy. (2) To tempt and then analyze other players' curiosity. Yours, for example, struck me as a little scummy because of your earlier fishing. Rash's I'm not sure about yet.

[fhqwhgads]

2) fhqwhgads and crywolf - you both posted after usernames claim without making any mention of it, even though it was the only relevant issue to come up at that point. Why did you choose not to even mention the claim? This goes for Lowell as well, however he only initially ignored it and then chimed in after ythills post.

Well, the truth is in fact a bit embarrassing and newbie-ish. Before this game, I have never seen the miller role. I confused it with the flavour (thinking miller, the guy who supplies the baker. Yeah, I know). I thought he was joking, claiming his 'flavour' rather than a serious role. After some people got talking about it, I consulted the wiki.

@fhq: You were unsure if wolf had missed a point or was fishing. Has #50 helped to solidify your opinion?

Well, I don't think she missed the point any longer.

There are so many people I want dead.

What? Wow. Really? Wow.