Mini 703 - A Roccisi Autumn - Over

[Ectomancer]

Did you dig up the numbers on 12 players, night start? I know that somewhere is a chart on whether you should no lynch or not with night starts.'
If we did it, would you presume to do it with little discussion, hence giving scum less to work with, and our information roles have another night to work. Or shall we scumhunt as usual, and then upon finding a case, abandon it for the no lynch because math might say so? Shall we hope a town power reveals himself in the hoped that it will lead to the capture of scum? And still no lynch?
Perhaps you have a different thought on the future as you would like.

[darkdude]

With even number of players during Day and assuming there is 1 kill per night it is more beneficial to have one No Lynch to reduce number to odd. However this can be done any time before Lynch or Lose, so I would rather not let a townie die right now for next to no reason. Might be useful later when all of the remaining players have some sort of suspicion; their flip would grant town more information.

But the fact that there may be vigs or SK means it could screw up the even/odd numbering. As far as I can tell we're better off lynching every day.

[MacavityLock]

And... I'm back with an

unvote, vote: Rage

. You did take Wombat way out of context, and pretty unfairly. And you asked for a role claim on page 1.

Wombat, generally people here don't like to No lynch day 1, especially since we don't know what kind of roles are out there, so no guilty reports might be forthcoming. Long days plus lynches are the norm.

[Korts]

Can't I get a good night's sleep without you guys starting? Just couldn't wait for me.

Wombat seems earnest in his newbness. Rage, however, acted very aggressively opportunistic. I may venture as far as stating that his call for a roleclaim was a bigger fish than Wombat's call for massclaim.

unvote, vote: Rage

I can understand Ecto's gambit, but his post 16 seems slightly more like backtracking than revealing the gambit. I'd have expected him to wait for everyone to check in before finally revealing that he was only fishing for reactions, otherwise the gambit's efficiency isn't really big.

Puta, who the hell is Marcunt, and what have they done to you?

[Tarballs]

Wow, this sure got to a quick start. I don't think I even need to throw a random vote at all.

I don't like BoW's first post at all. Reeks really scummy, especially for the parts that Rage already highlighted. Second post isn't much better either, as he's basically suggesting a No lynch, which is always a bad idea on day one. However, all of these "mistakes" are pretty common for newbies, so I'm not that convinced that BoW is scum. Might be, but I wouldn't take that chance at this point.

Rage, on the other hand, demanded BoW to role claim

on page one

and has been very aggressive towards him since... well, the beginning. Not a very warm way to welcome a new player. Rage is either a townie who believes that BoW is scum and is trying to push BoW as much as he can to see if BoW cracks under pressure - or a scum that sees BoW as an easy target to be lynched quickly.

Seeing how Rage's bandwagon has already piled up about 4 or 5 votes, I don't think I'm going to vote anyone just yet. Rage is slightly more suspicious than BoW, but I don't want to put anyone too close to a lynch this early. Mistakes can happen and an accidental lynch is something I wouldn't like to see.

[TDC]

Vote Count

Rage (3): darkdude, MacavityLock, Korts

Brain of Wombat (2): chuckrock, Rage

Not voting (7): Ectomancer, tubby216, Puta Puta, gorckat, Tarballs, Brain of Wombat, ThAdmiral

Note: Bold means that if the deadline was to hit right now, that player would be lynched. If no player is bolded, the day would end with no-lynch.

[Tarballs]

Oh, he only had 3? Well then,

Vote: Rage

. That's L-3, so were not in the danger zone just yet.

[ThAdmiral]

Just checkin in.

Ooh early wagon.

What's the deal are they scummy or not? Cause most people seem to think not these days...

[ThAdmiral]

Having actually read this particularly juicy first couple of pages... (only had a few minutes before)

brain of wombat = severe newbie/village idiot (not calling you an idiot that's just a term). Basically you haven't yet realized how games normally play and you said some things that put you in hot water.

On the other hand rage should not be chastised for calling BoW out for what he said because it

is

inherently scummy (i.e. calling for a mass claim right at the start of day 1 etc.) and he will never learn otherwise. I think people are focusing too much on rage's assertion that he took BoW's words "out of context", which is admittedly a bad choice of phrase, but isn't necessarily what he did. A better description of what he did would be "focusing on this particular sentence from his post" or something.

I think what I'm saying makes sense...

Anyway I'm going to guess that both rage and BoW are town and the mafia is happily sitting back and watching this unfold with two fairly viable day 1 wagons to choose from.

[Korts]

So who are your suspicions from this incident, ThAdmiral?

[Rage]

If the random voting stage is indeed over, which I firmly believe it is, then why can't I push for a role claim? Votes should no longer be useless pressure, and I am the only one pointing out what I am trying to achieve with my vote. I really don't think that warrants four quick votes on me, but I'll defend your accusations nonetheless.

Right now, you sound a lot like one of those ambiguous-alignment roles listed in one of the first posts by the mod. What I'm trying to say is, you sound like a scum version of one of those roles acting Too Townie.

What? You think you have a read on his role rather than alignment?

Yes. I don't see a strong enough reason to make me thing otherwise about why he is trying to:
a) get a cop/investigative role to claim
b) ask for a No Lynch

Asking for one, I can see proper reason for, but for both? You're outing power roles on Day 1 and not giving the chance for a scum to be lynched, albeit the

possible

information gained from an investigative role claim may lead to a scum death, but you must realize that since Town knows of the aforementioned claimed role, so does scum. And I don't think it would be a good idea to speculate about what happened on Night 0.

I want a role claim.

I don't want one. Not yet.

That's up to you to decide, but that's what my vote is there for.

Posted: Sun Nov 09, 2008 10:57 pm Post subject: 23
Rage wrote:
Brain of Wombat wrote:
I say it ever more earnestly now, because if this wagon keeps on rolling you actually will lynch a townie.
How do you expect us to believe you are town if townies usually are the only ones who know who they are?

And, the fact that you say this, taken out of context:
Brain of Wombat wrote:
I'm saying we should be careful not to lynch town
Means to me that you are trying to say you know who town is but don't want to give away that you do.. but I don't think any scum is dumb enough to say that, which leaves me confused. If, in fact, you do not want to lynch a townie, why aren't you providing who you think is most likely to be scum?

When he's just stating the obvious, it is not necessary to attack him quote for quote...

And you admit to taking his words out of context?

Unvote: Brain of Wombat
Vote: Rage

Why would you focus on me taking the words out of context? You yourself read them, and I was reminding viewers of what happened. This amounts up to a very weak reason for a vote.

And... I'm back with an unvote, vote: Rage. You did take Wombat way out of context, and pretty unfairly. And you asked for a role claim on page 1.

Fair enough, but you don't say why you think anything I've done is wrong here. Also, you might want to explain what's unfair about it, or I will be calling you out on weak reasoning.

Wombat seems earnest in his newbness.

How?

Rage, however, acted very aggressively opportunistic.

Again, how?

I may venture as far as stating that his call for a roleclaim was a bigger fish than Wombat's call for massclaim.

1) You're giving Wombat wiggle room by handing him the Newbie Card
2) Your venture is opinion, so there's nothing I can effectively rebuttal here

I don't like BoW's first post at all. Reeks really scummy, especially for the parts that Rage already highlighted. Second post isn't much better either, as he's basically suggesting a No lynch, which is always a bad idea on day one. However, all of these "mistakes" are pretty common for newbies, so I'm not that convinced that BoW is scum. Might be, but I wouldn't take that chance at this point.

Like I asked Korts, how do know BoW is a newbie?

Rage, on the other hand, demanded BoW to role claim on page one and has been very aggressive towards him since... well, the beginning. Not a very warm way to welcome a new player. Rage is either a townie who believes that BoW is scum and is trying to push BoW as much as he can to see if BoW cracks under pressure - or a scum that sees BoW as an easy target to be lynched quickly.

It being on page one should have no effect on what was said. At some point in the game we go back and review random votes, and they are on page one. Problem?

I don't see how it matters if I asked for a role claim

on page one

. Doesn't it matter that I have asked for one in the first place? You are also emphasizing how much I want a role claim, when, in fact, I do not "demand" anything. As I've said before, I mentioned why I was voting for him. That's more reason than we got from darkdude's "end the random voting stage" reason or

I think people are focusing too much on rage's assertion that he took BoW's words "out of context", which is admittedly a bad choice of phrase, but isn't necessarily what he did. A better description of what he did would be "focusing on this particular sentence from his post" or something.

The sole purpose of me stating that I took his words out of context was for people to realize that I was focusing on a certain phrase he wrote. The fact that I used the words "out of context" was to assert that, yes, I was indeed taking it out of context. I realized what I was doing by saying so, which is what the phrase "out of context" usually amounts to.

I would like to hear from Brain of Wombat about this before I try to "correct my ways". If he/she has no problem with what I've done I see no reason why I should explain further, unless anyone would like to actually explain themselves why they think me taking something out of context on purpose is scummy, instead of just bandwagonning with darkdude who said just that.

[MacavityLock]

Rage, you brought Wombat to L-4 on the first page. I don't have too much of a problem with that. But asking for a role-claim, given that usually they're asked for at L-1 (or maybe L-2), given that Wombat is new to MS, and given that a page 1 bandwagon usually still includes random votes, adds up to you role-fishing.

[Rage]

Huh. I didn't notice he joined 8 days ago. Still, he should be accountable for his actions, and I think we actually have a better read on him now than if he were "experienced" and have the potential to fool us, but who's to say he isn't doing that now?

Macavity, what do you have against role-fishing so early in the day? Also, why are you so forgiving to Brain of Wombat's role-fishing (asking for a cop claim), yet so quick to switch to me?

[Rage]

One more thing, MacavityLock. According to Tarballs, he has brought me to L-3 on page two. How is that much different?

Oh, he only had 3? Well then, Vote: Rage. That's L-3, so were not in the danger zone just yet.

[MacavityLock]

Macavity, what do you have against role-fishing so early in the day? Also, why are you so forgiving to Brain of Wombat's role-fishing (asking for a cop claim), yet so quick to switch to me?

I think Wombat's first post is certainly something to keep in mind, but it definitely felt like more of a newbie move (who's got info for us so that we can be lazy today?). Role-fishing early is bad because it gives scum better targets. You've been here longer than I have, do I really need to tell you that?

One more thing, MacavityLock. According to Tarballs, he has brought me to L-3 on page two. How is that much different?

He didn't ask for a claim from you on his L-3 vote.

[Rage]

Macavity, what do you have against role-fishing so early in the day? Also, why are you so forgiving to Brain of Wombat's role-fishing (asking for a cop claim), yet so quick to switch to me?

I think Wombat's first post is certainly something to keep in mind, but it definitely felt like more of a newbie move (who's got info for us so that we can be lazy today?).

Well, you may see it as a newbie move, but I've never seen that play before. So as far as I know, I'm reacting properly.

Role-fishing early is bad because it gives scum better targets.

Let's think this through. Brain of Wombat asks cops to claim, on day one, as his first post of the game. I then put my vote on him and ask him to claim instead.

Also, I don't think the number of votes should matter yet, since it's only day one and we're just beginning to discuss. I think that right now, they represent who stands for what, and that's why I addressed everyone who has a vote on me in my post after theirs.

You've been here longer than I have, do I really need to tell you that?

True, I have been here longer, but does that mean I should be looked at harder than Brain of Wombat? Hell, in a finished game, I was scum and outed my partner when he started bussing me. That doesn't sound like a smart thing to do for a player who's been here longer, does it? By the way, I'm moving on from that.

One more thing, MacavityLock. According to Tarballs, he has brought me to L-3 on page two. How is that much different?

He didn't ask for a claim from you on his L-3 vote.

Aye, he didn't. I should clear this up early.

@

Darkdude

,

MacavityLock

,

Tarballs

,

Korts

, do you have a purpose for your votes? If so, what is it? If not, please say so.

[ThAdmiral]

I think people are focusing too much on rage's assertion that he took BoW's words "out of context", which is admittedly a bad choice of phrase, but isn't necessarily what he did. A better description of what he did would be "focusing on this particular sentence from his post" or something.

The sole purpose of me stating that I took his words out of context was for people to realize that I was focusing on a certain phrase he wrote. The fact that I used the words "out of context" was to assert that, yes, I was indeed taking it out of context. I realized what I was doing by saying so, which is what the phrase "out of context" usually amounts to.

Taking someone's words out of context generally has negative connotations, i.e. when someone takes one part of someone else's post in order to misconstrue it's meaning to cast them in a bad light, when in the framework of the original post the part was harmless. A simplistic example of this would be if someone said "why do people think I am scum?" and someone else quoted him as saying "I am scum".
What you did was similar, but not the same. You focused on one part of BoW's post in order to draw attention to it and re-interpret it in your own way (which you believe made him look scummy). The difference is it wasn't his words you were using against him as evidence, but the interpretation of his words, which remained

in

the context of his original post.

Once again I think I'm making sense...

@ korts: I'm a bit suspicious of tarballs. He says he isn't sure of his suspicion on rage and that he mistakes can happen and that he doesn't want an accidental lynch, and then when he realizes that rage only has 3 votes on him he votes as well saying "we're not in the danger zone".
Just smacks a little of scumlike cautiousness not to be seen to be acting too recklessly, and then scumlike opportunism when he sees an opportunity for a "safe" bandwagon vote (i.e. one that hopefully wouldn't be focused on if it lead to a town lynch).

[Ectomancer]

Tarballs does look like he is interested in reserving a seat on the bus, but he wants to make sure it is a good one.

[darkdude]

If the random voting stage is indeed over, which I firmly believe it is, then why can't I push for a role claim? Votes should no longer be useless pressure, and I am the only one pointing out what I am trying to achieve with my vote. I really don't think that warrants four quick votes on me, but I'll defend your accusations nonetheless.

Right now, you sound a lot like one of those ambiguous-alignment roles listed in one of the first posts by the mod. What I'm trying to say is, you sound like a scum version of one of those roles acting Too Townie.

What? You think you have a read on his role rather than alignment?

Yes. I don't see a strong enough reason to make me thing otherwise about why he is trying to:
a) get a cop/investigative role to claim
b) ask for a No Lynch

Well if you follow Wombat's logic here, assuming he is town then this would apply regardless of any power his role may have since he believes it is town's best chance. And if he's scum, he doesn't have to have a special power (by that I mean something other than the standard scum night kill) to try to fish out a role.

So I see no relation between his behaviour and his specific role. I can hardly say anything about his alignment due to the WIFOM. Though if anything, I am leaning slightly towards newbiness rather than scum. What is also interesting about your attack on Wombat is that you did not even acknowledge this WIFOM element; simply jumping to the conclusion that it cannot be newbiness and must be scum.

By the way, if anyone wants some meta on newbs making mistakes in early game, you can take a look at this game that I had recently. The player in question put another player at -1 to Lynch on Page 2.

http://mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.ph ... &&start=25

Why would you focus on me taking the words out of context? You yourself read them, and I was reminding viewers of what happened. This amounts up to a very weak reason for a vote.

Well, the simple answer is that we're not just looking at the faults in Wombat that you pointed out, but also looking at how you do it, so to get a read on you. And I expect others to not only see the literal meaning in my posts criticizing you but also attempt to analyze my alignment which may be revealed by this critique. Of course, you (and most other mafia players, I hope) realize this. So your sentence which basically says "why are you asking me what I mean when I was talking about someone else" is very odd.

Now that aside, as ThAdmiral explained, taking things out of context is not a very productive thing to do since the meaning is deliberately changed. If you truly are using a quote out of context then any critique on it would be meaningless as the quote did not suggest what you are criticizing in the first place. And I agree with ThAdmiral on one more point; I do not think your were really taking Wombat out of context, but rather focusing specifically. However, what interested me was your own labeling of this action as "taking out of context". Thus I felt it necessary to question you. I expected you to immediately correct yourself, but since you do not deny you are taking it out of context, I can only conclude:

1. You are misusing the term "out of context", or;
2. You actually meant to take it out of context but did not in fact do this

It being on page one should have no effect on what was said. At some point in the game we go back and review random votes, and they are on page one. Problem?

Page # is a convenient way to express how long or at what stage a game is. Granted, this should not be taken with much emphasis on its accuracy, but it is accurate to some degree. So I think what they mean here is that it's too early in the game to jump to conclusions.

@Darkdude, MacavityLock, Tarballs, Korts, do you have a purpose for your votes? If so, what is it? If not, please say so.

Well I think I explained my reasons for the most part. But in addition to that, it was mainly just an opening move early in the game to get some more reactions from everyone. I do agree with ThAdmiral and Ectomancer that Tarballs didn't really seem to have a good reason to wagon on Rage, and acted overcautiously without apparent reason; I don't think hoping to avoid accidental hammer is a valid reason as it was quite obvious to me that there were only 3 votes on Rage, and at any rate there was no way he had 6 votes on him already.

[Rage]

So I see no relation between his behaviour and his specific role.

I'm not talking about any roles just yet, but I am trying to relate his behavior to a section of the roles given. Others call him a "newb" so I'm assuming that I'm on the right track because the signs would be easier to spot, but I can't make any assumptions about his specific role like a cop, doctor, tracker, etc.

What is also interesting about your attack on Wombat is that you did not even acknowledge this WIFOM element; simply jumping to the conclusion that it cannot be newbiness and must be scum.

I didn't know he was new to the site, and even then that still doesn't necessarily make him a newb.

So your sentence which basically says "why are you asking me what I mean when I was talking about someone else" is very odd.

No, what I meant was "why are you voting for me with your only reason given as taking something out of context?" but you've answered that since.

1. You are misusing the term "out of context"

This is more likely than the second option.

I, too, find it odd that Tarballs would exaggerate about how many votes are on me, withhold his vote, and then put me closer to this "danger zone" in his very next post. I am awaiting his response.

[chuckrock]

UNVOTE

While there have been a couple of mistakes, I don't feel strongly enough about anyone to cast a vote right now.

I will say that a role-fishing expedition is bad stuff, especially so early.

[Rage]

Hey! Where's

tubby216

,

Puta Puta

and

gorckat

?

[darkdude]

I am trying to relate his behavior to a section of the roles given

Please explain how it is possible to do this. As aforementioned, it seems to me his behaviour could be attributed to any type of role, vanilla or power. And even if you could, I see no reason to put this above alignment in priority, because you don't need to figure out what the scum's powers are to lynch the scum himself.

This is more likely than the second option.

Uh, so which one is it?

[Rage]

I am trying to relate his behavior to a section of the roles given

Please explain how it is possible to do this. As aforementioned, it seems to me his behaviour could be attributed to any type of role, vanilla or power. And even if you could, I see no reason to put this above alignment in priority, because you don't need to figure out what the scum's powers are to lynch the scum himself.

I agree with you for the most part, but I think it would be important to know a scum's role before we're forced to lynch them. It gives us time to decide how much of a threat they are and what other scum roles could exist in this game, because I'm doubting they're random.

This is more likely than the second option.

Uh, so which one is it?

I think I'm misusing the phrase "out of context".

[darkdude]

Unvote: Rage
Vote: tubby216

I have questioned Rage to my content now. Doesn't seem more likely to be scum or town at the moment; I am only wary of the way he responds to things. However so far my meta on him is saying town. To those who don't know, my good friend Rage here has had many games with me.

AFAIK tubby and gorckat are the only ones not to have posted yet.

Chuckrock has made two posts. Puta has made two posts. Neither had much to contribute.