Bay 12 Games Forum

Finally... => Forum Games and Roleplaying => Mafia => Topic started by: lordnincompoop on May 09, 2011, 01:01:32 pm

Title: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [1/7, 3/3]: Evening 3 - GAME OVER & TOWN WIN!
Post by: lordnincompoop on May 09, 2011, 01:01:32 pm
Welcome to Beginner's Mafia XXIII!
For the LORD hath driven out from before you great nations and strong: but as for you, no man hath been able to stand before you unto this day. (Joshua 23:9)



Introduction

This version of the game is aimed specifically at players who are new to Mafia, or are still relatively inexperienced. Here, it's more about having fun and learning than anything else, so don't give up hope if you find yourself in a bad position!
This Beginners' Mafia will feature playing ICs. This means that two more experienced people will join in the game to help you guys out and will actually be playing in the game. They can also be scum too, so always stay suspicious!
The ICs will never lie to you about the game mechanics though, and will usually have a special IC voice to use when they want to teach you guys, since their goal will be to get you guys ready for a real Mafia game. Just because they're playing doesn't mean you can't learn!



Gameplay and Concept

In Mafia, you are divided into two parts: 7 Town players and 2 Mafia players:

If you are Town, your goal is to lynch the Mafia. You do this by convincing others that one of the group is scum, and getting enough votes on them to lynch them.  The Town does not know who else is Town.

If you are Mafia, your goal is to kill off the Town until there is an equal number of them to you by getting them to lynch other Town or by killing them. You are given a kill each Night to kill any player in the game.  All the Mafia members know each other, and can communicate privately.

Each Day, everyone votes to lynch a player.  Vote for a player by posting their name in red.  You may change your vote at any time, remove your vote, or vote for No Lynch. Whoever has the most votes at the end of the day gets lynched, even if there is no majority. (Example: Nobody votes except for one guy, who votes Generic_Steve. Generic_Steve would get lynched). If you have a great deal of suspicion for someone, but don't want to vote for them just yet, point their name out in blue.

The Day will not end prematurely unless people vote to shorten the day. That is, there is no "hammer" in Beginner's Mafia, where X amount of votes (more than 50%) on a single person immediately ends the day with a lynch on that person. Some games do that, but not this one, and you would be explicitly informed in the rules if the hammer is active.

If there are tied votes for who gets lynched at the end of the day, the day ends in a no-lynch. (Two people vote for Generic_Steve, two people vote for Unassuming_Mary. Nobody gets lynched.) 

Each Night, you send in your actions. The cycle continues until one side wins. Days are 72 hours and nights are 24 hours. Weekends count for zero hours.



Rules and Guidelines
In this setup, there are the possibility of extra roles. These roles are Cop and Doctor for Town, and Roleblocker and Godfather for Mafia.
There is a 50% chance for any of these roles to show up. It is possible to end up with no extra roles.

Extensions require support from at least one of the players.  You may oppose extensions as well, which cancels out an extension request.  For example, if there were five players, with two requesting and two opposing, there would be no extension.  (2-2 = 0 of 5)

Along with opposing extensions, there is also the option to Shorten/End the Day. They work differently from extensions, 33% required to pass with no objections. Shortening the Day ends the Day makes the day end as quickly as I can process it. Due to the nature of these requests, they also act just like Counter-Extensions.

Please bold requests/opposition to extensions, and Mod/my name if you want to ask me a question in-thread.  (IE: Mod: I have a question!)



Attendance Sheet

Players:
Think0028, Nobleman
Heliman, Nobleman
Okami No Rei, Assassin
Powder Miner, Nobleman
Heliman, Nobleman
breadbocks, Assassin

ICs:
Toaster, Doctor
Jim Groovester, Nobleman
Jack AT, Nobleman

Player Replacement Queue:



Frequently Asked Questions

Spoiler (click to show/hide)



Resources
Our own Bay12 Mafia tutorial (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=39338.0)
The Notable Games archive. Read a famous game from start to finish! Learn some Mafia history. (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=64229.0)
The Mafiascum wiki. Lots of theory, terminology, and game analysis. (http://mafiascum.net/wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page)
An Interactive Flash tutorial by one of the Mafiascum.net people. Helpful visualization! (http://cataldo.freeshell.org/mafia/mafiascum04.swf)






If you're still confused, join anyhow and we'll teach you!

And if you have any other questions, just ask!
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [0/7, 0/2]: The Birth of Great Nations
Post by: Toaster on May 09, 2011, 01:02:56 pm
IC In.  Been pretty quiet lately.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [0/7, 1/2]: The Birth of Great Nations
Post by: Think0028 on May 09, 2011, 01:12:05 pm
In. Haven't played before, but I've been lurking for a while and finally worked up the courage to join (i.e. I missed the last Beginner's Mafia).
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [0/7, 1/2]: The Birth of Great Nations
Post by: Supercharazad on May 09, 2011, 01:25:57 pm
Yeah sure, why not?
I'm interested.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [0/7, 1/2]: The Birth of Great Nations
Post by: Jim Groovester on May 09, 2011, 03:15:18 pm
IC me up.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [0/7, 1/2]: The Birth of Great Nations
Post by: Okami No Rei on May 09, 2011, 08:19:21 pm
This game will probably be over before an IC shows up for Beginner's Vengeful...
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [0/7, 1/2]: The Birth of Great Nations
Post by: Powder Miner on May 09, 2011, 08:39:29 pm
Iiiinnnnnn yay!
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [0/7, 1/2]: The Birth of Great Nations
Post by: Taricus on May 10, 2011, 06:45:25 am
In.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [5/7, 2/2]: The Birth of Great Nations
Post by: Heliman on May 10, 2011, 11:32:59 am
I could go for another game as an SE this time, been playing elsewhere.

EDIT: In.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [5/7, 2/2]: The Birth of Great Nations
Post by: Darvi on May 10, 2011, 11:35:20 am
Just gonna pop in to note that LNCP's url tags are messed up.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [5/7, 2/2]: The Birth of Great Nations
Post by: anzki4 on May 11, 2011, 12:10:09 pm
Well count me in. Also my first mafia game in a long time. And first one in Internet.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [5/7, 2/2]: The Birth of Great Nations
Post by: lordnincompoop on May 11, 2011, 12:29:56 pm
And rollcall's over, folks.

I'll start within a day or two, but don't expect it to be as flavour-heavy as BMXXII.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: The Birth of Great Nations
Post by: Heliman on May 11, 2011, 03:44:11 pm
wow there's alot of players with no avatar this game. That may start getting annoying for me halfway through.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: The Birth of Great Nations
Post by: Think0028 on May 11, 2011, 04:36:49 pm
Woops, forgot I didn't have an avatar on here yet. That should solve that problem now.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: The Birth of Great Nations
Post by: Vector on May 11, 2011, 09:42:50 pm
Aw, Jesus Fuck, would've IC'd.

... Well, I'm going to be in Russia, anyway, so that probably wouldn't be a good idea.  But consider me considering for either replacement or IC'in for the next round.

(I'm not helping Vengeful because I don't know how to play)
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: The Birth of Great Nations
Post by: Toaster on May 11, 2011, 11:07:28 pm
I'll trade you my IC spot and take over for Vengeful if you're interested.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: The Birth of Great Nations
Post by: Vector on May 11, 2011, 11:30:02 pm
I'll trade you my IC spot and take over for Vengeful if you're interested.

Prolly not a good idea... I mean, we're really leaving soon and I strongly suspect that I'm going to be without a net connection for the vast bulk of the time I'm there.

But thanks for the offer!
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: The Birth of Great Nations
Post by: lordnincompoop on May 12, 2011, 01:06:41 am
Alright, if I happen to run BMXXIV I'll sign you up as IC then.

Feel free to apply for a spot once the inevitable replaces happen.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: The Birth of Great Nations
Post by: breadbocks on May 14, 2011, 09:32:09 pm
Spoilspec me on this one, if ya don't mind.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: The Birth of Great Nations
Post by: lordnincompoop on May 15, 2011, 09:20:11 am
Day 1 Has Begun!



Votecount:
Think0028 - 0 -
Supercharazard - 0 -
Okami No Rei - 0 -
Powder Miner - 0 -
Taricus - 0 -
Heliman - 0 -
anzki4 - 0 -
Jim Groovester - 0 -
Toaster - 0 -

Not Voting - 0 -
No Lynch  - 0 -

Extend  - 0 -
Shorten  - 0 -



“Greetings to all ye who here hath gathered today.”

The King rose from his throne, and addressed the group of nobles brought before him. There was little banter, and the nobles looked at their King with worry; he had faced colder winters as of late, and it seemed unlikely that he would survive another.

“What have you for us, my liege? Is it about the heir?”

“Indeed it is, Heliman, my son.”

He walked down from the raised platform and began to shout, face flushing red and shaking. “For in this court resides two assassins, present even now amongst you, who sought to kill me!”

His voice grew louder, and he sat back down on the throne. “And since it is your doing, by way of ill will or incompetence, none of you will leave until you find and kill these assassins yourselves.”

He gestured toward the doors, and two heavily armed guards closed them, standing by.

“Let it begin.”




The Day will end Tuesday, 8PM GMT.

You need 3 to Extend and 5 to Shorten.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Powder Miner on May 15, 2011, 10:09:59 am
If I'm understanding RVS correctly....

So, Heliman, you've been in the last Beginner's Mafia, with the ICs we have, so who do you think us newbies should watch out for?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: webadict on May 15, 2011, 11:10:17 am
If I'm understanding RVS correctly....

So, Heliman, you've been in the last Beginner's Mafia, with the ICs we have, so who do you think us newbies should watch out for?
Don't worry about trying to understand RVS. Just try to get a feel for what other players are doing. Are they trying to fit in? Are they trying to find information? Look at what they do and how they do it.

RVS isn't really all that scary in other games. You just gotta know what to do with it.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Powder Miner on May 15, 2011, 11:23:14 am
OK then. Just gonna wait for Heliman to answer.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Toaster on May 15, 2011, 01:10:51 pm
Welcome to Mafia!

As you should be aware, there are two teams- town and scum.  The town's goal is to find and lynch the scum.  The scum's goal is to successfully masquerade as town long enough to win.

As town, your primary and only goal is to hunt scum.  This is more important than everything else, including your survival.  If the mafia is scared enough of you to kill you, you've done a good job and should take it as a compliment to your abilities.  Do not fear death- fear not finding scum.

That said, how do you find scum?  Question, question, question.  Study people's motives.  Look for people who are either insincere about finding scum or who seemed overly concerned with their survival and/or image.  If someone says something that seems off or unusual to you, ask them about it!  Examine the logic people use to reach their conclusions.  If it's faulty, it could be a sign of scum trying to mislead.

Look also for people who are not truly scum hunting, but just trying to pretend like they are.  That is a big warning sign.

Don't read too much into who was chosen to be killed at night.  You can never be sure why the scum team picked that person, so trying to find scum by who they killed will only lead you in circles.

Finally, have fun!  It's a game- you should enjoy yourself!


Everything above is given to you as a completely impartial person who wants you to learn how to play and become skilled in the game.  I'm here to teach, but I am also a player.  Remember, it is possible for the ICs to be scum.  By the same token, we are most concerned about you becoming good players here- we will not mislead you with bad advice if either of us are scum.  Our playing advice is in 100% good faith, but you should still study our arguments to see if they hold water.

One piece of advice to the scum team:  The best way for you to win is to make everyone think you're town.  Do that by hunting scum just as you would if you were town.  I find it best as scum to not think about your alignment while reading the thread for scummy behavior.  Don't be afraid to hound your partner if he does something scummy.

Final word:  How someone answers a question is as important as the answer itself.  Did they react like they were hiding something?  Did the question unnerve them?



Now, to the game!  Generally, we here at Bay 12 open up by picking someone semi-arbitrarily, voting them, and asking them a question.  Don't feel limited to a single question, though.  Here's my opener for example:

anzki4:  If you were scum, what qualities would you like in your scum partner?


Taricus:  What do you think is the best way to hunt scum?



OK then. Just gonna wait for Heliman to answer.

Sitting around and waiting is passive.  Don't feel you can't do anything else while waiting for an answer- go question someone else.  You don't have to vote someone to question them.


Good luck and have fun!
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Powder Miner on May 15, 2011, 01:41:36 pm
Think no Rei how do you think this game is going to go?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Supercharazad on May 15, 2011, 02:29:58 pm
Heliman, if you were scum, would you be annoyed that you were singled out in the flavour text?
 
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Jim Groovester on May 15, 2011, 03:05:46 pm
Well, poo. Toaster got the opening IC post first. Had I been first here's what I would have put down. It's mostly a reinforcement of everything Toaster already said.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

I'll reiterate some key points that Toaster said, because they bear repeating for ever and ever.

You find scum by asking questions. Ask questions about anything that looks odd to you. And I do mean anything. Oftentimes it's the more subtler signals that give away scum. You might not know what these subtle signals are yet, but you want to get in the habit of asking about them anyway.

Stay active. Do all that you can to keep the conversation moving, preferably in a direction you want to take it. If you're not sure what to do, look through everybody's posts, ask questions about them, or ask for opinions about other players. If you're not active, you won't find scum. What's worse, you'll look like scum.

I hope I've communicated clearly enough the importance of asking questions and staying active.

Think0028, let's say you're the Doctor. What criteria would you use to make a decision about who to protect, and why?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Okami No Rei on May 15, 2011, 03:48:44 pm
Okami no Rei how do you think this game is going to go?
Well.  As long as the fresh blood doesn't develop chronic lurkitis,  I like the mix of experience I'm looking at.  This will be an interesting game.

Supercharazad - Stacking votes already?  Interesting.  In your opinion, how many votes constitutes a bandwagon in nine player RVS?

Think0028 - Have you read though any games Heliman played?  Would you rather be on his team as town or scum?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Taricus on May 15, 2011, 03:53:01 pm
Supercharizard - Hiding something?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: anzki4 on May 15, 2011, 04:13:09 pm
anzki4:  If you were scum, what qualities would you like in your scum partner?

If I were scum, I would prefer my partner to be someone deceptive, who knows how to lie.
But you tell me, Toaster if I were scum, would you be a good partner to me?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Okami No Rei on May 15, 2011, 04:34:29 pm
Unvote

Supercharizard - Hiding something?

Taricus - Nothing to add?  At least he included a decent RVS question when he stacked votes.   Jumping on an easy target like that, without even contributing to the investigation, is downright lazy, and terribly scummy.  Try again.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Taricus on May 15, 2011, 04:45:38 pm
Okami No Rei - True, however at this stage we have no idea on how everyone plays. Better to get an insight now than getting one too late.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: anzki4 on May 15, 2011, 04:58:14 pm
Jim Groovester, what you need the information about the doctor for?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Okami No Rei on May 15, 2011, 05:18:17 pm
Okami No Rei - True, however at this stage we have no idea on how everyone plays. Better to get an insight now than getting one too late.

I'm not sure you understood me.  Let me reiterate.  YOU are being lazy and scummy by bandwagoning Supercharazad without even offering a question.

"Hiding something?" is not a question.  He's not hiding something unless he's scum or he's cop/doctor.  Either way, he's certainly not going to tell you.

Just as you are seeking insight into everyone, so do we need insight in you.  Why would you be exempt from this?  Participate.  Ask questions.   Answer them.  You haven't even responded to Toaster's query yet:
Taricus:  What do you think is the best way to hunt scum?

Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Taricus on May 15, 2011, 05:33:38 pm
Okami No Rei -

You haven't even responded to Toaster's query yet:
Taricus:  What do you think is the best way to hunt scum?
Wait, that wasn't a theoretical question, crap. (I'm talking about toasters by the way). So one bad question is what makes you suspisous then. Fair point too though so...

Unvote Supercharizard

Toaster - The way I think is best is to listen, read and wait. Pounce once they have given themselves away and utterly destroy them. Do not let them escape with anyones support.

Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Heliman on May 15, 2011, 05:54:30 pm
oh hey. looks like we started.
So, Heliman, you've been in the last Beginner's Mafia, with the ICs we have, so who do you think us newbies should watch out for?
Who should you watch out for? Everyone! look at everybody! Everyone here has a chance of being scum, you need to look at them all and see for yourself! That's mafia!

Heliman, if you were scum, would you be annoyed that you were singled out in the flavour text?
Flavor text is just that, flavor text. Wouldn't be worried at all.

But you tell me, Toaster if I were scum, would you be a good partner to me?
Anzki4, Toaster is an IC, are you doubting his ability to play already?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: lordnincompoop on May 15, 2011, 05:58:00 pm
Since this seems to have been lost on some:

You only have one vote. Use it well.

For my sanity's sake, please Unvote before casting a new one.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Powder Miner on May 15, 2011, 07:04:14 pm
Think0028, unvote Heliman Ok, not exactly what I meant, but fair enough. Think, what would your favorite role be to have?

PFP.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Jim Groovester on May 15, 2011, 07:45:19 pm
Jim Groovester, what you need the information about the doctor for?

It's a hypothetical question designed to give me insight into how Think0028 thinks0028. I'm not actually looking for information about the Doctor.

Toaster - The way I think is best is to listen, read and wait. Pounce once they have given themselves away and utterly destroy them. Do not let them escape with anyones support.

What if the scum don't give themselves away so easily?

Well, then you're fucked.

The passive approach to scumhunting fails miserably against all scum save for completely new, never played a mafia before, scum. You can't expect that the scum will make mistakes for you. You have to press players and ask them prodding questions and keep them off balance, and otherwise force them into making revealing mistakes. Otherwise, you'll never find scum.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Vector on May 15, 2011, 07:48:04 pm
The passive approach to scumhunting fails miserably against all scum save for completely new, never played a mafia before, scum. You can't expect that the scum will make mistakes for you. You have to press players and ask them prodding questions and keep them off balance, and otherwise force them into making revealing mistakes. Otherwise, you'll never find scum.

*False at very advanced levels

Carry on :3
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Toaster on May 15, 2011, 08:09:16 pm
Stay active. Do all that you can to keep the conversation moving, preferably in a direction you want to take it. If you're not sure what to do, look through everybody's posts, ask questions about them, or ask for opinions about other players. If you're not active, you won't find scum. What's worse, you'll look like scum.

Quoted for truth.  I forgot this one, so let me say it too-  STAY ACTIVE!  You don't have to monitor this thread 24/7, but the general baseline for effort is one solid content-filled post every day- weekends you can slip a bit, but not weekdays.  More, of course, is always welcome.  Near day end and game end, try to put in more than that baseline.

Moving on...


anzki4:
anzki4:  If you were scum, what qualities would you like in your scum partner?

If I were scum, I would prefer my partner to be someone deceptive, who knows how to lie.
But you tell me, Toaster if I were scum, would you be a good partner to me?

Fair enough.  Unvote anzki4.

I consider my scum game superior to my town game, so I sure hope so.  I can scum hunt just fine on both sides of the fence, but I tend to fail at actually hitting the scum.


Taricus:
Okami No Rei - True, however at this stage we have no idea on how everyone plays. Better to get an insight now than getting one too late.

I'm not sure you understood me.  Let me reiterate.  YOU are being lazy and scummy by bandwagoning Supercharazad without even offering a question.

"Hiding something?" is not a question.  He's not hiding something unless he's scum or he's cop/doctor.  Either way, he's certainly not going to tell you.

Just as you are seeking insight into everyone, so do we need insight in you.  Why would you be exempt from this?  Participate.  Ask questions.   Answer them.  You haven't even responded to Toaster's query yet:
Taricus:  What do you think is the best way to hunt scum?

What he said.  Remember that you don't have to vote someone to ask them a question.  My personal preference is bold to get someone's attention, but use whatever you like (besides colors.  Red is voting and blue is unofficially the color of the Finger of Suspicion- when you want to indicate that you strongly suspect someone but for some reason aren't voting them.)


Toaster - The way I think is best is to listen, read and wait. Pounce once they have given themselves away and utterly destroy them. Do not let them escape with anyones support.

I have basically the same objection as Jim to this answer.  I have never been a fan of sitting around waiting for scum to screw up.  Now I will hold back a bit if I know something (usually role-based) and am trying to lead the target into screwing up, but even so I will still follow up on other leads. 


Jim G:  Would you enjoy the chance to be scum in this game to be able to personally tutor someone in the way of scum as well as teaching everyone how to be town?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Okami No Rei on May 15, 2011, 08:21:49 pm
So one bad question is what makes you suspisous then. Fair point too though so...
0.o

Fair point?  I just accused you of being bandwagoning scum, and you're agreeing with me?

Unvote Supercharizard

Why are you dropping your attack on Supercharizad?   I never said you were wrong to do it, I said you were lazy for not putting any meat behind the inquisition.  Why'd you vote him in the first place if you weren't interested in questioning him?  Why aren't you questioning anyone right now?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Taricus on May 15, 2011, 08:23:56 pm
Okami No Rei - No substance to the attack, and not very convincing argument means it'll fall through.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Okami No Rei on May 15, 2011, 09:01:46 pm
Okami No Rei - No substance to the attack, and not very convincing argument means it'll fall through.
Are you talking about my attack on you, or are you answering my question?  Either way, it's RVS.  I'm pushing you for a lead because you might be scum, and you might slip and give me something solid to work with.  You need to do the same.  Take your minor suspicions and substance-less attacks and use them as tools to harvest material for convincing arguments and uncover solid evidence.

You still haven't addressed the primary concern.  Are you bandwagoning scum or aren't you?  If not, why?

Answering the following might help your case:
Why'd you vote him in the first place if you weren't interested in questioning him?  Why aren't you questioning anyone right now?

You're activelurking right now, which only benefits the scum.  Defend yourself!  Attack somebody!  Do something!
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Taricus on May 15, 2011, 09:09:00 pm
Okami No Rei - The minute I tell everyone I'm not scum is the minute I get lynced completely. And I-hell with it.

Okami No Rei Nothing personal, though I'm getting a bit suspicious of you...
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Powder Miner on May 15, 2011, 09:38:28 pm
Unvote Think0028, Taricus Well, gee. You fail to answer his questions, and when he continues to press, you OMGUS him. Any reason for that?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Powder Miner on May 15, 2011, 09:39:07 pm
Or rather, almost OMGUS him.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Taricus on May 15, 2011, 09:50:42 pm
Powder miner - What do you mean, He caught without an answer, So I'm wrong.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Okami No Rei on May 15, 2011, 10:33:28 pm
Okami No Rei - The minute I tell everyone I'm not scum is the minute I get lynced completely.

I'm not asking you to tell everyone you're not scum.  I'm telling you that your behavior is scummy, and you need to either offer an explanation for that behavior, or you need to correct that behavior.  Me, Jim, and Toaster have all been trying to explain to you how to act in a manner that benefits Town, and you haven't been listening.

Powder miner - What do you mean, He caught without an answer, So I'm wrong.

The problem isn't that you were wrong.  You made a mistake.  Understandable in a beginner's game.  We're here to learn.  The problem is that you persist in the behavior you've been called out on, without providing a reason for doing so.   This forces us to assume that you have a reason that you're not willing to share, which usually means you're scum.

Okami No Rei Nothing personal, though I'm getting a bit suspicious of you...
Good!  You should be suspicious of everyone!  Not a question, though...
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Vector on May 15, 2011, 10:36:27 pm
@ONR: Do I know you from somewhere?

More appropriately, where have you played before?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Jim Groovester on May 15, 2011, 10:41:24 pm
*False at very advanced levels

Carry on :3

Quiet, you.

Jim G:  Would you enjoy the chance to be scum in this game to be able to personally tutor someone in the way of scum as well as teaching everyone how to be town?

Oh, absolutely. I would relish the chance to tell everybody how to play a perfectly good town game while being scum.

Although I'm not sure what I would tell my scum partner, or what it would be like for him. It would probably be even more nannying and controlling than what everybody else gets.

Okami No Rei - The minute I tell everyone I'm not scum is the minute I get lynced completely. And I-hell with it.

Not true at all.

You can say you're not scum.

As long as that's not your only defense.

And as long as you're actually scumhunting.

There's a lot you can get away with if you're trying to scumhunt.

So go scumhunt.

Okami No Rei Nothing personal, though I'm getting a bit suspicious of you...

This isn't a very effective attack.

What about Okami No Rei makes you suspicious? You need to outline your reasons whenever you suspect anybody. If you don't provide your reasons, you take out whatever force your attack had.

That goes for everybody. Whenever you vote or say somebody is suspicious, reasons reasons reasons reasons reasons reasons reasons reasons.

Powder miner - What do you mean, He caught without an answer, So I'm wrong.

You should work on being clear. I have no idea what you're talking about.

Me, Jim, and Toaster have all been trying to explain to you how to act in a manner that benefits Town, and you haven't been listening.

Oh, nice. Grouping yourself with the two ICs.

How about you let me and Toaster do the teaching. You could have a lot of experience for all I know, but I distrust your motives.

Speaking of your motives, why the hell are you being so hard on Taricus? You're putting a lot of pressure on him. I don't think it's because you actually think he's scum. I think it's because you want to make a good show of scumhunting.

You know what scumhunting for appearances' sake is? Scummy.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Powder Miner on May 15, 2011, 11:40:02 pm
Taricus, so let me understand this: You (almost) OMGUS'ed someone because they caught you without an answer?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Think0028 on May 16, 2011, 02:56:41 am
Think0028, let's say you're the Doctor. What criteria would you use to make a decision about who to protect, and why?

First day, I'd protect whoever is the most active and doesn't give me a scum reading, as I'd feel that as scum, I'd pick off the more active players first so I could get a win through more easily against the more passive players. Afterwards, I'd look for people who suddenly become more aggressive, on suspicion of them being a cop. What would you do as doctor?

Okami, I have not read any games with Heliman in them unfortunately.

Toaster, what would you do on the first day if you were a cop? What do you feel about Okami vs. Taricus right now? Personally, I feel that Taricus is being suspicious, but more in a noob way than in a scum way.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Jim Groovester on May 16, 2011, 03:13:58 am
Think0028, let's say you're the Doctor. What criteria would you use to make a decision about who to protect, and why?

First day, I'd protect whoever is the most active and doesn't give me a scum reading, as I'd feel that as scum, I'd pick off the more active players first so I could get a win through more easily against the more passive players. Afterwards, I'd look for people who suddenly become more aggressive, on suspicion of them being a cop. What would you do as doctor?

That's a good answer. Unvote.

I'd basically do the same thing. I'd think about likely night kill targets and work from there. Usually that means whoever's being the loudest, most obnoxious, most abrasive scumhunter.

Any opinion on anyone else in the game besides Taricus?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Jim Groovester on May 16, 2011, 03:15:18 am
What the hell am I doing, I should be RVing pressuring someone.

Okami No Rei, at least until he answers my question about Taricus.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: anzki4 on May 16, 2011, 05:22:57 am
Anzki4, Toaster is an IC, are you doubting his ability to play already?
Not at all. Just question about his fittingness to the part of a scum.
It's a hypothetical question designed to give me insight into how Think0028 thinks0028. I'm not actually looking for information about the Doctor.
Very well. Unvote Jim Groovester.

And Taricus, I wonder if your answers are just inexperience, which most of us here posses, or is there something else behind it...

Powder Miner, you have been spared for questions, so let me ask; if you were scum, who would be your partner?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Taricus on May 16, 2011, 06:32:09 am
That would be inexperience. Coupled with a lack of social skills.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Toaster on May 16, 2011, 08:24:12 am
Taricus:
Okami No Rei - No substance to the attack, and not very convincing argument means it'll fall through.

Then you should put substance in your attack.

Okami No Rei - The minute I tell everyone I'm not scum is the minute I get lynced completely. And I-hell with it.

Okami No Rei Nothing personal, though I'm getting a bit suspicious of you...

It's OK to say you're not scum if someone asks you if you are.  It's a good idea, in fact.

You should say why.

In general, you should go into more detail in your answers and questions.  A good rule of thumb is to assume everyone is adding "Why?" after every question they ask (as in "Who do you think is scum?  Why?")  One or two lines implies you either don't want to participate or are hiding something.

That would be inexperience. Coupled with a lack of social skills.

That's why you're here.


Jim:  Fair enough.  Unvote Jim G.


Toaster, what would you do on the first day if you were a cop? What do you feel about Okami vs. Taricus right now? Personally, I feel that Taricus is being suspicious, but more in a noob way than in a scum way.

During the day, I'd play as I would if I was vanilla town.  At night, I'd either investigate my strongest suspicion or someone I had trouble reading- former if said suspicion was very strong, latter if I was unsure.

Okami seems to know what he is doing while Taricus is clearly new.  I'm not yet getting strong scum vibes from either of them.   But since I'm here...


Okami:  Clearly you've played before.  Do you prefer playing town or scum?  Why?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Think0028 on May 16, 2011, 10:45:02 am
Any opinion on anyone else in the game besides Taricus?

Nothing quite in particular yet, but I'm a tad concerned about potential momentum building up on Taricus on the grounds of him looking scummy because he's a beginner, so I'm looking at other people at the moment. Although I'm feeling a slight suspicion towards Okami.



During the day, I'd play as I would if I was vanilla town.  At night, I'd either investigate my strongest suspicion or someone I had trouble reading- former if said suspicion was very strong, latter if I was unsure.

Okami seems to know what he is doing while Taricus is clearly new.  I'm not yet getting strong scum vibes from either of them.   But since I'm here...


Okami:  Clearly you've played before.  Do you prefer playing town or scum?  Why?

Thank you, I'll unvote Toaster. But before I go on, I'd like to ask you and Jim Groovester the same question, seeing as you're both experienced on playing Mafia on these forums. Do you prefer playing town, or scum? Also, if town, would you prefer to have a power role or be vanilla? As scum?

Oh, Powder Miner, I missed your question earlier. As this is my first game, I'd be quite happy with a plain vanilla townsie. If I was scum, however, I would be much more willing to take on a power role, thanks to the support network of scumchat. As town, I don't think I have enough experience/intelligence to take on a power role as of yet.

Back to what I said earlier, Okami no Rei. While I understand that Taricus is throwing a very large scumtell of active lurking and lacks meat to his attacks, I feel like he's reacting more like a inexperienced town than a bandwagoning scum. Consider that he folded almost instantly when you started pushing him and hasn't fought back. I believe as a scum he would be more concerned with his appearances, especially as a beginner on the first day. Do you think that Taricus is scum, or are you pressuring him to improve his game?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Toaster on May 16, 2011, 11:21:43 am
Think:  I'm better at scum, so a slight preference toward it.  As town, I like having something to do at night, but I'll take whatever I get dealt.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Supercharazad on May 16, 2011, 11:46:15 am

Supercharazad - Stacking votes already?  Interesting.  In your opinion, how many votes constitutes a bandwagon in nine player RVS?

2, unless it's RVS or the second person has their own argument.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Supercharazad on May 16, 2011, 11:48:47 am
Supercharizard - Hiding something?

 unvote

So, as a matter of fact, I'm not.

Tell me, why the vauge RV? What possible outcome would that answer have generated other than a "no"?

Tacricus, Why the vauge RV? Also, who would prefer as your scumpartner?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Taricus on May 16, 2011, 11:58:39 am
Vauge?

And to answer your question, someone more competant than me at it.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: anzki4 on May 16, 2011, 12:04:46 pm
Vauge?

Probably meant vague...
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Taricus on May 16, 2011, 12:10:46 pm
Ah, many thanks Anzki.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Vector on May 16, 2011, 12:47:08 pm
Hmm... intentional evading of my questions, and a laughing man avatar... no questions about mafia, and an easy alighnment with the ICs... an aggressive, familiar playing style.

I'll resume questioning post-game, because I think it's a distraction right now.  However, ONR, I've got my eye on you.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Supercharazad on May 16, 2011, 01:28:28 pm
Ah, many thanks Anzki.

If you know what I meant now, then why not answer?


Not answering questions, that'd be a scumtell you know.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Taricus on May 16, 2011, 01:31:13 pm
It would've generated A response, something I could worked with.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Supercharazad on May 16, 2011, 02:58:52 pm
It would've generated A response, something I could worked with.

Why not say that when you understood it, not after I pressed you?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Taricus on May 16, 2011, 03:00:41 pm
I understood it after you pressed on...
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Supercharazad on May 16, 2011, 03:06:46 pm
I understood it after you pressed on...

No, you understood it BEFORE I pressed the issue of you not answering it.

Ah, many thanks Anzki.


So, as I said, why not say it right after you understood, instead of after I pressed you on not answering.


That's now a second time you've avoided answering.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Taricus on May 16, 2011, 03:08:27 pm
And how do you know that? Because I have no clue at what is going on right now...
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Toaster on May 16, 2011, 03:09:11 pm
I understood it after you pressed on...

While it's nice to see multiple posts out of you, it'd be nicer to have one that answered questions in detail.  One brief sentence at each point addressed to you is not what we're looking for here.

And how do you know that? Because I have no clue at what is going on right now...

Ask questions, then.  Answer ones asked of you in detail.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Supercharazad on May 16, 2011, 03:11:49 pm
And how do you know that? Because I have no clue at what is going on right now...

Because, you said
Ah, many thanks Anzki.

right after he explained it.


Therefore, you must have understood it after that, which means you only went to answer my question AFTER I HAD PRESSED YOU ON NOT ANSWERING.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Taricus on May 16, 2011, 03:12:47 pm
There is no detail to it, plain and simple. You want needless elaboration and detail in which I may possibly be able to deceive you with a wall of text, go get someone else. I give it as simply as I can. Not to mention I do forget things...
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Supercharazad on May 16, 2011, 03:15:06 pm
There is no detail to it, plain and simple. You want needless elaboration and detail in which I may possibly be able to deceive you with a wall of text, go get someone else. I give it as simply as I can. Not to mention I do forget things...

You want me to stop pressing you? How about... no.

Give me a reason not to press you further, and then answer the bloody question.
It would've generated A response, something I could worked with.

Why not say that when you understood it, not after I pressed you?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Taricus on May 16, 2011, 03:16:24 pm
And the fact is, I gave you an answer. I you don't want to read out of delusion, fine by me.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Supercharazad on May 16, 2011, 03:18:34 pm
And the fact is, I gave you an answer. I you don't want to read out of delusion, fine by me.

No, actually, you didn't answer.

My question was:

Why not answer the question when you understood it, not after I pressed you on not answering.


Also, you didn't give a reason for me not to press you, so I want that too.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Taricus on May 16, 2011, 03:20:49 pm
And I'll say it again, I understood it after you pressed it.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Think0028 on May 16, 2011, 03:25:24 pm
There is no detail to it, plain and simple. You want needless elaboration and detail in which I may possibly be able to deceive you with a wall of text, go get someone else. I give it as simply as I can. Not to mention I do forget things...

So here's the thing: we can't let up on you. There's a 2/9 chance that you're scum from sheer probability. Information changes that. Lack of information only makes you more suspicious, not less. Why would someone be unwilling to share information? The only good reason here is that you're scum and you don't want to reveal your position. A vanilla townie will want to talk as much as possible because the worst that can happen for a townie is that you're accidentally lynched, and then people can read everything you said knowing you're innocent. Seeing how people react to innocent talk can be extremely enlightening. If you constantly keep to yourself, you hurt the town because when you (almost inevitably) die, we get very little information.

Also consider that if all townies are extremely open, then if the scum clam up, it's obvious who's scum. This forces the scum to open up and provide more information for us to analyze.

In summary: if you're a townie, you want to share information. If you're scum, you want to share information so that you aren't obviously scummy.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Think0028 on May 16, 2011, 03:26:25 pm
Follow-up: I get 2/9 from an educated guess and knowledge of previous BM. I don't actually know if there's 2 mafia or not.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Taricus on May 16, 2011, 03:26:44 pm
Fact is I don't have much information to give.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Supercharazad on May 16, 2011, 03:26:49 pm
And I'll say it again, I understood it after you pressed it.

You understood it before I pressed it, I already gave evidence that you understood.


ANSWER THE FUCKING QUESTIONS.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Supercharazad on May 16, 2011, 03:28:14 pm
Right, going to sleep now, I'll deal with you later, if you havn't answered yet, I'm going to be pissed.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Taricus on May 16, 2011, 03:29:14 pm
And I don't even remember. If I don't answer you, it means I don't have an answer. Enjoy your anger.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Vector on May 16, 2011, 03:30:59 pm
I don't actually know if there's 2 mafia or not.

There's always a 2/9 scumteam in these games unless someone has grievously fucked up.


And I don't even remember. If I don't answer you, it means I don't have an answer. Enjoy your anger.

Get off your ass and scumhunt.  You're playing too passively.

I understand the social skills thing, bro.  I really, really do--that's why I came here in the first place.  Don't give up on it, because it does get better.  But to do that, you're going to have to stop playing off the sidelines.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Think0028 on May 16, 2011, 03:32:48 pm
I don't actually know if there's 2 mafia or not.

There's always a 2/9 scumteam in these games unless someone has grievously fucked up.


Good to know, thanks.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Toaster on May 16, 2011, 03:36:58 pm
And I don't even remember. If I don't answer you, it means I don't have an answer. Enjoy your anger.

You need to acknowledge questions, at least.  If you don't have an answer, explicitly say so, explain why, and prepare to defend your lack of answer.

Fact is I don't have much information to give.

You're going to get pressured in this game- everyone does.  Come to expect it.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Taricus on May 16, 2011, 03:39:31 pm
Fact is I don't have much information to give.

You're going to get pressured in this game- everyone does.  Come to expect it.
Pressure applied to someone doesn't equal the fact that you'll get much out of them. Not to mention that a scum would be more subtle than me.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Toaster on May 16, 2011, 03:46:47 pm
Fact is I don't have much information to give.

You're going to get pressured in this game- everyone does.  Come to expect it.
Pressure applied to someone doesn't equal the fact that you'll get much out of them. Not to mention that a scum would be more subtle than me.

Pressure generally won't go away if the person applying it doesn't like what they get out of it.

Beyond that, that logic you used ("Scum me wouldn't do this") is actually no good, commonly referred to here as WIFOM (http://mafiascum.net/wiki/index.php?title=WIFOM).  Simply put, 99 times out of 100 that type of statement does no good and shouldn't be used.

I don't see you applying pressure of your own.  Why aren't you questioning people?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Taricus on May 16, 2011, 03:57:50 pm
No information, no motive yet. I say we attempt a stalemate for the lynch this round, call suspicions rather than voting.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Jim Groovester on May 16, 2011, 04:08:44 pm
Taricus, there's been lots of good advice thrown at you. But you aren't listening to it.

Why aren't you listening?

Instead of offering excuses for why you're not doing stuff, you should, oh, I don't know, go out and try the stuff people are telling you to do.

Being meek and lacking confidence in your play is a quick way to lynchtown. It's a pretty cool place, lots of people to hang around with.

So go be bold already.

Thank you, I'll unvote Toaster. But before I go on, I'd like to ask you and Jim Groovester the same question, seeing as you're both experienced on playing Mafia on these forums. Do you prefer playing town, or scum? Also, if town, would you prefer to have a power role or be vanilla? As scum?

I don't really have a preference. In games where there's a possibility for interesting third party roles, I hope I end up as one of them. But in a game with just town and scum, I don't really worry too much about what I'll end up as.

As for roles, they're nice to have but I generally feel like I'm limited in using them since I'm pretty high up on the list of night targets. And I can do plenty of damage with or without them, so I don't really worry too much about getting them. But as scum, yes, I'd want a power role. A more powerful scum team is a more dangerous scum team.

Also consider that if all townies are extremely open, then if the scum clam up, it's obvious who's scum. This forces the scum to open up and provide more information for us to analyze.

In summary: if you're a townie, you want to share information. If you're scum, you want to share information so that you aren't obviously scummy.

I'll use this to point out that this is excellent advice for everybody. As a member of the town, you want to be as open and transparent as possible. (Barring information about your role, of course.)

You want everybody to get a good read on you, and ideally, you want that read to be town. So answer questions as quickly and openly and helpfully as you can.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Vector on May 16, 2011, 04:19:51 pm
No information, no motive yet. I say we attempt a stalemate for the lynch this round, call suspicions rather than voting.

In general that just gives the scum a free N1 kill.  You can't read into the nightkill unless you're quite sharp, and even then you need a lot of other data.

To date, there's only one time I remember an NK leading to the scum.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Taricus on May 16, 2011, 04:35:30 pm
Possibly, though they get a kill reguardless if we get one of them this day or not, and whoever got killed at that night may either been onto something or completely off.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Think0028 on May 16, 2011, 04:40:36 pm
Possibly, though they get a kill reguardless if we get one of them this day or not, and whoever got killed at that night may either been onto something or completely off.

... Buh? I really can't parse what you're saying here. So you're saying that if we do nothing, we get no information? Then clearly we should do something, no?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Vector on May 16, 2011, 04:41:58 pm
Possibly, though they get a kill reguardless if we get one of them this day or not, and whoever got killed at that night may either been onto something or completely off.

All right, let me put it this way:

It's a bad idea.  We tried it, it sucked, we have run through many, many newbies thinking it was a good idea and it has always been a bad idea.

So get to it.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Taricus on May 16, 2011, 04:45:47 pm
Well then, I've nothing.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: breadbocks on May 16, 2011, 05:16:37 pm
Spoilspec me on this one, if ya don't mind.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Powder Miner on May 16, 2011, 07:23:37 pm
Anzki, If I were scum, I wouldn't know my partner until I got my PM. The roles are randomly assigned, and even if they weren't I'd have no way of knowing who the host would pick. However, if I could CHOOSE a partner, which is what I assume you meant, I would pick one of the ICs, as their experience would help me to win the game.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Toaster on May 16, 2011, 08:00:39 pm
Well then, I've nothing.

Then get something.  The simplest way to do this is to ask questions and gauge people's responses.  Remember, how the question is answered is as important as the answer itself.

Have you read any prior games?  This (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=79927.0) game was played with the same role set (though in that one each role was guaranteed instead of 50/50 like this one) with several of the best players on this board.  See how the first day of that game went for advice on how to start this day.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Okami No Rei on May 16, 2011, 09:39:06 pm
There is no detail to it, plain and simple. You want needless elaboration and detail in which I may possibly be able to deceive you with a wall of text, go get someone else. I give it as simply as I can.
I think this is the third time you've made it clear that you know what we expect of you, yet you continue to fail to deliver.
Not to mention I do forget things...
No excuse for that. It's all there for you to read.
Pressure applied to someone doesn't equal the fact that you'll get much out of them. Not to mention that a scum would be more subtle than me.
No information, no motive yet. I say we attempt a stalemate for the lynch this round, call suspicions rather than voting.
I don't know what (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/CaptainOblivious) to think (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ObfuscatingStupidity).
Well then, I've nothing.
And I've had it with you.

Unvote

Speaking of your motives, why the hell are you being so hard on Taricus? You're putting a lot of pressure on him. I don't think it's because you actually think he's scum. I think it's because you want to make a good show of scumhunting.

You know what scumhunting for appearances' sake is? Scummy.
You're right.  I don't think he's scum.  I don't think he's not scum, either.  At this point I've been more interested in seeing the reactions to my pressing him.  Specifically, I've been using him as bait while trawling for bandwagoning scum.  That plan's over now I've said it, which is why I waited until tonight rather than last night to post again (needing to sleep and go to work played a role in the decision as well).  Now I've got a veritable mountain of reactions to sift through.

Okami no Rei. While I understand that Taricus is throwing a very large scumtell of active lurking and lacks meat to his attacks, I feel like he's reacting more like a inexperienced town than a bandwagoning scum. Consider that he folded almost instantly when you started pushing him and hasn't fought back. I believe as a scum he would be more concerned with his appearances, especially as a beginner on the first day. Do you think that Taricus is scum, or are you pressuring him to improve his game?
I was directing the pressure to try and improve his game, but the primary concern is to create a sufficient amount of chaos that opportunistic, inexperienced scum scramble out of the woodwork at the the smell of an easy lynch.

And Taricus, I wonder if your answers are just inexperience, which most of us here posses, or is there something else behind it...
This response reeks of scumminess.  You're encouraging the bandwagon without actually hopping on, but why?  What 'something more' do you suspect?

anzki4 - I think you're covering for/indirectly supporting your partner, which would make Powder Miner or Supercharazad your counterpart.

Unvote Think0028, Taricus Well, gee. You fail to answer his questions, and when he continues to press, you OMGUS him. Any reason for that?
Since Powder Miner was only the second vote and actually brought an original accusation to the table...

Supercharizard - Hiding something?

unvote

So, as a matter of fact, I'm not.

Tell me, why the vauge RV? What possible outcome would that answer have generated other than a "no"?

Tacricus, Why the vauge RV? Also, who would prefer as your scumpartner?
Ah, many thanks Anzki.

If you know what I meant now, then why not answer?


Not answering questions, that'd be a scumtell you know.
Supercharazad - You're rehashing my arguments without providing original material, you were the third vote on the bandwagon, and judging by your post history, you've been around long enough to know better.  Explain yourself.

Also,

Supercharazad - Stacking votes already?  Interesting.  In your opinion, how many votes constitutes a bandwagon in nine player RVS?

2, unless it's RVS or the second person has their own argument.
Do I really need to add 'and why?'?  How many in RVS?  Not in general.

Okami:  Clearly you've played before.  Do you prefer playing town or scum?  Why?
Scum, of course!  Much more interesting, though substantially more difficult.  I enjoy the meta-challenge of keeping my scum and town behaviour consistent, without deliberately playing town poorly to keep my scumgame easy.

Okami, I have not read any games with Heliman in them unfortunately.
Darn.  Looks like I'll have go find and read it/them myself.

@ONR: Do I know you from somewhere?

More appropriately, where have you played before?
Hmm... intentional evading of my questions, and a laughing man avatar... no questions about mafia, and an easy alighnment with the ICs... an aggressive, familiar playing style.

I'll resume questioning post-game, because I think it's a distraction right now.  However, ONR, I've got my eye on you.
Intentional?  I haven't even posted since you asked the first one...

Spoiler: TL;DR (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Vector on May 16, 2011, 10:05:07 pm
Usually, when one finds someone one suspects of trolling and says "You're a troll," they ignore it if they are a troll, and refute it if they are not.  Similar for other such matters.  In this instance I fucked up, and yet received all the information I needed.

So you have to keep pressing, upon which point one gains information as to character.  A response, to shake the pursuer off, but nothing else.  No response.  No interest in being helpful to the questioner whatsoever.

To which I say, of course:

At least I know you aren't Zathras/Book.


And also: This is how you scumhunt, bitches.  If I were actually in this game and asking questions about scumminess instead of forum-knowledge, I'd be lynching right now on two posts of information.  So pay attention.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Think0028 on May 16, 2011, 10:10:55 pm
Okami no Rei. While I understand that Taricus is throwing a very large scumtell of active lurking and lacks meat to his attacks, I feel like he's reacting more like a inexperienced town than a bandwagoning scum. Consider that he folded almost instantly when you started pushing him and hasn't fought back. I believe as a scum he would be more concerned with his appearances, especially as a beginner on the first day. Do you think that Taricus is scum, or are you pressuring him to improve his game?
I was directing the pressure to try and improve his game, but the primary concern is to create a sufficient amount of chaos that opportunistic, inexperienced scum scramble out of the woodwork at the the smell of an easy lynch.
Hmm. You'd be way more suspicious to me if this wasn't a Beginner's Mafia, but Taricus's game needs such obvious help that this seems highly plausible. I would've done the same if you didn't. Unvote.

With everyone but anzki and Heliman having made enough posts I can sink into, I'd like to ask them some questions. Heliman a question. Who do you have strong reads on? What is your opinion on Taricus and the people voting on him? anzki4, what convinces you that Taricus is scum and not a bad player?

Usually, when one finds someone one suspects of trolling and says "You're a troll," they ignore it if they are a troll, and refute it if they are not.  Similar for other such matters.  In this instance I fucked up, and yet received all the information I needed.

So you have to keep pressing, upon which point one gains information as to character.  A response, to shake the pursuer off, but nothing else.  No response.  No interest in being helpful to the questioner whatsoever.

To which I say, of course:

At least I know you aren't Zathras/Book.
Damn it all that was my guess. But they sound so alike...
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Vector on May 16, 2011, 10:16:36 pm
Okami no Rei isn't from the States.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Powder Miner on May 16, 2011, 11:04:29 pm
Well, wow. I didn't even notice super. But I'm still demanding my answer from Taricus. Otherwise, I really don't know what to say since Okami's post really blew my mind. I mean wow, Walls of Text are quite impressive when you're actually in the game. I actually don't hav anthing to say so this is kind of a meaningless vote. Oh well, on to some more Random Questioning.

Okami no Rei, who would you be most afraid of if they were scum?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Heliman on May 16, 2011, 11:09:27 pm
@Think
Okami. Why? WHY??? Ok I'll tell you.

@Okami
I'm not falling for this load of "Oh no I was just pretending to hunt newbie scum the others scum hunting this guy are the real scum!" Bullshit. This entire charade could easily be an  attempt to quell the players suspicious of you for going after the weakest link. It doesn't automatically justify a sham of a scum hunt followed by a planned lurk, it just introduces WIFOM into the equation.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Jim Groovester on May 16, 2011, 11:13:09 pm
You're right.  I don't think he's scum.  I don't think he's not scum, either.  At this point I've been more interested in seeing the reactions to my pressing him.  Specifically, I've been using him as bait while trawling for bandwagoning scum.  That plan's over now I've said it, which is why I waited until tonight rather than last night to post again (needing to sleep and go to work played a role in the decision as well).  Now I've got a veritable mountain of reactions to sift through.

Since you're clearly not a beginner, I'll tell you straight.

That plan is stupid.

You'll just as easily catch inexperienced town as you will inexperienced scum. And since the game's full of inexperienced players, how actually worthwhile are the results you got?

To everybody else who isn't a beginner: Don't even think about trying to be clever. I don't want to see any clever plans or carefully laid traps or anything like that. If I have anything to say about it you'll learn a decent, basic, fundamental town game first, and then after you've got the basics down, then you can think about being clever.

Everybody got that? NO CLEVER PLANS. Good fundamental scumhunting habits are vastly more important.

I think this is the third time you've made it clear that you know what we expect of you, yet you continue to fail to deliver.

And there you go with that 'we' business again.

I thought I was clear. Stop that.

Okami no Rei. While I understand that Taricus is throwing a very large scumtell of active lurking and lacks meat to his attacks, I feel like he's reacting more like a inexperienced town than a bandwagoning scum. Consider that he folded almost instantly when you started pushing him and hasn't fought back. I believe as a scum he would be more concerned with his appearances, especially as a beginner on the first day. Do you think that Taricus is scum, or are you pressuring him to improve his game?
I was directing the pressure to try and improve his game, but the primary concern is to create a sufficient amount of chaos that opportunistic, inexperienced scum scramble out of the woodwork at the the smell of an easy lynch.
Hmm. You'd be way more suspicious to me if this wasn't a Beginner's Mafia, but Taricus's game needs such obvious help that this seems highly plausible. I would've done the same if you didn't. Unvote.

I don't like this exchange but I can't exactly pinpoint why.

With your first question, you say you suspect him but you don't even make a light accusation in the paragraph you voted him, and the two options you provided him are both positive. You say you suspect him slightly, but you throw him a complete softball.

And then you give it up, and say you'd find it suspicious, but it's a Beginner's game, so you don't. Why does a Beginner's game have anything to do with it? That doesn't make a lot of sense to me. I mean, why are you giving slack to a clearly experienced player, when the only people you should be doing that to, in a Beginner's game anyway, are beginners?

Okami no Rei isn't from the States.

The Book-or-not guessing game is tremendously fascinating but there is a game going on, as in, an actual Beginner's game, where new players play and ICs teach them, and this is distracting everybody from that.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Powder Miner on May 16, 2011, 11:18:42 pm
I actually don't know what to say for the Okami thing. I'm actually pretty confused... Oh well. Anyway, umm...

Looking at Super's posts, his points do seem rather similar to Okami's, but not to the point of bandwagoning. He's just trying to press Taricus too.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Think0028 on May 16, 2011, 11:25:52 pm
Okami no Rei. While I understand that Taricus is throwing a very large scumtell of active lurking and lacks meat to his attacks, I feel like he's reacting more like a inexperienced town than a bandwagoning scum. Consider that he folded almost instantly when you started pushing him and hasn't fought back. I believe as a scum he would be more concerned with his appearances, especially as a beginner on the first day. Do you think that Taricus is scum, or are you pressuring him to improve his game?
I was directing the pressure to try and improve his game, but the primary concern is to create a sufficient amount of chaos that opportunistic, inexperienced scum scramble out of the woodwork at the the smell of an easy lynch.
Hmm. You'd be way more suspicious to me if this wasn't a Beginner's Mafia, but Taricus's game needs such obvious help that this seems highly plausible. I would've done the same if you didn't. Unvote.

I don't like this exchange but I can't exactly pinpoint why.

With your first question, you say you suspect him but you don't even make a light accusation in the paragraph you voted him, and the two options you provided him are both positive. You say you suspect him slightly, but you throw him a complete softball.

And then you give it up, and say you'd find it suspicious, but it's a Beginner's game, so you don't. Why does a Beginner's game have anything to do with it? That doesn't make a lot of sense to me. I mean, why are you giving slack to a clearly experienced player, when the only people you should be doing that to, in a Beginner's game anyway, are beginners?
I think I can pinpoint why because I don't like it either. I don't like Okami one bit, I've been thinking this was a stupid plan, but I've been having trouble getting a read on him. If I softball him, it's because of indecisiveness on my part. I accept it in Beginner's mafia because if this were a non-Beginner's mafia, I would read that entire chain as a failed attack on a townie leading into a springboard off to 'oh, this was all just as planned.' But since this is Beginner's, I can 1) believe he was sincerely trying to help Taricus 2) believe that a townie would come up with this plan.

But you know what? Even if this is a beginner's game, it's still mafia, and my gut reaction was that he was scum.

With Heliman posting and answering my question, I'm going to unvote and put my vote on Okami. Now that I think more about your actions and your responses, I see you as pushing for a bandwagon you didn't want to physically participate in that didn't materialize. Now that that's finished, I think you're trying to find someone to pin the blame on.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Vector on May 17, 2011, 12:09:42 am
The Book-or-not guessing game is tremendously fascinating but there is a game going on, as in, an actual Beginner's game, where new players play and ICs teach them, and this is distracting everybody from that.

Well, that would be why I'm also jumping all over Taricus, and attempted to tie my little digression into the game at hand.

But yes, I will attempt to return to straight-up helping.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: anzki4 on May 17, 2011, 12:37:25 am
Unvote Powder Miner. That is a good answer.

This response reeks of scumminess.  You're encouraging the bandwagon without actually hopping on, but why?  What 'something more' do you suspect?

anzki4 - I think you're covering for/indirectly supporting your partner, which would make Powder Miner or Supercharazad your counterpart.
What can something more possibly mean. Being a scum and pretending - at least to some degree - newbiness.

anzki4, what convinces you that Taricus is scum and not a bad player?
I have my suspicion(see above). But I am not so sure about it, that's why the blue color instead of red.

Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Jim Groovester on May 17, 2011, 01:02:37 am
With Heliman posting and answering my question, I'm going to unvote and put my vote on Okami. Now that I think more about your actions and your responses, I see you as pushing for a bandwagon you didn't want to physically participate in that didn't materialize. Now that that's finished, I think you're trying to find someone to pin the blame on.

And then you reverse yourself again. Not because you really pressured him or anything but because I pointed it out to you. Why, you even call what Okami No Rei did a stupid plan, just like I did. Just after I did.

You look like you're trying to be agreeable more than you are trying to find scum, because you caved in and changed your opinion immediately after I asked you about it.

That's very suspect of you.

This response reeks of scumminess.  You're encouraging the bandwagon without actually hopping on, but why?  What 'something more' do you suspect?

anzki4 - I think you're covering for/indirectly supporting your partner, which would make Powder Miner or Supercharazad your counterpart.

Ooh, oh! Thanks for bringing this quote up. There's something I want to point out.

It's way too early to be looking for scumteams. You still want to look for scum, but by that, I mean individual scum tells. The things that a player does that give himself away. Looking for easy lynches, caving in to light pressure, generally things that make it look more like they're trying to blend in rather than find scum.

There are plenty of tells that can give up scumteams, though. Things like giving token suspicion, but never going anywhere with it, or just outright ignoring a completely scummy player. It's hard for a scumteam to interact in a way that looks natural, and so, it's often easier to simply not interact at all. You should keep your eyes open for these sorts of tells too, but you don't want to get in the mindset where you lump two players together and call them a scum team. You always want to keep an open mind with your suspicions, and trying to figure out scumteams generally causes you to ignore everybody else while you try to lynch the scumteam you've picked. That's usually a speedy way to a town loss.

So, with that said, look for and lynch scummy players, not scum teams. Keep an eye out for any odd interactions, but make sure you don't get too focused on any two players. I haven't seen too much of this in this game so far, so this is just a cautionary word.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Okami No Rei on May 17, 2011, 01:11:27 am
Okami no Rei, who would you be most afraid of if they were scum?
Jim - Because then there'd be two scum running around with flawless towngames.

This entire charade could easily be an  attempt to quell the players suspicious of you for going after the weakest link.
Continuing to interrogate Taricus wasn't exactly getting me anywhere.  I don't like doing work and then having nothing to show for my efforts.

It doesn't automatically justify a sham of a scum hunt
A sham?  Do elaborate on this claim.  Bring evidence.

followed by a planned lurk, it just introduces WIFOM into the equation.
Planned lurk?  That's what you call knocking off for the night, and returning the next day?  I've got another four of those planned for the rest of this week.

Since you're clearly not a beginner, I'll tell you straight.

That plan is stupid.
I never said it was the peak of brilliance.  More of a salvage operation of a scumhunt gone sour.

You'll just as easily catch inexperienced town as you will inexperienced scum. And since the game's full of inexperienced players, how actually worthwhile are the results you got?
Quite worthwhile, considering I caught someone who's semi-experienced, and, as I said earlier, should know better.  I didn't think it would actually yield fruit when I came up with it.

Okami. Now that I think more about your actions and your responses, I see you as pushing for a bandwagon
Pushing for scum.  Bandwagons, like mobs, tend to form around action.

you didn't want to physically participate in
Certainly not after I saw I wasn't getting anywhere.  Like I said, I like to see results.

that didn't materialize.
Because I was the one who shut it down.

Now that that's finished, I think you're trying to find someone to pin the blame on.
Blame?  For the bandwagon?  Who?  I'm the one who started it, collapsed it, and am now hunting with its remains.

Unvote Powder Miner. That is a good answer.

This response reeks of scumminess.  You're encouraging the bandwagon without actually hopping on, but why?  What 'something more' do you suspect?

anzki4 - I think you're covering for/indirectly supporting your partner, which would make Powder Miner or Supercharazad your counterpart.
What can something more possibly mean. Being a scum and pretending - at least to some degree - newbiness.

anzki4, what convinces you that Taricus is scum and not a bad player?
I have my suspicion(see above). But I am not so sure about it, that's why the blue color instead of red.
So you think he's pretending newbiness?  Show us the evidence.  Just a hunch?  Why aren't you interrogating him yourself?  You can't just say "I think he's scum" and not be providing reasons or actively searching for them.  You're not even voting for him (or anyone else at the moment, for that matter, what's up with that?).

Toaster - You're not voting for anyone, either.   In fact, you've been remarkably passive thus far.  What do you think of Supercharazad?

I think this is the third time you've made it clear that you know what we expect of you, yet you continue to fail to deliver.

And there you go with that 'we' business again.

I thought I was clear. Stop that.
You were crystal clear.  That was a 'we' in the sense of those of us interrogating him.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Heliman on May 17, 2011, 01:45:29 am
ah-heh heh heh, Forgot to unvote first.

Unvote
Vote Okami no Rei

I'll try to address more of your WOT tomarrow but for now-
Okami no Rei, who would you be most afraid of if they were scum?
Jim - Because then there'd be two scum running around with flawless towngames.
*does a spittake*
What? Two flawless scum? how could you possibly know that?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Think0028 on May 17, 2011, 01:47:05 am
With Heliman posting and answering my question, I'm going to unvote and put my vote on Okami. Now that I think more about your actions and your responses, I see you as pushing for a bandwagon you didn't want to physically participate in that didn't materialize. Now that that's finished, I think you're trying to find someone to pin the blame on.

And then you reverse yourself again. Not because you really pressured him or anything but because I pointed it out to you. Why, you even call what Okami No Rei did a stupid plan, just like I did. Just after I did.

You look like you're trying to be agreeable more than you are trying to find scum, because you caved in and changed your opinion immediately after I asked you about it.

That's very suspect of you.

I am aware it's very suspect, but this is the pattern I went through:

1) Made post in response to Okami, full of doubt.
2) Ruminated on doubt.
3) Saw your post, which pressed my doubts.
4) Decided to go with my doubts.

I swear up and down I thought the plan was bad beforehand, but I have no way of proving that, unfortunately, as I left that out of my posts intentionally, to avoid showing my indecision. Once you pressed it, I decided that the voice in my head shouting "don't trust Okami" is louder than the one shouting "stick with what you said." The vote on Heliman was mostly me stalling for time by waiting for some response from him so I didn't have to keep thinking about Okami. Heliman also suspecting Okami suggested to me that what I saw wasn't something I made up in my head.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Jim Groovester on May 17, 2011, 02:50:58 am
Hrmmm.

I can understand where you're coming from.

If you say exactly what you're thinking at all times then you don't run into any problems like that, because then you'll never have to say "Well, I was thinking it at the time, but..." and run into problems when that comes back to bite you.

This leads me back into my lesson about being as transparent and open as possible. You don't want to look like you've got anything to hide or anything that you've been hiding.

But you also don't want to change your mind too often, because that looks unusual and alarming, and depending on the circumstances, looks opportunistic and scummy.

More of a salvage operation of a scumhunt gone sour.

And now you're changing up your story.

I was directing the pressure to try and improve his game, but the primary concern is to create a sufficient amount of chaos that opportunistic, inexperienced scum scramble out of the woodwork at the the smell of an easy lynch.

You could understand how somebody could get the impression that it was your plan from the start to use Taricus as bait for inexperienced scum, considering that it was apparently 'the primary concern'.

And now you're saying that it was a scumhunt gone sour.

So which is it?

Continuing to interrogate Taricus wasn't exactly getting me anywhere.  I don't like doing work and then having nothing to show for my efforts.

Ah, so I was right. You were just pressuring Taricus for show.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Supercharazad on May 17, 2011, 02:56:09 am
No information, no motive yet. I say we attempt a stalemate for the lynch this round, call suspicions rather than voting.


Passiveness: Scumtell.

Possibly, though they get a kill reguardless if we get one of them this day or not, and whoever got killed at that night may either been onto something or completely off.

They MAY have been on to something. WIFOM right here.


Also: To everyone, I might not be playing well today due to a series of events, including kneeing my own neck, resulting in a bad cold and a neck that is very painful when I turn it. Thus, my concentration is probably going to be a bit off.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: lordnincompoop on May 17, 2011, 03:32:28 am
Votecount:
Think0028 - 0 -
Supercharazard - 1 - Okami No Rei,
Okami No Rei - 4 - Heliman, Think0028, Jim Groovester, Taricus
Powder Miner - 0 -
Taricus - 2 - Supercharazard, Powder Miner,
Heliman - 0 -
anzki4 - 0 -
Jim Groovester - 0 -
Toaster - 0 -

Not Voting - 2 - anzki4, Toaster
No Lynch  - 0 -

Extend  - 0 -
Shorten  - 0 -



The Day will end Tuesday, 8PM GMT.

You need 3 to Extend and 5 to Shorten.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Jim Groovester on May 17, 2011, 03:34:12 am
Supercharazad, do you have an opinion on any other player in the game besides Taricus?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Supercharazad on May 17, 2011, 03:58:22 am
Supercharizard - Hiding something?

unvote

So, as a matter of fact, I'm not.

Tell me, why the vauge RV? What possible outcome would that answer have generated other than a "no"?

Tacricus, Why the vauge RV? Also, who would prefer as your scumpartner?
Ah, many thanks Anzki.

If you know what I meant now, then why not answer?


Not answering questions, that'd be a scumtell you know.
Supercharazad - You're rehashing my arguments without providing original material, you were the third vote on the bandwagon, and judging by your post history, you've been around long enough to know better.  Explain yourself.

Actually, I didn't notice you using those arguments. But, why are you saying that I shouldn't be bandwagoning, when I have my own arguments? Are you trying to defend Tacricus?

Also,

Supercharazad - Stacking votes already?  Interesting.  In your opinion, how many votes constitutes a bandwagon in nine player RVS?

2, unless it's RVS or the second person has their own argument.
Do I really need to add 'and why?'?  How many in RVS?  Not in general.

In RVS, I think any amount of bandwagoning is fine, so long as you can give a reason and a question.


Supercharazad, do you have an opinion on any other player in the game besides Taricus?

Yes, I think Okami is defending Tacricus by voting me, which makes him my second scumpick, below Tacricus.

Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Jim Groovester on May 17, 2011, 04:25:28 am
Alright.

But why would Okami No Rei be trying to defend Taricus when at the beginning of the game, he was pressing him?

I don't think there's as much connection between the two as you think there is.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Supercharazad on May 17, 2011, 05:33:23 am
Alright.

But why would Okami No Rei be trying to defend Taricus when at the beginning of the game, he was pressing him?

I don't think there's as much connection between the two as you think there is.

What would stop scum from pressing eachother? It could have been staged pressing, but I'd rather stay out of an ocean of Wine.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: anzki4 on May 17, 2011, 06:17:59 am
So you think he's pretending newbiness?  Show us the evidence.  Just a hunch?  Why aren't you interrogating him yourself?  You can't just say "I think he's scum" and not be providing reasons or actively searching for them.  You're not even voting for him (or anyone else at the moment, for that matter, what's up with that?).

Yes, you could call that just a hunch. And about not voting Taricus, like I already said, my suspicion is not strong enough. And about the not voting anyone part; I had to hurry to school when I last made a post, so I didn't have time to RV anyone and make a question.

So here goes; Toaster. If you could decide who to lynch today, and had to lynch someone, who would go?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Toaster on May 17, 2011, 09:44:43 am
Okami:
Okami no Rei, who would you be most afraid of if they were scum?
Jim - Because then there'd be two scum running around with flawless towngames.

So who's the other scum with a flawless towngame?

I think this is the third time you've made it clear that you know what we expect of you, yet you continue to fail to deliver.

And there you go with that 'we' business again.

I thought I was clear. Stop that.
You were crystal clear.  That was a 'we' in the sense of those of us interrogating him.

It's still light buddying- you putting up an "Us vs Them" situation.

Toaster - You're not voting for anyone, either.   In fact, you've been remarkably passive thus far.  What do you think of Supercharazad?

Super?  After his RV, he tunneled Taricus for a while for being so uncooperative before moving on.  His play is reasonable, but I'd like to see him spread his questioning a bit broader.

What do you think of the four votes on you?  What is the likelihood that at least one is scum?  Think both scum are in on it?


Super:  If Taricus flipped town either via lynch or NK before D2, what would that do to your opinion of Okami?


Think:  After reading your waffling on voting Okami several times and trying to decide if it was honest indecision or not, I have to conclude it isn't.  Why?  Your interim actions.

With everyone but anzki and Heliman having made enough posts I can sink into, I'd like to ask them some questions. Heliman a question. Who do you have strong reads on? What is your opinion on Taricus and the people voting on him? anzki4, what convinces you that Taricus is scum and not a bad player?

This is perfectly fine.  You back off a suspicion after a satisfactory response and you go on to get two quiet people to talk.

With Heliman posting and answering my question, I'm going to unvote and put my vote on Okami. Now that I think more about your actions and your responses, I see you as pushing for a bandwagon you didn't want to physically participate in that didn't materialize. Now that that's finished, I think you're trying to find someone to pin the blame on.

Then you go back after you get what you wanted.  Fine.

Except for one thing- anzki never answered you.  You didn't actually get what you said you wanted.  You asked a question with no intent to follow up on it.  The only conclusion here is you're scum hopping back on the wagon.  The fact that you revoted after someone else voted Okami stinks too.


Anzki:
So here goes; Toaster. If you could decide who to lynch today, and had to lynch someone, who would go?

Think for the reasons above. 

How about you?  It's getting a bit late in the day for RV questions.  Who do you suspect and why?


Powder Miner:  Who are your top two suspects and why?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Think0028 on May 17, 2011, 10:10:18 am

Think:  After reading your waffling on voting Okami several times and trying to decide if it was honest indecision or not, I have to conclude it isn't.  Why?  Your interim actions.

With everyone but anzki and Heliman having made enough posts I can sink into, I'd like to ask them some questions. Heliman a question. Who do you have strong reads on? What is your opinion on Taricus and the people voting on him? anzki4, what convinces you that Taricus is scum and not a bad player?

This is perfectly fine.  You back off a suspicion after a satisfactory response and you go on to get two quiet people to talk.

With Heliman posting and answering my question, I'm going to unvote and put my vote on Okami. Now that I think more about your actions and your responses, I see you as pushing for a bandwagon you didn't want to physically participate in that didn't materialize. Now that that's finished, I think you're trying to find someone to pin the blame on.

Then you go back after you get what you wanted.  Fine.

Except for one thing- anzki never answered you.  You didn't actually get what you said you wanted.  You asked a question with no intent to follow up on it.  The only conclusion here is you're scum hopping back on the wagon.  The fact that you revoted after someone else voted Okami stinks too.

I never waited for anzki to respond because my suspicions on anzki were not particularly strong, and after Jim and Heliman's posts I became more concerned with figuring out Okami than waiting for a post from someone I only wanted an answer from because he hasn't been posting much. Like I said about Heliman in the post above, I was just stalling for time while I thought about Okami. The revote looks scummy, but it comes from an honest change of mind.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Think0028 on May 17, 2011, 10:13:13 am
Besides, isn't it possible to vote for someone while waiting on questions for someone else? You're doing the same right now with me and anzki4 as well.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Supercharazad on May 17, 2011, 10:26:15 am

Super:  If Taricus flipped town either via lynch or NK before D2, what would that do to your opinion of Okami?


It would lessen my suspicion of him, but I'd still keep a eye on him.

Jim Groovester: Who are your two top scumpicks, and why?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Toaster on May 17, 2011, 10:38:06 am
Think:
Besides, isn't it possible to vote for someone while waiting on questions for someone else? You're doing the same right now with me and anzki4 as well.

You almost had me convinced until you tried to deflect back on to me.

Let's look at your wording.

With everyone but anzki and Heliman having made enough posts I can sink into, I'd like to ask them some questions. Heliman a question. Who do you have strong reads on? What is your opinion on Taricus and the people voting on him? anzki4, what convinces you that Taricus is scum and not a bad player?

You're grouping them together here.  You want content from both of them.

With Heliman posting and answering my question, I'm going to unvote and put my vote on Okami. Now that I think more about your actions and your responses, I see you as pushing for a bandwagon you didn't want to physically participate in that didn't materialize. Now that that's finished, I think you're trying to find someone to pin the blame on.

And the connection is gone.  Anzki hasn't posted between these two posts, yet you lose interest in his response.

This is entirely different from me going after you and Anzki.  I am attacking you and trying to get more content out of him in an entirely separate thread.  You're just trying to make yourself look better via making me look bad.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Think0028 on May 17, 2011, 10:48:16 am
With everyone but anzki and Heliman having made enough posts I can sink into, I'd like to ask them some questions. Heliman a question. Who do you have strong reads on? What is your opinion on Taricus and the people voting on him? anzki4, what convinces you that Taricus is scum and not a bad player?

You're grouping them together here.  You want content from both of them.

With Heliman posting and answering my question, I'm going to unvote and put my vote on Okami. Now that I think more about your actions and your responses, I see you as pushing for a bandwagon you didn't want to physically participate in that didn't materialize. Now that that's finished, I think you're trying to find someone to pin the blame on.

And the connection is gone.  Anzki hasn't posted between these two posts, yet you lose interest in his response.

This is entirely different from me going after you and Anzki.  I am attacking you and trying to get more content out of him in an entirely separate thread.  You're just trying to make yourself look better via making me look bad.

I lose interest in his post because I lost interest in his post. If you'll look back to my post to Groovester:

And then you reverse yourself again. Not because you really pressured him or anything but because I pointed it out to you. Why, you even call what Okami No Rei did a stupid plan, just like I did. Just after I did.

You look like you're trying to be agreeable more than you are trying to find scum, because you caved in and changed your opinion immediately after I asked you about it.

That's very suspect of you.

I am aware it's very suspect, but this is the pattern I went through:

1) Made post in response to Okami, full of doubt.
2) Ruminated on doubt.
3) Saw your post, which pressed my doubts.
4) Decided to go with my doubts.

I swear up and down I thought the plan was bad beforehand, but I have no way of proving that, unfortunately, as I left that out of my posts intentionally, to avoid showing my indecision. Once you pressed it, I decided that the voice in my head shouting "don't trust Okami" is louder than the one shouting "stick with what you said." The vote on Heliman was mostly me stalling for time by waiting for some response from him so I didn't have to keep thinking about Okami. Heliman also suspecting Okami suggested to me that what I saw wasn't something I made up in my head.

This applies equally to me suspecting anzki4. anzki4 was never a vote, I was bugging him to post more than anything else:

With everyone but anzki and Heliman having made enough posts I can sink into, I'd like to ask them some questions. Heliman a question. Who do you have strong reads on? What is your opinion on Taricus and the people voting on him? anzki4, what convinces you that Taricus is scum and not a bad player?

I'm not even slightly concerned with making you look bad at the moment, I'm just trying to make my case and explain my actions. My follow-up post was not intended to be "oh yeah well you did that too" but more "isn't this a legitimate thing that can be done? Can't we both be in the right?".
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: anzki4 on May 17, 2011, 11:03:32 am
How about you?  It's getting a bit late in the day for RV questions.  Who do you suspect and why?
Unvote Toaster.

There are IMO couple more suspicious persons here than the rest. First we have Okami for the reasons already mentioned by others. Secondly there is Taricus, for reasons I have already posted. Thirdly and fourthly there are Heliman and Think0028 for perhaps too eager lynchstacking...

Taricus, who would you at this moment to be the two scums?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Taricus on May 17, 2011, 11:05:55 am
Anzki4: Can you reword your question, I don't understand it right now.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: anzki4 on May 17, 2011, 11:07:26 am
Anzki4: Can you reword your question, I don't understand it right now.
Yeah. Sorry about that.
Who would you, at this moment, think to be the two scums?
Better?  :D
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Taricus on May 17, 2011, 11:13:46 am
Yes, much.

First would be Okami No Rei due to the fact the playstyle seems a bit too townie.

Second would be Supercharazad due to his relentlessness.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Supercharazad on May 17, 2011, 11:36:29 am
Second would be Supercharazad due to his relentlessness.

We play mafia aggressivly here. Deal with it.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Toaster on May 17, 2011, 12:16:11 pm
Anzki:
There are IMO couple more suspicious persons here than the rest. First we have Okami for the reasons already mentioned by others. Secondly there is Taricus, for reasons I have already posted. Thirdly and fourthly there are Heliman and Think0028 for perhaps too eager lynchstacking...

Taricus, who would you at this moment to be the two scums?

Fair enough, but one question:  Why are you voting your second suspect instead of your first?


Taricus:
Yes, much.

First would be Okami No Rei due to the fact the playstyle seems a bit too townie.

Second would be Supercharazad due to his relentlessness.

I'm glad you have suspicions and reasons for them, but those are both bad reasons.  First, "too townie" is a fallacy.  If someone is playing in a very townlike manner, it is usually because they are, in fact, town.  Relentlessness is similarly a good trait in this game and not something that is attacked over.  Tunneling exclusively on one person is something that bears examination, but not aggression.


Think:  If you were just "stalling for time" waiting for him to post, why unvote him at all?

I'm not even slightly concerned with making you look bad at the moment, I'm just trying to make my case and explain my actions. My follow-up post was not intended to be "oh yeah well you did that too" but more "isn't this a legitimate thing that can be done? Can't we both be in the right?".

It's a good thing to follow up multiple leads.  The way you did it is suspect.



Let me be the first to ask for an extension: there's more to find out today.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Think0028 on May 17, 2011, 12:21:33 pm
Toaster: It is suspect. I chalk that up to my inexperience. I won't do that again. My idea was that I wasn't certain what to do about Okami, so my vote would be more powerful to bring Heliman in than as an uncertain hold on Okami.

Instead of just defending my voting for Okami, I'm going to challenge him some more.

Okami. Now that I think more about your actions and your responses, I see you as pushing for a bandwagon
Pushing for scum.  Bandwagons, like mobs, tend to form around action.
you didn't want to physically participate in
Certainly not after I saw I wasn't getting anywhere.  Like I said, I like to see results.
that didn't materialize.
Because I was the one who shut it down.

There was a fair bit of time between you starting the push on Taricus and you 'revealing' your master plot. About 24 hours or so. While I understand that you can only make so many content filled posts or so, you can't say that you didn't expect anything to happen in those 24 hours. What would you have done if the bandwagon really materialized? Maybe it's just me, but I feel like you're pushing for someone to hang, even if they're non-scum.

Quote from: Okami no Rei
Now that that's finished, I think you're trying to find someone to pin the blame on.
Blame?  For the bandwagon?  Who?  I'm the one who started it, collapsed it, and am now hunting with its remains.

To blame for hopping onto a bandwagon of your own creation. It's one thing to point out people hopping onto a bandwagon, it's another if you're driving it. Why should we believe that you aren't scum pushing for the easy lynch? First you go for the guy unwilling to commit or post anything, then you go for the ones who hop on a bandwagon, again, that you started.

What I don't see is someone who's actually concerned with finding scum. What I see is someone who's concerned with finding lynchable people. Why Supercharazad? What makes you think that his vote is a scum vote and not a beginner townie vote?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Heliman on May 17, 2011, 01:27:37 pm
@SuperCharazard

Horseshit. Calling a chainsaw defense without any flipped scum is a Null Tell.

It doesn't automatically justify a sham of a scum hunt
A sham?  Do elaborate on this claim.  Bring evidence.
Don't need to pillweef, because the answer is simple. You said yourself that you weren't scum hunting Taricus because he was scummy, therefore your scum hunt was a ruse.

followed by a planned lurk, it just introduces WIFOM into the equation.
Planned lurk?  That's what you call knocking off for the night, and returning the next day?  I've got another four of those planned for the rest of this week. You're changing your story again, you said that the lurk was a tactical move to get "reactions" and work and sleep played a role in deciding to wait.

Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Jim Groovester on May 17, 2011, 01:38:26 pm
Jim Groovester: Who are your two top scumpicks, and why?

Okami No Rei. For pressuring Taricus for show and for changing up his story about what he was actually doing about that.

And then... I'm not sure. After Okami No Rei there's a sharp drop-off in my suspicions. I'd probably say anski4 for the following reasons.

Thirdly and fourthly there are Heliman and Think0028 for perhaps too eager lynchstacking...

There's nothing wrong with wanting people lynched. It's how the town wins games.

You just have to watch out that they're not going for easy lynches instead of lynching their suspects.

I'll also note that three out of four of your suspects are voting for Okami No Rei, while your fourth is Okami No Rei. That's... a very interesting scum list, seeing as how it is focused around Okami No Rei. Toaster pointed out that you're voting your second suspect, and not your first. But at some point, if you're actually telling the truth about who you suspect, you're going to have to bite the bullet and vote Okami No Rei.

So when are you going to do that?

If you don't, you're his partner.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: anzki4 on May 17, 2011, 01:39:45 pm
Toaster: They were in no particular order. Probably should've said that.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Supercharazad on May 17, 2011, 02:01:07 pm

followed by a planned lurk, it just introduces WIFOM into the equation.
Planned lurk?  That's what you call knocking off for the night, and returning the next day?  I've got another four of those planned for the rest of this week. You're changing your story again, you said that the lurk was a tactical move to get "reactions" and work and sleep played a role in deciding to wait.

o_0

You're interragating yourself?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: anzki4 on May 17, 2011, 02:25:23 pm
Unvote Taricus: fair enough.

Jim Groovester: like I said in my previous post, the listing was in random order, so Okami is not my "prime suspect." I honestly did not have one before this:

followed by a planned lurk, it just introduces WIFOM into the equation.
Planned lurk?  That's what you call knocking off for the night, and returning the next day?  I've got another four of those planned for the rest of this week. You're changing your story again, you said that the lurk was a tactical move to get "reactions" and work and sleep played a role in deciding to wait.
Something making you nervous, Heliman?? What make's you so distracted arguing against yourself?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: anzki4 on May 17, 2011, 02:27:00 pm
I should probably rephrase my question to Heliman; What make's you so distracted that you are arguing against yourself?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Toaster on May 17, 2011, 02:29:09 pm
Anzki:
Toaster: They were in no particular order. Probably should've said that.

So who is your #1 pick?


Think:  All right.  I'm willing to buy your story for now.  Unvote Think0028.

I'll need to look back over things again to go from here.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Toaster on May 17, 2011, 02:33:14 pm
Anzki:  Scratch that question- I started that post before your last one and didn't really read it.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Heliman on May 17, 2011, 02:39:36 pm
@SuperCharazard
Oh god damn it I misquoted. It's supposed to go
followed by a planned lurk, it just introduces WIFOM into the equation.
Planned lurk?  That's what you call knocking off for the night, and returning the next day?  I've got another four of those planned for the rest of this week.
You're changing your story again, you said that the lurk was a tactical move to get "reactions" and work and sleep played a role in deciding to wait.
[/quote]
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Heliman on May 17, 2011, 02:44:21 pm
I should probably rephrase my question to Heliman; What make's you so distracted that you are arguing against yourself?
Aww, whose a cute little parrot? You are! Polly want a cracker?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Jim Groovester on May 17, 2011, 03:35:52 pm
Let me be the first to ask for an extension: there's more to find out today.

I'll second the extension. I forgot to anyway.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Heliman on May 17, 2011, 03:47:27 pm
Oh yeah that's probably a good idea. Extend
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Think0028 on May 17, 2011, 05:15:03 pm
I'll extend too just in case.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: lordnincompoop on May 17, 2011, 05:48:11 pm
Votecount:
Think0028 - 0 -
Supercharazard - 1 - Okami No Rei
Okami No Rei - 4 - Heliman, Think0028, Jim Groovester, Taricus
Powder Miner - 0 -
Taricus - 2 - Supercharazard, Powder Miner
Heliman - 1 - anzki4
anzki4 - 0 -
Jim Groovester - 0 -
Toaster - 0 -

Not Voting - 1 -  Toaster
No Lynch  - 0 -

Extend  - 4 - Toaster, Jim Groovester, Heliman, Think0028
Shorten  - 0 -



The Day has been extended to Thursday, 8PM GMT.

You need 3 to Extend and 5 to Shorten.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Powder Miner on May 17, 2011, 06:03:40 pm
I'd have to say Okami no rei for the "two scum running around with flawless town games" thing, and the points everyone else has been making, and still Taricus a little bit, he has been quite scummy.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Think0028 on May 17, 2011, 06:10:45 pm
I'd have to say Okami no rei for the "two scum running around with flawless town games" thing, and the points everyone else has been making, and still Taricus a little bit, he has been quite scummy.

Are you going to keep your vote on Taricus, or will you move it to Okami?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Heliman on May 17, 2011, 06:41:20 pm
I'd have to say Okami no rei for the "two scum running around with flawless town games" thing, and the points everyone else has been making, and still Taricus a little bit, he has been quite scummy.
I made that point too parrot.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Jim Groovester on May 17, 2011, 06:49:46 pm
So did Toaster. You gonna call him a parrot too?

Or are you too chicken?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Powder Miner on May 17, 2011, 06:50:01 pm
Heliman, I was going nuts over that before you made the point, and everyone seems to have forgotten about it. Anyway, I'm not about to bandwagt]on him for it, it's just a reason I'm suspicious. But I'm staying with Taricus for now.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Jim Groovester on May 17, 2011, 06:57:58 pm
You were?

From when Okami No Rei mentioned there being two scum with flawless town games to just now, you didn't make a single post. So how were you going nuts about it?

And what makes Taricus more suspicious than Okami No Rei right? You've decided to stick with Taricus, so it must be that he's scummier somehow. Please, explain it to me.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Powder Miner on May 17, 2011, 07:00:03 pm
Not posting, just privately. Shoulda made it clear. Middle school keeps me from posting most of the day. And I meant before I NOTICED he made the point. Never mind. Anyway, I'm keeping my vote on Tarius because he's still scummy seeming and I'm afraid I'll get accused of bandwagoning if I vote for Okami.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Jim Groovester on May 17, 2011, 07:07:47 pm
Not voting who you say you suspect because you're worried you'll look suspicious is actually considerably more suspicious than just voting for who you suspect, even if you're the fifth vote on someone.

You're worried about appearances. That's scummy. You should be worried about finding scum, and that's the only thing you should be worried about.

If you make finding scum your only concern everything else falls nicely into place.

I kid you not.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Powder Miner on May 17, 2011, 07:20:31 pm
Oh. OK then. But anyway, I'm still going to press Taricus, peer pressure or not. And Taric does seem to be lurking a little bit. I'm going to bug him.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Taricus on May 17, 2011, 07:24:24 pm
...Do I have to get the magazine Powder?

At any rate, the last time I did ask a question I screwed up big time.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Powder Miner on May 17, 2011, 07:28:14 pm
Er... forgot my first question...
OK, Taricus, why do you think lurking will help the town?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Taricus on May 17, 2011, 07:36:18 pm
It won't. However my post always seem to start more crap than they finish.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Think0028 on May 17, 2011, 07:45:54 pm
It won't. However my post always seem to start more crap than they finish.

So are you just quitting the game then? Should LNCP bring someone in to replace you? Because it seems to me like you're saying that the only thing you'll do from now on is not play. C'mon, post something, anything, take 5 minutes of your time to type something up.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Powder Miner on May 17, 2011, 07:46:37 pm
Lurking only helps scum. You need to be active. Or are you actually scum looking for an excuse to not have to post?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Taricus on May 17, 2011, 07:47:04 pm
I'm not quitting, I'm just trying to think up something that won't get me dogpiled.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Jim Groovester on May 17, 2011, 08:02:47 pm
You get dogpiled with helpful advice.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: lordnincompoop on May 17, 2011, 08:06:17 pm
I've got a few replacements in mind, should it be necessary.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Toaster on May 17, 2011, 09:44:43 pm
Powder Miner:
I'd have to say Okami no rei for the "two scum running around with flawless town games" thing, and the points everyone else has been making, and still Taricus a little bit, he has been quite scummy.

Is Taricus a little bit suspicious, or quite scummy?  Why has he been quite scummy?  Even if it is blatantly obvious to you, you still have to say why.  Otherwise, you look like bandwagonning scum.

Actually, your very passive play is irking me.  Why aren't you doing anything to pursue your suspects?  Why are you just popping in to answer questions and not asking ones of your own, nor attacking players you think scummy?

Sitting there on the sideline is not doing anyone any good.


Taricus:
I'm not quitting, I'm just trying to think up something that won't get me dogpiled.

You shouldn't be afraid to speak your mind.  If you say what's on your mind and are honest and forthright, people will listen to you.   You may get attention if your reasons or logic sucks, but that gives you a chance to clarify it.  If you're constantly vocal about what you think of others and pursue scum, you'll find yourself not voted. 
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Powder Miner on May 17, 2011, 10:04:59 pm
Well, Toaster, for one, he's Only aq little bit susipicious at this point due to him acting less scummy. And my passive play? You must be blind. If you open your eyes, you'll see that I actually got annoyed and pulled Taricus over here, and... guess what: I asked a question! Oh, what a shocker (sarcasm if you fail to understand it as such)! Now, YOU on the other hand, I haven't seen many posts from you and certainly not a lot of scumhunting. So are YOU being passive? (Heck, you're the only one who wasn't voting up until now. Hmm....)
Anyway, It won't hurt to scumhunt someone else.
How about you, Unvote, Jim Groovester? Who do you find most and second most scummy right now?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Powder Miner on May 17, 2011, 10:06:25 pm
Fakeedit: Looking at some of the earlier posts, you are pretty active, Toaster, and I've been scumhunting too. But if you mean me being three pages gone at a time as passivism, that is middle school. No choice in that.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Powder Miner on May 17, 2011, 10:07:27 pm
Further fakeedit: Gah, what was I thinking calling you passive at all? I need to check the pages I've been gone for more closely.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Jim Groovester on May 17, 2011, 10:52:02 pm
How about you, Unvote, Jim Groovester? Who do you find most and second most scummy right now?

Jim Groovester: Who are your two top scumpicks, and why?

Okami No Rei. For pressuring Taricus for show and for changing up his story about what he was actually doing about that.

And then... I'm not sure. After Okami No Rei there's a sharp drop-off in my suspicions. I'd probably say anski4 for the following reasons.

You can add yourself to the list.

Any other questions?

. . .

Oh, fine. I'll tell you why you should add yourself to the list. It's only my job as an IC.

You're being extremely panicky and reactionary. Toaster's pressure wasn't really all that fierce, so I've got to wonder, what is it about you that makes you panic from so little pressure? Could it be, that you're scum? And now that somebody's voting you you don't know what to do? I dunno. Seems like that could be the case to me.

You don't want to lose your cool. Not from pressure that other players are putting on you. Sometimes players will vote you just to see what happens, and if you react like you just did, you'll give them reason to keep their vote on you.

You know, coupled with your wishy washy voting, I've got more than enough reason to switch my vote to you. But I still want to hear from Okami No Rei.

Good thing we got that extension!
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Powder Miner on May 17, 2011, 11:08:27 pm
OK, you find me scummy. This is why I'm only in a Beginner's Mafia. Anyway, wishy-washy? It's the Random Vote tage, and since I wasn't getting an answer form Taricu, I decided to scumhunt other people. It shows who you are if you have a problem with that.

Anyway, I anwered him perfectly well, although I do admit my tirade as a bit panicky.

But can you please tell me how I'm being passive/wishy-washy? I'm not trying to be.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Powder Miner on May 17, 2011, 11:12:13 pm
Actually, you know what? Screw this. I don't care if I end up killing myself, I'm going to scumhunt Taricus. Until I end up getting lynched or nightkilled, if I'm unlucky.
And with two RL days until day end, I should have plenty of time.
Unvote, Taricus
OK Taricus, I want answers. Why did you rearlier get close to OMGUSing Okami no Rei when he caught you without an answer? Do you expect that it'll help town win by lurking with the excuse that whatever you post will get you into trouble. Or are you scum? And I don't care if you object, I want your answers now.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Jim Groovester on May 17, 2011, 11:20:09 pm
But can you please tell me how I'm being passive/wishy-washy? I'm not trying to be.

'Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeell, I want to vote Okami No Rei, but I'm worried about looking scummy, buuuuuuuuuuuut now that I know it's even scummier to do something like that, I guess I'm not going to change my vote and just keep voting Taricus anyway because he's kinda sorta scummy, buuuuuuuuuuuuuuut now that I got called out on it I guess I'll change my vote to Jim Groovester? Maybe that's a good move? I don't really know.'

...and since I wasn't getting an answer form Taricu, I decided to scumhunt other people. It shows who you are if you have a problem with that.

Yes. The IC.

Why would you stop trying to get an answer from Taricus? I mean, if you were reeeally concerned about it, you would hound him until you answered or you voted him because he didn't. If he's scum, you giving up because he didn't answer you works in his favor. So, in essence, you're not doing your due town diligence.

You know what we call people who don't do their due town diligence? Scum.

Anyway, I anwered him perfectly well, although I do admit my tirade as a bit panicky.

Hoohaaheehaahaa. Oh, that's good.

You still flipped out. You can't pretend that that didn't happen. You've got to carry that for the rest of the game.

FAKEEDIT: You're not helping your case. You're still flipping the fuck out.

That's bad, you know. You should probably stop flipping the fuck out and calm down instead.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Think0028 on May 17, 2011, 11:29:15 pm
Seriously, Powder Miner. Regardless of whether you're town or scum, always take a deep breath and wait a while before you make a post. Take that time to look over your response, the whole thread, and see if what you're saying is what you really want to say. If you're town, it'll prevent you from making silly mistakes that distract everyone else and let the scum pounce on you, and if you're scum, it'll prevent you from making that one post that'll cost you the game. Taking time will save you from a lot of mistakes you make in the heat of the moment, and the deadline is a long ways off.

'Sides, it's not like LNCP is holding a gun to your head to react instantly to every post. You can afford to wait a bit.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Powder Miner on May 17, 2011, 11:33:48 pm
Well. God, I look scummy to myself now. Or I would if I didn't know my role. But if I didn't know my iwn role I wouldn't know if I were scum or not- Never mind.
Anyway, who's flipping out at this point? Both of us.

And if I waited several days whilst not doing anything else, or not scumhunting anyone ele whilst stopping pressure voting Taricus, that would be not doing my town due diligence. And acording to you, that means I'm scum.
Anyway, I'm in full knowledge of my flip-out level. I just said I answered the question, not. "No, I'm not flipping out, WHAT DO YOU MEAN I'M FLIPPING OUT SCUUUUUUM" (slight exaggeration)

And I'm confused about your top point. And Jim Groovester, I'm not going with a continued vote change. I'm RVing. And I know I'm flipping out. If I manage to get enough info to expoe Taricus a scum, even if I die right afterwards, i'll win. One doesn't need to be alive to win, especially as town. Although aliveness is preferable

Fakeedit: Think, I guess you're right.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Powder Miner on May 17, 2011, 11:34:27 pm
Gah, forgot to remove that. I'm NOT confused about your top point. switching up my points here. Geh.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Jim Groovester on May 17, 2011, 11:52:16 pm
But it's not the Random Vote Stage anymore. Once people start voting people they suspect, i.e., not randomly anymore, then it's over.

Anyway, who's flipping out at this point? Both of us.

Aaaaaahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.

You're funny.

And I'm confused about your top point. And Jim Groovester, I'm not going with a continued vote change. I'm RVing. And I know I'm flipping out. If I manage to get enough info to expoe Taricus a scum, even if I die right afterwards, i'll win. One doesn't need to be alive to win, especially as town. Although aliveness is preferable

Wrong attitude.

You think Taricus is scum because...??????? Well, you don't have that yet. I guess you'll find it.

That's not how it works. That's not how it works at all. That's a completely horrible and terrible mindset and it loses games.

Reasons come first. They always come first. You can't suspect somebody for no reason and expect to fill in the gaps later. You need the reasons first, and then you can suspect somebody.

And I know I'm flipping out.

Knowing you're doing something scummy is not an excuse for it.

Because if you know you're doing it, why don't you just stop?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Okami No Rei on May 18, 2011, 12:25:59 am
More of a salvage operation of a scumhunt gone sour.

And now you're changing up your story.

I was directing the pressure to try and improve his game, but the primary concern is to create a sufficient amount of chaos that opportunistic, inexperienced scum scramble out of the woodwork at the the smell of an easy lynch.

You could understand how somebody could get the impression that it was your plan from the start to use Taricus as bait for inexperienced scum, considering that it was apparently 'the primary concern'.

And now you're saying that it was a scumhunt gone sour.

So which is it?
Ahem...
Speaking of your motives, why the hell are you being so hard on Taricus? You're putting a lot of pressure on him. I don't think it's because you actually think he's scum. I think it's because you want to make a good show of scumhunting.

You know what scumhunting for appearances' sake is? Scummy.
You're right.  I don't think he's scum.  I don't think he's not scum, either.  At this point I've been more interested in seeing the reactions to my pressing him.  Specifically, I've been using him as bait while trawling for bandwagoning scum.  That plan's over now I've said it, which is why I waited until tonight rather than last night to post again (needing to sleep and go to work played a role in the decision as well).  Now I've got a veritable mountain of reactions to sift through.
From the start, I was questioning him in order to get a read on him.  When he proved unreadable, my priorities changed to salvaging the interrogation by pushing it beyond reasonable territory, thereby getting reads one everyone from the responses to it.   So it's both.  Only by twisting my words do you arrive at the conclusion that my stories changed.

Continuing to interrogate Taricus wasn't exactly getting me anywhere.  I don't like doing work and then having nothing to show for my efforts.

Ah, so I was right. You were just pressuring Taricus for show.
Semantics.  Again, you twist my words to have your own meaning.  Do I need to spell it out for you?

I don't work for nothing.  In this case, I work to catch scum.  Interrogating Taricus directly was not helping catch scum, but a simple shift in tactics part way through did.

Okami. Now that I think more about your actions and your responses, I see you as pushing for a bandwagon
Pushing for scum.  Bandwagons, like mobs, tend to form around action.
you didn't want to physically participate in
Certainly not after I saw I wasn't getting anywhere.  Like I said, I like to see results.
that didn't materialize.
Because I was the one who shut it down.

There was a fair bit of time between you starting the push on Taricus and you 'revealing' your master plot. About 24 hours or so. While I understand that you can only make so many content filled posts or so, you can't say that you didn't expect anything to happen in those 24 hours. What would you have done if the bandwagon really materialized? Maybe it's just me, but I feel like you're pushing for someone to hang, even if they're non-scum.
I did expect things to happen in the 18 hours I was gone.  On my return, I analyzed what had happened.  The bandwagon did materialize, and one of the members looked like scum.  I am now interrogating him.  Had the bandwagon never materialized, which is what I assume you meant, I'd have come up with a new plan, or revised my old one to work in the new environment.

Quote from: Okami no Rei
Now that that's finished, I think you're trying to find someone to pin the blame on.
Blame?  For the bandwagon?  Who?  I'm the one who started it, collapsed it, and am now hunting with its remains.
To blame for hopping onto a bandwagon of your own creation. It's one thing to point out people hopping onto a bandwagon, it's another if you're driving it. Why should we believe that you aren't scum pushing for the easy lynch? First you go for the guy unwilling to commit or post anything, then you go for the ones who hop on a bandwagon, again, that you started.

What I don't see is someone who's actually concerned with finding scum. What I see is someone who's concerned with finding lynchable people. Why Supercharazad? What makes you think that his vote is a scum vote and not a beginner townie vote?
Because Taricus (FAKEDIT: And now Powder Miner, I suppose) is the easy lynch right now.  The ones that hopped on the bandwagon aren't so easy as you seem to think, since everyone's looking at them as victims right now.  I'm pushing for one of them because I think one of them is scum, not because he's easy.

Scum are very lynchable people, and Supercharazad is scum.  He's a liar, as I show in detail below.

It doesn't automatically justify a sham of a scum hunt
A sham?  Do elaborate on this claim.  Bring evidence.
Don't need to pillweef, because the answer is simple. You said yourself that you weren't scum hunting Taricus because he was scummy, therefore your scum hunt was a ruse.
I said I stopped trying because I didn't think he was scum, but I didn't think he was not scum, either.  I couldn't get him to play, so I couldn't get a read on him, so continuing was a waste of my time.

followed by a planned lurk, it just introduces WIFOM into the equation.
Planned lurk?  That's what you call knocking off for the night, and returning the next day?  I've got another four of those planned for the rest of this week.
You're changing your story again, you said that the lurk was a tactical move to get "reactions" and work and sleep played a role in deciding to wait.
I was fixing to retire for the night at the time anyways, then Jim calls me out on pushing Taricus as hard as I was, and I knew the plan was shot.  So I decided to get some sleep and explain myself the next day, in order to give the plan time to generate results before I had to blow it out of the water.


To everyone, I might not be playing well today due to a series of events, including kneeing my own neck, resulting in a bad cold and a neck that is very painful when I turn it. Thus, my concentration is probably going to be a bit off.
No kidding.  You're using Toaster's points now as well.

Are you trying to defend Tacricus?
Heavens, no.  If he won't take the time and effort to play, I'm certainly not going to take the time and effort to defend him.

In RVS, I think any amount of bandwagoning is fine, so long as you can give a reason and a question.
You hopped on a bandwagon.  You gave several questions.  Let's see your explanation:

Actually, I didn't notice you using those arguments. But, why are you saying that I shouldn't be bandwagoning, when I have my own arguments?
You've got arguments, sure, but none of them are, as you say, your own.

Allow me to demonstrate:

Supercharizard - Hiding something?

Taricus - Nothing to add?  At least he included a decent RVS question when he stacked votes.   Jumping on an easy target like that, without even contributing to the investigation, is downright lazy, and terribly scummy.  Try again.
vs
Supercharizard - Hiding something?

unvote

So, as a matter of fact, I'm not.

Tell me, why the vauge RV? What possible outcome would that answer have generated other than a "no"?

Tacricus, Why the vauge RV? Also, who would prefer as your scumpartner?
I've already called him out on his poor excuse for a RV.

Okami No Rei - No substance to the attack, and not very convincing argument means it'll fall through.
Are you talking about my attack on you, or are you answering my question?  Either way, it's RVS.  I'm pushing you for a lead because you might be scum, and you might slip and give me something solid to work with.  You need to do the same.  Take your minor suspicions and substance-less attacks and use them as tools to harvest material for convincing arguments and uncover solid evidence.

You still haven't addressed the primary concern.  Are you bandwagoning scum or aren't you?  If not, why?

Answering the following might help your case:
Why'd you vote him in the first place if you weren't interested in questioning him?  Why aren't you questioning anyone right now?

You're activelurking right now, which only benefits the scum.  Defend yourself!  Attack somebody!  Do something!
vs
If you know what I meant now, then why not answer?


Not answering questions, that'd be a scumtell you know.
and
No information, no motive yet. I say we attempt a stalemate for the lynch this round, call suspicions rather than voting.


Passiveness: Scumtell.
I've already hammered him for not answering questions and playing passively.


Fact is I don't have much information to give.

You're going to get pressured in this game- everyone does.  Come to expect it.
Pressure applied to someone doesn't equal the fact that you'll get much out of them. Not to mention that a scum would be more subtle than me.

Pressure generally won't go away if the person applying it doesn't like what they get out of it.

Beyond that, that logic you used ("Scum me wouldn't do this") is actually no good, commonly referred to here as WIFOM (http://mafiascum.net/wiki/index.php?title=WIFOM).  Simply put, 99 times out of 100 that type of statement does no good and shouldn't be used.

I don't see you applying pressure of your own.  Why aren't you questioning people?
vs
Possibly, though they get a kill reguardless if we get one of them this day or not, and whoever got killed at that night may either been onto something or completely off.

They MAY have been on to something. WIFOM right here.
Toaster's already pointed out the WIFOM.

So you don't actually have any arguments of your own against him.  Why'd you join the bandwagon, or, if you prefer, why'd you lie?


So you think he's pretending newbiness?  Show us the evidence.  Just a hunch?  Why aren't you interrogating him yourself?  You can't just say "I think he's scum" and not be providing reasons or actively searching for them.  You're not even voting for him (or anyone else at the moment, for that matter, what's up with that?).

Yes, you could call that just a hunch. And about not voting Taricus, like I already said, my suspicion is not strong enough. And about the not voting anyone part; I had to hurry to school when I last made a post, so I didn't have time to RV anyone and make a question.
Fine, until

There are IMO couple more suspicious persons here than the rest. First we have Okami for the reasons already mentioned by others. Secondly there is Taricus, for reasons I have already posted. Thirdly and fourthly there are Heliman and Think0028 for perhaps too eager lynchstacking...

Taricus, who would you at this moment to be the two scums?
You start interrogating Taricus.  Progress.  But you turn right around and say you're suspicious of me, don't bother asking me a question, and fail to provide original reasoning.  Finally, you accuse Heliman and Think0028 of behaviour that you, yourself, are encouraging.  So, you're supporting my bandwagon, you're condemning its participants, and the only person you're interrogating in all this is Taricus.  What's your motive for all this?  I'll tell you.  You're pushing for what you percieve to be an easy lynch on me, you're covering your tracks by condemning my attackers, and you're continuing to pursue the old easy lynch in case my bandwagon falls through.

Anzki4: Can you reword your question, I don't understand it right now.
Yeah. Sorry about that.
Who would you, at this moment, think to be the two scums?
Better?  :D
You're not even serious about questioning Taricus.

Unvote Taricus: fair enough.

Jim Groovester: like I said in my previous post, the listing was in random order, so Okami is not my "prime suspect." I honestly did not have one before this:

followed by a planned lurk, it just introduces WIFOM into the equation.
Planned lurk?  That's what you call knocking off for the night, and returning the next day?  I've got another four of those planned for the rest of this week. You're changing your story again, you said that the lurk was a tactical move to get "reactions" and work and sleep played a role in deciding to wait.
Something making you nervous, Heliman?? What make's you so distracted arguing against yourself?
And now you're trying to cover your tracks after Jim called you out on not directly attacking me, by going after Heliman over what? A post that's clearly mangled only due to some quote tagging errors?  You're really reaching now.


Okami no Rei, who would you be most afraid of if they were scum?
Jim - Because then there'd be two scum running around with flawless towngames.
*does a spittake*
What? Two flawless scum? how could you possibly know that?
I don't know that, but I would be very concerned about scum getting one-on-one coaching from him, and it's the worst case scenario I'm assuming in any theories around his being scum.

Okami:
Okami no Rei, who would you be most afraid of if they were scum?
Jim - Because then there'd be two scum running around with flawless towngames.

So who's the other scum with a flawless towngame?
Powder Miner was my choice up until this post:
Not posting, just privately. Shoulda made it clear. Middle school keeps me from posting most of the day. And I meant before I NOTICED he made the point. Never mind. Anyway, I'm keeping my vote on Tarius because he's still scummy seeming and I'm afraid I'll get accused of bandwagoning if I vote for Okami.

Heliman now.  He's already parroting Jim.  Presciently, even.

I think this is the third time you've made it clear that you know what we expect of you, yet you continue to fail to deliver.

And there you go with that 'we' business again.

I thought I was clear. Stop that.
You were crystal clear.  That was a 'we' in the sense of those of us interrogating him.

It's still light buddying- you putting up an "Us vs Them" situation.
"Us vs Him" would be more appropriate, in this case.  I'm quite frustrated with his behaviour.  I second the call to Replace Taricus.


Toaster - You're not voting for anyone, either.   In fact, you've been remarkably passive thus far.  What do you think of Supercharazad?

Super?  After his RV, he tunneled Taricus for a while for being so uncooperative before moving on.  His play is reasonable, but I'd like to see him spread his questioning a bit broader.

What do you think of the four votes on you?  What is the likelihood that at least one is scum?  Think both scum are in on it?
But is he scum?

Taricus is OMGUSing, which is a nulltell like everything else about him. Heliman and Think are following Jim as the Voice of Authority and Reason.  Not a scumtell, since he's an IC.  Jim's is the only vote that really means anything.  At least one is scum?  Very likely if I'm wrong about Super and Anzki.  Which one is the question.  I'm still working out Jim's game.  I'd lay even odds that Think or Heliman is scum.  Are both?  Taricus and Think are the only possibility that springs to mind.  Heliman and Jim are a longshot.  None of the other combinations work.

Powder Miner - 0.o
What is this?  I don't even...
You're just plain confusing me now.  Did you forget to take medication or something?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Okami No Rei on May 18, 2011, 12:28:57 am
Now, if you'll excuse me, I need to sleep.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Jim Groovester on May 18, 2011, 01:08:44 am
"Us vs Him" would be more appropriate, in this case.  I'm quite frustrated with his behaviour.  I second the call to Replace Taricus.

No, absolutely not. Not a fucking chance.

This is a Beginner's Game. If he's got issues with his play, then he's in the right place.

Who the fucking hell do you think you are to demand replacements of other players in a Beginner's Game?

I'll keep pretending like I don't recognize who you are, and give you a warning: Cut that shit out right now.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Think0028 on May 18, 2011, 01:33:53 am

I did expect things to happen in the 18 hours I was gone.  On my return, I analyzed what had happened.  The bandwagon did materialize, and one of the members looked like scum.  I am now interrogating him.  Had the bandwagon never materialized, which is what I assume you meant, I'd have come up with a new plan, or revised my old one to work in the new environment.

You got Supercharazad, the (now second) jumpiest player I've ever seen on this forums, and Powder Miner, who as we now see is extremely excitable, to actually vote. I'd count that as a failed bandwagon.

Quote from: Okami no Rei
Because Taricus (FAKEDIT: And now Powder Miner, I suppose) is the easy lynch right now.  The ones that hopped on the bandwagon aren't so easy as you seem to think, since everyone's looking at them as victims right now.  I'm pushing for one of them because I think one of them is scum, not because he's easy.
They're looking at them as victims because you called them out as the culmination to a half-assed plot you grabbed to try and save yourself. The easy lynches are the guy you were pushing for and the guy who flipped out in the middle of your posting, so you can hardly say that you were good and noble and virtuous not pushing for Powder Miner. You're voting for a guy who agreed with you when you were supposedly acting as town. This is all just you sowing suspicion now that your attempts to take someone down are failing.

Quote from: Okami no Rei
Taricus is OMGUSing, which is a nulltell like everything else about him. Heliman and Think are following Jim as the Voice of Authority and Reason.  Not a scumtell, since he's an IC.  Jim's is the only vote that really means anything.  At least one is scum?  Very likely if I'm wrong about Super and Anzki.  Which one is the question.  I'm still working out Jim's game.  I'd lay even odds that Think or Heliman is scum.  Are both?  Taricus and Think are the only possibility that springs to mind.  Heliman and Jim are a longshot.  None of the other combinations work.

Lumping me in with the guy who refuses to say anything, thanks. So I'm possibly scum because I agree with two other people (and one who's OMGUSing you, but he's not relevant to this conversation)? This is all just sowing doubt to distract us from the issues at hand.

You tried to lead an attack on someone, it failed, and now you're trying to use that attack to implicate other people. You aren't scumhunting. You're scum.

PPE: I wish I were in cahoots with Taricus. Then at least I could try to coach him privately. Not that'd he'd listen to me anyways.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Jim Groovester on May 18, 2011, 02:38:43 am
Okami No Rei, why Supercharazad over anzki4? You've accused both of them of similar things, and in my mind, what anzki4 did was worse, what with parroting Supercharazad over broken quote tags. I think your points about Supercharazad parroting you are, quite frankly, crap, and calling him a liar when it could just as easily be that he saw the same things about Taricus that you did is stretching it pretty far. anzki4, though, you've got something there, something I can totally see, so why's your vote on Supercharazad?

That seems inconsistent. And lies? Yeah, right. That's hyberpole to make what Supercharazad did seem scummier than what it actually was. In other words, that was disingenuous and you should be lynched for it.

They're looking at them as victims because you called them out as the culmination to a half-assed plot you grabbed to try and save yourself. The easy lynches are the guy you were pushing for and the guy who flipped out in the middle of your posting, so you can hardly say that you were good and noble and virtuous not pushing for Powder Miner. You're voting for a guy who agreed with you when you were supposedly acting as town. This is all just you sowing suspicion now that your attempts to take someone down are failing.

I like what you're doing, by being bold and aggressive and demanding, but I've got to step in.

Can you back up everything you're saying here? You're making lots of heavy accusations, but you're light on evidence and I can see Okami No Rei doing some of the stuff you accuse him of as town.

You generally want to stay very grounded in your accusations. If you start thinking too far ahead of the facts you start losing sight of what actually made somebody scummy. You can still make suppositions about the motives behind someone's actions, but if you start thinking that everything somebody does is scummy or that everything is part of some scummy plan to be incredibly devious and mislead the town, you're taking it too far.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Supercharazad on May 18, 2011, 04:08:34 am

You're being extremely panicky and reactionary. Toaster's pressure wasn't really all that fierce, so I've got to wonder, what is it about you that makes you panic from so little pressure? Could it be, that you're scum? And now that somebody's voting you you don't know what to do? I dunno. Seems like that could be the case to me.


Explain.


It might be the fact that I get sharp pain when I move my neck causing me to lose concentration.
It also might be stress from Beginners Vengeful.


I realise I can be pretty excitable, and I do try to hold that down, but sometimes stress just gets too high.



Now, I'll try to do some actual scumhunting and get a decent post in today.





To everyone, I might not be playing well today due to a series of events, including kneeing my own neck, resulting in a bad cold and a neck that is very painful when I turn it. Thus, my concentration is probably going to be a bit off.
No kidding.  You're using Toaster's points now as well.

Are you trying to defend Tacricus?
Heavens, no.  If he won't take the time and effort to play, I'm certainly not going to take the time and effort to defend him.

In RVS, I think any amount of bandwagoning is fine, so long as you can give a reason and a question.
You hopped on a bandwagon.  You gave several questions.  Let's see your explanation:

Actually, I didn't notice you using those arguments. But, why are you saying that I shouldn't be bandwagoning, when I have my own arguments?
You've got arguments, sure, but none of them are, as you say, your own.

Allow me to demonstrate:

Supercharizard - Hiding something?

Taricus - Nothing to add?  At least he included a decent RVS question when he stacked votes.   Jumping on an easy target like that, without even contributing to the investigation, is downright lazy, and terribly scummy.  Try again.
vs
Supercharizard - Hiding something?

unvote

So, as a matter of fact, I'm not.

Tell me, why the vauge RV? What possible outcome would that answer have generated other than a "no"?

Tacricus, Why the vauge RV? Also, who would prefer as your scumpartner?
I've already called him out on his poor excuse for a RV.

Okami No Rei - No substance to the attack, and not very convincing argument means it'll fall through.
Are you talking about my attack on you, or are you answering my question?  Either way, it's RVS.  I'm pushing you for a lead because you might be scum, and you might slip and give me something solid to work with.  You need to do the same.  Take your minor suspicions and substance-less attacks and use them as tools to harvest material for convincing arguments and uncover solid evidence.

You still haven't addressed the primary concern.  Are you bandwagoning scum or aren't you?  If not, why?

Answering the following might help your case:
Why'd you vote him in the first place if you weren't interested in questioning him?  Why aren't you questioning anyone right now?

You're activelurking right now, which only benefits the scum.  Defend yourself!  Attack somebody!  Do something!
vs
If you know what I meant now, then why not answer?


Not answering questions, that'd be a scumtell you know.
and
No information, no motive yet. I say we attempt a stalemate for the lynch this round, call suspicions rather than voting.


Passiveness: Scumtell.
I've already hammered him for not answering questions and playing passively.



So, basically, you're saying I shouldn't play because other people get to see their posts before me?
You think I should stay perfectly silent because my arguments have been used once before?


Yes, it really does look like you are subtly trying to defend Taricus.
You're still my second pick for scum.



PPE: I wish I were in cahoots with Taricus. Then at least I could try to coach him privately. Not that'd he'd listen to me anyways.


True that.

It won't. However my post always seem to start more crap than they finish.

That's a good thing. Just start that crap on the scum instead, and use it. Use that shitty, brown stuff for good! Start asking questions, pick out tiny flaws and FOR LOGIC'S SAKE, START PLAYING YOU PASSIVE LURKER!

Oh, yes, add passive lurking to my reasons to vote him.

Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Jim Groovester on May 18, 2011, 04:15:32 am
Explain.

Well, you see, Powder Miner asked me a question, but since you asked me an identical question earlier in the game, I just quoted myself on the answer.

All that stuff about being panicky and reactionary wasn't about you, it was actually directed at Powder Miner, but I could see how you got confused about that. I got confused about it looking back just now too.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Supercharazad on May 18, 2011, 04:54:15 am
Explain.

Well, you see, Powder Miner asked me a question, but since you asked me an identical question earlier in the game, I just quoted myself on the answer.

All that stuff about being panicky and reactionary wasn't about you, it was actually directed at Powder Miner, but I could see how you got confused about that. I got confused about it looking back just now too.

Ah, right. No problem then.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Taricus on May 18, 2011, 05:18:13 am
Taricus:
I'm not quitting, I'm just trying to think up something that won't get me dogpiled.
You shouldn't be afraid to speak your mind.  If you say what's on your mind and are honest and forthright, people will listen to you.   You may get attention if your reasons or logic sucks, but that gives you a chance to clarify it.
That last bit there is the reason WHY I'm not saying much. I can't do that.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Supercharazad on May 18, 2011, 05:29:20 am
Taricus:
I'm not quitting, I'm just trying to think up something that won't get me dogpiled.
You shouldn't be afraid to speak your mind.  If you say what's on your mind and are honest and forthright, people will listen to you.   You may get attention if your reasons or logic sucks, but that gives you a chance to clarify it.
That last bit there is the reason WHY I'm not saying much. I can't do that.

You can't clarify? -.-

It's very simple:

Say why you thought of something.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Toaster on May 18, 2011, 08:22:49 am
Powder:
Well, Toaster, for one, he's Only aq little bit susipicious at this point due to him acting less scummy. And my passive play? You must be blind. If you open your eyes, you'll see that I actually got annoyed and pulled Taricus over here, and... guess what: I asked a question! Oh, what a shocker (sarcasm if you fail to understand it as such)! Now, YOU on the other hand, I haven't seen many posts from you and certainly not a lot of scumhunting. So are YOU being passive? (Heck, you're the only one who wasn't voting up until now. Hmm....)
Anyway, It won't hurt to scumhunt someone else.
How about you, Unvote, Jim Groovester? Who do you find most and second most scummy right now?

I vote you, and you post five of the next six posts.  Some people (like you, I believe) start talking a lot when they get nervous.  You went from quiet to extremely vocal over one vote.  I got a very strong reaction out of you when you voted, which is a huge red flag.

In one of my first non-town games, I got caught out because I changed my play after getting called on being too passive.  This is pretty much what happened here. 

Your first response was to deflect attention away from yourself, calling me passive and RVing Jim with a question that I had asked others earlier.  Scum like to deflect, because attention on them is bad.  When they're put on the spot, any mistake is going to be noticed.  (This is why you keep the pressure up when you think you've nailed scum.)

This isn't RL Mafia.  Take a second to calm down and post something rational.  The preview button is your best friend- get to know him.  Type it out, preview it, read it again and see if it makes sense.  (As a free bonus, you can check your formatting and quote tags.)

Sum up your cases with evidence and try again.


Okami:  No, I don't particularly think Super is scum right now.

And be nice.  This is a beginner's game.


Taricus:
Taricus:
I'm not quitting, I'm just trying to think up something that won't get me dogpiled.
You shouldn't be afraid to speak your mind.  If you say what's on your mind and are honest and forthright, people will listen to you.   You may get attention if your reasons or logic sucks, but that gives you a chance to clarify it.
That last bit there is the reason WHY I'm not saying much. I can't do that.

It's not something I'd normally recommend, but you could try stream of consciousness (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stream_of_consciousness_%28narrative_mode%29) writing.  You could read over the thread and type out what you think of everything as you think it (preferably in notepad.)  Look over that and summarize your thoughts and opinions into a single cohesive post.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: lordnincompoop on May 18, 2011, 12:37:02 pm
anzki4 has requested a replacement.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Think0028 on May 18, 2011, 03:04:34 pm
You generally want to stay very grounded in your accusations. If you start thinking too far ahead of the facts you start losing sight of what actually made somebody scummy. You can still make suppositions about the motives behind someone's actions, but if you start thinking that everything somebody does is scummy or that everything is part of some scummy plan to be incredibly devious and mislead the town, you're taking it too far.

Good point, and thank you. Let me talk about some solid evidence then. If Okami's latest post is true, and he saw Jim's post before quitting, he knew even back then that it was instantly called out as not helpful for town and didn't explain himself then. Okami, why do you still think your plan has merit? Why did you go through with it after Jim called you out? Why are you so certain that of the two people who voted with you, a scum was one of them? If we believe you that you were pressing Taricus to get him to play better, why don't we believe Supercharazad, who repeatedly pressed Taricus on being a better player?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Jim Groovester on May 18, 2011, 03:50:51 pm
That last bit there is the reason WHY I'm not saying much. I can't do that.

Have you actually given a decent effort to trying to do that?

I mean, when every post is a lament about your inability to play mafia or communicate... I start to wonder.

How about this: Say who you suspect. Then talk about why you suspect them. Don't worry about whether what you're saying is right or wrong, just take the first step and put your thoughts down about it.

Can you do that?

Will you do that?

Are you going to do that?

I don't really want to see another excuse about it. Put a little effort into it and you'll see it's not that hard.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Powder Miner on May 18, 2011, 04:24:20 pm
Jim, I've already told you my reasons, but: I've been going onto Taricus because of that OMGUS and his lurking. But now it's seeming more like it's not because he's scummy, but just noobtells, although I'm not really good enoughn to tell the difference. Yet I'm still going to press him because I'm not convinced he's town, he hasn't been lynched, and I'm not dead. So I'll continue to press him. I hope that clears it up.

So, Taricus, Did you near-OMGUS Okami no Rei because he caught you without an answer? And do you expect that it'll make town win by lurking? If you sit on your hands, not only are you not helping town, but you're helping mafia. So are you REALLY lurking because you are afraid of getting dogpiled- Which now that I think about it, doesn't matter because someone doesn't necessarily need to be alive to win, so townies should focus on not hiding but getting information- or are you really scum trying to escape attention?

Anyway, yes, I have been forgetting my Tourette's medications, but that's not behavior-affecting. And thankfully I've calmed down.

Quote from: Jim Groovester
You're funny.

I aim to please :P
But seriously though, I'm a pretty jumpy person right now. I dunno why.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: breadbocks on May 18, 2011, 04:25:10 pm
I request a spoilspec and get an invitation to replace someone. Der fuck.

Sure, I guess. Just don't put me officially in till the end of day1. I need to read the thread.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Taricus on May 18, 2011, 04:32:05 pm
Powder miner: Simply put, I'm not scum but just inexperienced to a larger degree. I didn't post due to the lack of anyone asking me anything and I couldn't think of anything to say that may've help the town.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Powder Miner on May 18, 2011, 04:35:31 pm
OK, fine. But what about your near-OMGUS earlier?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Taricus on May 18, 2011, 04:38:28 pm
That was me tripping on my own inexperience.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Jim Groovester on May 18, 2011, 04:52:24 pm
I request a spoilspec and get an invitation to replace someone. Der fuck.

Sure, I guess. Just don't put me officially in till the end of day1. I need to read the thread.

Because spoiler spectators limit the pool of replacements, which is already very small.

Jim, I've already told you my reasons, but: I've been going onto Taricus because of that OMGUS and his lurking. But now it's seeming more like it's not because he's scummy, but just noobtells, although I'm not really good enoughn to tell the difference. Yet I'm still going to press him because I'm not convinced he's town, he hasn't been lynched, and I'm not dead. So I'll continue to press him. I hope that clears it up.

So you're not sure about him but you're going to try and get him lynched anyway?

You can't lynch willy-nilly; you've only got two free mislynches before you have to get it right. You want to be using them on your best guesses for scum, not people you're not sure about.

Who else do you have an opinion besides your not-sure-but-gonna-vote-anyway opinion on Taricus?

That was me tripping on my own inexperience.

Don't you have a list of suspicions you need to make?

That's a rhetorical question. You do, in fact, have a list of suspicions you need to make.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Powder Miner on May 18, 2011, 05:13:04 pm
I actually don't have very many suspicions besides Taricus, although the reasoning you people've been bringing to bear on Okami is beginnign to make me suspicious of Okami. However, I'll refrain from voting until I question Okami myself. Because otherwise it would be a bandwagon, and from personal experience, (I've tried hosting several Mafia games on a forum Igo to), bandwagons don't usually end well for town.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Jim Groovester on May 18, 2011, 05:19:15 pm
Such as...?

You're not actually bringing up any original arguments, and you're rehashing a several days old argument over to justify voting Taricus. Rehashing seems to describe your overall scumhunting strategy pretty well.

Essentially, scummy scummy scum scum scumface mcscumigan.

The only reason you 'suspect' Okami No Rei is because I do and you're hoping that'll satisfy me and get me off your case. It won't.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Powder Miner on May 18, 2011, 05:40:33 pm
Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong and wrong.

I'm not rehashing my arguments, I'm trying to get Taricus to answer them, which he finally has begun to do. And you're not the only person in the world, and I hate to hurt your ego, but I'm not trying to appease you. I'm actually suspicious of Okami. And scumhunt me all you want, it doesn't matter. You can employ your tactics to try to go for an easy noob lynch, but as long as I get as much information as possible before it, I can still win because one doesn't need to be alive to win. Or was that what you were afraid of, sir scum?

First of all, first you accuse me of having no reason, and then when I point out that I do, you continue to attempt to find a reason to make my reasons bad. (Debasing my reaons to get me off of people is something you seem to be doing a lot lately: I believe it's called chainsaw defending) As Taricus is lurking due to fear, I haven't got any answers out of him (Surprise!), although he's started to asnwer my questions. Then, to scumhunt more people, I'm going to wait until Okami coomes on beause I'm going to question him. And I've stated before that I was a little suspicious of Okami, and because he bugs me, I'm going to scumhunt him, which you seem to have a problem with me doing (scumhunting) for some reason. And seriously, do you h ave a better argument than "scummy scummy scum scum scumface mcscumigan", sir?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Jim Groovester on May 18, 2011, 06:01:54 pm
If you're suspicious of Okami No Rei, what about him makes you suspicious?

Then, to scumhunt more people, I'm going to wait until Okami coomes on beause I'm going to question him. And I've stated before that I was a little suspicious of Okami, and because he bugs me, I'm going to scumhunt him, which you seem to have a problem with me doing (scumhunting) for some reason.

How about you ask Okami No Rei questions now.

No dicking around or stalling for time. Put your money where your mouth is, scumbucket.

If you don't ask a bunch of questions now, you're just waiting for Okami No Rei to give you a list of good questions to ask to save your sorry ass.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Powder Miner on May 18, 2011, 06:21:04 pm
No matter what you may try, painting me as wanting to stay alive at all costs isn't going to do anything, and I'm sorry for you if you think that's going to stop me from scumhunting. And you're right. I AM waiting for Okami to post, because I haven't been paying attention to his posts. And I have your little trap figured out. If I wait anymore you're going to call me passive, and rail against me on that. And If I use an older post, you're going to accuse me of rehashing statements. But to be frank, your intimidation tactics don't work. I'm going to do what I'm going to do- that is, find legitimate questions to ask, so I can actually scumhunt instead of trying to fight against your attempts to prevent me from doing so. And your name-calling is rather silly. Just saying.

And as I said, I'm just trying to get as much info as possible before death. As long as I manage to turn up something good, there's a better lynch chance that whoever the scum is, they'll be lynched. And one can win after death.

Also, I am actually suspicious Okami because of the argument between you two. But still, I'll wait  until I make an argument on my own before I do that.
But since I need to scumhunt, and you seem awfully eager to prevent that, how about I question YOU, unvote, Jim Groovester Jim?
And I'm keeping my vote until I'm satisfied with your answers, call it OMGUS as you wish.

So, Jim, do you have a single argument other than the passivity one you keep rehashing and rehashing (and unlike Taricus, I'm actually answering you.)? Please, tell it to me. Because it seems to me like you're not actually scumhunting, just going in an attempt to get me lynched. If you were scumhunting me, you would actually ask me different questions, not just ones you repeat over and over again (albeit with different names in the blank.) So do it. I'm actually open to being scumhunted, because if you actually scumhunt me, I think you'll find that I'm actually NOT just going to lie down and pose as scum. And I think that maybe you already know that I'm not scum. (Yes, that's right, I'm calling you scum. Go ahead and call me out on it. Please, I actually do want an answer from you.) But you do know that I'm jumpy and an easy lynch, after Toaster voted me with an accusation of passivity (Which I overreacted to, being unusually jumpy that night- I don't really remember why) And hey, your passive argument isn't even original- It's repeated from Toaster- Bandwagon much?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Powder Miner on May 18, 2011, 06:30:35 pm
Wow! And your question about why I was going for Okami wasn't original either! I've been asked the same question by Toaster! And considering the fact that you've asked the same question about Taricus a billion times, I think you need to find a new argument other than repeating Toaster's questions. I mean, really, Jim, I thought you were better than that, being the almighty IC.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Powder Miner on May 18, 2011, 06:32:27 pm
And- sorry for triple posting- the reason I was jumpy last night might have been the swollen gland in my neck. Only mild swelling, but it still aches annoyingly.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Jim Groovester on May 18, 2011, 06:47:26 pm
So I ask you to list what makes you suspicious of Okami No Rei, and then I tell you to ask a bunch of questions now instead of later.

Your reaction?

Don't do any of that, vote me, and then make up a bunch of stuff.

You see, a key part of scumhunting is getting your scum targets to do what they're avoiding trying to do, to get them in a position where they have to do it or they otherwise lose all credibility and basically reveal themselves to be scum.

You really don't want to lift a finger against Okami No Rei.

Why not?

It's easy. You're scum.

Unvote. Powder Miner. Congratulations, you've earned it.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Powder Miner on May 18, 2011, 07:09:34 pm
Actually, I do want to lift a finger against Okami. I just don't want to be yelled at for doing that same thing by you- And as I predicted in that earlier post, exactly as I just predicted, you're calling me out on passivity and accusing me of not wanting to scumhunt Okami no rei. The thing is, you really, really need to read my points, which you seem not to be doing. Or rather, you seem to not be addressing the points that I make against you that look incriminating of you and that you don't like. In short, you're trying to deflect attention away from my arguments- especially by trying to poison the well with a random excuse that I'm making everything up- which i'm not. You really are taking your arguments from Toaster. You really ARE using the same question and argument (stolen too) over and over again.

I'm not going to ask a bunch of questions NOW. And I'm tired of having to list my suspicions over and over again. Either stop your fallacious reasoning and stop tunneling me, or continue with a nice bandwagon attempt. Because I don't have any questions to ask! And you seem to be rather jittery about me scumhunting you, piled on top with a nice OMGUS.

So let's recap your arguments here:

If I scumhunt someone, you accuse me of being repetitive. If I start scumhunting other people too, you call me passive and wishy-washy.
You refuse to acknowledge any of the points whch you can't easily wriggle your way out of. Indeed, you try to deflect attention from them, by calling them made-up.  And then you OMGUS. I guess you reeeeeeeeeeally don't like getting scumhunted, huh Jim? Now, as you said, I should get you to do something you are avoiding. And what that is is very simple to deduce. Answer those poitns. Every one of them. Stop ignoring my answers to your questions. And stop recycling the same logic.

And what is your big supposed logic? When I don't immediately ask questions of which I have none (And have already said so, but you're tunneling me), you say  that I don't want to touch Okami. And then you attempt to justify everything with "Oh look he's scum, obviously! Everyone look away from me, HE'S the scum!" I mean really, stop tunneling. Get a new argument. Stop tunneling me. and especially stop trying to avoid getting scumhunted. I know it's want you don't want to happen. So. Answer me, Jim. Or are you really unprepared with any actual logic, scum?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Think0028 on May 18, 2011, 07:15:04 pm
Powder Miner:

1) What the hell?
2) What happened to focusing only on Taricus, who you were so insistent was scum?
3) What happened to your suspicions of Okami? Why wouldn't you form them into actual questions?
4) Why are you attacking Jim for IC behavior?
5) What the hell?!
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Powder Miner on May 18, 2011, 07:27:51 pm
1. I don't understand what you're trying with the profanity. I'm simply calling him out. And if you look at my previous post, I really did say that he'd attempt to call me out on passivity- an argument he's been recycling- and he did. And he has been refusing to answer my points, he's just been continuing to use the same question (Which Toaster had just used against me mind you). I don't see the problem.

2. I've never attempted to focus ONLY on Taricus. Doing so would be bad for town. I'm scumhunting multiplem people. And judging by his tunneling, I'm guessing I'm being fairly successful. And Taricus is also an easy lynch. I want to see about other people as well before I go for a throat.

3. My suspicions? I still have them. I just don't HAVE any actual questions for him yet and I don't want to steal an argument.

4. I'm certainly not attacking Jim for scum behavior. Tunneling, deflection, OMGUS, and recycling arguments are in no way IC behavior. They're scum behavior. Why are you defending Jim from my scumhunting over that?

5. Again with the profanity. No idea what you're trying to prove there.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Jim Groovester on May 18, 2011, 07:34:25 pm
Actually, I do want to lift a finger against Okami.

Then go fucking do it.

Until you do that you don't really have a defense.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Powder Miner on May 18, 2011, 07:38:48 pm
Jim. Answer my points. Stop tunneling. Stop recycling the same argument over and over again. Sotp deflecting. Don't OMGUS. Do I really have to plead with you to get you to use logic?


So, Okami. Why would you not scumhunt directly? Why would you have to weave an elaborate supposed bandwagon trap, and end up using it to blame someone of being scum, namely everyone else who scumhunts Taricus. And then why would you have to defend Taricus? Why not just go out and scumhunt.

That was easier than expected.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Think0028 on May 18, 2011, 07:43:23 pm
1. I don't understand what you're trying with the profanity. I'm simply calling him out. And if you look at my previous post, I really did say that he'd attempt to call me out on passivity- an argument he's been recycling- and he did. And he has been refusing to answer my points, he's just been continuing to use the same question (Which Toaster had just used against me mind you). I don't see the problem.

2. I've never attempted to focus ONLY on Taricus. Doing so would be bad for town. I'm scumhunting multiplem people. And judging by his tunneling, I'm guessing I'm being fairly successful. And Taricus is also an easy lynch. I want to see about other people as well before I go for a throat.

3. My suspicions? I still have them. I just don't HAVE any actual questions for him yet and I don't want to steal an argument.

4. I'm certainly not attacking Jim for scum behavior. Tunneling, deflection, OMGUS, and recycling arguments are in no way IC behavior. They're scum behavior. Why are you defending Jim from my scumhunting over that?

5. Again with the profanity. No idea what you're trying to prove there.

The profanity is because I'm having trouble comprehending what you're doing here. It wasn't until after Jim asked you to push Okami that you claimed he was scum. Is anyone who pushes you to explain your actions automatically in the wrong? Why were you saying you suspect Okami and then not doing anything? You're flipping out over someone whose only real request has been to put your suspicions about Okami in words. There's also the fact that no matter what content you're putting out, you're really obviously flipping out. Posting 3 times in a row, never pausing to think, trying to fill up as much space as possible.

I don't understand what you're doing. I don't know why you suddenly talk about Okami now when you refused to the first 3 times you were asked to. I don't know why I should believe you're town.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Powder Miner on May 18, 2011, 07:56:51 pm
I claimed he was scum, NOT because he asked me to push Okami but because he was reusing the same argument about passivity, refusing to answer my points (seriously he just called them made-up), and just generally tunneling me. The OMGUS doesn't help either. Jim's acting scummy, so I scumhunt them, and both you and Jim have a problem with that for some reason. Anyway, you need to read too. I have repatedly- repeatedly put my suspicion into words. And I'm not really flipping out. I'm scumhunting him. They're not the same, and if you are trying to disprove allll my scumhunting my saying "Oh, you're flipping out and trying to fill space", and trying to distract me with this, as well as defending Jim with the excuse that tunneling and OMGUSes are IC behavior- which they are in no way- and chainsawing me, which you have no reason to do- You're probably scum. I've been talking about Okami all the time, readily answering Jim's questions (which he's ignored and tunneled me), every time. I just refused to ask him something because I couldn't think of something original, and I knew he'd accuse me of bandwagoning if I didn't have something new. And now I thought of something.

I triple posted because one cannot edit. First, my main post. Second, investigating something I jadn't seen until I posted. And Third, explaining why I was so jump yesterday, which I'd just remembered.
I know what I'm doing. I'm scumhunting. You're trying to chainsaw me to stop me scumhunting Jim. Don't believe I'm town if you really want to. If you're town though, you'd actually look at my posts instead of simply agreeing with everything Jim says,
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Jim Groovester on May 18, 2011, 08:00:36 pm
A defense of mafia jargon is a pretty weak one.

Stop tunneling.

I'm not.

Stop recycling the same argument over and over again.

No.

If it's effective I can repeat an argument as much as I want. In fact, I should repeat an effective argument as much as possible.

Sotp deflecting.

I'm not.

Don't OMGUS.

It's not an OMGUS if I have good reasons.

It's only an OMGUS if it's a kneejerk reaction to being voted.

Do I really have to plead with you to get you to use logic?

Mafia really isn't a game of logic. It's a game of observation and intuition .

So, Okami. Why would you not scumhunt directly? Why would you have to weave an elaborate supposed bandwagon trap, and end up using it to blame someone of being scum, namely everyone else who scumhunts Taricus. And then why would you have to defend Taricus? Why not just go out and scumhunt.

That was easier than expected.

It took you this long and a ton of whining to ask a weak question to a person you said you suspected.

That's inconsistent. Inconsistency is very scummy.

And you still don't look like you really want to deal with Okami No Rei, because it took this long.

See what I'm doing here? I'm repeating an effective argument.

FAKEEDIT: And now you're completely melting down. You can't accuse everybody who's got perfectly legitimate questions about what you're doing of being scum and expect to live long afterward.

Next time, don't flip the fuck out at everything. And make sure your actions line up with your words.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Powder Miner on May 18, 2011, 08:30:27 pm
So. You refuse to even acknowledge the myriad other points I'd had against you- Like the stealing of your argument from Toaster, and other things, and your mere dismisslal of them isn't tunneling? It isn't deflecting? And it's not particularly effective. You're just gettnig me to repeat the same thing over and over again in the hopes that I'll sound scummy enough a time that I say it that you can lead a bandwagon against me. That's nto something a townie should do.

And I answered his questions. The ones that were exaclty the same as yours, based off of your reasoning. That's called exactly doing everything you say. He's, like you, shoving the same question in my face and acting like I've never answered it before, when I have every time. You can't keep me from having my scumpicks, nor can you keep me from scumhunting- which I'm now doing with three people at once, you, Okami, and Think- And both you AND Think are appearing to really not like getting scunhunted. Is it because you two are scum? Is it?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Powder Miner on May 18, 2011, 08:36:13 pm
Oh, and scumhunting aggressively does NOT equal flipping out, so you know? Why are you so annoyed about me scumhunting you and Think, Jim?
Why are you pressing me so hard to only go for
Okami, who you're trying to get lynched?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Heliman on May 18, 2011, 09:01:28 pm
Going around and a little bit back here, but w/e lets go.

@Jim,
Continuing to interrogate Taricus wasn't exactly getting me anywhere.  I don't like doing work and then having nothing to show for my efforts.
Ah, so I was right. You were just pressuring Taricus for show.
I don't like how you're purposely twisting Okami's words here. He's not saying "show" he's saying "to show for my efforts," which denotes a meaning that translates to "to get from all this."

@Okami
Heliman now.  He's already parroting Jim.  Presciently, even.
Excuse me? Where and how.

@Powder Miner
(Debasing my reaons to get me off of people is something you seem to be doing a lot lately: I believe it's called chainsaw defending)
With no scum flips, a suspected Chainsaw defense is a Null Tell.


Oh, and scumhunting aggressively does NOT equal flipping out, so you know? Why are you so annoyed about me scumhunting you and Think, Jim?
  Powder, if there's anyone flipping teh fuck out right now, it's you, to the point where you're even getting worked up over cussing.

Why are you pressing me so hard to only go for Okami, who you're trying to get lynched?
No he isn't still going for Okami, he's going after you. You know, with that red vote that looks kinda like Unvote,Vote Powder Mines (hoo hoo subtle vote haa haa)
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Powder Miner on May 18, 2011, 09:09:41 pm
I always flip out about profanity.
And I didn't say that he's going only after Okami. I said that he's trying to get me to only go after Okami.
If you kill me, it'll just be -1 townie. No big deal. But at least be smart enough to cop Jim Groovester. Or Think.
And also, Heliman I didn't say that Jim was flipping out. You're misunderstanding what I'm saying pretty badly. And what IS a null tell? No idea.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Powder Miner on May 18, 2011, 09:09:57 pm
Oh, and what's a scum flip?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Powder Miner on May 18, 2011, 09:20:45 pm
And since I'm probably about to die, I'm going to post my entire case about Jim right now. That's right Jim, your attempts to get me to stop scumhunting you have failed. You people may not listen to me, but when I turn out townie, this'll be out here. It just will. And there's nothing you can do about it, scum.
My case:
First off, Jim thinks I'm scummy for my overreaction. Perfectly acceptable. He thenaccuses me of passivity when I'm pressing Taricus, for not going for my lesser suspicions over Okami. Still not a case at all for me. I answer him about why I'm not going for Okami yet. He proceeds to ask me the same question again. I answer him again. After a little bit of this, complete with me finally pulling off of Taricus, who is turning out to be lurking from fear of posting, he accuses me of rehashing my answers to the same question. Of course, I haven't suddenly changed my mind. So I continue to defend myself, call him out on reusing the same question. He then votes me for it, with the grand logic claim, that, despite my answering, I apparently reaaally don't want to touch Okami. And the only other logic? He calls me scum. Whoop-de-do. He also denies my repeated answering of his question, and summarily attempts to dismiss all of my arguments against him with "he made it up" And he OMGUSes me.
I call him out on that and using the same argument and nearly the same question that Toaster was. (That's probably what he said I made up) Anyway, he still refuses to answer about that, and aqlthough he defends his votef ro me, he's conveniently forgotten about my other points, and the fact that I HAVE answered him repeatedly. And then he claims that he's not tunneling me.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Jim Groovester on May 18, 2011, 09:51:15 pm
That's right Jim, your attempts to get me to stop scumhunting you have failed.

I never wanted you to stop scumhunting. You not scumhunting in the first place is exactly what got you in this mess.

Just one correction of many that you deserve, because I don't really want to trawl through all your scattershot arguments and refute them line by line since you don't actually seriously think I'm scum. The only reason you bothered attacking me in the first place is because I pressed you about your suspicions. I mean, what a terrible thing for me to do. Everything after that has been a kneejerk reaction to it and it should be clear to everyone that that's exactly what's going on.

Oh, and what's a scum flip?

When a player is lynched or nightkilled, their role is revealed. This is called a roleflip. Depending on their alignment, a player can flip town or flip scum. Scumflip, townflip, come from that.

And what IS a null tell? No idea.

Null tells are common things players do that don't really mean anything one way or the other about their alignment. For the chainsaw defense example, a player can only chainsaw defend (i.e., attack a player who is attacking their scumbuddy) if they are scum. However, it could just as easily be that that player is town and thinks the other is scummy. So until that player's alignment is known, that they attacked somebody who was attacking someone else doesn't really mean anything one way or the other.

For contrast, there are town tells, which indicate a player is town, and scum tells, which indicate that a player is scum.

@Jim,
Continuing to interrogate Taricus wasn't exactly getting me anywhere.  I don't like doing work and then having nothing to show for my efforts.
Ah, so I was right. You were just pressuring Taricus for show.
I don't like how you're purposely twisting Okami's words here. He's not saying "show" he's saying "to show for my efforts," which denotes a meaning that translates to "to get from all this."

Yep, I know.

But Okami No Rei's hard to attack. I don't like what he's doing but don't have a perfect answer for how to deal with him.

I don't think I'm wrong about it though. I do think he only pressured Taricus because he thought he would be an easy target as well as to make a show of scumhunting, because it was clear almost from the moment Taricus spoke that he was only inexperienced. But I'm at a complete loss about how to nail him to the wall about it. I tried what you pointed out to see if I could get anything to stick.

Nope.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Vector on May 18, 2011, 09:53:05 pm
I always flip out about profanity.

I realize that you're young, so you have a viable excuse for this--but if you keep playing with us (and I hope you do!), you are going to need to toss this habit.

In the end, it doesn't matter THAT much what you've got going on in your own life and personality.  If you're going to play this game, you're going to need to learn how to calm down and stop giving excuses for your own scummy behavior as "just how you are."  It may be true, but it's also an argument that has flown extremely well for scum in the past (i.e. me), and which we generally don't accept for that reason.

Keep going, though.  I can tell that you'll play a lot better once you have this game under your belt, and I look forward to facing you :3
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Powder Miner on May 18, 2011, 09:54:58 pm
Jim, I DO seriously think you're scum. I've been scumhunting you all this time, or at least been trying to.  But seriously though, you took that passivity thing from Toaster.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Powder Miner on May 18, 2011, 09:59:36 pm
I mean, I AM scumhunting. I wouldn't be asking you anything if I weren't. I'd probably just try to get you to shut up.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Jim Groovester on May 18, 2011, 10:02:17 pm
I agree with Toaster about you being passive.

That's something you can do, you know. But I've got more than enough arguments of my own.

Jim, I DO seriously think you're scum. I've been scumhunting you all this time, or at least been trying to.

Nah, you don't. You're throwing mafia jargon at me, probably every term you've ever heard. That's not a solid attack, that's just grasping for anything you can. Again, only in reaction to me calling you scum.

Meh, I'm done arguing with you about this. I'm gonna go play video games or something.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Jim Groovester on May 18, 2011, 10:11:17 pm
Taricus, you're posting right now.

The problem is that you're not posting here. Where are you and why aren't you playing?

I asked you to do something simple and I'm still waiting.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Heliman on May 18, 2011, 10:14:15 pm
@Powder Miner
I always flip out about profanity.
Oh fuck, that's a problem then, If you saw [img=http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=78826.0]The Why would you do that Mafia game going on right now you would probably herniate or something.[img]

And I didn't say that he's going only after Okami. I said that he's trying to get me to only go after Okami.
Again, you said "Why are you pressing me so hard to only go for Okami, who you're trying to get lynched?" The second part of the sentence clearly accuses Jim of trying to get Okami Lynched, so the sentence reads "Why are you pressing me so hard" then "to only go for Okami" then "who you're trying to get lynched?"


And also, Heliman I didn't say that Jim was flipping out. You're misunderstanding what I'm saying pretty badly.
If you make a whole new post starting with  "Oh, and scumhunting aggressively does NOT equal flipping out, so you know?" followed by a sentence that says "Why are you so annoyed about me scumhunting you and Think, Jim?" I can only assume that you're referencing to Jim.

@Jim Groovester

Continuing to interrogate Taricus wasn't exactly getting me anywhere.  I don't like doing work and then having nothing to show for my efforts.
Ah, so I was right. You were just pressuring Taricus for show.
I don't like how you're purposely twisting Okami's words here. He's not saying "show" he's saying "to show for my efforts," which denotes a meaning that translates to "to get from all this."

Yep, I know.

But Okami No Rei's hard to attack. I don't like what he's doing but don't have a perfect answer for how to deal with him.

I don't think I'm wrong about it though. I do think he only pressured Taricus because he thought he would be an easy target as well as to make a show of scumhunting, because it was clear almost from the moment Taricus spoke that he was only inexperienced. But I'm at a complete loss about how to nail him to the wall about it. I tried what you pointed out to see if I could get anything to stick.

Nope.
|
V
I'll use this to point out that this is excellent advice for everybody. As a member of the town, you want to be as open and transparent as possible. (Barring information about your role, of course.)
Well if you knew what he meant beforehand, you aren't following your own advice. You're not being transparent by hiding what you really feel about a statement. That doesn't look like a townie thing to do.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Vector on May 18, 2011, 10:14:58 pm
But seriously though, you took that passivity thing from Toaster.

I'm going to add a little something here, because I think it's relevant.

You can take part of someone's argument from someone else.  You just generally need to expand upon it.  Even then, there are sometimes slips so egregious that "bandwagoning" is the only sensible thing to do.  For example, in a game with no jesters, the statement of "I am scum" means it's time for everyone to go a-lynching.

Similarly, agreeing with another person's allegation is in no means scummy.  At all.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Taricus on May 18, 2011, 10:39:30 pm
Jim Groovster: I was off playing a game for half an hour.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Toaster on May 18, 2011, 10:44:32 pm
Taricus:  What do you think of the advice people are giving you?

Jim Groovster: I was off playing a game for half an hour.

That's fine... assuming you then post some content.  How about some?


Powder:  Here's the thing- once you got a non-RV vote on you, your posting rate basically doubled.  You went from a couple double posts to repeated double and even triple posts.  You are oozing panic from every pore.  The correct response to pressure is to respond calmly to the allegations against you.  You are freaking out.

I actually don't have very many suspicions besides Taricus, although the reasoning you people've been bringing to bear on Okami is beginnign to make me suspicious of Okami. However, I'll refrain from voting until I question Okami myself. Because otherwise it would be a bandwagon, and from personal experience, (I've tried hosting several Mafia games on a forum Igo to), bandwagons don't usually end well for town.

Jim already mentioned this, but you keep saying (here and other posts) that you're going to question Okami, but you never do it.  When you're backed into a wall over it, you respond with an OMGUS.


I need to give you a better reply, but I had to run off halfway through this post, lost my train of thought, and am too tired to reclaim it.  I'll give you more in the morning.  However, if you're town and about to be mislynched, the best thing you can do is post your thoughts on everyone, especially those you think scum.  It likely won't save you, but at least your thoughts are there for the world to see.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Taricus on May 18, 2011, 10:46:49 pm
Good, and very necessary if do want to win and/or survive ingame.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Heliman on May 18, 2011, 10:50:05 pm
Just as necessary to actually do something like answer questions and scumhunt, Taricus. And elaborate. And make posts longer than a line in length.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Jim Groovester on May 18, 2011, 10:50:25 pm
I'll use this to point out that this is excellent advice for everybody. As a member of the town, you want to be as open and transparent as possible. (Barring information about your role, of course.)
Well if you knew what he meant beforehand, you aren't following your own advice. You're not being transparent by hiding what you really feel about a statement. That doesn't look like a townie thing to do.

I love it when people use what I say against me.

I made a shaky accusation to see if it would turn anything up. This is known as reaction testing. It's a fairly common tactic, and the only reason it's not very effective is because pretty much everybody can recognize what's going on. It is, unfortunately, in apparent violation of what I said about being transparent, because it's a tactic that requires some subtlety. I can't tell Okami No Rei that I'm testing for his reaction, now can I?

I explained what I was doing fully when you asked about it, so it's up to you to judge whether or not I'm being malicious about it even though I'm in apparent violation of the letter of my own advice.

Good, and very necessary if do want to win and/or survive ingame.

So...

That's nice that you've acknowledged getting advice.

Are you ever going to put it into action?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Jack A T on May 18, 2011, 10:52:24 pm
Replacement needed?  Huh.  I feel like playing a rather plain game (haven't played anything but BYOR-type games for a bit), so...I'm in, if that's acceptable.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Taricus on May 18, 2011, 10:53:35 pm
Well, I'm posting more and I'm starting to ask a few questions so I'd say I'm starting.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Powder Miner on May 18, 2011, 10:55:30 pm
Unvote Gah! I know I'm panicking! I don't want to be panicking, I just am! I'm confused though. and pprobably abuot to be lynched... Oh well. As lnog as town gets the Mafia anyway, I can still win...
Anyway, time to get away from my horrible botch attempt at scumhunting and try again! Preferably more calmly!

Oh, and Toaster, I already posted my thoughts. That's what my case was meant to be.

So..... Okami, why haven't you been posting?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Heliman on May 18, 2011, 10:56:14 pm
I'll use this to point out that this is excellent advice for everybody. As a member of the town, you want to be as open and transparent as possible. (Barring information about your role, of course.)
Well if you knew what he meant beforehand, you aren't following your own advice. You're not being transparent by hiding what you really feel about a statement. That doesn't look like a townie thing to do.
I love it when people use what I say against me.
I'm pretty sure that's the only way to play mafia.

I made a shaky accusation to see if it would turn anything up. This is known as reaction testing. It's a fairly common tactic, and the only reason it's not very effective is because pretty much everybody can recognize what's going on. It is, unfortunately, in apparent violation of what I said about being transparent, because it's a tactic that requires some subtlety. I can't tell Okami No Rei that I'm testing for his reaction, now can I?
In the same way, wouldn't what Okami did be reaction testing? Why would you agree with me in the first place if that was the case?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Powder Miner on May 18, 2011, 10:59:43 pm
Oh, and Heliman, I DID see that thread. I'd been following it fro a while with quite a bit of interest. I averted my eyes.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Heliman on May 18, 2011, 11:03:26 pm
Replacement needed?  Huh.  I feel like playing a rather plain game (haven't played anything but BYOR-type games for a bit), so...I'm in, if that's acceptable.
I think Breadbocks is already subbing in.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Jim Groovester on May 18, 2011, 11:13:48 pm
Well, I'm posting more and I'm starting to ask a few questions so I'd say I'm starting.

It would be pretty cool if you would put all that good advice into action.

Sometime soon.

Like now.

I made a shaky accusation to see if it would turn anything up. This is known as reaction testing. It's a fairly common tactic, and the only reason it's not very effective is because pretty much everybody can recognize what's going on. It is, unfortunately, in apparent violation of what I said about being transparent, because it's a tactic that requires some subtlety. I can't tell Okami No Rei that I'm testing for his reaction, now can I?
In the same way, wouldn't what Okami did be reaction testing? Why would you agree with me in the first place if that was the case?

Yeah, that was reaction testing. But I don't like it and I don't believe that he was doing it to try and catch scum. Or even that he was actually trying to do a reaction test in the first place.

I agreed with you because I actually was twisting his words, but I knew full well what I was doing and what I was trying to accomplish by doing that.

There's nothing wrong with reaction testing, and there's nothing wrong on the surface about what I did or what Okami No Rei did. It comes down to a question of motives, just like everything else. I think he was trying to be malicious about it, so it ultimately comes down to whether you think I was trying to do the same when I was testing for his reaction.

I love it when people use what I say against me.
I'm pretty sure that's the only way to play mafia.

Well, yeah, but I seem especially prone to people using my mafia platitudes as attacks against me or a defense against what I have to say about them.

My typical response is to say that I don't give a flying fuck about what I said in the past, but I'm an IC so I'm sorta stuck with what I said.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Powder Miner on May 18, 2011, 11:19:44 pm
I'm going to need some seriou s advice on how to play once this is over.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Taricus on May 18, 2011, 11:30:28 pm
Supercharizad: Why haven't you posted today?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Vector on May 18, 2011, 11:32:04 pm
I'm going to need some seriou s advice on how to play once this is over.

You're already receiving that advice, you know.

Calm down, breathe, stop panicking, and stop posting about panicking.  The first step to not panicking is to refuse to allow yourself to panic.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Heliman on May 19, 2011, 12:10:02 am
I love it when people use what I say against me.
I'm pretty sure that's the only way to play mafia.
Well, yeah, but I seem especially prone to people using my mafia platitudes as attacks against me or a defense against what I have to say about them.
So... your saying that your advice is really meaningless statements presented as if they were significant?

I made a shaky accusation to see if it would turn anything up. This is known as reaction testing. It's a fairly common tactic, and the only reason it's not very effective is because pretty much everybody can recognize what's going on. It is, unfortunately, in apparent violation of what I said about being transparent, because it's a tactic that requires some subtlety. I can't tell Okami No Rei that I'm testing for his reaction, now can I?
In the same way, wouldn't what Okami did be reaction testing? Why would you agree with me in the first place if that was the case?
Yeah, that was reaction testing. But I don't like it and I don't believe that he was doing it to try and catch scum. Or even that he was actually trying to do a reaction test in the first place.
I agreed with you because I actually was twisting his words, but I knew full well what I was doing and what I was trying to accomplish by doing that.
There's nothing wrong with reaction testing, and there's nothing wrong on the surface about what I did or what Okami No Rei did. It comes down to a question of motives, just like everything else.
Where does the line between a lie and a reaction test end, exactly?

I think he was trying to be malicious about it, so it ultimately comes down to whether you think I was trying to do the same when I was testing for his reaction.
And ultimately, your defense comes down to a WIFOM scenario.
Unvote
Vote Jim Groovester.

Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Jim Groovester on May 19, 2011, 12:43:16 am
So... your saying that your advice is really meaningless statements presented as if they were significant?

No, it's good advice. It's definitely worth listening to.

I just hate it when it gets thrown back in my face to make me look like a hypocrite, as if that's somehow supposed to prove something.

I'll tell you right now that hypocrisy isn't a scum tell. It just makes the person a hypocrite. And scum love it, they absolutely relish the opportunity to make somebody look like a hypocrite, because it means they can get away with something that they're completely guilty of.

I know this from experience, because it's happened to me several times.

Where does the line between a lie and a reaction test end, exactly?

I have no idea what you're talking about. There's no specific relationship between lies and reaction tests so I don't know why you're asking for the line between the two.

And ultimately, your defense comes down to a WIFOM scenario.
Unvote
Vote Jim Groovester.

What the hell are you talking about, that's not a WIFOM scenario.

If I were trying to use WIFOM to defend myself I would be saying something along these lines: "Why would I do something as x if I were y?"

Do you see me doing that? No. I've explained exactly what I was doing completely unambiguously.

Would you like to vote me for something else you clearly don't have a full understanding of? I would love to correct you about it.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Heliman on May 19, 2011, 01:22:29 am
So... your saying that your advice is really meaningless statements presented as if they were significant?

No, it's good advice. It's definitely worth listening to.

Then you may want to look at the definition of "platitudes" again.

Where does the line between a lie and a reaction test end, exactly?
I have no idea what you're talking about. There's no specific relationship between lies and reaction tests so I don't know why you're asking for the line between the two.
In saying "Ah, so I was right. You were just pressuring Taricus for show." Because you knew that your interpretation truly wasn't what he meant, you made, strictly speaking, a lie. You say you used this lie as a mechanism for a reaction test, so I'm asking you, where's the difference? What makes the lie suddenly okay? Okami didn't lie when he tried to do a reaction test, he just aggrandized the truth, so what stopped you from doing the same?

And ultimately, your defense comes down to a WIFOM scenario.
Unvote
Vote Jim Groovester.
What the hell are you talking about, that's not a WIFOM scenario.
If I were trying to use WIFOM to defend myself I would be saying something along these lines: "Why would I do something as x if I were y?"
Do you see me doing that? No. I've explained exactly what I was doing completely unambiguously.
Would you like to vote me for something else you clearly don't have a full understanding of? I would love to correct you about it.
[/quote]WIFOM is the circular reasoning that results from trying to determine the choices of an opponent who acted with full knowledge that his behavior would be subject to scrutiny. Your defense was telling me that in order for me to consider you scum, I have to decide weather or not your actions were malicious. This means that you invited me decide weather or not you were scum by scrutinizing your behavior and therefore formed the following question: "Why would I do something malicious if I'm Town?"
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Heliman on May 19, 2011, 01:31:00 am
Oh god damn it I messed up the quotes again.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Jim Groovester on May 19, 2011, 02:13:54 am
Where does the line between a lie and a reaction test end, exactly?
I have no idea what you're talking about. There's no specific relationship between lies and reaction tests so I don't know why you're asking for the line between the two.
In saying "Ah, so I was right. You were just pressuring Taricus for show." Because you knew that your interpretation truly wasn't what he meant, you made, strictly speaking, a lie. You say you used this lie as a mechanism for a reaction test, so I'm asking you, where's the difference? What makes the lie suddenly okay? Okami didn't lie when he tried to do a reaction test, he just aggrandized the truth, so what stopped you from doing the same?

I tried to get him to slip up. I used a lie to do this. It's a tactic. I explained exactly what I was doing and what its purpose was when I was asked. If it worked I would have ended up with something usable, more than a worthy goal. It didn't work. Just because it didn't doesn't mean the attempt was some horribly scummy thing to do. (I'll mention that there are tactics out there that are completely dangerous and stupid and scummy to use; a worthy goal doesn't justify using a tactic if it's incredibly risky, but the most that could happen from reaction testing is that somebody points out that you're reaction testing. It's a pretty safe thing to do.)

What would I have used to 'aggrandize the truth'? I used what I thought I could since I've already stated Okami No Rei is hard to attack. I did everything I could think of to do.

'Aggrandizing the truth' still would've been dishonest of me, so if you've got a problem with just the dishonesty itself I guess you're suggesting that I shouldn't try anything at all if I'm completely flummoxed by a difficult opponent where my normal methods wouldn't work at all.

And ultimately, your defense comes down to a WIFOM scenario.
Unvote
Vote Jim Groovester.
What the hell are you talking about, that's not a WIFOM scenario.
If I were trying to use WIFOM to defend myself I would be saying something along these lines: "Why would I do something as x if I were y?"
Do you see me doing that? No. I've explained exactly what I was doing completely unambiguously.
Would you like to vote me for something else you clearly don't have a full understanding of? I would love to correct you about it.
WIFOM is the circular reasoning that results from trying to determine the choices of an opponent who acted with full knowledge that his behavior would be subject to scrutiny. Your defense was telling me that in order for me to consider you scum, I have to decide weather or not your actions were malicious. This means that you invited me decide weather or not you were scum by scrutinizing your behavior and therefore formed the following question: "Why would I do something malicious if I'm Town?"

Well, then, you should clarify. I did not use WIFOM. I did nothing of the sort. You're just reading too much into what I said and putting words in my mouth that I did not say or mean. Now who's fault is that?

I told you to look at it and make a judgment for yourself. In case it's not obvious, that's what you're supposed to be doing for everything you come across.

Why are you saying I've tried using WIFOM when I told you to do something that isn't even remotely remarkable or objectionable at all?

That's silly.

You're silly.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Heliman on May 19, 2011, 02:54:54 am
Where does the line between a lie and a reaction test end, exactly?
I have no idea what you're talking about. There's no specific relationship between lies and reaction tests so I don't know why you're asking for the line between the two.
In saying "Ah, so I was right. You were just pressuring Taricus for show." Because you knew that your interpretation truly wasn't what he meant, you made, strictly speaking, a lie. You say you used this lie as a mechanism for a reaction test, so I'm asking you, where's the difference? What makes the lie suddenly okay? Okami didn't lie when he tried to do a reaction test, he just aggrandized the truth, so what stopped you from doing the same?

I tried to get him to slip up. I used a lie to do this. It's a tactic. I explained exactly what I was doing and what its purpose was when I was asked. If it worked I would have ended up with something usable, more than a worthy goal. It didn't work. Just because it didn't doesn't mean the attempt was some horribly scummy thing to do. (I'll mention that there are tactics out there that are completely dangerous and stupid and scummy to use; a worthy goal doesn't justify using a tactic if it's incredibly risky, but the most that could happen from reaction testing is that somebody points out that you're reaction testing. It's a pretty safe thing to do.)

What would I have used to 'aggrandize the truth'? I used what I thought I could since I've already stated Okami No Rei is hard to attack. I did everything I could think of to do.

'Aggrandizing the truth' still would've been dishonest of me, so if you've got a problem with just the dishonesty itself I guess you're suggesting that I shouldn't try anything at all if I'm completely flummoxed by a difficult opponent where my normal methods wouldn't work at all.
Flummoxed? I don't need to hear complaints like that from an IC. I've only been around a bit and I've already caught him with a scum slip that many people are giving him the eye for! Perhaps you can't find an avenue of attack because you're scum and you know that he's town?
You can use almost any fact to aggrandize the truth. Fact+Suitably Ridiculous Summation= Aggrandized truth, Case in point, the last sentence of my first paragraph would be one such aggrandized truth.
Also you seem to be vague about "If it worked." You know full well that Okami wasn't going to cave to pressure, what were you expecting?

And ultimately, your defense comes down to a WIFOM scenario.
Unvote
Vote Jim Groovester.
What the hell are you talking about, that's not a WIFOM scenario.
If I were trying to use WIFOM to defend myself I would be saying something along these lines: "Why would I do something as x if I were y?"
Do you see me doing that? No. I've explained exactly what I was doing completely unambiguously.
Would you like to vote me for something else you clearly don't have a full understanding of? I would love to correct you about it.
WIFOM is the circular reasoning that results from trying to determine the choices of an opponent who acted with full knowledge that his behavior would be subject to scrutiny. Your defense was telling me that in order for me to consider you scum, I have to decide weather or not your actions were malicious. This means that you invited me decide weather or not you were scum by scrutinizing your behavior and therefore formed the following question: "Why would I do something malicious if I'm Town?"
Well, then, you should clarify. I did not use WIFOM. I did nothing of the sort. You're just reading too much into what I said and putting words in my mouth that I did not say or mean. Now who's fault is that?
I told you to look at it and make a judgment for yourself. In case it's not obvious, that's what you're supposed to be doing for everything you come across.
Why are you saying I've tried using WIFOM when I told you to do something that isn't even remotely remarkable or objectionable at all?
To say that statement twice in a row without a reason would just be a pointless waste of space, because everyone, especially me, knows that already. But, you put meaning behind your statement by posting it and I can only take that meaning as a concealed WIFOM. WIFOM isn't good WIFOM just because it comes in a pretty bottle, sometimes the best WIFOM doesn't even have a label.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Jim Groovester on May 19, 2011, 03:21:45 am
Flummoxed? I don't need to hear complaints like that from an IC. I've only been around a bit and I've already caught him with a scum slip that many people are giving him the eye for! Perhaps you can't find an avenue of attack because you're scum and you know that he's town?

Gotcha. This is about my ICness.

Least I know that's in play again.

You can use almost any fact to aggrandize the truth. Fact+Suitably Ridiculous Summation= Aggrandized truth, Case in point, the last sentence of my first paragraph would be one such aggrandized truth.

What about: "So I was right: You were just pressuring Taricus for show."

I mean, it meets your criteria.

Fact: Okami No Rei was pressuring Taricus.
Suitably Ridiculous Summation: He was doing it for show.

Good enough? It must not be. I can't fathom why not.

Also you seem to be vague about "If it worked." You know full well that Okami wasn't going to cave to pressure, what were you expecting?

What are you expecting with your aggrandized truth in your first paragraph? You can't be expecting much. But you did it anyway. Why? I bet you thought it wouldn't hurt.

Same deal.

To say that statement twice in a row without a reason would just be a pointless waste of space, because everyone, especially me, knows that already. But, you put meaning behind your statement by posting it and I can only take that meaning as a concealed WIFOM. WIFOM isn't good WIFOM just because it comes in a pretty bottle, sometimes the best WIFOM doesn't even have a label.

That's idiotic. That is the most downright idiotic thing that was ever produced by the gentle tapping of your fingers on a keyboard. I mean, how terribly malicious of me to mention that you should do the obvious thing. It clearly was part of some devious plan I employed to dupe you into thinking that I was somehow... you know what. I don't even know what the fuck you're going on about. Concealed WIFOM is pretty much the most bullshit accusation I've ever heard. I mean, it's just so fucking goddamn pointless.

Let's take it further, to its logical extreme. Any person who answers a question quickly and honestly is using Concealed WIFOM. Clearly they want you to think they're town by answering your questions. It's all part of their devious plan to make everybody think they're town. But you're gonna call them out on it, because you know what's up. There's obviously no other alternative.

Oh, and anybody who scumhunts too. Concealed WIFOM. Only scum would want to look like town by hunting for scum.

You know what? Pretty much anybody who's trying to do good townlike things is probably using Concealed WIFOM. You should probably get on everybody for that.

Are you done yet? This whole conversation is bullshit. I already answered everything perfectly fine, and now you're making shit up to be difficult for no good reason since you've got { } to go on.

That's a math joke by the way. It means the empty set. I.E., nothing. I'm sure Vector appreciated it.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Toaster on May 19, 2011, 08:59:47 am
A word on reaction testing:

It's a useful tactic.  If someone seems scummy to you but you can't nail down why, a well-worded leading question can sometimes provoke a slip out of them.  This is one of those times where you hold back from being fully open.  Asking them a question and expecting a certain answer to be scummy can put a wedge in someone's defenses that you can pry open and use for an attack.  Alternately, accusing them with something flimsy can potentially squeeze out an overreaction, a sign that they're nervous about something.  Again, you can use that reaction as an avenue to open an attack.

If you get a solid town response out of them, you can either move on to the next target or try something else.

Scum can do something similar as well- they can try to provoke an "easy target" into making a mistake and then throwing a case at them over that.  It's a blurry line that mostly comes down to intent and the soundness of the argument against the target.  If someone reaction tests someone and goes overboard attacking what seems to be a reasonable response, it could be someone fishing for a lynch.  Telling the difference will come with experience.



Powder:  Telling us that you're panicking won't influence us, because we can tell that already from your posts.  Show us (not tell us, show us) that you've calmed down and proceed reasonably with your case on someone else and you may find the votes falling off you.

So..... Okami, why haven't you been posting?

This is a start, but the question is weak.  You should have enough content by now to be asking prying questions regarding statements the target has made, not offhand questions that could be dismissed with a simple "I've been busy."


Taricus:
Good, and very necessary if do want to win and/or survive ingame.

You're reading the advice.  You're acknowledging that you got the advice.  You're then ignoring it.

I don't know what else to say here.  Look around at the other posts in this game.  Can you not get enough information out of any of them to ask probing questions of others?


Heliman:  You're making a mountain out of a molehill here with your case on Jim.  It's founded on this:

Continuing to interrogate Taricus wasn't exactly getting me anywhere.  I don't like doing work and then having nothing to show for my efforts.
Ah, so I was right. You were just pressuring Taricus for show.
I don't like how you're purposely twisting Okami's words here. He's not saying "show" he's saying "to show for my efforts," which denotes a meaning that translates to "to get from all this."

You're mincing words here.  I'd be lying if I said I hadn't minced words in the past, but I really think you've got nothing here.  Yes, you should be open, but you can't tell someone why you're asking them a question if you're looking for a specific reaction out of them.

You've played a couple games- you should know this.

Just so I'm clear at what's going on in your head, who is your #2 pick and why?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Taricus on May 19, 2011, 09:18:29 am
Right now, I don't see what I could question anyone about in regards to their posts and such.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Toaster on May 19, 2011, 09:44:58 am
Then you're not looking hard enough.

I suggest doing a reread in one of two ways:

1) Read the thread post by post.  In Notepad or whatever, mark down anything odd/interesting about posts something like this:

PlayerA asks RV of PlayerB
PlayerB blows it off and votes PlayerA
PlayerC votes Player B for OMGUS

When that's done, read over the list and see who looks scummiest.  Ask them about whatever it was that made them the scummiest.

2)  Pick a player (either one you suspect, have a bad read of, or arbitrarily) and read all their posts.  Follow their train of thought and see where it takes you.  Is it honest?  Are they consistent?  Are they doing original work and not looking for an easy lynch?  If the answer to any of those questions is no, ask them about it.  Repeat for another player if nothing comes up, or do it even if it does.


You'll get something- you just have to do a bit of work.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Supercharazad on May 19, 2011, 11:12:30 am
Supercharizad: Why haven't you posted today?

Because I'm human, as such, I need sleep. I also had this magical thing called school.


Taricus: Why did you ask such an idiotic question?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Taricus on May 19, 2011, 11:40:35 am
Technically yesterday for me, different timezones and that.

I have to start the ball rolling.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Toaster on May 19, 2011, 12:56:13 pm
Technically yesterday for me, different timezones and that.

I have to start the ball rolling.

That is true, but then you have to keep it rolling.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Supercharazad on May 19, 2011, 01:37:34 pm
Heliman: Who are your top two scumpicks?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Taricus on May 19, 2011, 01:58:02 pm
Supercharazad: You seem a bit on edge today, why?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Supercharazad on May 19, 2011, 02:05:17 pm
Supercharazad: You seem a bit on edge today, why?

What makes you think I'm on edge?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Vector on May 19, 2011, 02:07:12 pm
@Jim: Why yes, I did enjoy that rant!  Thank you.


Supercharazad: You seem a bit on edge today, why?

Excellent start.  Good man.  Keep going.  Go go go~!
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Taricus on May 19, 2011, 02:09:26 pm
Supercharazad: Your behavior. You're hiding something.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Think0028 on May 19, 2011, 04:53:35 pm
Wait, is the day over? Is it too late to ask for an extension and a votecount? 
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Jim Groovester on May 19, 2011, 04:55:26 pm
A votecount would be helpful right now.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Okami No Rei on May 19, 2011, 05:47:46 pm
Wait, is the day over? Is it too late to ask for an extension and a votecount? 

Apparently the day ended almost two hours ago.  I second the extension if it's not too late.  I need to catch up.

Sorry about the absence yesterday.   Family business came up.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: lordnincompoop on May 19, 2011, 06:19:21 pm
Sorry, everyone. With so much stuff suddenly popping up I'm having trouble coping.



Votecount:
Think0028 - 0 -
Supercharazard - 1 - Okami No Rei
Okami No Rei - 2 - Think0028, Taricus
Powder Miner - 2 - Toaster, Jim Groovester,

Taricus - 1 - Supercharazard,
Heliman - 1 - anzki4
anzki4 - 0 -
Jim Groovester - 1 -  Heliman
Toaster - 0 -

Not Voting - 1 -  Powder Miner,
No Lynch  - 0 -

Extend  - 2 - Think0028, Okami no Rei
Shorten  - 0 -



The Day has been modextended to Friday, 8PM GMT.

You need 3 to Extend and 5 to Shorten.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Jim Groovester on May 19, 2011, 06:22:43 pm
Powder Miner unvoted.

I think that's the only error.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Okami No Rei on May 19, 2011, 06:24:40 pm
In that case, I won't be able to post before the end of the day.  I get home from work, if I'm lucky, between 9 and 10pm GMT.

So tonight is it for me, unless we extend to the weekend.

Working on a comprehensive post.  I'll de-lurk if you ask any questions.

"Us vs Him" would be more appropriate, in this case.  I'm quite frustrated with his behaviour.  I second the call to Replace Taricus.

No, absolutely not. Not a fucking chance.

This is a Beginner's Game. If he's got issues with his play, then he's in the right place.

Who the fucking hell do you think you are to demand replacements of other players in a Beginner's Game?
Sorry.  You're right.  That was out of line.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: lordnincompoop on May 19, 2011, 06:25:18 pm
Powder Miner unvoted.

I think that's the only error.

Fux'd
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Think0028 on May 19, 2011, 06:43:58 pm
Okay, I'll unextend now that we have a mod extension and wait until tomorrow if I actually want an extension. I'll post more later, should be working right now.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Think0028 on May 19, 2011, 08:41:48 pm
So unless something changes, this will end in no lynch. That would be really bad.

Powder Miner: You seem extremely convinced that Jim is scum over him pushing you to attack Okami. Considering he wasn't telling you to vote Okami, only push him with more questions, why did you refuse to for so long? How is his vote an OMGUS when he clearly stated that he was voting for you because you weren't questioning Okami? You seemed to think just saying "Okami is suspicious" is sufficient and that you didn't need to do anything more. Was that what you were thinking? Why did you not want to formalize that into questions?

Okami: I posted some questions earlier, and I presume you'll see them and answer them in your upcoming wall of text.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Powder Miner on May 19, 2011, 08:49:18 pm
I don't really know about Jim anymore, but I refused because I wanted to wait for Okami to post something I could bite into instea of recycling arguments.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Think0028 on May 19, 2011, 09:06:05 pm
I don't really know about Jim anymore, but I refused because I wanted to wait for Okami to post something I could bite into instea of recycling arguments.

Really? Okami's been posting quite a lot, putting out a big wall of text every day except for yesterday and right when the game started, where he had multiple posts attacking Taricus. You couldn't find anything in there? We've thoroughly dissected his posts? Why were you hesitant to try?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Powder Miner on May 19, 2011, 09:32:00 pm
Hmmm? I've been gone at middle school. I only really kim what's happened when I'm gone, although I try to make it otherwise.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Jim Groovester on May 19, 2011, 09:32:56 pm
I don't really know about Jim anymore, but I refused because I wanted to wait for Okami to post something I could bite into instea of recycling arguments.

I'll quote Toaster about this:

This is a start, but the question is weak.  You should have enough content by now to be asking prying questions regarding statements the target has made, not offhand questions that could be dismissed with a simple "I've been busy."

There's definitely stuff to dig into. Worrying about recycling arguments is a pretty weak excuse to not ask probing questions.

You've never actually stated what about Okami No Rei you found suspicious. If you're worried about recycling arguments then you have to agree with all the other people who've spoken out on Okami No Rei about something.

I think you should list what you find suspicious.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Powder Miner on May 19, 2011, 09:36:27 pm
Well, first of all, I'm inagreement with you about how it's a bandwagon trap, and how he accuses anyone else who scumhunts or remotely comes close (anzki) of being scum, and that "two scum with flawless towngames" quote that Heliman had noticed.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Jim Groovester on May 19, 2011, 09:51:27 pm
I'd like a little more detail.

...and that "two scum with flawless towngames" quote that Heliman had noticed.

Okami No Rei explained that. Didn't you notice?

Or are you not keeping track of what you're supposed to be suspecting him for?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Powder Miner on May 19, 2011, 10:34:58 pm
He did explain it? Where?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Think0028 on May 19, 2011, 10:39:09 pm
He did explain it? Where?

For most people, this'd be a cue to go look and find it. However, I'm feeling nice:
I don't know that, but I would be very concerned about scum getting one-on-one coaching from him, and it's the worst case scenario I'm assuming in any theories around his being scum.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Okami No Rei on May 19, 2011, 10:42:49 pm
I did expect things to happen in the 18 hours I was gone.  On my return, I analyzed what had happened.  The bandwagon did materialize, and one of the members looked like scum.  I am now interrogating him.  Had the bandwagon never materialized, which is what I assume you meant, I'd have come up with a new plan, or revised my old one to work in the new environment.

You got Supercharazad, the (now second) jumpiest player I've ever seen on this forums, and Powder Miner, who as we now see is extremely excitable, to actually vote. I'd count that as a failed bandwagon.
My accusations of Supercharazad are independent of his jumpiness, and I also found Anzki.  Deliberately failed bandwagon.  Successful scumhunt.

Quote from: Okami no Rei
Because Taricus (FAKEDIT: And now Powder Miner, I suppose) is the easy lynch right now.  The ones that hopped on the bandwagon aren't so easy as you seem to think, since everyone's looking at them as victims right now.  I'm pushing for one of them because I think one of them is scum, not because he's easy.
They're looking at them as victims because you called them out as the culmination to a half-assed plot you grabbed to try and save yourself.
To save myself?  No.  I already said I did it to salvage a day of failed scumhunting.

The easy lynches are the guy you were pushing for and the guy who flipped out in the middle of your posting, so you can hardly say that you were good and noble and virtuous not pushing for Powder Miner.
His flipout looked like honest panic rather than scum panic to me at the time that I posted.  I wouldn't say I was good, noble, and virtuous as much as tired, confused, and not ready to deal with this right now.

You're voting for a guy who agreed with you when you were supposedly acting as town. This is all just you sowing suspicion now that your attempts to take someone down are failing.
I'm voting for the guy who I believe to be semi-experienced jumping onto a bandwagon and then lying about the reasons he gave for jumping on, and the guy who more or less subtly supported said bandwagon.  These two are the first people I've seriously pushed to take down, and I don't see it failing yet.

Quote from: Okami no Rei
Taricus is OMGUSing, which is a nulltell like everything else about him. Heliman and Think are following Jim as the Voice of Authority and Reason.  Not a scumtell, since he's an IC.  Jim's is the only vote that really means anything.  At least one is scum?  Very likely if I'm wrong about Super and Anzki.  Which one is the question.  I'm still working out Jim's game.  I'd lay even odds that Think or Heliman is scum.  Are both?  Taricus and Think are the only possibility that springs to mind.  Heliman and Jim are a longshot.  None of the other combinations work.

Lumping me in with the guy who refuses to say anything, thanks. So I'm possibly scum because I agree with two other people (and one who's OMGUSing you, but he's not relevant to this conversation)? This is all just sowing doubt to distract us from the issues at hand.
I'm not 'sowing doubt' as you say.  I'm making a prediction based on my grasp of the current situation combined with the restrictions Toaster placed on the request.

You tried to lead an attack on someone, it failed, and now you're trying to use that attack to implicate other people. You aren't scumhunting. You're scum.
I tried to press someone, and got stonewalled, so I pressed harder and am now hunting people based on their reactions to my actions.

If Okami's latest post is true, and he saw Jim's post before quitting, he knew even back then that it was instantly called out as not helpful for town and didn't explain himself then. Okami, why do you still think your plan has merit? Why did you go through with it after Jim called you out?
Jim didn't call me out on my plan, he called me out on pressing Taricus.  Pressing Taricus alone had no further merit.  That's why I decided to press harder and trawl for reactions.  All Jim calling me out on it did was push forward my timeline.  I still believe my plan has merit because I still believe it caught scum.

Why are you so certain that of the two people who voted with you, a scum was one of them?
Because he slipped up.

If we believe you that you were pressing Taricus to get him to play better, why don't we believe Supercharazad, who repeatedly pressed Taricus on being a better player?
Your comparison of us lies on faulty logic.  If I made you a sandwich out of peanut butter and jelly, and he made you a sandwich out of peanut butter and cyanide, would we be equally at fault because we both used peanut butter?
Pressing him on being a better player is irrelevant.  I attacked Taricus to find scum, and failing that, used my attack to find scum.  He attacked Taricus, and lied in the course of justifying his attack.


Okami No Rei, why Supercharazad over anzki4? You've accused both of them of similar things, and in my mind, what anzki4 did was worse, what with parroting Supercharazad over broken quote tags. I think your points about Supercharazad parroting you are, quite frankly, crap, and calling him a liar when it could just as easily be that he saw the same things about Taricus that you did is stretching it pretty far. anzki4, though, you've got something there, something I can totally see, so why's your vote on Supercharazad?
Because I pieced the post together chronologically, and I'd already written my vote onto him when I got to anzki.  Both deserve it.

Why didn't you question anzki about parroting, if it's so awful?

That seems inconsistent. And lies? Yeah, right. That's hyberpole to make what Supercharazad did seem scummier than what it actually was. In other words, that was disingenuous and you should be lynched for it.
One lie.  Claiming his arguments were his own and not that of others.


So, basically, you're saying I shouldn't play because other people get to see their posts before me?
Every single post I provided as evidence against your claim was posted prior to your own.  You're saying you didn't see them?  They were there for you to read.  I can understand missing one, but all of them?

So you don't read everything, but you consistently answer questions and respond to answers to yours.  Assuming you're telling the truth here, it looks to me like you're just skimming for your name and then questioning/responding to whatever pops up.  Why be so selective?  I don't think you care about scumhunting so much as keeping up appearances.

You think I should stay perfectly silent because my arguments have been used once before?
No, but when your sole justification for speaking out is clearly a fabrication, that tends to set off a few alarm bells.


So, Okami. Why would you not scumhunt directly?
I was scumhunting directly, and I was also scumhunting indirectly.  I've been attacking on multiple fronts the entire game.

Why would you have to weave an elaborate supposed bandwagon trap,
Because I can.

and end up using it to blame someone of being scum, namely everyone else who scumhunts Taricus.
Get your facts straight.  I was looking for reactions.  Joining the bandwagon is a reaction.  The manner in which they joined the bandwagon is the important part, and the part I'm using against people.

And then why would you have to defend Taricus?
I'm not defending him.  Please provide evidence.

Why not just go out and scumhunt.
Because it's more Fun this way.

That was easier than expected.
Keep it up, then.

Okami, who you're trying to get lynched?
Supercharazad and anzki4

So..... Okami, why haven't you been posting?
I've been busy.

@Okami
Heliman now.  He's already parroting Jim.  Presciently, even.
Excuse me? Where and how?

I was thinking of these two posts:
@Think
Okami. Why? WHY??? Ok I'll tell you.

@Okami
I'm not falling for this load of "Oh no I was just pretending to hunt newbie scum the others scum hunting this guy are the real scum!" Bullshit. This entire charade could easily be an  attempt to quell the players suspicious of you for going after the weakest link. It doesn't automatically justify a sham of a scum hunt followed by a planned lurk, it just introduces WIFOM into the equation.
Since you're clearly not a beginner, I'll tell you straight.

That plan is stupid.

You'll just as easily catch inexperienced town as you will inexperienced scum. And since the game's full of inexperienced players, how actually worthwhile are the results you got?

To everybody else who isn't a beginner: Don't even think about trying to be clever. I don't want to see any clever plans or carefully laid traps or anything like that. If I have anything to say about it you'll learn a decent, basic, fundamental town game first, and then after you've got the basics down, then you can think about being clever.

Everybody got that? NO CLEVER PLANS. Good fundamental scumhunting habits are vastly more important.
It's not a perfect comparison, but it did allow me to use the word parrot.

Anzki - If you're still there, the day isn't over yet.  Let's hear some answers.

Powder Miner - You're panicking, dropping WIFOM like candy, and making excuses.  Why shouldn't I drop everything and vote you right now?  If you think I'm scum, why aren't you voting me?  What happened to your suspicions of Taricus?

Heliman and Powder Miner - Is Jim scum, or not, and why?

Toaster  - If no one else posted for the rest of the day, would you leave your vote on Powder Miner or switch it to me?

FAKEDIT:
He did explain it? Where?

Here:
Okami no Rei, who would you be most afraid of if they were scum?
Jim - Because then there'd be two scum running around with flawless towngames.
*does a spittake*
What? Two flawless scum? how could you possibly know that?
I don't know that, but I would be very concerned about scum getting one-on-one coaching from him, and it's the worst case scenario I'm assuming in any theories around his being scum.

Okami:
Okami no Rei, who would you be most afraid of if they were scum?
Jim - Because then there'd be two scum running around with flawless towngames.

So who's the other scum with a flawless towngame?
Powder Miner was my choice up until this post:
Not posting, just privately. Shoulda made it clear. Middle school keeps me from posting most of the day. And I meant before I NOTICED he made the point. Never mind. Anyway, I'm keeping my vote on Tarius because he's still scummy seeming and I'm afraid I'll get accused of bandwagoning if I vote for Okami.

Heliman now.  He's already parroting Jim.  Presciently, even.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Vector on May 19, 2011, 10:45:10 pm
Better, ONR, but you'll play better once you've taken the arrogance down a peg.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Think0028 on May 19, 2011, 11:14:43 pm
... damn.

As much as I'd hate to be "the one that always does what Jim does", I'm not quite willing to lynch you now, Okami. I doubt your character, but I don't think that your actions imply that you're scum. To me they imply that you're extremely overconfident in yourself. The question to me is if your confidence comes from your personality or you knowing everything there is to know because you're scum... and I can't answer that.

Unvote. Powder Miner. While I can forgive you for panicking at having your first vote on you (I felt much the same way when Toaster first voted me), I can't forgive you for your failure to press Okami, you exploding at whoever pushes you, and your trouble reading the posts of the guy you say you 'suspect'. I missed this choice quote earlier:

And you're right. I AM waiting for Okami to post, because I haven't been paying attention to his posts.
You couldn't take the time to sit down and read his posts? If you're really a townie, why couldn't you just wait a little while to respond and formulate a good response? I think the reason you couldn't wait was because you're scum and you wanted your reputation cleared as soon as possible.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Toaster on May 19, 2011, 11:20:31 pm
Okami:
Toaster  - If no one else posted for the rest of the day, would you leave your vote on Powder Miner or switch it to me?

Nasty choice.  I'm pretty convinced Powder is scum, and you ping only faintly on my scumdar.  No-lynch helps no one, so I probably would switch as a last resort.

I assume you'd switch to Powder to prevent a no-lynch?

PPE:  Well, there went the tie.  The answer and question remain.


Super:  I'm not seeing enough content out of you to satisfy me.  Can you restate your cases on your top two or three picks?


Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Jim Groovester on May 19, 2011, 11:27:42 pm
Powder Miner! Hey! Look! Okami No Rei posted! When are you going to press him?!?! He's right there! Do it! What are you waiting for?!

Okami No Rei, why Supercharazad over anzki4? You've accused both of them of similar things, and in my mind, what anzki4 did was worse, what with parroting Supercharazad over broken quote tags. I think your points about Supercharazad parroting you are, quite frankly, crap, and calling him a liar when it could just as easily be that he saw the same things about Taricus that you did is stretching it pretty far. anzki4, though, you've got something there, something I can totally see, so why's your vote on Supercharazad?
Because I pieced the post together chronologically, and I'd already written my vote onto him when I got to anzki.  Both deserve it.

Why didn't you question anzki about parroting, if it's so awful?

So, what? You can't go back and edit your post halfway through?

I asked you why Supercharazad was more worthy of a vote, and your answer is that you put red text around Supercharazad's name first?

That's weak.

I didn't question anzki4 about it because 1) I'm not obsessed with calling everybody a parrot like you are, and 2) it looked like a noob mistake.

That seems inconsistent. And lies? Yeah, right. That's hyberpole to make what Supercharazad did seem scummier than what it actually was. In other words, that was disingenuous and you should be lynched for it.
One lie.  Claiming his arguments were his own and not that of others.

Hokay, bro. Sure thing.

Powder Miner - You're panicking, dropping WIFOM like candy, and making excuses.  Why shouldn't I drop everything and vote you right now?

Good question. Why aren't you? Those are several very good reasons to vote for somebody. What's holding you back? You're not partners with him, are you?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Okami No Rei on May 20, 2011, 12:25:23 am
Okami:
Toaster  - If no one else posted for the rest of the day, would you leave your vote on Powder Miner or switch it to me?

Nasty choice.  I'm pretty convinced Powder is scum, and you ping only faintly on my scumdar.  No-lynch helps no one, so I probably would switch as a last resort.

I assume you'd switch to Powder to prevent a no-lynch?
Ideally, yes.   However, the choice for me is less clear cut, since I won't be around at days end.

Okami No Rei, why Supercharazad over anzki4? You've accused both of them of similar things, and in my mind, what anzki4 did was worse, what with parroting Supercharazad over broken quote tags. I think your points about Supercharazad parroting you are, quite frankly, crap, and calling him a liar when it could just as easily be that he saw the same things about Taricus that you did is stretching it pretty far. anzki4, though, you've got something there, something I can totally see, so why's your vote on Supercharazad?
Because I pieced the post together chronologically, and I'd already written my vote onto him when I got to anzki.  Both deserve it.

Why didn't you question anzki about parroting, if it's so awful?

So, what? You can't go back and edit your post halfway through?
Sure can.  If it's important, I do.

I asked you why Supercharazad was more worthy of a vote, and your answer is that you put red text around Supercharazad's name first?

That's weak.
I didn't, and still don't, have any reason to suspect one over the other.

I didn't question anzki4 about it because 1) I'm not obsessed with calling everybody a parrot like you are, and 2) it looked like a noob mistake.
Didn't you just say
in my mind, what anzki4 did was worse, what with parroting Supercharazad over broken quote tags. I think your points about Supercharazad parroting you
You're appear to be more obsessed with the parroting than I am, and seem to think anzki's parroting was important.

So, is it or isn't it? 

I've never been attacking Supercharazad for parroting.  I've never been attacking anzki for parroting.  Supercharazad lied about his reasons for voting Taricus.  anzki is pushing bandwagons on me and Taricus without getting his hands dirty.  Both are scum.

Powder Miner - You're panicking, dropping WIFOM like candy, and making excuses.  Why shouldn't I drop everything and vote you right now?

Good question. Why aren't you? Those are several very good reasons to vote for somebody. What's holding you back? You're not partners with him, are you?
I don't think he's scum, and this close to day end, I'm not going to put my vote on him just to apply pressure.  I'm voting to lynch.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Okami No Rei on May 20, 2011, 12:33:01 am
Goodnight.  I'll see y'all on the other side.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Think0028 on May 20, 2011, 01:10:18 am
Votecount:
Supercharazard - 1 - Okami No Rei

This has been bugging me and a lot of people keep making this mistake: It's SupercharaZAD. There's no R in the last syllable. More like Scherezad than Charizard.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Think0028 on May 20, 2011, 01:36:32 am
Actually, eff if I know the proper romanization. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scheherazade (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scheherazade). Still, the point stands.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Jim Groovester on May 20, 2011, 01:43:49 am
I asked you why Supercharazad was more worthy of a vote, and your answer is that you put red text around Supercharazad's name first?

That's weak.
I didn't, and still don't, have any reason to suspect one over the other.

Why not?

This is what I keep asking you and you keep on giving me non-answers. What can I conclude? I guess that you don't have an answer.

Fine enough by me.

I didn't question anzki4 about it because 1) I'm not obsessed with calling everybody a parrot like you are, and 2) it looked like a noob mistake.
Didn't you just say
in my mind, what anzki4 did was worse, what with parroting Supercharazad over broken quote tags. I think your points about Supercharazad parroting you
You're appear to be more obsessed with the parroting than I am, and seem to think anzki's parroting was important.

So, is it or isn't it? 

Fantastic misrepresentation.

I asked you the question based on the criteria you were attacking people with. Namely, you were attacking Supercharazad for parroting your arguments against Taricus, but you completely ignored it when anzki4 did an arguably worse example of parroting when he copied Supercharazad's attack on Heliman's broken quote tags. I wanted to know why you were being inconsistent.

I don't really care about parroting and have never made a big deal about it.

I've never been attacking anzki for parroting.

I KNOW.

The point I'm making is, why not? You attacked Heliman for parroting. You attacked Supercharazad for parroting. Every other time somebody used a vaguely familiar argument you pointed out that they were parroting.

Why not anzki4? You noticed right when he did it:

Something making you nervous, Heliman?? What make's you so distracted arguing against yourself?
And now you're trying to cover your tracks after Jim called you out on not directly attacking me, by going after Heliman over what? A post that's clearly mangled only due to some quote tagging errors?  You're really reaching now.

This was right after Supercharazad attacked Heliman for the exact same thing. I find it hard to believe you'd miss it with your highly developed parrotometer, especially after quoting it, so the question still is, why are you being inconsistent?

I've never been attacking Supercharazad for parroting.

Really.

Supercharazad - You're rehashing my arguments without providing original material, you were the third vote on the bandwagon, and judging by your post history, you've been around long enough to know better.  Explain yourself.

So basically you just lied.

That's not even a wild accusation designed to show hostility or get you on edge. The only reason you called Supercharazad a liar is because you didn't believe his explanation about the arguments he used. So you pretending that your attack had nothing to do with Supercharazad parroting is completely dishonest and disingenuous.

That makes you perfectly lynchable by your own standards.

Powder Miner - You're panicking, dropping WIFOM like candy, and making excuses.  Why shouldn't I drop everything and vote you right now?

Good question. Why aren't you? Those are several very good reasons to vote for somebody. What's holding you back? You're not partners with him, are you?
I don't think he's scum, and this close to day end, I'm not going to put my vote on him just to apply pressure.  I'm voting to lynch.

Why not?

I'd expect a more developed opinion about Powder Miner from you. Your only real mention of him is from when he first flipped the fuck out because of Toaster's light pressure on him. What do you think about his more recent fuck out flipping where he thrashed wildly around and accused everybody who dared pressure him into doing what he says?

What do you think about how he won't even get anywhere near you? He's proven he can attack people pretty seriously when he wants to, but what do you think about you getting the ten foot pole treatment?

And you don't think he's scum.

Mind-boggling.

Or just simple dishonesty.

You know what? I pretty much find everything about you difficult to believe. Unvote Powder Miner, Okami No Rei.

I'll change my vote if I have to to avoid a no-lynch.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Heliman on May 20, 2011, 03:28:56 am
God, it's too late at night for me to be posting this, I need to sleep but IDK if I'll have time tomorrow.

You can use almost any fact to aggrandize the truth. Fact+Suitably Ridiculous Summation= Aggrandized truth, Case in point, the last sentence of my first paragraph would be one such aggrandized truth.

What about: "So I was right: You were just pressuring Taricus for show."

I mean, it meets your criteria.

Fact: Okami No Rei was pressuring Taricus.
Suitably Ridiculous Summation: He was doing it for show.

But you lied in saying it, If you were to say "So I'm right then? You were just pressing Taricus for show all along?" It would keep the wild accusation without the lie. Yes it's as easy as using question marks in the right place which is one half of why I'm dropping this bit. According to both the ICs, dishonesty in reaction test is apparently an OK thing to do, which more or less invalidates both this and the WIFOM, because throwing something like that out there would be pointless if the accused action was actually a town thing to do.

Also you seem to be vague about "If it worked." You know full well that Okami wasn't going to cave to pressure, what were you expecting?

What are you expecting with your aggrandized truth in your first paragraph? You can't be expecting much. But you did it anyway. Why? I bet you thought it wouldn't hurt.

Same deal.
Incorrect. I made that sentence with the sole intention of using it as an example in the next paragraph. According to what I have learned, a reaction test has no weight if caught out in the open, so pointing it out as a reaction test in my the very next paragraph would be a tad pointless if such a test was my intention.


You're mincing words here.  I'd be lying if I said I hadn't minced words in the past, but I really think you've got nothing here.  Yes, you should be open, but you can't tell someone why you're asking them a question if you're looking for a specific reaction out of them.
But Jim didn't look for a specific reaction, did he? I'm pretty sure he just said that it wouldn't hurt.


Just so I'm clear at what's going on in your head, who is your #2 pick and why?
Well now that were on that, my first pick is Okami once again, now that he's finally posted. Yes like Powder I was waiting for him to show up but I made sure I didn't twiddle my thumbs in the meantime. But since he's my first scum pick now, the second one is Powder, because of those outbursts of his. It doesn't look like how the classic newbie town would panic to me, but that's just opinion.

So anyhow, @Okami.

My accusations of Supercharazad are independent of his jumpiness, and I also found Anzki.  Deliberately failed bandwagon.  Successful scumhunt.
Scumhunts aren't successful until something flips scum, you have to convince town to do that. Considering the votes at the moment, you haven't been doing much of that.

Quote from: Okami no Rei
Because Taricus (FAKEDIT: And now Powder Miner, I suppose) is the easy lynch right now.  The ones that hopped on the bandwagon aren't so easy as you seem to think, since everyone's looking at them as victims right now.  I'm pushing for one of them because I think one of them is scum, not because he's easy.
They're looking at them as victims because you called them out as the culmination to a half-assed plot you grabbed to try and save yourself.
To save myself?  No.  I already said I did it to salvage a day of failed scumhunting.
Oh and were supposed to believe everything you say then? Yeah, right.


@Okami
Heliman now.  He's already parroting Jim.  Presciently, even.
Excuse me? Where and how?

I was thinking of these two posts:
@Think
Okami. Why? WHY??? Ok I'll tell you.

@Okami
I'm not falling for this load of "Oh no I was just pretending to hunt newbie scum the others scum hunting this guy are the real scum!" Bullshit. This entire charade could easily be an  attempt to quell the players suspicious of you for going after the weakest link. It doesn't automatically justify a sham of a scum hunt followed by a planned lurk, it just introduces WIFOM into the equation.
Since you're clearly not a beginner, I'll tell you straight.

That plan is stupid.

You'll just as easily catch inexperienced town as you will inexperienced scum. And since the game's full of inexperienced players, how actually worthwhile are the results you got?

To everybody else who isn't a beginner: Don't even think about trying to be clever. I don't want to see any clever plans or carefully laid traps or anything like that. If I have anything to say about it you'll learn a decent, basic, fundamental town game first, and then after you've got the basics down, then you can think about being clever.

Everybody got that? NO CLEVER PLANS. Good fundamental scumhunting habits are vastly more important.
It's not a perfect comparison, but it did allow me to use the word parrot.
No it doesn't allow for calling me a parrot. My post in this instance came before Jim's. I can't be called for parroting things that haven't been said yet. This is a pretty weak gambit to try and group me together with Jim and Think (at least I think it was Think) just so our points seem less important.
Vote:Okami



Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Jim Groovester on May 20, 2011, 03:46:42 am
No no no.

You see, you were parroting me. Presciently. That's what Okami No Rei said. Exactly what he said.

As in, you knew what I was going to say before it, so you said something along the same lines because you agreed with what I said before I said it.

Makes sense, right?

Just thought I should point that out, since Okami No Rei is going to be completely unable to defend himself.

Because he'll be gone. Not because his arguments are terrible.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Powder Miner on May 20, 2011, 09:11:42 am
I'll admit that I'm panicky as heck, and was making a few excuses in my feeble attempt to defend against Jim.
But WIFOM? What WIFOM? I have no circular reasoning, anf you really shouldn't try to just drop the word WIFOM in there to try to get me on a false charge. IT's worse than what I was just doing.

Also, why are you trying to lynch anzki when he didn't even get on the bandwagon, and has only been questioned a little bit?

And you had defendedTaricu earlier- You were saying something around that his inactivity was justified, but it was quite a few pages ago.

Short before-school post. I hate timezones.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Toaster on May 20, 2011, 01:01:01 pm
Powder:
I'll admit that I'm panicky as heck, and was making a few excuses in my feeble attempt to defend against Jim.
But WIFOM? What WIFOM? I have no circular reasoning, anf you really shouldn't try to just drop the word WIFOM in there to try to get me on a false charge. IT's worse than what I was just doing.

Also, why are you trying to lynch anzki when he didn't even get on the bandwagon, and has only been questioned a little bit?

Any sort of attack that uses the phrase "it's worse than what I was just doing" loses all potency.  However, you are at least starting to ask better questions.   I still think you're scum, though.


Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Supercharazad on May 20, 2011, 01:49:17 pm


Super:  I'm not seeing enough content out of you to satisfy me.  Can you restate your cases on your top two or three picks?


My picks are as follows:

1: Taricus. For being passive, passive lurking, I happen to REALLY hate his attitude, a REALLY vague RV.
2: Okami. For defending Taricus (once) and trying to get me lynched, without actually scumhunting.



I'll get a content filled post in later tonight, probably.

Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Jim Groovester on May 20, 2011, 02:01:07 pm
Taricus, anything to add before the day ends?

You've done exactly nothing this whole game.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Taricus on May 20, 2011, 02:10:59 pm
Nothing unless asking people on whoever they think will be nightkilled is a reasonable question to ask.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Jim Groovester on May 20, 2011, 02:14:39 pm
No, it isn't.

So there's a whole day of play to look over and you don't have anything to say.

Are you actually interested in playing this game at all?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Taricus on May 20, 2011, 02:17:05 pm
Well, I don't know what questions to ask, so could you give me a few pointers? (If you already have, mind linking me back to it?0
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Toaster on May 20, 2011, 02:23:02 pm
It's not, because it won't get any useful information.  Before you ask, asking tomorrow about why someone thinks X person got night killed isn't, either.

The night kill target provides little to no information as to who the scum is.  You can't back-calculate who the killer is by the target, because you don't know what motives the scum used to make their choice.  Example motives:

"PlayerA is the best scumhunter- kill him."
"PlayerB thinks I'm scum- kill him."
"PlayerC thinks PlayerD is scum- kill him."
"PlayerE might be a power role- kill him."
"I don't know who to kill, so I used random.org and got PlayerF- kill him."

You have no idea which of those or any of the other innumerable reasons the scum team used, so trying to read into the kill will get you nowhere.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Toaster on May 20, 2011, 02:25:29 pm
Missed your post, so I'm going to give you a short and long answer.

Short answer:  Ask about anything you find suspicious.

Long answer:  Read Dakrian's guide to scum hunting (below)

Spoiler: This is good stuff. (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Jim Groovester on May 20, 2011, 02:27:46 pm
Well, I don't know what questions to ask, so could you give me a few pointers? (If you already have, mind linking me back to it?0

Perhaps I should clarify.

If you are interested in playing the game, then you should put in an effort to actually play it.

If you're not, you should request a replacement. I don't care if you do. I won't be offended. Mafia isn't a game for everyone.

What will offend me is if you're just stringing me along and giving me the runaround because you don't have it in you to tell me you don't want to play.

You've been getting tons of good advice that you've completely ignored. So you asking for more when there's already a wealth available to you is completely absurd.

Go read through the thread. Read all the advice. Look at other people's play, and the sorts of questions they ask. Copy them if you have to. Get to work.

You can't be spoon fed how to play mafia. You actually have to put in an ounce of effort and figure out what works and what doesn't for yourself.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Supercharazad on May 20, 2011, 02:39:18 pm
Taricus, you bother me.FoS Taricus.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Toaster on May 20, 2011, 02:40:03 pm
Taricus, you bother me.FoS Taricus.

Why?


Yes, you have to say why, even if it's "obvious."
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Jim Groovester on May 20, 2011, 02:40:36 pm
Aren't you voting him?

That's pretty redundant to FoS somebody after you've voted him.

And Toaster beat me to the why.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Toaster on May 20, 2011, 02:42:03 pm
Oh hey, you are voting him.  What was the point of that FoS then?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Supercharazad on May 20, 2011, 02:45:37 pm
Taricus, you bother me.FoS Taricus.

Why?


Yes, you have to say why, even if it's "obvious."

Because he bothers me.
Why are you trying to defend him, Toaster?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: Jim Groovester on May 20, 2011, 02:52:37 pm
Taricus, you bother me.FoS Taricus.

Why?


Yes, you have to say why, even if it's "obvious."

Because he bothers me.
Why are you trying to defend him, Toaster?

Lesson time!

You shouldn't assume that because somebody is asking you about your suspicions of another player, that they are defending said player.

More likely, they have an issue with you.

Turning around and suspecting them is not the proper response. You look scummy and jumpy doing that. You should, instead, just answer their question. Hopefully, your answer is good, but any answer is better than suspecting them for doing something completely innocent.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: 1 replace, please!~
Post by: lordnincompoop on May 20, 2011, 03:04:10 pm
Day 1 Has Ended!
Okami no Rei has been Lynched!
He was an Assassin (Mafia)!



Votecount:
Think0028 - 0 -
Supercharazard - 1 - Okami No Rei
Okami No Rei - 3 - Taricus, Jim Groovester, Heliman
Powder Miner - 2 - Toaster, Think0028,
Taricus - 1 - Supercharazard,
Heliman - 1 - breadbocks
breadbocks - 0 -
Jim Groovester - 0 -
Toaster - 0 -

Not Voting - 1 -  Powder Miner,
No Lynch  - 0 -

Extend  - 2 - Okami no Rei
Shorten  - 0 -



The King surveyed the table of votes as the nobles spoke. And when the church bell rang outside, the nobles were restrained.

"Okami, Lord of Rei, you have been declared guilty by your peers gathered here today. Any final words?"

"Yes! The revolution will never die, you swine! You may kill the men, but you can never kill the idea! We will be martyrs, haunting you for the remainder of your days and outstripping your legacy tenfold! Vive la Re-"

He was cut short as a longsword was driven into his chest, and with a short gasp he collapsed onto the floor, dead.

"You have done well. Now that it is night, you may retire to the chambers that I have prepared for you. We will meet again come dawn."

The guards show you to your room, and you see the king stumble into the royal bedroom.



Okami no Rei has been lynched. He was an Assassin (Mafia).
breadbocks has replaced anzki4.



Night 1 has begun!
Scum & power roles, send in your night actions.

The Night will end Monday, 8PM GMT.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: The Birth of Great Nations
Post by: lordnincompoop on May 25, 2011, 04:07:10 pm
Day 1 Has Begun!
Heliman has been Nightkilled!
He was a Nobleman (Town).



Votecount:
Think0028 - 0 -
Supercharazard - 0 -
Powder Miner - 0 -
Taricus - 0 -
breadbocks - 0 -
Jim Groovester - 0 -
Toaster - 0 -

Not Voting - 0 -
No Lynch  - 0 -

Extend  - 0 -
Shorten  - 0 -



You all wake up to a red dawn, noticing first the pale green body on the floor swollen beyond recognition. Only by the clothes do you manage to identify the corpse as that of Heliman, Earl Green.

"The assassins have taken another life for their twisted cause. But as we take an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth, so shall we take one of their lives for this honourable man now lost."

"You may begin."



The Day will end Friday, 8PM GMT.

You need 3 to Extend and 5 to Shorten.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [5/7, 2/2]: D2 - The Law of Retaliation
Post by: Think0028 on May 25, 2011, 04:17:20 pm
Powder Miner. Not only was your reaction to pressure extremely suspicious, the fact that your panic came from being pressed to question Okami gives me very good reason to believe you're scum. Why was the only question you generated for Okami so weak? I suspect it was because you were trying to appease Jim so that he'd get off your back without putting pressure on your scumbuddy.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [5/7, 2/2]: D2 - The Law of Retaliation
Post by: Toaster on May 25, 2011, 05:12:03 pm
Powder:  Who are your top two suspects now?  Why?


Super:  Have your suspicions changed any?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [5/7, 2/2]: D2 - The Law of Retaliation
Post by: Toaster on May 25, 2011, 05:14:00 pm
Also, IC note:

Well done!  Lynching scum on D1 is an accomplishment.  That has put the last scum on the defensive.

You can now read back on Okami's posts to see which of his interactions seem forced or unnatural in an attempt to dig out clues as to his scumbuddy might be.  Also look back on how everyone interacted with him to look for slips.

More later, but I'm tight for time.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [5/7, 2/2]: D2 - The Law of Retaliation
Post by: breadbocks on May 25, 2011, 05:45:40 pm
So, Toaster, why do you think Powder is suspicious enough to earn a second vote this early into D2? Think clearly stated why he thought Powder was suspicious, but you just look like you're looking for an excuse to bandwagon with "Who are your top two suspects now? Why?".
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [5/7, 2/2]: D2 - The Law of Retaliation
Post by: Jim Groovester on May 25, 2011, 05:52:43 pm
Huh, my Internet was gone for a few days. Guess I didn't miss anything.

Anyways, yes, listen to Toaster. He's exactly right about the situation.

Scum's worst enemies are themselves first, then their teammates, then finally, clever town, so scan through Okami No Rei's interactions with every other player, and every player's interactions with Okami No Rei, for clues. Interactions that look forced, ones that completely ignore another player (unless pressed), and trying to stay arm's length away, are generally good indications.

Remember, though, looking for interactions guides your search. You generally can't lynch on them on their own (unless it's really, really blatant). You still need good, solid evidence of a player's own individual scumminess to lynch him. It does give you material to use to dig into another player, at the very least. Material you should use.

Powder Miner, you refused to attack Okami No Rei when pressed, even though you claimed you suspected him, and he claimed you were town with barely any reason to think so. Combined with your flipping out at anybody who pressed you, you're looking very scummy.

There's pretty much nothing you can say to make me think you're not scum, but you're welcome to try.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [5/7, 2/2]: D2 - The Law of Retaliation
Post by: Powder Miner on May 25, 2011, 05:58:36 pm
I didn't refuse to press. I was waiting for another post from him because I hate recycling other people's ideas- as I've had to mention several times, but which has been repeatedly ignored by you, Think.
And wait, he claimed I was town? I didn't really notice that. Where, please? The only time he mention me-at least as far as I can see. is in his bandwagon trap, and not to call me town.
And Think, my panis in no way came from having to pressure Okami. If you'll read my posts, I had started panicking since Toaster had voted me.
The question I had made was weak because I was trying to get Okami to psot so I could actually make some new points.

And Toaster, I think my top two suspicions would be Supercharazad, because of his lack of much posting. Probably if he hadn't been waiting for a replace, it would have been anzki for the same reason. But he HAS been waiting for a replacement.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [5/7, 2/2]: D2 - The Law of Retaliation
Post by: Powder Miner on May 25, 2011, 05:59:47 pm
Oh, and Supercharazad's random attacks on Taricus, with the only reasoning being: "Hiding something?" and "You bother me.", although the second one was only a FoS
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [5/7, 2/2]: D2 - The Law of Retaliation
Post by: Heliman on May 25, 2011, 06:45:50 pm
Et tu, assassin assholes? Then fall! Heliman!
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [5/7, 2/2]: D2 - The Law of Retaliation
Post by: Powder Miner on May 25, 2011, 06:54:37 pm
I think you mean !@#hole. One died :D
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [5/7, 2/2]: D2 - The Law of Retaliation
Post by: breadbocks on May 25, 2011, 07:00:09 pm
Powder, way to dodge Toaster's question. He asked for TWO, not one and one that you would have picked, had I not been there.

Off topic:
Et tu, assassin assholes? Then fall! Heliman!
Ah, gotta love the "Bah" post. Always interesting to see what people say. And on the same vein of death, LNCP, did you remember to give the lynchee(s) the deadchat link?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [5/7, 2/2]: D2 - The Law of Retaliation
Post by: Powder Miner on May 25, 2011, 07:01:36 pm
Breadbocks, I don't really HAVE another one. I answered my question to the best of my abilities. And answering it, even if not exactly, isn't dodging it.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [5/7, 2/2]: D2 - The Law of Retaliation
Post by: Okami No Rei on May 25, 2011, 07:05:14 pm
Valar morghulis.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [5/7, 2/2]: D2 - The Law of Retaliation
Post by: Jim Groovester on May 25, 2011, 08:04:27 pm
I didn't refuse to press. I was waiting for another post from him because I hate recycling other people's ideas- as I've had to mention several times, but which has been repeatedly ignored by you, Think.
And wait, he claimed I was town? I didn't really notice that. Where, please? The only time he mention me-at least as far as I can see. is in his bandwagon trap, and not to call me town.

If you didn't notice you should pay closer attention.

I don't think he's scum, and this close to day end, I'm not going to put my vote on him just to apply pressure.  I'm voting to lynch.

Your excuses for why you're not really scumhunting don't really matter since you're repeating the same pattern today.

If you suspect Supercharazad, ask him some questions.

Mentioning your suspicions while you're on the spot doesn't really mean anything. You still have to do something with them if you actually want to make it through to the end of the day without your neck in the noose.

Taricus, are you still in this game?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [5/7, 2/2]: D2 - The Law of Retaliation
Post by: Powder Miner on May 25, 2011, 08:10:53 pm
OK then, but it doesn't really matter if I get lynched as long as town wins. So let's get cracking.
So, supercharazad, do you have any reasoning other than "Hiding something?" and "You bother me", or are you going to bandwagon and OMGUD all day long?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [5/7, 2/2]: D2 - The Law of Retaliation
Post by: Taricus on May 25, 2011, 08:15:35 pm
Yeah, My schedule is a bit hectic at the moment though...
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [5/7, 2/2]: D2 - The Law of Retaliation
Post by: Jim Groovester on May 25, 2011, 08:27:24 pm
So you've got an afternoon to play RTDs and other Forum games but not a moment to spare for mafia.

Right.

Sure.

Hectic.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [5/7, 2/2]: D2 - The Law of Retaliation
Post by: Toaster on May 25, 2011, 08:30:26 pm
I need to study Okami's interactions to see what can be gleaned from them, but here's this first.   More will come later.

Breadbocks:
So, Toaster, why do you think Powder is suspicious enough to earn a second vote this early into D2? Think clearly stated why he thought Powder was suspicious, but you just look like you're looking for an excuse to bandwagon with "Who are your top two suspects now? Why?".

The same reason I thought him suspicious enough to vote yesterday.  Calling it a bandwagon vote at this point is asinine, considering I spelled out my suspicions clearly yesterday.

However, I'll indulge you:

I wanted to see more out of Powder mid D1, so I voted him with a question.  He had an extremely over reactive meltdown in response (containing a deflection and kneejerk OMGUS), and spends the rest of the game day extremely jittery.  Additionally, he flipped and flopped over his suspicions [1].  He kept stating suspicion of Okami without actually doing anything about it until much later. 

To add on, we have his recent post here (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=84271.msg2299292#msg2299292).  He starts off defending himself from the votes (which is fine) and stating his suspicion of Super in response to me (also fine.)

He then finishes his post without scumhunting or questioning at all.  Not fine.

In his most recent post, he finally starts questioning Super, but only after Jim asks him why he isn't.   He's reactionary hyper-defensive scum.


How about you?  You just replaced in.  Who (still living now) was the scummiest at the end of D1?  After the opening D2 shots, who is scummiest now?

[1]
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=84271.msg2278808#msg2278808  Flip
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=84271.msg2278822#msg2278822  Flop


Powder:  While your suspicions are fine, you need to follow up on them, especially at the start of the new game day.  If you press attacks and make sound arguments, you'll find yourself getting lynched much less.


Super:
Taricus, you bother me.FoS Taricus.

Why?


Yes, you have to say why, even if it's "obvious."

Because he bothers me.
Why are you trying to defend him, Toaster?

Missed this.  I'm not defending him- I have a habit of calling out people who don't post sufficient reasoning with their votes/FoSes.


Taricus:  There's plenty of material now for you to get some good solid questioning and accusations.  If you can't, either you're not trying or this isn't the game for you.  (It happens.)




Valar morghulis.

Valar dohaeris.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [5/7, 2/2]: D2 - The Law of Retaliation
Post by: Taricus on May 25, 2011, 08:33:28 pm
So you've got an afternoon to play RTDs and other Forum games but not a moment to spare for mafia.

Right.

Sure.

Hectic.
Thread locked before I could ask for a Replace though...
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [5/7, 2/2]: D2 - The Law of Retaliation
Post by: Powder Miner on May 25, 2011, 08:36:24 pm
I hate how I'm scummy-looking enough to be getting scum advice when I'm not even scum.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [5/7, 2/2]: D2 - The Law of Retaliation
Post by: breadbocks on May 25, 2011, 08:59:23 pm
Unvote Toaster. Fair enough. I hadn't any real suspicions, and your lack of stating why was as good a starting point as any.

Going into the night, I didn't really have any concrete suspicions. I was too busy being distracted at ONR's utter panic. However, Powder's reaction to being pressured has been.... Odd, to say the least.

So, Powder, why do you think it's scum advice, when all Toast is doing is stating what keeps the noose off of your neck. The same fact applies to everyone else in the game.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [5/7, 2/2]: D2 - The Law of Retaliation
Post by: Jim Groovester on May 25, 2011, 09:27:39 pm
Toaster, the last Beginner's Game where both ICs survived through to the second day was when you were scum.

Is there something I should look into there?

This is a meta argument and it's pretty substanceless. I have no reason to suspect Toaster is actually scum, but I'm using knowledge of previous games to help guide my search. There's nothing wrong with doing this, and a lot of your play as you get more experienced will be comparing players' current game to previous games.

The argument I'm using right now is pretty WIFOMy, even without considering the meta aspects. I'm looking into the nightkill for reasons to suspect somebody, which is something I have repeatedly said that you should never, ever, ever do. Maybe not in this game, but past games. The connection between no IC nightkills => Scum IC is completely baseless and if I did suspect Toaster for it I would be being super stupid dumb dumb.

In other words, don't do it.

So what's the point of this then, if I've got no reason to suspect Toaster at all and I'd be completely and totally wrong about it anyway? Well, maybe he'll give me something to work with. If this were a normal game I wouldn't have to explain all of this without a bunch of cautionary details, but since it is a Beginner's Game I have to make sure I cover all my bases in terms of teaching and being an example so I don't pass on tactics that are dangerous for inexperienced players to use.

And yes, explaining it completely deflates my attack, but it's not like Toaster is shaking in his boots about it anyway.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [5/7, 2/2]: D2 - The Law of Retaliation
Post by: Powder Miner on May 25, 2011, 10:17:05 pm
Yeah, but I've had other people say how I'd look more town if I did (insert thing here), or something like it.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [5/7, 2/2]: D2 - The Law of Retaliation
Post by: Toaster on May 26, 2011, 11:18:05 am
Jim:
Toaster, the last Beginner's Game where both ICs survived through to the second day was when you were scum.

Is there something I should look into there?

If you were being serious about this...

1.  I'd refer you to my previous post (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=84271.msg2285210#msg2285210) on the subject.
2.  I'd point out that you should know better to dive headfirst into the WIFOM.
3.  If I really wanted to indulge the WIFOM, I'd point out that same argument could be used on you.


Do you have a secondary pick besides Powder?


Powder:
I hate how I'm scummy-looking enough to be getting scum advice when I'm not even scum.

That was town advice as much as it was scum advice.  Let me stress again that the single goal of town is to find scum.   As town, if you dedicate yourself wholly to that, it will show, and you'll garner less suspicion (and therefore fewer votes.)  As scum, if you can convincingly act like you are scum hunting, you'll lead more lynches astray.  In either case, if you're passive and lazy in your scum hunting, you'll get suspected, voted, and lynched if it's bad enough.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [5/7, 2/2]: D2 - The Law of Retaliation
Post by: Supercharazad on May 26, 2011, 01:59:05 pm

Super:  Have your suspicions changed any?

No.

The whole FoS thing was to try and get reactions out of some people, and it didn't work out very well.

I'm very suspicious of Okami still, and I want to be certain he's not scum before moving on.

So, supercharazad, do you have any reasoning other than "Hiding something?" and "You bother me", or are you going to bandwagon and OMGUD all day long?


Well, for one thing, I have not OMGUSd at all.
Have you READ Dak's scumhunting guide, or are you just stupid? It's called trying to apply pressure, something I can't really do right now because everyone seems to hate it.


Okami: Who are your top two scumpicks?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [5/7, 2/2]: D2 - The Law of Retaliation
Post by: Think0028 on May 26, 2011, 02:02:27 pm
Super: ... Okami's dead.

Are you paying attention?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [5/7, 2/2]: D2 - The Law of Retaliation
Post by: Supercharazad on May 26, 2011, 02:06:47 pm
Super: ... Okami's dead.

Are you paying attention?

Oh. Right.

Failure on my part. I must have got confused.



unvote, Vote Taricus:
Who are your top two scumpicks?

Replace all instances of "Okami" in that last post with "Taricus"
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [5/7, 2/2]: D2 - The Law of Retaliation
Post by: Powder Miner on May 26, 2011, 06:10:20 pm
Wow. You need reasons, not just jumping on bandwagons all day long. Hiding something? and You bother me are not valid.
And for a matter of fact I DID read it. You're being vague I'm calling you out on it. Simple.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [5/7, 2/2]: D2 - The Law of Retaliation
Post by: Jim Groovester on May 26, 2011, 06:36:57 pm
Do you have a secondary pick besides Powder?

Not really. If Powder Miner doesn't flip scum I'll be a bit lost.

I'll probably look into Supercharazad for critical attention error. Or reread the thread.

unvote, Vote Taricus

Think0028 pointed out that Okami No Rei was killed. Now I'm going to point out that Taricus has asked for a replacement and will no longer be playing the game (as if he ever did in the first place).

So what are you doing? What do you expect to gain from pressing players who aren't here?

You're missing critical facts about players you 'suspect', so I'm starting to get the sense that you're more interested in the appearance of scumhunting than actually scumhunting.

Because, you know, a critical part of scumhunting is paying attention to what's going on.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [5/7, 2/2]: D2 - The Law of Retaliation
Post by: Think0028 on May 26, 2011, 06:40:43 pm
Powder: how is what Super doing now jumping on bandwagons? Jumping to conclusions about Taricus, possibly, but it's hard for him to jump on a bandwagon when no one else is voting Taricus. You're throwing terms at a guy that don't relate at all to what he's doing. Also, he hasn't OMGUS'd because he's been voting Taricus the whole time. Indeed, the only person who voted him yesterday was Okami, and Super hasn't been voting for Okami. Please sit down and think about what you're posting. Just because OMGUS and bandwagoning are accusations doesn't mean you can use them willy nilly.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [5/7, 2/2]: D2 - The Law of Retaliation
Post by: breadbocks on May 26, 2011, 08:14:14 pm
I was willing to give Powder the benefit of the doubt about him being town who just had no clue, as I've been, but holy fuck. Think hit the nail on the head when he said Powder is making shit up. It really does just look like he's flailing around for some straw to grasp.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [5/7, 2/2]: D2 - The Law of Retaliation
Post by: Powder Miner on May 26, 2011, 10:21:07 pm
I was referring to earilier with Taricus, day 1, although he did turn out to be scum.
Come on Think, think.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [5/7, 2/2]: D2 - The Law of Retaliation
Post by: Powder Miner on May 26, 2011, 10:23:17 pm
And the Day 1 OMGUSFoS. I'm not stupid, I actually look for evidence when I pressure someone.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [5/7, 2/2]: D2 - The Law of Retaliation
Post by: Toaster on May 26, 2011, 10:27:17 pm
Powder:
And the Day 1 OMGUSFoS. I'm not stupid, I actually look for evidence when I pressure someone.

Really?

Further fakeedit: Gah, what was I thinking calling you passive at all? I need to check the pages I've been gone for more closely.

You've obviously attracted a lot of suspicion.  At this point, the best thing for you to do is for you to present a detailed, well-reasoned, and backed up attack on your top pick.  One or two line attacks will not do it.   If it's well-reasoned and insightful, you may get people to agree with it.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [5/7, 2/2]: D2 - The Law of Retaliation
Post by: Think0028 on May 26, 2011, 10:40:01 pm
Wow. You need reasons, not just jumping on bandwagons all day long.

He 'jumped on a bandwagon' once, at the beginning of day 1, and since then he's been sticking doggedly to Taricus. If anything, you could be accusing him of tunneling, seeing as how he's been surprisingly adamant in not questioning anyone but Taricus.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [5/7, 2/2]: D2 - The Law of Retaliation
Post by: Powder Miner on May 26, 2011, 10:56:53 pm
OK. I'll be referencing D1 for this attack.
Day 1. Early on in the day, a vote fore Taricus arises. After seeing him do somethign close to an OMGUS I decide to question him about it. I do so, and supercharazad proceeds to join in with simply no more explanation than "Hiding something?". Seems like a bandwagon to me. LAter on in the day, after switching targets, he gets in an argument with Taricus, starts with something around "You bother me" and eventually stopping at a vote. For a player who, as Jim noted, isn't even here.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [5/7, 2/2]: D2 - The Law of Retaliation
Post by: Jim Groovester on May 27, 2011, 12:57:16 am
Arguments are best presented when they're directed against the player you suspect.

Which is to say, go confront him and demand an explanation for his actions.

Just laying out your suspicions isn't really all that effective. It doesn't prompt any action from your target.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [5/7, 2/2]: D2 - The Law of Retaliation
Post by: breadbocks on May 27, 2011, 02:10:35 am
Hurp derp just realized I messed up BBcodes in my last post. For clarification: Vote Powder Miner. Sorry about any confusion, LNCP.

Miner, before you get all "yeah yeah whatever" at Jim, he has a point. You should listen to the ICs, rather than getting surly every time they say something.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [5/7, 2/2]: D2 - The Law of Retaliation
Post by: Supercharazad on May 27, 2011, 01:13:02 pm
Alright, I'm focusing too much on the beginner's vengeful.
Replace please. I'll keep playing until I'm replaced, but I can't get myself to focus on two games at once.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [5/7, 2/2]: D2 - The Law of Retaliation
Post by: Jim Groovester on May 27, 2011, 02:08:57 pm
I still want answers from you.

If you're going to stick around until you can get replaced, then go do that.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [5/7, 2/2]: D2 - The Law of Retaliation
Post by: Supercharazad on May 27, 2011, 02:10:41 pm

So what are you doing? What do you expect to gain from pressing players who aren't here?

You're missing critical facts about players you 'suspect', so I'm starting to get the sense that you're more interested in the appearance of scumhunting than actually scumhunting.

Because, you know, a critical part of scumhunting is paying attention to what's going on.

I'm not trying to do this. I've decided I can't focus on two of these at once.
If I were trying to to this, I wouldn't have asked for a replace.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [5/7, 2/2]: D2 - The Law of Retaliation
Post by: Powder Miner on May 27, 2011, 06:51:53 pm
I wasn;t about to get surly. In fact, that's good advice.

So, Super. Why did you bandwagon Taricus D1, and go back at him later in the day with a simple "You bother me?" And don't give the excuse: "I'm applying pressure!" You're nto applying pressure if you're not asking questions or even providing reasoning. You had another reason for doing those votes, and it wasn't pressure.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [5/7, 2/2]: D2 - The Law of Retaliation
Post by: Toaster on May 27, 2011, 11:10:57 pm
I think the day should be over, so I'll throw out a word on extensions and shortenings.


An extension is important to get when the deadline approaches and there is still quite a bit of active discussion and not a lot of consensus.  Keeping people talking means they have more content to read through, and therefore you are better able to get a read of them.  If people are still talking near day end, feel free to vote for one.  On the other hand, if there is little discussion going on and there's a definite leader in votes, let the day end so the game can go on- don't just stall it.  Asking for an extension and then not using it is a great way to annoy the mod.

Shortens should be used sparingly.  If there's any real discussion going on, don't ask for one.  Trying to stop the discussion is a good way to prevent others from getting reads on people and to allow the scum more control.  It also might prevent someone from contributing when they thought they could.  On the other hand, if there's a massive majority vote on someone and there's no discussion about it (for example, a cop claiming a scum result on someone with no counterclaim), go ahead and end the day- not much more will get done.

A simple majority alone isn't a good enough reason to shorten, especially if there is more than one scum alive.  You can always vote one person while interrogating someone else.

In short, encouraging discussion is pro-town, while squashing it is anti-town.

In this situation, there's a clear (but not overwhelming) majority on Powder, so the best thing to do is just let the day run out.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [5/7, 2/2]: D2 - The Law of Retaliation
Post by: breadbocks on May 27, 2011, 11:37:07 pm
Oh, yeah. I keep wondering about shortens. Since it seems their's nothing going on right now, why would it be better to wait for the day to end, rather than just going on and ending it, so we can either finish the game, or move on to the point where there would be stuff to discuss?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [5/7, 2/2]: D2 - The Law of Retaliation
Post by: Toaster on May 27, 2011, 11:40:19 pm
Because by mod-timer, the day has already ended.

Seriously though, Powder should get a fair chance to set up a defense.  Someone may want to grill someone else.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [5/7, 2/2]: D2 - The Law of Retaliation
Post by: Jim Groovester on May 27, 2011, 11:43:38 pm
Oh, yeah. I keep wondering about shortens. Since it seems their's nothing going on right now, why would it be better to wait for the day to end, rather than just going on and ending it, so we can either finish the game, or move on to the point where there would be stuff to discuss?

Because LNCP hasn't logged in since the 26th. Even if everybody shortens the day isn't going to end any faster.

Shortens are a pretty pushy thing to do anyway. Unless the situation clearly calls for it, it's not worth bothering about. You'll get people who will wonder why you want a shorten and then people who will block your shorten and call for an extension so that you can answer questions about why you wanted a shorten.

It's easier to let the day pass.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [5/7, 2/2]: D2 - The Law of Retaliation
Post by: Supercharazad on May 28, 2011, 03:04:09 am

So, Super. Why did you bandwagon Taricus D1, and go back at him later in the day with a simple "You bother me?" And don't give the excuse: "I'm applying pressure!" You're nto applying pressure if you're not asking questions or even providing reasoning. You had another reason for doing those votes, and it wasn't pressure.

Actually, I didn't bandwagon him. He voted me vaguely with no questions, and never stated that it was to get a reaction.
When I FoSd him, it was to get reactions out of people, to see if anyone seemed particularly jumpy about it.

As for saying I had another reason for the votes, kindly fuck off with the WIFOM
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: N2 - All assassins must die, Jon Snow.
Post by: lordnincompoop on May 28, 2011, 05:01:20 am
Day 2 Has Ended!
Powder Miner has been Lynched!
He was a Nobleman (Town).



Votecount:
Think0028 - 0 -
Supercharazard - 1 - Powder Miner
Powder Miner - 4 - Toaster, Think0028, Jim Groovester, breadbocks
Taricus - 1 - Supercharazard
breadbocks - 0 -
Jim Groovester - 0 -
Toaster - 0 -

Not Voting - 0 - Taricus
No Lynch  - 0 -

Extend  - 0 -
Shorten  - 0 -



The sun is setting on the horizon, and the King grows weary of the aristocrats' endless rambling. He signals to one of his guard.

"Listen up!" he shouts, bashing his sword on his shield to drown out the voices. "the King wishes to make something known!"

"Have you all come to an agreement?"

The court did. And the name that came forth was Polvere, count Minatori. He was dragged forth.

"Any last words for us? Perhaps a confession, to save your damned soul"

"'Tis not I! Have mercy!" The count pleads, but to no avail. The crowd has convicted him already in their hearts. He is thrown outside and decapitated by the guards, and the men come back only after nightfall.

"So, any clues from his body?"

"None, your Majesty. He was but a noble." the guard bowed and left.



Supercharazard is up for replace.



Night 2 has begun!
Scum & power roles, send in your night actions.

The Night will end Tuesday, 8PM GMT.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [4/7, 2/2]: D3 - For peace and trade
Post by: lordnincompoop on June 01, 2011, 01:06:52 pm
Day 3 Has Begun!
Think0028 has been Nightkilled!
He was a Nobleman (Town).



Votecount:
Supercharazard - 0-
Taricus - 0-
breadbocks - -0
Jim Groovester - 0 -
Toaster - 0 -

Not Voting - 0 -
No Lynch  - 0 -

Extend  - 0 -
Shorten  - 0 -



Before you lies the body of James "Think" Northtop XXVIII, drawn and quartered during the night.

There are but five of you left, one of which is the assassin. The King has grown weary of the death, and, fatigued, the announces,

"Let it begin. Let us hope that this day will be the last."



The Day will end Friday, 8PM GMT.

You need 3 to Extend and 5 to Shorten.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [3/7, 2/2]: D3 - For Peace and Trade
Post by: lordnincompoop on June 01, 2011, 01:21:41 pm
Heliman has replaced Supercharazard!



Votecount:

Heliman - 0-
Taricus - 0-
breadbocks - -0
Jim Groovester - 0 -
Toaster - 0 -

Not Voting - 0 -
No Lynch  - 0 -

Extend  - 0 -
Shorten  - 0 -
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [3/7, 2/2]: D3 - For Peace and Trade
Post by: Heliman on June 01, 2011, 01:31:39 pm
(PFP)
What? Wasn't supercharazard up for replace?

Anyways, I LIVE. Sup scum, townies, did you miiiiiiiiss me? FYI, I've already looked over D2, and I will post my thoughts on what I think when I have the time.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [3/7, 2/2]: D3 - For Peace and Trade
Post by: lordnincompoop on June 01, 2011, 01:33:12 pm
Fux'd
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [3/7, 2/2]: D3 - For Peace and Trade
Post by: Think0028 on June 01, 2011, 01:38:29 pm
LNCP! IT'S SUPERCHARAZAD.

I mean blargh I'm dead.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [3/7, 2/2]: D3 - For Peace and Trade
Post by: Jim Groovester on June 01, 2011, 02:21:30 pm
The fuck is going on.

If you're as confused about the game as I am, what you do is go back and read through everything. Pay special attention to everybody's who's still alive. Pick at everything you can, stuff you may have let slide when it happened.

That's what I'm going to do.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [3/7, 2/2]: D3 - For Peace and Trade
Post by: Heliman on June 01, 2011, 07:14:54 pm
Ok, time to kick off D3 for real now.

I think the day should be over, so I'll throw out a word on extensions and shortenings.
^
|
V
Seriously though, Powder should get a fair chance to set up a defense.  Someone may want to grill someone else.
If you thought Powder should have gotten a fair chance to set up a defense, why did you think the day should have ended there?

The fuck is going on.
What is confusing to you?


Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [3/7, 2/2]: D3 - For Peace and Trade
Post by: Jim Groovester on June 01, 2011, 07:24:20 pm
My major scum pick flipped town, my secondary scum pick replaced himself as soon as he got a smidgeon of pressure, and I don't have any good reads on the remaining players.

Not to mention that both ICs are still alive, which is completely surprising to me.

I have no idea what's going on. And I haven't completed (or started) my readthrough of the thread yet.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [3/7, 2/2]: D3 - For Peace and Trade
Post by: Heliman on June 01, 2011, 07:38:35 pm
You had 4 days or so to revise it during the night, didn't you?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [3/7, 2/2]: D3 - For Peace and Trade
Post by: Jim Groovester on June 01, 2011, 07:55:44 pm
Yeah.

So?

I had nothing to do with the night being four days long. If there's some expectation that I'm supposed to be thinking about mafia all day long and all night long, even when the thread is locked, there isn't, and it's usually easier to wait until the nightkill happens, so that everybody has two roleflips to think through instead of just one.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [3/7, 2/2]: D3 - For Peace and Trade
Post by: Heliman on June 01, 2011, 08:20:37 pm
Fair enough, feel free to reread as much as you please, but if you can try not to end up hiding away in a hole for a day or two "rereading the thread" while the shit starts getting thrown.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [3/7, 2/2]: D3 - For Peace and Trade
Post by: Toaster on June 01, 2011, 08:25:22 pm
I think the day should be over, so I'll throw out a word on extensions and shortenings.
^
|
V
Seriously though, Powder should get a fair chance to set up a defense.  Someone may want to grill someone else.
If you thought Powder should have gotten a fair chance to set up a defense, why did you think the day should have ended there?

I thought the day should have ended as in that post was made past the time the mod said the day would end.  He had plenty of time to defend himself.


I need to reread this, but I'm going to toss out some questions before I do.


LNCP:  Your D3 final vote count is wrong.  Breadbocks voted for Powder, not himself.  Also, I am both voting and not voting, and Taricus is absent from the list.


Breadbocks:  As a replacee yourself, what do you think having a second replacement will do to the game?


Heliman:  What do you think of your predecessor's case on Taricus?


Jim:  What value do you put on Powder's suspicion of Super?


Taricus:  Who do you suspect now that you have two full days' worth of information to work through?



This is a personal preference thing, but if I open the day at a blank (because all my previous suspects are dead and town, usually), I start off by firing questions off at several people.  While I wait for answers, I reread the thread and look for something meaningful.  The questions are there to address any preexisting suspicions I have or to get people talking, mostly depending on the read I already have on the target.  It's just something to keep the ball rolling while I look for something deeper.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [3/7, 2/2]: D3 - For Peace and Trade
Post by: Heliman on June 01, 2011, 08:53:02 pm
I think the day should be over, so I'll throw out a word on extensions and shortenings.
^
|
V
(extended the second quote for fittyness)
Because by mod-timer, the day has already ended.

Seriously though, Powder should get a fair chance to set up a defense.  Someone may want to grill someone else.
If you thought Powder should have gotten a fair chance to set up a defense, why did you think the day should have ended there?
I thought the day should have ended as in that post was made past the time the mod said the day would end.  He had plenty of time to defend himself.
But judging by the diction in the post you said that yesterday, you weren't taking the mod-timer seriously.


Heliman:  What do you think of your predecessor's case on Taricus?
He didn't have a case, to me, Super was just trying to probe him. Taricus probably smelled funny to him. Unfortunately, Taricus was absent most of D2, once again preventing any case to be formed on himself by not doing fucking anything.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [3/7, 2/2]: D3 - For Peace and Trade
Post by: Jim Groovester on June 01, 2011, 09:06:09 pm
Jim:  What value do you put on Powder's suspicion of Super?

Very little.

Powder Miner unfortunately never really put together a coherent case on anyone. There was a kernel of a good case in there but he couldn't put it together.

Supercharazad did spend most of his time pressuring Taricus for no good reason, and paid absolutely no attention to anything that happened during Day 2, but I chalked that up mostly to Supercharazad being Supercharazad. That was until I decided to take the nub gloves off because I thought it would help his game.

Then he asked for a replacement.

There's stuff to look into about Supercharazad/Heliman, but it's not because of anything Powder Miner said.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [3/7, 2/2]: D3 - For Peace and Trade
Post by: Jim Groovester on June 01, 2011, 10:25:39 pm
Toaster: A few things.

I need to study Okami's interactions to see what can be gleaned from them, but here's this first.   More will come later.

So, anything come from that? Unfulfilled promises of scumhunting set me on edge.

Can you explain what about Okami No Rei made him ping low on your scumdar (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=84271.msg2283810#msg2283810)? What's more, you never really said anything about him. You only answered questions directed from him to you. Did nothing about him set you off?

I wish Beginner's Mafias didn't have such a high replacement rate, because there's stuff I'd ask anzki4 and Supercharazad if they were still around.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [3/7, 2/2]: D3 - For Peace and Trade
Post by: Heliman on June 02, 2011, 12:42:11 am
Taricus, why you gotta avoid us? Before, you merely coated my clavicle in frigid frost.  But now you've made 15 posts since day 3 started, and not a single one here? You make me feel like I'm wearing a mantle of ice, coated with liquid nitrogen and adorned with President Nickson's frozen heart.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [3/7, 2/2]: D3 - For Peace and Trade
Post by: Jim Groovester on June 02, 2011, 12:53:40 am
Taricus, why you gotta avoid us?
Thread locked before I could ask for a Replace though...

President Nickson

Don't skimp on your studies, dude.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [3/7, 2/2]: D3 - For Peace and Trade
Post by: Heliman on June 02, 2011, 01:02:24 am
Ahha yeah misspelling Nixon's name, I totally meant to do that.

Anyways, LNCP never stated that his slot was up for replace, so I can only assume that he was stating it out of context then and is still playing.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [3/7, 2/2]: ONE REPLACE PLOX
Post by: lordnincompoop on June 02, 2011, 07:03:52 am
Taricus is up for replace!
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [3/7, 2/2]: D3 - For Peace and Trade
Post by: Toaster on June 02, 2011, 10:09:01 am
Jim:
Toaster: A few things.

I need to study Okami's interactions to see what can be gleaned from them, but here's this first.   More will come later.

So, anything come from that? Unfulfilled promises of scumhunting set me on edge.

Not really.  Nothing useful, just some WIFOM in guessing his motives.

Can you explain what about Okami No Rei made him ping low on your scumdar (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=84271.msg2283810#msg2283810)? What's more, you never really said anything about him. You only answered questions directed from him to you. Did nothing about him set you off?

I wish Beginner's Mafias didn't have such a high replacement rate, because there's stuff I'd ask anzki4 and Supercharazad if they were still around.

I found him to be aggressive and interested in finding scum.  I didn't see any holes in his armor, and I had other targets I was more interested in.

Why not ask the replacements?  I'm going to.


On Super/Heliman, Super tunneled the hell out of Taricus early on, which is either scummy or lazy.  I'm going with lazy, because of this post (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=84271.msg2301148#msg2301148).

Why?  He missed the vital point that Okami, scum, was dead.  I've seen several instances of people missing something like that, and I've never found them to be actually reliable for finding scum.  However, this one is different- Okami was dead scum instead of dead town.  I think that if Super was scum, he'd have no trouble remembering that his scumbuddy was dead.  It's far from conclusive, but it makes me think that Super (and therefore Heliman) is town.


Breadbocks:  You, however, I think are scum.

Here (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=84271.msg2276403#msg2276403) anzki posts that he has suspicions without saying what they are nor doing anything about them- a weak post overall.  Here (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=84271.msg2277253#msg2277253) a lot of suspicion is being spread for weak reasons, and again not much is done about them.  When he finally votes on it (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=84271.msg2277653#msg2277653), it's for a terrible reason- a broken quote.   Really?  Shit happens and this is the best vote on it?

I realize that was your predecessor and you can't directly answer for what he did, but the actions are still there.  However, I'm not done.

After you replace, you start D2 (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=84271.msg2299252#msg2299252) by voting me for voting Powder, saying I'm looking for an excuse to bandwagon.  You seem to completely ignore my D1 case against him.  Once I remind you of that case, you vote Powder (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=84271.msg2301976#msg2301976) with what is basically a rehash of old arguments.  You don't bring anything else to the table.

So I ask you now, if it's not you, who is scum?  Why?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [3/7, 2/2]: ONE REPLACE PLOX
Post by: Toaster on June 02, 2011, 03:46:17 pm
Also, LNCP: I think Jack A T said he'd replace.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [3/7, 2/2]: D3 - For Peace and Trade
Post by: Heliman on June 02, 2011, 04:03:17 pm
So you're not going to address the contradiction I pointed out? Treating the mod timer like it was not a big deal at the time sort of invalidates the defense you made.

Here (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=84271.msg2276403#msg2276403) anzki posts that he has suspicions without saying what they are nor doing anything about them- a weak post overall.  Here (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=84271.msg2277253#msg2277253) a lot of suspicion is being spread for weak reasons, and again not much is done about them.  When he finally votes on it (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=84271.msg2277653#msg2277653), it's for a terrible reason- a broken quote.   Really?  Shit happens and this is the best vote on it?
A horrible reason for voting is more indicative of a newbie than a scum. It's rather common for greenhorn town to have crazy and outlandish theories like that.

So I ask you now, if it's not you, who is scum?  Why?
Am I the only one that's getting a Red Scare vibe from this? Toaster, is there any reason why you ask questions irrelevant to your case? Because to me, it just looks like you're trying to lock-up his scumhunting.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [3/7, 2/2]: D3 - For Peace and Trade
Post by: Jim Groovester on June 02, 2011, 04:40:24 pm
Not really.  Nothing useful, just some WIFOM in guessing his motives.

So why'd you say it?

Why did you forget to mention it later?

Can you explain what about Okami No Rei made him ping low on your scumdar (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=84271.msg2283810#msg2283810)? What's more, you never really said anything about him. You only answered questions directed from him to you. Did nothing about him set you off?

I wish Beginner's Mafias didn't have such a high replacement rate, because there's stuff I'd ask anzki4 and Supercharazad if they were still around.

I found him to be aggressive and interested in finding scum.  I didn't see any holes in his armor, and I had other targets I was more interested in.

And nothing about his inconsistent arguments and rapidly changing stories made you the least bit interested in asking him, oh, anything at all?

So I ask you now, if it's not you, who is scum?  Why?

Oh, well, when you phrase it like that, how can I do anything but agree?

I do want to hear from breadbocks (who hasn't posted despite being available) but I really don't like the way you're making it seem like he's the only and obvious choice here.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [3/7, 2/2]: ONE REPLACE PLOX
Post by: Think0028 on June 02, 2011, 04:42:22 pm
I'll replace in again if LNCP is cool with it.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [3/7, 2/2]: ONE REPLACE PLOX
Post by: Jack A T on June 02, 2011, 06:41:31 pm
Also, LNCP: I think Jack A T said he'd replace.

Aye, I can replace.

I'll replace in again if LNCP is cool with it.
...Unless Think does.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [3/7, 2/2]: ONE REPLACE PLOX
Post by: Think0028 on June 02, 2011, 06:45:14 pm
No, you go ahead, I already died, I'd feel better if someone who hasn't played yet replaced in.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [3/7, 2/2]: D3 - For Peace and Trade
Post by: Toaster on June 02, 2011, 08:09:54 pm
Heliman:
So you're not going to address the contradiction I pointed out? Treating the mod timer like it was not a big deal at the time sort of invalidates the defense you made.

Here (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=84271.msg2276403#msg2276403) anzki posts that he has suspicions without saying what they are nor doing anything about them- a weak post overall.  Here (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=84271.msg2277253#msg2277253) a lot of suspicion is being spread for weak reasons, and again not much is done about them.  When he finally votes on it (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=84271.msg2277653#msg2277653), it's for a terrible reason- a broken quote.   Really?  Shit happens and this is the best vote on it?
A horrible reason for voting is more indicative of a newbie than a scum. It's rather common for greenhorn town to have crazy and outlandish theories like that.

So I ask you now, if it's not you, who is scum?  Why?
Am I the only one that's getting a Red Scare vibe from this? Toaster, is there any reason why you ask questions irrelevant to your case? Because to me, it just looks like you're trying to lock-up his scumhunting.

I don't see what contradiction you're talking about.  He had plenty of time to work on his defense starting from when the votes began piling up on him, which was day start.  When I made that comment, it was past when LNCP said the day would be over.  It wasn't an opinion, it was a statement of fact.  In most of the games here, the day isn't over until the mod locks the thread.  I don't see a rule of "Once the day is over by timer, stop posting until mod gets on to lock thread."  There is frequently discussion going on between the official time of end and thread lock, and I don't recall objection to that.  So no, I don't take it seriously in the sense that I stop posting.  If the mod said to stop posting, I would.

As for breadbocks, while it may be a case of newbie town voting on a bad reason, I am unconvinced.  He's still my top pick with or without that point.

I'm encouraging him to hunt in addition to defending himself.  Town or scum, that's a good habit to have.


Jim:
Not really.  Nothing useful, just some WIFOM in guessing his motives.

So why'd you say it?

Why did you forget to mention it later?

Because I was going to do it.  I did it, and got nothing.  Not saying so later was a mistake.  Oops- oh well.  I don't know why I forgot to do so.


Can you explain what about Okami No Rei made him ping low on your scumdar (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=84271.msg2283810#msg2283810)? What's more, you never really said anything about him. You only answered questions directed from him to you. Did nothing about him set you off?

I wish Beginner's Mafias didn't have such a high replacement rate, because there's stuff I'd ask anzki4 and Supercharazad if they were still around.

I found him to be aggressive and interested in finding scum.  I didn't see any holes in his armor, and I had other targets I was more interested in.

And nothing about his inconsistent arguments and rapidly changing stories made you the least bit interested in asking him, oh, anything at all?

Nope.  I was more interested in other targets at the time.


So I ask you now, if it's not you, who is scum?  Why?

Oh, well, when you phrase it like that, how can I do anything but agree?

I do want to hear from breadbocks (who hasn't posted despite being available) but I really don't like the way you're making it seem like he's the only and obvious choice here.

See response to Heliman on that one.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [3/7, 2/2]: ONE REPLACE PLOX
Post by: breadbocks on June 03, 2011, 01:38:22 am
Breadbocks:  As a replacee yourself, what do you think having a second replacement will do to the game?
Not much. I think we'll need to grill him all the harder to pick apart his mind.

Breadbocks:  You, however, I think are scum.

Here (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=84271.msg2276403#msg2276403) anzki posts that he has suspicions without saying what they are nor doing anything about them- a weak post overall.  Here (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=84271.msg2277253#msg2277253) a lot of suspicion is being spread for weak reasons, and again not much is done about them.  When he finally votes on it (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=84271.msg2277653#msg2277653), it's for a terrible reason- a broken quote.   Really?  Shit happens and this is the best vote on it?

I realize that was your predecessor and you can't directly answer for what he did, but the actions are still there.  However, I'm not done.

After you replace, you start D2 (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=84271.msg2299252#msg2299252) by voting me for voting Powder, saying I'm looking for an excuse to bandwagon.  You seem to completely ignore my D1 case against him.  Once I remind you of that case, you vote Powder (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=84271.msg2301976#msg2301976) with what is basically a rehash of old arguments.  You don't bring anything else to the table.

So I ask you now, if it's not you, who is scum?  Why?
Well, this is awkward. You vote me before I even get the chance to answer you question. Should you continue to attack me, let it be known that the reason I didn't answer your last question right away is because I didn't have access to internet.
Anyways, to answer you. Let me straighten you out. I started D2 off with a random vote. While plenty of scum hunting was done D1, most of it was just confirming ONR. And so I took a random vote. However, your vote without the immediate "why?" which Jim pressures so much over seemed a good enough place to start from, so I pressured. I didn't get anything out of it, so I was more than a little at a loss. At that point Powder was floundering. And I felt Think made a convincing argument. I didn't need to spend 8 hours dissecting each sentence to see Powder was being silly. Are you accusing me of being vulnerable to persuasion? Sorry. I thought having an open mind was a good thing. I'll make sure to ignore clear logic next time.

As for who I think is scum? I was going to say I'd like to see what Heliman thought about his current position, seeing as how he's been NK'd once, and now he's replaced back in, how he thinks the scum would react, assuming it isn't him. Super crumpled last game when he was Scum, and the matching behavior strikes the wrong string for me.
However, Toaster, your post strikes me as scummy. Why did you wait until now to vote me, rather than in your last post, where you clearly acknowledged I existed, so why not attack me then? Why did you wait until now to call me scum? And don't claim you had nothing, because you called me out on what was already there, and nobody pacified any suspicions you were working on overnight, so why didn't you build the case on me while Think was being murdered? I smell something fishy, and it isn't the sewers.

Now, Heliman, my would-be question still stands. What do you think about your current position? You were scumkilled, and now you're back.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [3/7, 2/2]: ONE REPLACE PLOX
Post by: Jim Groovester on June 03, 2011, 04:14:07 am
Toaster:

I'm encouraging him to hunt in addition to defending himself.  Town or scum, that's a good habit to have.

I don't believe that. Well, I don't believe that was the reason you tacked that on there at the end.

Your case is weak and you know it. Tacking "If not you then who?" adds nothing to the substance of your argument and strengthens it only superficially. It strikes me as scummy that you'd resort to something like that. So why'd you put it there?

Heliman, I'd like your read on Toaster and breadbocks (and for kicks, myself and Taricus and/or his replacement if he posts in time), as well as a summary of what your thoughts were while going through Day 2.

No special reason for this. I just want a read on you.

breadbocks, I don't think your case on Toaster is much better. It's essentially an OMGUS. I'm going to need more than an issue of timing to vote for him. What else you got?

Taricus' replacement, just post something. Anything.

My gut says Toaster at this point, but really I need to hear from everybody. At the very least, we've got a mislynch to spare.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [3/7, 2/2]: ONE REPLACE PLOX
Post by: lordnincompoop on June 03, 2011, 04:16:41 am
Jack AT has replaced Taricus!
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [3/7, 2/2]: ONE REPLACE PLOX
Post by: Jim Groovester on June 03, 2011, 04:22:04 am
And extension, since we're probably going to need it.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [3/7, 2/2]: ONE REPLACE PLOX
Post by: Toaster on June 03, 2011, 09:34:21 am
Breadbocks:
Breadbocks:  As a replacee yourself, what do you think having a second replacement will do to the game?
Not much. I think we'll need to grill him all the harder to pick apart his mind.

Fair enough.

As for the rest of your post, I never said your lack of response was scummy.  That wasn't a part of the case.  Your reasoning on the D2 vote is valid, but it doesn't make me think you're innocent.

As for your vote, really?  I said twice I was going to reread the thread after I made that post.  I knew it would be the next morning, so I threw out some questions to get discussion happening (again, like I said.)  Did you read that part?   It just feels like you're basing your case on something I never said or even implied.


Jim:
Toaster:

I'm encouraging him to hunt in addition to defending himself.  Town or scum, that's a good habit to have.

I don't believe that. Well, I don't believe that was the reason you tacked that on there at the end.

Your case is weak and you know it. Tacking "If not you then who?" adds nothing to the substance of your argument and strengthens it only superficially. It strikes me as scummy that you'd resort to something like that. So why'd you put it there?

If you don't believe it, too bad.  I had no other reason.

I'll grant you that the case is weak, but it's the best I have right now.


I'm down with that extension.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [3/7, 2/2]: D3 - For Peace and Trade
Post by: lordnincompoop on June 03, 2011, 09:59:22 am
Riight, I forgot this was a 5p game now.

Votecount:
Heliman - 0-
Jack AT - 0-
breadbocks - 1 - Toaster
Jim Groovester - 0 -
Toaster - 1 - breadbocks

Not Voting - 0 - Jack AT, Heliman, Jim Groovester
No Lynch  - 0 -

Extend  - 2 - Jim Groovester, Toaster
Shorten  - 0 -



The Day will has been extended to Monday, 8PM GMT.

You need 2 to Extend and 3 to Shorten.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [3/7, 2/2]: ONE REPLACE PLOX
Post by: Heliman on June 03, 2011, 05:27:59 pm
As for who I think is scum? I was going to say I'd like to see what Heliman thought about his current position, seeing as how he's been NK'd once, and now he's replaced back in, how he thinks the scum would react, assuming it isn't him. Super crumpled last game when he was Scum, and the matching behavior strikes the wrong string for me.
My current position is interesting, but is unfortunately not very open to exploitation. I have a certain tell that in mind that could occur as a result of this, but it would be a primarily subjective argument. Also I have as much of an idea as you all (minus one scum) do in regards to what the scum was thinking when they killed me, so I have even less of an idea of what they are thinking right now. Their thoughts could literally go across the board.

Heliman, I'd like your read on Toaster and breadbocks (and for kicks, myself and Taricus and/or his replacement if he posts in time), as well as a summary of what your thoughts were while going through Day 2.

No special reason for this. I just want a read on you.

Ah, that's alot of people. Ok, where to start...

Toaster:Aside from his bum case against powder, hasn't brought much to light with his hunting.  It felt like he was buddying me a little in this (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=84271.msg2319612#msg2319612) post. I also noted a "Good job!" post at the start of D2, which isn't a scum tell per se but makes me a little more suspicious. As far as how scummy he looks, I'm still trying to get a read on him.

Breadbocks: Hasn't posted often enough for me to have a good read yet, although there is a certain meta tell I'm on the lookout for with this current bout between him and Toaster. That tell may not come to fruition, but we'll see.

Taricus: Don't like Taricus. He says too little.

Jim Groovester: I started to become a little worried that there wasn't enough people probing you during D1, so I tried pressing you on something and unfortunately came up with nothing. Okami turning scum made you look very town, because you pressed him directly after I did. It still doesn't clear you entirely, but helped your case a lot. It's also very surprising that you are not dead yet.

My summary of day two: The violent ass riding of the angry and misunderstood powder miner, the sequel. Besides my previous replacement slipping up names at the beginning and Taricus leaving when under duress, that was basically everything important that went on that day.


I'm encouraging him to hunt in addition to defending himself.  Town or scum, that's a good habit to have.
Yeah, if you were encouraging him to hunt more you wouldn't be adding pressure with a vote on him, with newer players that can eventually lead to the mafia equivalent of writer's block.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [3/7, 2/2]: ONE REPLACE PLOX
Post by: Jack A T on June 03, 2011, 06:31:15 pm
Taricus' replacement, just post something. Anything.

Something.  Anything.

More seriously, I'm here and I'm going to be carefully reading the game for a bit.  Actual useful stuff will come soon.

Quick note: I replaced Taricus, but I can't read his mind.  If asking me a question, do not assume I can.  Thank you.

Toaster: Who, if breadbocks turns out to be town, would you most suspect of being scum?  Why?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [2/7, 3/3]: D3 - For Peace and Trade
Post by: Toaster on June 03, 2011, 08:34:29 pm
Jack:  Well, right now my #2 pick is Jim, but that's mostly by default.  Heliman I am fairly sure is town.  You (via Taricus) I have a very null read on.  Jim bugs me a bit, but it is probably because I can't read him at all.  I don't have anything specific to accuse him of.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [3/7, 2/2]: D3 - For Peace and Trade
Post by: Jack A T on June 04, 2011, 12:40:20 am
Should you continue to attack me, let it be known that the reason I didn't answer your last question right away is because I didn't have access to internet.
Breadbocks:What does this have to do with anything?  I can understand defending yourself against attacks that actually were used, but why against one that was not?

My thoughts on everyone:

*Toaster: Don't like how he saw Okami as completely town (if I'm understanding him correctly).  His attack against Breadbocks...I agree with Jim and Heliman when it comes to the question.  It just feels unnecessary and pointless.  Second pick.
*Heliman: I don't particularly like some of the things he has pointed out as evidence against Toaster (the "contradiction", the congratulation post).  Both he and Supercharazad have shown a lack of awareness of the game. Feels like unaware townie.
*Breadbocks: His attack on Toaster is rather weak and OMGUSy.  He's also overly defensive, as well, in my eyes.  My current top suspect.
*Jim: Feels kind of town to me, but it's a hunch.  I'm having problems reading him.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [2/7, 3/3]: D3 - For Peace and Trade
Post by: Jim Groovester on June 04, 2011, 12:46:58 am
Heliman, so of the remaining players of the game, which ones are you most suspicious of and/or most wary of? You've got your eye on breadbocks for some reason. Who else?

Jack A T, what about the reasons Heliman listed don't you like?

It bugs me that this Beginner's Mafia doesn't have any beginners left, but I suppose there's nothing we can do about that.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [2/7, 3/3]: D3 - For Peace and Trade
Post by: Heliman on June 04, 2011, 01:23:38 am
Heliman, so of the remaining players of the game, which ones are you most suspicious of and/or most wary of? You've got your eye on breadbocks for some reason. Who else?
1. As far as wariness goes, you and toaster. Two ICs alive on D3? Whaaat. Nothing to back it up with of course, but seriously.
2. Everyone.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [2/7, 3/3]: D3 - For Peace and Trade
Post by: Jack A T on June 04, 2011, 01:26:26 am
Jack A T, what about the reasons Heliman listed don't you like?
*"Contradiction": What contradiction?

Essentially, Heliman seemed to have misinterpreted Toaster's statement that D2 should have been over according to the mod timer as some sort of evidence that indicated that Toaster was scum because he also said that Powder should've had some time to defend himself.  And then interpreted Toaster's attempt to point out that he meant the mod timer as a lie because Toaster had also pointed out that LNCP was away from the forum and unable to finish the day.  Terrible, nonsensical attack, but showing inexperience more than scumminess.

*The "Good job!" post complaint: Heliman, while admitting that it's not a scumtell in itself, says that one of the posts (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=84271.msg2299138#msg2299138) Toaster made specifically as an IC made Toaster feel off.  I don't like it when ICs get attacked for their actions as teachers, not players.  This, I feel, is actually scummy, though Heliman's admission that it's weak evidence makes it less bad.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [3/7, 2/2]: D3 - For Peace and Trade
Post by: Toaster on June 04, 2011, 03:58:30 pm
Jack A T:
*Toaster: Don't like how he saw Okami as completely town (if I'm understanding him correctly).  His attack against Breadbocks...I agree with Jim and Heliman when it comes to the question.  It just feels unnecessary and pointless.  Second pick.

I said that he "ping[ed] only faintly on my scumdar." (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=84271.msg2283810#msg2283810)

Where do you see Breadbocks as defensive?  I'd like to see your reasoning a bit more for a D3 vote.


Heliman:
Heliman, so of the remaining players of the game, which ones are you most suspicious of and/or most wary of? You've got your eye on breadbocks for some reason. Who else?
1. As far as wariness goes, you and toaster. Two ICs alive on D3? Whaaat. Nothing to back it up with of course, but seriously.
2. Everyone.

Really, now?  See this post (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=84271.msg2300801#msg2300801) for reasons that is dumb.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [3/7, 2/2]: D3 - For Peace and Trade
Post by: Jack A T on June 04, 2011, 04:51:02 pm
I said that he "ping[ed] only faintly on my scumdar." (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=84271.msg2283810#msg2283810)
Ah.  I was thinking of a different post when I was writing that bit about you.  Specifically, the one where you said you "didn't see any holes in his armor".  Your response indicates that what I said was definitely a bit of a misunderstanding.

Where do you see Breadbocks as defensive?  I'd like to see your reasoning a bit more for a D3 vote.
He was defending himself against an attack that never had been used (in addition to attacks that had been used), in his main attack post against you.  Essentially, in addition to trying to refute your points against him, he started by trying to defend himself from an attack he seemed to think you would inevitably use.  That, on its own, brings him up on my list.  It feels overly defensive and somewhat panicky.  The fact that he continued on in that post to vote for you because you hadn't voted for him immediately doesn't exactly help his case.  I'm currently waiting for an answer to a question about the defensiveness.  A question at the start of my "my thoughts on everyone" post.  That is my main point against him.

Most of his other posts...well, as far as I can tell, neither he nor anzki have done too much.  Both have/had short, calm posts that often go off-topic, generally.  Breadbocks's last post stood out against that.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [3/7, 2/2]: D3 - For Peace and Trade
Post by: Jim Groovester on June 04, 2011, 05:47:05 pm
Really, now?  See this post (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=84271.msg2300801#msg2300801) for reasons that is dumb.

It bugs me that you're preemptively nipping this line of thought in the bud before anything comes from it, even though Heliman didn't say he actually suspected anybody for it.

Both ICs being alive is incredibly noteworthy, so why don't you want people talking about it?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [2/7, 3/3]: D3 - For Peace and Trade
Post by: breadbocks on June 04, 2011, 06:11:22 pm
Firstly, Extension is in order. I've missed most of the day due to a vacation I hadn't planned for.

Breadbocks:
Breadbocks:  As a replacee yourself, what do you think having a second replacement will do to the game?
Not much. I think we'll need to grill him all the harder to pick apart his mind.

Fair enough.

As for the rest of your post, I never said your lack of response was scummy.  That wasn't a part of the case.  Your reasoning on the D2 vote is valid, but it doesn't make me think you're innocent.

As for your vote, really?  I said twice I was going to reread the thread after I made that post.  I knew it would be the next morning, so I threw out some questions to get discussion happening (again, like I said.)  Did you read that part?   It just feels like you're basing your case on something I never said or even implied.
Makes sense, I suppose. Unvote Toaster

As for the response thing, this is directed at everyone, I was considering the possibility of it being used as a weak reason to continue to persecute me, and headed it off.

Now, for the vote. I was thinking that you would have prepared the attack overnight.

breadbocks, I don't think your case on Toaster is much better. It's essentially an OMGUS. I'm going to need more than an issue of timing to vote for him. What else you got?
Jim Honestly? Nothing. I was hoping that my (pretty damn weak) attack on Toaster would have either him, or someone else commenting on it would give a scumtell. Right now I've literally nothing on anybody right now.

Should you continue to attack me, let it be known that the reason I didn't answer your last question right away is because I didn't have access to internet.
Breadbocks:What does this have to do with anything?  I can understand defending yourself against attacks that actually were used, but why against one that was not?

My thoughts on everyone:

*Toaster: Don't like how he saw Okami as completely town (if I'm understanding him correctly).  His attack against Breadbocks...I agree with Jim and Heliman when it comes to the question.  It just feels unnecessary and pointless.  Second pick.
*Heliman: I don't particularly like some of the things he has pointed out as evidence against Toaster (the "contradiction", the congratulation post).  Both he and Supercharazad have shown a lack of awareness of the game. Feels like unaware townie.
*Breadbocks: His attack on Toaster is rather weak and OMGUSy.  He's also overly defensive, as well, in my eyes.  My current top suspect.
*Jim: Feels kind of town to me, but it's a hunch.  I'm having problems reading him.
I find it better to nip would-be attacks in the bud. Proactivity > Reactivity, no?
Also, nice Bandwagon you got there. It'd be a shame if you didn't back it up with real meat. sssssSSSSSSS *BOOM*

Spoiler: COMPLETELY UNRELATED (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [2/7, 3/3]: D3 - For Peace and Trade
Post by: Jim Groovester on June 04, 2011, 06:38:38 pm
I find it better to nip would-be attacks in the bud. Proactivity > Reactivity, no?

Not necessarily. I find it suspect that somebody would defend themselves from nobody. It makes me want to suspect them for whatever they were preemptively defending themselves about.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [2/7, 3/3]: D3 - For Peace and Trade
Post by: Toaster on June 04, 2011, 09:04:22 pm
Jack:  Fair enough re Breadbocks.  "No holes in his armor" means I don't have an angle of attack on him.


Jim:
Really, now?  See this post (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=84271.msg2300801#msg2300801) for reasons that is dumb.

It bugs me that you're preemptively nipping this line of thought in the bud before anything comes from it, even though Heliman didn't say he actually suspected anybody for it.

Both ICs being alive is incredibly noteworthy, so why don't you want people talking about it?

This is WIFOM and you know it.  Why do you all of the sudden blow it off when usually you're down people's throats over it?  This is unusual for you.


Breadbocks:  I took the lazy way (as usual) and waited for the NK result to try to re-find my scum picks.

First you say you have nothing, but then you go after Jack for bandwagonning.  Which is it?  You're not really putting any meat on him, to use your words.



Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [2/7, 3/3]: D3 - For Peace and Trade
Post by: breadbocks on June 04, 2011, 11:39:00 pm
I'm not going after Jack, yet. I want to have a solider case than "he bandwagon'd lynch him" before I go after him. In effect, I've nothing.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [2/7, 3/3]: D3 - For Peace and Trade
Post by: Jim Groovester on June 05, 2011, 03:50:26 am
Jim:
Really, now?  See this post (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=84271.msg2300801#msg2300801) for reasons that is dumb.

It bugs me that you're preemptively nipping this line of thought in the bud before anything comes from it, even though Heliman didn't say he actually suspected anybody for it.

Both ICs being alive is incredibly noteworthy, so why don't you want people talking about it?

This is WIFOM and you know it.  Why do you all of the sudden blow it off when usually you're down people's throats over it?  This is unusual for you.

Because I am completely lost and am picking at anything and everything I can in the hopes that something might turn up. You're the recipient of my scrutiny.

This also doesn't answer my question.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [3/7, 2/2]: D3 - For Peace and Trade
Post by: lordnincompoop on June 05, 2011, 08:42:56 am
Riight, I forgot this was a 5p game now.

Votecount:
Heliman - 0-
Jack AT - 0-
breadbocks - 2 - Toaster, Jack AT
Jim Groovester - 0 -
Toaster - 0 -

Not Voting - 3 - Heliman, Jim Groovester, breadbocks
No Lynch  - 0 -

Extend  - 0 -
Shorten  - 0 -



The Day will end Monday, 8PM GMT.

You need 2 to Extend and 3 to Shorten.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [2/7, 3/3]: D3 - For Peace and Trade
Post by: Toaster on June 05, 2011, 12:51:27 pm
Jim:  I don't want people drinking the WIFOM.

Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [2/7, 3/3]: D3 - For Peace and Trade
Post by: Jim Groovester on June 05, 2011, 01:52:41 pm
I'm not going after Jack, yet. I want to have a solider case than "he bandwagon'd lynch him" before I go after him. In effect, I've nothing.

You ever going to get that case?

If you don't hunt I don't see any reason I should shy away from you.

Heliman and Jack A T, are the two of you just going to sit back while I pick at Toaster all day long? I don't care if there's nothing to go off of, you still need to post something and make yourselves readable.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [2/7, 3/3]: D3 - For Peace and Trade
Post by: Jack A T on June 05, 2011, 03:25:16 pm
As for the response thing, this is directed at everyone, I was considering the possibility of it being used as a weak reason to continue to persecute me, and headed it off.
So...why specifically direct it to Toaster, then?  Convenience?
I find it better to nip would-be attacks in the bud. Proactivity > Reactivity, no?
Also, nice Bandwagon you got there. It'd be a shame if you didn't back it up with real meat. sssssSSSSSSS *BOOM*
Nip would-be attacks in the bud: It's the tone that makes it feel defensive.  You used a hostile, "Oh, and before you inevitably use this against me" tone.  I personally prefer just quickly apologizing for my inability to post (with the BAND TRIP OF DOOM being an exception).  Doesn't seem overly defensive, but still deals with attacks like that.

To summarize: Calmly noting lack of internet access looks fine.  Announcing what is essentially "Oh, and before you attack me for this, here's my defense, Toaster!" looks twitchy and overly defensive.

Bandwagon/Lack of Meat: First, allow me to direct you to this post. (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=84271.msg2325546#msg2325546)

Second: Calm.  When someone is accusing you of being overly defensive, it is not generally a good idea to hastily attack him with almost no evidence.  Especially when you admit that you effectively have nothing (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=84271.msg2326547#msg2326547) on him.  Twice.

Heliman and Jack A T, are the two of you just going to sit back while I pick at Toaster all day long? I don't care if there's nothing to go off of, you still need to post something and make yourselves readable.
This is a very busy weekend for me (lots of acting-related stuff).  I'm going to do what I can, though.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [2/7, 3/3]: D3 - For Peace and Trade
Post by: Heliman on June 06, 2011, 12:23:25 am

Heliman and Jack A T, are the two of you just going to sit back while I pick at Toaster all day long? I don't care if there's nothing to go off of, you still need to post something and make yourselves readable.
*tiredly looks at thread*
,,,
Oh yeah.

As for the response thing, this is directed at everyone, I was considering the possibility of it being used as a weak reason to continue to persecute me, and headed it off.
So...why specifically direct it to Toaster, then?  Convenience?
Quote
Explain why it could possibly be convenient to target Toaster.

I find it better to nip would-be attacks in the bud. Proactivity > Reactivity, no?
Also, nice Bandwagon you got there. It'd be a shame if you didn't back it up with real meat. sssssSSSSSSS *BOOM*
Nip would-be attacks in the bud: It's the tone that makes it feel defensive.  You used a hostile, "Oh, and before you inevitably use this against me" tone.  I personally prefer just quickly apologizing for my inability to post (with the BAND TRIP OF DOOM being an exception).  Doesn't seem overly defensive, but still deals with attacks like that.
To summarize: Calmly noting lack of internet access looks fine.  Announcing what is essentially "Oh, and before you attack me for this, here's my defense, Toaster!" looks twitchy and overly defensive.
Toaster just did the same thing, and you said nothing about him doing it. Are you afraid to go after a better player, Jack?

Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [2/7, 3/3]: D3 - For Peace and Trade
Post by: Heliman on June 06, 2011, 12:39:31 am
Oh God damn it. Messed up with quotes. the post should read like this:

Heliman and Jack A T, are the two of you just going to sit back while I pick at Toaster all day long? I don't care if there's nothing to go off of, you still need to post something and make yourselves readable.
*tiredly looks at thread*
...
Oh yeah.

As for the response thing, this is directed at everyone, I was considering the possibility of it being used as a weak reason to continue to persecute me, and headed it off.
So...why specifically direct it to Toaster, then?  Convenience?
Explain why it could possibly be convenient to target Toaster.

I find it better to nip would-be attacks in the bud. Proactivity > Reactivity, no?
Also, nice Bandwagon you got there. It'd be a shame if you didn't back it up with real meat. sssssSSSSSSS *BOOM*
Nip would-be attacks in the bud: It's the tone that makes it feel defensive.  You used a hostile, "Oh, and before you inevitably use this against me" tone.  I personally prefer just quickly apologizing for my inability to post (with the BAND TRIP OF DOOM being an exception).  Doesn't seem overly defensive, but still deals with attacks like that.
To summarize: Calmly noting lack of internet access looks fine.  Announcing what is essentially "Oh, and before you attack me for this, here's my defense, Toaster!" looks twitchy and overly defensive.
Toaster just did the same thing, and you said nothing about him doing it. Are you afraid to go after a better player, Jack?


Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [2/7, 3/3]: D3 - For Peace and Trade
Post by: Jack A T on June 06, 2011, 12:59:48 am
Heliman:

Convenient to target Toaster: He was going into a rebuttal of Toaster's arguments.  It could've been convenient to just include the whole "Oh, and before you attack me for this" in the Toaster rebuttal.  However, I don't know what Breadbocks was thinking.  Ergo, I asked him a question.

"Toaster just did the same thing": Where?  Because I don't see anything like that since I came in.  Please clarify.

"afraid to go after [Toaster]": My extremely meta (and long) rebuttal. (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=81714.0)  Or, to put it differently, I've played with the guy before.  I'm not exactly scared of him.  He's a bit tough to read, but I've found that being outright afraid to go after someone isn't helpful to me, no matter what I am.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [2/7, 3/3]: D3 - For Peace and Trade
Post by: Reelyanoob on June 06, 2011, 01:21:02 am
Watching thread. I'd like to sign up for future rounds if possible.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [2/7, 3/3]: D3 - For Peace and Trade
Post by: Heliman on June 06, 2011, 02:39:35 am
"Toaster just did the same thing": Where?  Because I don't see anything like that since I came in.  Please clarify.
Jim was just going after him for it. (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=84271.msg2325688#msg2325688)
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [2/7, 3/3]: D3 - For Peace and Trade
Post by: Heliman on June 06, 2011, 02:43:29 am
Watching thread. I'd like to sign up for future rounds if possible.
That would be great, but you might not want to post this in games that are in session! If you want, try posting in the Games Threshold Discussion and List (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=45016.0) It's a stupidly specific and ornate sounding thread title, but it's basically where we talk about general things mafia when not in character for the games.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [2/7, 3/3]: D3 - For Peace and Trade
Post by: Jack A T on June 06, 2011, 03:14:44 am
"Toaster just did the same thing": Where?  Because I don't see anything like that since I came in.  Please clarify.
Jim was just going after him for it. (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=84271.msg2325688#msg2325688)

Ah, so that's what you meant.  I still fail to see the resemblance.  At all.  As far as I can tell (correct me if I'm wrong, Toaster), Toaster is trying to steer the game away from WIFOMy WIFOM, not to defend himself.  Nor is he being overly defensive, seeing how he's not really defending himself (as far as I can tell).  And I agree with him there.

While not nearly the worst possible WIFOMy thinking, it's still not a great reason to be wary of someone.  Maybe the mafia is finding the ICs useful in its schemes?  Maybe one of the ICs is scum?  Maybe the scum is killing anyone who comes close to the truth?  Maybe the scum is killing anyone who doesn't?  Maybe the scum looked at previous BM games and saw the attempts to get ICs lynched, and said "Oh, cool, let's let them do that!"?  Maybe the scum is just randomly killing people?  And so on, and so on.  Using stuff like that to determine pretty much anything isn't the greatest idea.  Your case is particularly mild, but still, try to avoid the WIFOM.

Besides, I'm a bit too young to legally drink alcoholic beverages.

To summarize: WIFOM usually bad.  Stopping excessive WIFOM ≠ being overly defensive.  Being overly defensive = being overly defensive.  Ug.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [2/7, 3/3]: D3 - For Peace and Trade
Post by: Toaster on June 06, 2011, 07:54:57 am
What Jack said, basically.

I'd be less suspicious of breadbocks if he was working on building a case on someone instead of sitting around waiting for the lynch.  For the record, this applies somewhat to Jim as well- he's being very quiet for a D3.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [2/7, 3/3]: D3 - For Peace and Trade
Post by: lordnincompoop on June 06, 2011, 07:56:57 am
Day ends in 6hrs, people.



Votecount:
Heliman - 0-
Jack AT - 0-
breadbocks - 2 - Toaster, Jack AT
Jim Groovester - 0 -
Toaster - 0 -

Not Voting - 3 - Heliman, Jim Groovester, breadbocks
No Lynch  - 0 -

Extend  - 0 -
Shorten  - 0 -



The Day will end Monday, 8PM GMT.

You need 2 to Extend and 3 to Shorten.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [2/7, 3/3]: D3 - For Peace and Trade
Post by: Toaster on June 06, 2011, 08:02:38 am
Putting out a preliminary extend to give nonvoters a chance to commit.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [2/7, 3/3]: D3 - For Peace and Trade
Post by: Jim Groovester on June 06, 2011, 02:36:59 pm
breadbocks.

I have to default to people who aren't hunting.

For the record, this applies somewhat to Jim as well- he's being very quiet for a D3.

What?

What?

I've probably posted the most out of anyone on Day 3. Every page features my scowling visage multiple times.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [2/7, 3/3]: D3 - For Peace and Trade
Post by: Toaster on June 06, 2011, 03:20:01 pm
Jim:  I was mostly referring to your lack of walls and this (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=84271.msg2326929#msg2326929) post.  It's not really scummy, just unusual.


Spoiler: Also... (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [2/7, 3/3]: Evening 3 - GAME OVER & TOWN WIN!
Post by: lordnincompoop on June 06, 2011, 04:22:02 pm
Day 3 Has Ended!
breadbocks has been Lynched!
He was an Assassin (Mafia)!

The Game Has Ended!



Votecount:
Heliman - 0-
Jack AT - 0-
breadbocks - 2 - Toaster, Jack AT, Jim Groovester
Jim Groovester - 0 -
Toaster - 0 -

Not Voting - 3 - Heliman, breadbocks
No Lynch  - 0 -

Extend  - 1 - Toaster
Shorten  - 0 -



The sun nears the horizon, painting the sea in shades of red and purple.

And to the chiming of church bells, the last of the rebellion is crushed. Breadbocks' broken body, bloodied breastplate and all, are paraded down the roads as great groups of guards arrest the surviving revolutionaries with the traitorous information revealed with his dying breath.

The King lives on, and the old regime with him. Health and stability has returned to the land from poisoned bodies and paranoid minds.

The nobles are dismissed without thank or fanfare. They return to their estates and, roused to action by one slight too many, begin plotting a new and better uprising.



The Tofu Dog has snuck onto the throne.



Postgame has Begun!
ICs, begin evaluation of your newbies.
Discuss the events of the game freely.

Scumchat: http://www.quicktopic.com/46/H/mNy3u6ZVcYM
Deadchat: http://www.quicktopic.com/46/H/brjutMsX9w3
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [2/7, 3/3]: Evening 3 - GAME OVER & TOWN WIN!
Post by: Darvi on June 06, 2011, 04:24:14 pm
The Tofu Dog has snuck onto the throne.
Wha?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [1/7, 3/3]: Evening 3 - GAME OVER & TOWN WIN!
Post by: Think0028 on June 06, 2011, 04:32:30 pm
Woooooooo! Win on my first game!


... Holy crap Okami, once random.org spoke, you were dogged in getting me.
Also Breadbocks, why'd you stick to me?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [2/7, 3/3]: D3 - For Peace and Trade
Post by: Heliman on June 06, 2011, 04:41:58 pm
What? I'm- OK! We uh, won I guess? Lol I thought we had extensions BAD ADMIN, BAD.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [1/7, 3/3]: Evening 3 - GAME OVER & TOWN WIN!
Post by: Darvi on June 06, 2011, 04:42:46 pm
Nope, it said it was going to end today.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [1/7, 3/3]: Evening 3 - GAME OVER & TOWN WIN!
Post by: Think0028 on June 06, 2011, 04:43:05 pm
Toaster extended, but one extend vote isn't enough for an extension! If you want an extension, you better be on before the game ends.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [1/7, 3/3]: Evening 3 - GAME OVER & TOWN WIN!
Post by: Think0028 on June 06, 2011, 04:45:43 pm
Woah, Toaster was a doctor? Guess it goes to show slight scumminess can mean doctor as well as scum. I never posted it, but I would've lynched you if I was alive and breadbocks wasn't scum.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [1/7, 3/3]: Evening 3 - GAME OVER & TOWN WIN!
Post by: Jim Groovester on June 06, 2011, 04:48:08 pm
Oh crap a town win. When was the last time that happened in a Beginner's mafia? Has that happened ever?

I guess we ran out of beginners there by Day 3, which is a bit disappointing, but stuff happens.

Who wants their play analyzed and rated?

I should probably also ask for feedback about the beginner tutorial system in general. Do you like it? Is it stressful? Are we nice enough? Does it make you want to stick around and play mafia?

Powder Miner, since you asked for feedback before you were lynched I'll give you some: Look over all the advice you were given as you were being pressed. When people suspect you and give their reasons it doubles as criticism of your game. So everything you were criticized for is legitimate advice on areas to improve.

What you need to do most though, is just calm down. Getting voted isn't that big of a deal. No need to flip out over it. If you start to sense that you're flipping out about it, you should probably avoid posting for a little bit. Go calm down, don't think about it for a little bit, then come back and address their concerns in the simplest and most straightforward manner.

Also go hunt the people you say you suspect. Don't worry about treading on other people's arguments. It's worse to do nothing because you were beat to the punch.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [1/7, 3/3]: Evening 3 - GAME OVER & TOWN WIN!
Post by: Darvi on June 06, 2011, 04:50:31 pm
Woah, Toaster was a doctor?
Whuh?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [1/7, 3/3]: Evening 3 - GAME OVER & TOWN WIN!
Post by: Jim Groovester on June 06, 2011, 04:51:44 pm
First post was updated with everybody's roles.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [1/7, 3/3]: Evening 3 - GAME OVER & TOWN WIN!
Post by: Darvi on June 06, 2011, 04:51:55 pm
Ah.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [2/7, 3/3]: D3 - For Peace and Trade
Post by: lordnincompoop on June 06, 2011, 04:52:29 pm
BAD ADMIN, BAD.

Fuck you, I'm not a dog.

Nope, it said it was going to end today.

Yup.

Woah, Toaster was a doctor? Guess it goes to show slight scumminess can mean doctor as well as scum. I never posted it, but I would've lynched you if I was alive and breadbocks wasn't scum.

Once you get better, you'll learn to distinguish, say, coptells and doctells alongside the more usual scumtells. It's tricky and I don't have the hang of it yet, so you can ask the ICs for more info.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [1/7, 3/3]: Evening 3 - GAME OVER & TOWN WIN!
Post by: Think0028 on June 06, 2011, 04:58:13 pm

Who wants their play analyzed and rated?
I do!
Quote
I should probably also ask for feedback about the beginner tutorial system in general. Do you like it? Is it stressful? Are we nice enough? Does it make you want to stick around and play mafia?
I like it, I think it's one of the better ways to do feedback. Then again, I was never really on the target end of some of the harsher advice, so don't ask me. I don't think there's much that would convince me to go away, I'd been lurking for a month or two before I signed up for this game.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [1/7, 3/3]: Evening 3 - GAME OVER & TOWN WIN!
Post by: Darvi on June 06, 2011, 05:03:18 pm
Hmmm, I've looked through the first day and can't say that I see any blatant flaws. Which is good, because if I could see them then you would truly be an abysmal player.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [1/7, 3/3]: Evening 3 - GAME OVER & TOWN WIN!
Post by: breadbocks on June 06, 2011, 05:04:08 pm
What I wouldn't have given for a partner who wasn't dead when I joined. :-\
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [1/7, 3/3]: Evening 3 - GAME OVER & TOWN WIN!
Post by: Jim Groovester on June 06, 2011, 05:13:46 pm
Who wants their play analyzed and rated?
I do!

You did excellently.

The only problem with your play was on Day 1 when you got ahead of yourself and made a bunch of accusations that couldn't be backed up. I pointed it out then and you corrected your play almost instantly.

So yeah, you did good. Nothing else really to say. Congratulations?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [1/7, 3/3]: Evening 3 - GAME OVER & TOWN WIN!
Post by: Ottofar on June 06, 2011, 05:16:52 pm
Congrats on the town win. You don't see those every game.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [1/7, 3/3]: Evening 3 - GAME OVER & TOWN WIN!
Post by: Think0028 on June 06, 2011, 05:18:50 pm
Cool, thanks.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [2/7, 3/3]: D3 - For Peace and Trade
Post by: Heliman on June 06, 2011, 05:40:38 pm
BAD ADMIN, BAD.
Fuck you, I'm not a dog.
Woah woah no need for bad blood, I was only playing ^.^'

Who wants their play analyzed and rated?
Awesome, I'd love to have one of those too.

I should probably also ask for feedback about the beginner tutorial system in general. Do you like it? Is it stressful? Are we nice enough? Does it make you want to stick around and play mafia?
I like the tutorial system alot! The only thing I think could make it better would be a something like a Scum Nanny, or a non-playing person who gives advice to scum. Otherwise, it holds up great!
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [1/7, 3/3]: Evening 3 - GAME OVER & TOWN WIN!
Post by: Powder Miner on June 06, 2011, 06:28:12 pm
Wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee I won anyway! Anyway, Tofu Dog, wut?
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [1/7, 3/3]: Evening 3 - GAME OVER & TOWN WIN!
Post by: lordnincompoop on June 06, 2011, 06:32:57 pm
Wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee I won anyway! Anyway, Tofu Dog, wut?

You'll never find out what it truly means!

*cackles*
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [2/7, 3/3]: D3 - For Peace and Trade
Post by: Jim Groovester on June 06, 2011, 07:11:12 pm
Who wants their play analyzed and rated?
Awesome, I'd love to have one of those too.

The only things I can think of after doing a quick scan of your play is that I would've liked to see more activity and more detail in your posts.

Like when you attacked me on Day 1 for how I twisted Okami No Rei's words. More of that, but directed at more people, and not about stupid stuff. I guess I can forgive it if you were trying to press me over something.

Otherwise, no complaints. You're doing great.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [1/7, 3/3]: Evening 3 - GAME OVER & TOWN WIN!
Post by: Toaster on June 06, 2011, 08:02:26 pm
A-yup, I was the doctor- I protected Jim both nights (shocker).  Good game, town- been quite a while since a BM town win.


A couple quick post-game points to throw out:

Breadbocks:  If you're scum and get pressure lategame, don't fold and give up.  See Roguelike Mafia (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=78265.0) for an example of scum Jim getting the majority of votes, then busting ass to turn the lynch around for a mislynch and scum win.  Start around reply #642 (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=78265.msg2089597#msg2089597) for when it starts.

It sucks to replace in to a bad situation, but it just makes the wins where you pull it off that much sweeter.


Powder:  The dead horse is fairly beaten at this point, but don't panic and remain calm.  Think before you post.  The preview button is a very good friend of yours (Town or scum- if nothing else, it'll help you spot broken quote tags).  If you're too tired/hungry/whatever to post rationally, say so, get some sleep, and look at it with a fresh eye in the morning.  No one will give you crap for that (unless you have a reputation for saying "more later" and not delivering.)


Think:  I thought you had a very solid towngame once that issue I called you on D1 was resolved.  You handled the pressure smoothly and easily- you'll do just fine.


Heliman:  I thought you tunneled a bit much.  I'm a big fan of spreading my attention around to see what turns up.  Your mileage may vary, of course.


Jim:  We both got a bit slack on the advice on D2/3, though D2 was pretty much an open and shut case, and D3 was low on newblood.

Also, how dare you ignore that picture I worked so hard on!


LNCP:  Thanks for hosting!
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [1/7, 3/3]: Evening 3 - GAME OVER & TOWN WIN!
Post by: breadbocks on June 06, 2011, 08:20:00 pm
Thanks for the advice, Toaster. I'll keep that in mind when I inevitably get scum role again.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [1/7, 3/3]: Evening 3 - GAME OVER & TOWN WIN!
Post by: Jim Groovester on June 06, 2011, 08:23:41 pm
Also, how dare you ignore that picture I worked so hard on!

I didn't ignore it. It was a beautiful picture that I spent ten minutes in gimp to try and give the background transparency to so I could use it as an avatar for the day, but since I don't know jack shit about gimp I just gave up.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [1/7, 3/3]: Evening 3 - GAME OVER & TOWN WIN!
Post by: lordnincompoop on June 06, 2011, 08:25:56 pm
LNCP:  Thanks for hosting!

No problem! Enjoy the tofu, everyone!

Also, how dare you ignore that picture I worked so hard on!

I didn't ignore it. It was a beautiful picture that I spent ten minutes in gimp to try and give the background transparency to so I could use it as an avatar for the day, but since I don't know jack shit about gimp I just gave up.

I'll see what I can do, if you're willing to use it later.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [1/7, 3/3]: Evening 3 - GAME OVER & TOWN WIN!
Post by: Jim Groovester on June 06, 2011, 08:33:59 pm
Maybe for a day or two.

I am very fond of the scowl.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [1/7, 3/3]: Evening 3 - GAME OVER & TOWN WIN!
Post by: Heliman on June 06, 2011, 08:47:39 pm
*hack* *hack*
Done.
(http://i.imgur.com/hC9CJ.gif)
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [1/7, 3/3]: Evening 3 - GAME OVER & TOWN WIN!
Post by: Toaster on June 06, 2011, 08:47:50 pm
Animated gif that scowls for 30 seconds then smiles for one.  Trip people out.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [1/7, 3/3]: Evening 3 - GAME OVER & TOWN WIN!
Post by: Jim Groovester on June 06, 2011, 08:52:33 pm
It is done.

So weird looking.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [1/7, 3/3]: Evening 3 - GAME OVER & TOWN WIN!
Post by: Heliman on June 06, 2011, 09:01:37 pm
Animated gif that scowls for 30 seconds then smiles for one.  Trip people out.
Also done because I was bored.
(http://i.imgur.com/NUYtk.gif)
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [1/7, 3/3]: Evening 3 - GAME OVER & TOWN WIN!
Post by: Toaster on June 06, 2011, 09:40:16 pm
Awesome.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [1/7, 3/3]: Evening 3 - GAME OVER & TOWN WIN!
Post by: Jim Groovester on June 06, 2011, 09:48:33 pm
Eh heh heh heh.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [1/7, 3/3]: Evening 3 - GAME OVER & TOWN WIN!
Post by: Toaster on June 07, 2011, 08:01:30 am
Fun fact:  The last time Town won a BM game was BM8- in Feb 2010.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [1/7, 3/3]: Evening 3 - GAME OVER & TOWN WIN!
Post by: breadbocks on June 07, 2011, 08:38:51 am
Well, now I feel like REALLY bad scum. I know I played badly, but damn.  :(
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [1/7, 3/3]: Evening 3 - GAME OVER & TOWN WIN!
Post by: Vector on June 07, 2011, 09:05:25 am
Fun fact:  The last time Town won a BM game was BM8- in Feb 2010.

That long ago?  It feels like just yesterday... jegus, I'm getting old.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [1/7, 3/3]: Evening 3 - GAME OVER & TOWN WIN!
Post by: Toaster on June 07, 2011, 09:20:44 am
Well, now I feel like REALLY bad scum. I know I played badly, but damn.  :(

You weren't that bad- you replaced into a tricky situation.  Just remember to always be pressing your case.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [1/7, 3/3]: Evening 3 - GAME OVER & TOWN WIN!
Post by: Okami No Rei on June 07, 2011, 06:05:21 pm
I must say, I had quite a bit of fun.  Wish I could have been on the day I got lynched.  I think I could've talked my way out of it.

Sorry for the mess I left, Breadbocks.

Who wants their play analyzed and rated?
Please do.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [1/7, 3/3]: Evening 3 - GAME OVER & TOWN WIN!
Post by: Jim Groovester on June 07, 2011, 07:43:24 pm
Your cases were weak and selective but you pushed them regardless. You voted Supercharazad for no good reason, he defended himself convincingly, and then you tried to invent a case of him lying from thin air. For all the crap you gave people about parroting (and for the love of God, don't ever accuse anybody of presciently parroting ever again, because that's a seriously bullshit accusation), you would've been better off jumping off your weak cases and onto the stronger ones presented by members of the town.

Also, never say an attack on a weak player was part of a plan to catch weak scum. You look doubly scummy, once for pressing a weak player, and then twice for claiming it was part of a plan, which is in no way verifiable to everybody else. It would have been much easier to claim you could not get a read on Taricus, say nothing else about it, and then move on.

Your only goal as scum is to avoid detection, and it's counterproductive to that goal to draw all attention to yourself by pushing weak cases that even you don't look like you really believe yourself and claiming a plan with a constantly changing goal.

Also, you should stop pretending that you're not Book, because it's pretty obvious you are, and you got lynched, as scum, on Day 1, in a Beginner's game, so I'd pretty much say that the jig is up.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [7/7, 2/2]: D1 - Courtroom Brawl
Post by: Toaster on June 07, 2011, 08:26:28 pm
Vector:

And also: This is how you scumhunt, bitches.  If I were actually in this game and asking questions about scumminess instead of forum-knowledge, I'd be lynching right now on two posts of information.  So pay attention.

I'm curious as to who/what you saw here.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [1/7, 3/3]: Evening 3 - GAME OVER & TOWN WIN!
Post by: Heliman on June 07, 2011, 08:33:27 pm
Also, you should stop pretending that you're not Book, because it's pretty obvious you are, and you got lynched, as scum, on Day 1, in a Beginner's game, so I'd pretty much say that the jig is up.
Oh for the love of- Can we stop talking about god damn Book? Look, if it makes you feel any better, I'm Book, I've been posing as the Heliman you know and love this whole time in order to phase myself seamlessly back in should I be banned.

jk. Honestly though, lets stop now.
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [1/7, 3/3]: Evening 3 - GAME OVER & TOWN WIN!
Post by: Think0028 on June 07, 2011, 10:33:51 pm
Heliman can't be Book, I'm Book!
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [1/7, 3/3]: Evening 3 - GAME OVER & TOWN WIN!
Post by: IronyOwl on June 07, 2011, 10:36:47 pm
I am Book!
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [1/7, 3/3]: Evening 3 - GAME OVER & TOWN WIN!
Post by: Jim Groovester on June 07, 2011, 10:56:32 pm
I'm Book.
Heliman can't be Book, I'm Book!
I am Book!

Okay.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [1/7, 3/3]: Evening 3 - GAME OVER & TOWN WIN!
Post by: Jack A T on June 07, 2011, 11:00:49 pm
Book?  Bah!  I'm Zathras!
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [1/7, 3/3]: Evening 3 - GAME OVER & TOWN WIN!
Post by: IronyOwl on June 07, 2011, 11:54:53 pm
I'm Book.
Heliman can't be Book, I'm Book!
I am Book!

Okay.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
I lol'd for a good 10-15 seconds. :P
Title: Re: Beginners' Mafia XXIII [1/7, 3/3]: Evening 3 - GAME OVER & TOWN WIN!
Post by: breadbocks on June 08, 2011, 12:41:07 am
I wanna be Sparticus Book. (http://www.explosm.net/comics/1715/)