Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Leafsnail]

@Jim: honestly, no. I don't think she's scum. It's too... convenient. I suspect both you and Leafsnail, but I can't prove anything just yet. Hence why I want her to make a better case. But, I can't make her do better, and I'm okay with lynching her if she doesn't want to. The point is that regardless, she's a liability to the town if she doesn't improve.

Maybe it sounds scummy, but allowing bad cases to exist is a far greater threat. Plus, I doubt I have the evidence to lynch the two of you. Leafsnail maybe, but I don't have the resources to do that right now. You I can deal with later.

unvote vote webadict.  What the hell are you doing?

There are two people you regard as scummy.  Yet instead of making any real efforr to sttack either of them you're just attacking their cases on someone.  And what's more, you're GOING ALONG WITH TWO PEOPLE YOU THINK ARE SCUM due to some vague policylynch bullshit.

Questions:
- Why are you voting for someome you think is town, even though you could swing the vote?
- If you're after policy lynch, wouldn't it be better to hit a lurker than somepne who is actually contributing?  My phone won't let me edit the bit below so it makes no sense.
- Why are you not attempting to lynch

[webadict]

@Jim: honestly, no. I don't think she's scum. It's too... convenient. I suspect both you and Leafsnail, but I can't prove anything just yet. Hence why I want her to make a better case. But, I can't make her do better, and I'm okay with lynching her if she doesn't want to. The point is that regardless, she's a liability to the town if she doesn't improve.

Maybe it sounds scummy, but allowing bad cases to exist is a far greater threat. Plus, I doubt I have the evidence to lynch the two of you. Leafsnail maybe, but I don't have the resources to do that right now. You I can deal with later.

unvote vote webadict.  What the hell are you doing?

There are two people you regard as scummy.  Yet instead of making any real effort to attack either of them you're just attacking their cases on someone.  And what's more, you're GOING ALONG WITH TWO PEOPLE YOU THINK ARE SCUM due to some vague policylynch bullshit.

Questions:
- Why are you voting for someone you think is town, even though you could swing the vote?
- If you're after policy lynch, wouldn't it be better to hit a lurker than someone who is actually contributing?
- Why are you not attempting to lynch to one of the players you suspect?

I believe I have corrected your post, but if you meant something else, please let me know.

Policy lynch? I think you're using that word wrong. I'm not proposing a policy lynch. In fact, I would very much not like to lynch her. But, I refuse to let her continue making a crappy case, and if I have to lynch her, then oh well, I guess she might learn something from it.

But, I'm assuming you don't really care about that. I'm thinking big picture here, aren't I? Let's stick with the little picture. Little picture (okay, maybe slightly smaller picture) is this: She isn't lynched, but she doesn't learn. She is kept alive until some Day in the future, where people will think "Hey, why didn't we lynch her Day 1 again?" And then she'll be lynched. Then, she'll have accomplished nothing, we'll have lost a Day later in the game, where Days are far more important, and she'll have learned her lesson way later.

The littler picture is that I might be wrong, and I'd rather not end up doubting myself later, so Today is a great Day to remove both a player that is making a poor case and appearing scummy to everyone.

The littlest picture is that I'm trying to get her to do something productive Today. If she doesn't, then she gets lynched, regardless of how town I believe her to be.

I don't know where you got the idea that I was being vague about it. Indeed, I've told her multiple times what would allow me to unvote her and allow her to be a functioning member of the Town. I don't believe I've been vague in explaining this either. If anything, I was simply not asked.

As for voting a lurker... really? Man, YOU'RE a lurker. Your posts are below average in just about all the important aspects. If it makes you feel better, I'll certainly vote you. I've got no problem with that. I have never not had a point to voting as I do, but voting someone for lurking would be stupidly lame. I'd rather they got modkilled. Which is simply a better option.

Now for the third point... The easiest answer is that there isn't enough evidence to do that. The best answer is that there isn't enough GOOD evidence to do it. I can certainly bring up your shoddy posting, contribution, understanding, and overall play, but you'll coast by making minimal effort until at least Tomorrow, posting things such as "PFP busy cant answrr" which I can't verify or counter, kill me Tonight, and then pretend nothing happened. Or WIFOM it. Or just make the Town retarded, as usual.

The point is that I'd rather I fixed a problem we're having now that will continue to reoccur while I'm still alive to do it. I used to think this game was winnable by yourself. But it's not. No matter what team, alignment, or role you have in a game, you need to rely on other players. The players I need to rely on just happen to be the Town. And if they can't shape up their actions, then I wasn't going to win with flawless arguments anyway.

Riddle me that, Batman.

[Jim Groovester]

In fact, I would very much not like to lynch her.

Then don't.

webadict.

[Jim Groovester]

I suppose I should add, if you're that concerned about getting new players to learn, go IC a Beginner's Mafia.

Voting and lynching people you don't suspect for making bad cases is idiotic and scummy, and no amount of flimsy justifications and rationalizations will ever support that.

[webadict]

I suppose I should add, if you're that concerned about getting new players to learn, go IC a Beginner's Mafia.

Voting and lynching people you don't suspect for making bad cases is idiotic and scummy, and no amount of flimsy justifications and rationalizations will ever support that.

Hahahahahaha.

Haha.

Ha.

Oh Jim. Thank you for making your lynching so much easier. I have never literally been handed a blank check like this. This is such a great day, you have no idea. I literally CANNOT lose! This is amazing!

Let's rock, babe. Jim Groovester.

Let's start with the explanations first.

First, show where the justification is flimsy.
Second, please explain in greater detail how it is scummy. I don't believe it is self-explanatory to everyone watching, especially since you pointed out that no justification at all would be valid. Therefore, there must be a point where it begins to be scummy.

Then, the questions.

Why do you believe it is acceptable to allow bad cases in any game at all?
Who do you believe is Town?
Why do you believe this is about new players at all?

[webadict]

"I feel like the prettiest girl at the ball!" Because I totally am.

[Jim Groovester]

Did you go insane at some point?

I'm seriously starting to wonder.

First, show where the justification is flimsy.

Alright, let's start with the part where you think it's a good idea to lynch players you don't suspect.

Let's also stop there, since that's all that needs to be said.

Because in a game where the town win by finding scum and lynching them, it should be really obvious that spending lynches on players you don't suspect is counterproductive.

Second, please explain in greater detail how it is scummy. I don't believe it is self-explanatory to everyone watching, especially since you pointed out that no justification at all would be valid. Therefore, there must be a point where it begins to be scummy.

It provides an easy cover for scum.

Instead of scumhunting, they can just vote for people with bad cases! All under the altruistic guise of critiquing them under threat of lynch.

Truly there's no possible way any member of the scum team would possibly abuse that to avoid engaging in the more difficult task of pretending to scumhunt.

Why do you believe it is acceptable to allow bad cases in any game at all?

Because bad cases and punishing them is not the point of the game of mafia.

Who do you believe is Town?

I haven't seen anything in this game from any player that makes me think they're town since everybody's activity has been dismal and their scumhunting underwhelming. For the most part, my opinion on everybody is neutral.

You're scummy though.

Why do you believe this is about new players at all?

Believe what about new players?

[zombie urist]

Ugh I'm not really feeling this game at all and I just moved to my college-place. Also I forgot my mouse at home so I have to use a tablet, which makes mafia more annoying.

Hrmm... I agree with Webadict to a degree in that town people can be anti-town (zoomzoll in MasonsMafiaHackers) but not really here. Also Webadict doesn't seem to have a case on Jim.
OTOH Jim's vote on Web was awfully speedy after LS's.
Toaster's feeling kinda meh. Can't pinpoint anything specific though.
Griffion needs to summarize his WoT's cuz I can't make anything of them. (and post more)

lenglon if you would rather kick Tiruin out rather that griffionday then why arent' you voting her?

That was addressed to Solifuge, not Tiruin.

I really only read the first few and last few sentences. While you might use umms in RL a lot, it makes reading harder to follow.

[Vector]

Man, I'm sorry--it seems like a lot of people are having trouble getting into this.  Is there anything, as a mod, that I could do to help you out?  Please feel free to let me know.


VOTE COUNT

Okami no Rei
Leafsnail
Tiruin
Lenglon
Griffinpup - NotQuiteThere, Toaster
zombieurist -
Griffionday - Solifuge
notquitethere - Okami no Rei, Griffionday
Solifuge - Lenglon
Jim Groovester - Webadict
Ottofar
Toaster
Webadict - Leafsnail, JimGroovester

Not voting - griffinpup, zombie urist, Ottofar [needs replacement], Tiruin [hurricane]

Day end is scheduled for Thursday at 12:00 (-8 GMT).  Six requests for extension required.  One more extension available.

[Solifuge]

((I'm into this. Just had a few busy days, and I now need to get caught up. Day 1 has always kinda bored me, and having more than a week of chained Extends does cool my interest. There's only so much speculating I can do about people's words before I need something Definite to happen. Something that lets me know if I need to revisit my thinking, or if I'm on to something.))

[Vector]

((Hmm, I'll change up the extension rules a little bit for tomorrow, then.))

[Tiruin]

Man, I'm sorry--it seems like a lot of people are having trouble getting into this.  Is there anything, as a mod, that I could do to help you out?  Please feel free to let me know.

((It's my net connection, and the fact that we're really under the weather. Figuratively pertaining to myself, and literally.

I'll post later and this game is awesome. :I))

[Griffionday]

NOTE: Post split into four parts to avoid the wall of text that happens when you answer the questions of seven people.  Please do inform me if there is a more preferred way of dealing with this.

As is fairly obvious by now I don't have a clear picture of how my case is coming across.  Obviously my actions make sense to me, and as far as I can tell they absolutely do not to a fair number of you.

To get a clearer picture of how my case is being seen by others: does my case sound about as bad as Webadict's against Jim?  (obviously in a different fashion, I'm referring to quality/validity)  If so, I'm terribly sorry, and I'll avoid the methods I was attempting to use in the future at least until I figure out how to properly hunt through the normal channels.

Until I've cleared up the confusion about the thinking behind my read and subsequent case, both to others and to myself, I will unvote.
Lady Jim:

How about, you give me a fucking quote, or even better, as many fucking quotes as it takes, because I still don't understand what the fuck point you're trying to make.

That's my bad; I was trying to avoid making an already giant WOT even larger.  May I compromise and put the relevant quotes in spoilers?

So if your accounting of the events is accurate, and I see no reason to dispute, I don't really see any fault with NQT at all. He pointed out you did not respond to his question as intended, like he should have, and then you decide to be cagey for no good reason and not answer him, like you should not have.

Why do you think he decided to not follow up with you, instead of him just forgetting about it?

Because he was following up with other players and calling out scummy moves on their part.

Spoiler: Relevant quote (click to show/hide)

Princess Lenglon

-snip-

Different from other games you've played in. So you've perfected your mafia technique and plan on making no changes to your playstyle? An enviable position!

Princess Cado

-snip-

Why are you so jumpy about a substanceless RVS vote?

And yet he forgot about a line of communication with someone who was voting him?  Possible, yes.  But I'm afraid I don't know how likely; I considered it worthy of focusing on to see what would happen.

Fun fact! Attempting to play better is not, in fact, a town tell.  Stop using it as a shield.

WHERE

And I don't want a goddamned link, I want a quote to a specific location.

I was responding to this:

Spoiler: Relevant quote (click to show/hide)

Get back to you in what fashion?  If you meant for me to try again to answer your question again why did you not bring this up when you next talked to me here?  Possibly you should have pursued that inquiry at all.

I'm not sure where your misunderstanding here lies. I asked you an ambiguous question, you answered the question one way, I implied you'd not answered the way I'd intended you to answer, you asked me why I didn't ask me the question again, then I asked the question again freely admitting that I should have reasked it sooner. I didn't reask it sooner because my focus on the game was not sufficiently strong. This isn't a scum-tell, it's just me being distracted. Now I'm more on the ball, I'm determined not to let things get to Great Temple levels where I was town but utterly ineffectual.

As I saw the quote, he is claiming that his not paying attention to the game was not a scum-tell, as evidenced by the fact that he is playing better now.

Filling space, brah. You're great at it. I wonder, is your RP worth reading or is it more useless space filling?

I just read it, nope. Thank you for wasting my time.

I've tried hunting in RP mode.  It didn't turn out well for any party involved.  In this game I've used my RP purely for fun; I'm sorry I wasn't clear on this.

[Griffionday]

NQT:

If you didn't care about the question, yes.  I say that you didn't care because it didn't really seem to interest you, in fact you pretty much allowed me complete control over that question.

To start you asked the question, I responded in a fashion that I knew was not the one you intended (town baiting). In the same post I shoot the question back to you, you bring up the fact that it wasn't answered in the fashion you intended and reply using my read of your question.  I let the matter lie for a post, you do the same.  I bring up the fact that I didn't answer the question you intended, you rephrase your question to be non-ambiguous.

By this point you've let me have complete control over this line of inquiry, indicating that you really don't care about keeping me off balance to test me if I'm scum.  This indicates that either you've a complete read on me (which is idiotic at this stage of the game as others have pointed out) or that you in fact are not town.

Well it did interest me, hence why I got back to it later. But here I feel we're talking about talking about talking and the original issue and the motivations surrounding it have become somewhat obscured. What you seem to be saying here is that answering someone's enquiries (and it's not as if I haven't asked questions in return) is proof of scumhood. What you are doing here is starting with a prejudice which you then try to rationalise until it becomes a universal rule. Ask yourself, could a town player conceivably act in the way I have seen this princess act?

To answer your accusation: I tend to ask myself "Is the player in question acting in the most likely way town would, or how scum would?"  Hence the reason I go to such lengths to engineer situations where a difference could occur.  In the example you're referring too I'm saying that town would be more likely to attempt to be in control of a line of questions that they are asking (so they can be more sure of what the answer is telling them) while scum might be more willing to allow a question to be dictated by the answer as they're not interested in the read they'll be getting, but rather being seen to ask and answer questions.

If this wasn't the answer you were expecting I'm not sure what else I can do for you. It appears as if you've decided that I'm scum and are getting annoyed when I don't self-incriminate enough. Since you've already prejudged my case, why not simply say so? You're not fooling anyone with this charade. Tell me, what answer would have satisfied you that I was town?

Completely? Nothing.

That being said, an answer that showed that you had read and gotten something from my answer would have done a good deal.  If your answer wasn't directly structured and formatted like the verbatim win-con, and showed enough editing that scum couldn't pull all the essential terms from your claim it would have satisfied me that you had actually read my answer.  The fact that you almost directly quoted seemed to indicate that my answer should have been very odd and strange to you; so the question to me was why didn't you press me on that?
Webadict:

My goodness, Griffionday, you're not getting it.

Apparently not in the slightest.

To shove with full force is foolish.

Could we just go with that one in the future so I clearly know the whole case you're leveling against me all at once?

I do have one question though:

Why would I chainsaw defend NQT? She's doing just fine by letting you talk.

I've no idea WHY you would do it; but isn't the definition of chainsawing "pressuring someone with the purpose of getting them to unvote a third party"?  As in, pretty much exactly what you are doing?  So why ARE you chainsawing?

[Griffionday]

Leafsnail:

PFP @Griffionday: as far as I can tell your new answer on the aggressive apology contradicts your old one.  Previously you said you weren't only paying attention to him, now you're saying you were but it's ok because he's scum.

Still not gettin other point, NQT is scum with town wincon??

We're referring to this right?

Spoiler: Relevant quote (click to show/hide)

Secondly: let me clarify exactly what I'm apologizing for in that second sentence.  I've no problem with any part of my case on NQT, what I'm apologizing about is the fact that there where days that it was all I was pursuing, which is slightly sloppy play.

Sure.  But the first sentence and the first half of the second sentence are passive aggressive - "I am sorry that you are wrong".  It's like you're trying to both stand your ground and concede that you were wrong at the same time.

Which is exactly what was trying to do.  I'm convinced that NQT is scum, and as such I've no reason to unvote him, on the other hand I was conceding the point that my play with regards to tunneling was wrong.

The other person I pursuing a line of inquiry with was Tiruin; who has been having difficulty posting with any frequency.  I did excuse myself from finding other lines of inquiry to follow while waiting for her to return (the tunneling I was referring to) because I felt I was getting something on my other line of inquiry.  This is of course poor play.

As to the other point, as Webadict showed, it is completely legal for scum to ask for the town wincon; so scum having the town wincon isn't impossible.
ZU:

Griffionday: give me a short summary of your posts plz.

Griffion needs to summarize his WoT's cuz I can't make anything of them. (and post more)

I understand you don't have time to read all of my WOTs, unfortunately I don't have time right now to provide summaries that are succinct and accurate.  I hope you understand but I'm going to have to refuse.  I'll try to avoid WOTs in the future, not quite sure how though.
Toaster:

Griffionday: I tend to agree with the other cases on you that say your case on NQT sucks, but this in particular jumped out at me:

-snip-

Wait, what?

Are you saying you're dropping scum tells on purpose for him and you're expecting him to go after you on them, or he's not town?   Please tell me I'm misreading this, because as such it makes no damn sense.

You are not misreading that.

My goal was to test the validity of his scum-hunting through experiment; rather than just seeing what I felt of his cases as seems to be status quo.  I attempted to manufacture situations that I had more control over, to see if he was hunting or just trying to appear to be doing so.  As he did not press what I felt he should have (that is what I thought was ambiguous or scummy enough to warrant pressing on), I assumed that he was avoiding engagement.  Which I took as needlessly defensive.

Does that make more sense or less now?
Tiruin:

Griffionday: Why ask that question anyway (@NQT--the thing I linked to; wincon)?

Because I had no idea why NQT found it to be an interesting or useful question, and thought it would be a good idea to reverse his question on him.  Turns out, it's an awful question.

What was your explanation afterwards talking about and what was it referring to?

Could you be more specific with this question?

(s)He directly answered the question, did (s)he not?

As I mentioned to him, the reason I disliked his answer so much was that it showed he cared nothing about my answer; and while anyone could have the town wincon, I feel only scum wouldn't be suspicious if a player responded with an answer that wasn't very similar to how they would have answered the question.