Mafia 82: International (Game Over)

[armlx]

The kind of behavior the pact endorses is terrible for scum hunting. Letting people make their own decisions and be held accountable for them is really good I hear. Not to mention how the plan exacerbates tunnel vision and rushes claims.

The Nhat-Peter Griffin thing is possibly notable for later. But much later.

[rant]BM needs to stop fucking multi-posting for no reason. The material you are posting is ALL IN THE THREAD AT THE TIME YOU ARE POSTING. Be patient enough to put multiple trains of thought in the same post before you blow your load.[/rant]

That said, I want to look at the people who jumped into the plan sorta later on. Plenty of room for abuse there.

[armlx]

Vote Dynamo

FoS PeterG, Wolf

See previous post.

[armlx]

I agree with this sentiment, though I think wolf was being much more blatant.

I have found Wolf has a tendency to agree with ideas that look well supported a lot more then normal, or I would have voted him.

SC, BM likes these dumb "Lets all gang up and vote someone to proceed the game" things regardless of alignment I think.

As for him posting infinite, he also has a tendency to be killed early on because a vig or scum group finds him too damn random/annoying to play the game with. You know its bad when a scum group targets you because.

Also, quality + quantity = good, but one without the other is not indicative of being scum. Moderate quantity without quality is, and a complete lack of both is as well.

[armlx]

Which do you find more credible: three posts that all make a good case or ten posts that suck?

But since when is that the issue at hand?

[armlx]

I'm reminded of one of Stoofer's laws here.

That law became completely irrelevant upon its naming as a law, as it turned into WIFOM.

[armlx]

Admittedly, I should go back and finish reading the pre-game, but that is where my guts takes me based upon the first 7 or so pages.

Gut != valid. Explain please.

SC: BM's posts weren't really devoid of content, and the example you are using is flawed. Its not 3 vs 10, its 73 vs 3, in which the 73 add up to actual content, just spread out. Also, I'm interested in why you are insisting on content before there is even a random stage.

[armlx]

I don't get what you are saying there nhat. Mind elaborating, or is it just a simple attack on a "slip" where he says our as in he is part of a mafia group, which is also perfectly valid to say if our refers to the town?

[armlx]

I'm P sure he's confusing "slip" with "soft claim", or using it under the technicality of a mafia soft claim being a slip.

[armlx]

Thats my question.

[armlx]

I mean he's soft-claiming town by including himself in the group who scumhunts. He's labeling himself town, but subtly. I can live with an all out townie claim, even a clever or humorous one. But one under the radar like this rubs me the wrong way.

nhat, there is no way in hell "too townie" is ever going to fly as a valid scumtell if I have anything to say about it.

This.

Vote: Untitled for craplogic, pretty sure I touched on this in the pregame.

Elaborate plz.

While I'm at it, Snaps_the_Pirate's case on me at #271 sucks since Battle Mage isn't anywhere near lynch either. What doesn't make sense is how one measly person, who has said multiple times that he has to manage things one case at a time, can be trying to push for a lynch when 14 people have to agree that the person is scummy. You, my friend, are blowing my case out of proportion.

Not really. You can be trying to lynch someone from vote #1.

I don't think nhat is scummy at this point, he's just extremely wrong.

[armlx]

Do you honestly think it is pro-town of me to suggest somebody's lynch this early and with this few posts on Battle Mage when I've repeatedly stated that there are too many posts to manage everybody's case?

You definitely did suggest his lynch. Just not in a direct kill now plz way.

Minor FoS: animorpherv1 because this is not the random voting stage.

It sorta is.

[armlx]

Normally it would be, but with 11 or so pages of pre-game discussion, in practice we just skipped straight to voting based on potentally scummy actions. So random voting is kind of unhelpful at this point.

Meh. I guess. Still not scummy.

[armlx]

I actually take the opposite stance of nhat. Soft claim is ok. Straight up saying "I am pro-town" without provocation is dumb as EVERYONE would say that.

[armlx]

gneral tip the manner in which you say somthing can help your case if you seem disrespectful of other peoples idea or thoughts poeple arent likely to change their mind.

Do you have any opinions on the situation or just anecdotal comments?

[armlx]

Where I come from you know the cop and doc in advance, so you can't kill them!

I'm so floored by this concept of mafia I'm making a non-content post about it.

[armlx]

PeterGriffin, your vote reeks of OMGUS.

Where did you attack him to prompt the OMGUS?

[armlx]

face + palm......

[armlx]

@Dynamo: why are you so hesitant to vote? Both cases look strong enough for this phase of the game, and they're both at L-12 or something like that.

I endorse this post.

Vote nhat

. I really don't like how he tried to misrepresent PG's post and then responded to EA's post in an attempt to extend the misrep. Among other things.

[armlx]

Cris, mind pointing out why those players are catching your attention or why you think those people are suspicious?

[armlx]

Ok, looks from what I've heard nhat is has been Soft Claiming- and that's not good, therefore unvote vote: nhat

1) Why is soft claiming bad?

2) This is the post that there is the issue with

Eh, just one soft claim

exactly, we're still in pre-game and you've already managed to start an argument with several people over something that's pretty much useless for determining alignment. that and the fact that you apparently think it's hilarious to get people riled over nothing. unless you change your behaviour once the game starts, I can't see you being anything other than a detriment

to our scumhunting

.

vote - Untitled

Do you think what Untitled did (the bolded section) was a soft claim? Was it scummy?

[armlx]

For people to vote me for that is plain silly. Disagreement is fine, as I had said before.

Disagreement is fine. Except when your vote was more or less baseless and based upon illogical attacking of minutia.

And the pact, while a dumb idea, attracted not so dumb responses.

[armlx]

Not to post a fluff post, but what happened to BM anyway? I need to go back and look at his posts again, I think.

He's away for a while. Just in general. He posted that as his last post in thread.

[armlx]

nhat's being all bitchy isn't helping him at all (hinthint, actually discussing with a logical person while they are being wagoned does wonders for the town in so many ways I hear).

[armlx]

There's no undoing what's been done, and if you have anything new to add to your case against me besides me flipping out on unoriginal posts, then get to it.

So... you just got nothing?

[armlx]

You make a good point about the Cephrir vote swap, especially after he had already made a serious vote.

[armlx]

I'm with nhat here.

Unvote

[armlx]

Vote Dynamo

The whole jumping on the pact wagon is definitely scummy.

[armlx]

Cass, his first vote was weak, the second weaker even, and finally the third strong. Whats weak about that case?

[armlx]

The way he jumped on the treaty, but mostly how he had two cases today, but didn't vote.

Yeah, that too. I'm having issues connecting separated scummy events by 1 player in this game due to speed + size.

Cass, he votes EA because he is vote flopping after 10 pages of relevant discussion based on weak premises. And vote should = intent to lynch here. Not necessarily end with lynch right there, but want to see a line of action that could lead to that.

[armlx]

Okay but I agreed to be the second person on that pact,

Not true. Korts was considered on it, and I'm P sure one other person (Wolf?) was on it too.

I disagree that a vote = always an intent to lynch.

Again, early D1 usually there aren't 10 pages of info like there are. At this point your vote should be on someone that if nothing changes you would not mind seeing lynched. I can understand unvoting so more info can happen like you said, but that is different.

I can see Netlava's logic.

[armlx]

Woah, dude, don't get pissy because you aren't the only one who is allowed to post alot. That said, this reaction is pretty standard from Armlx.

The issue is the runner posts just cause the thread to extent longer and longer for no reason, which makes rereads practically impossible. Not to mention reading it the first time is obnoxious.

[armlx]

BM, I disagree that the pre-game thing is a reason to not contribute here, but I didn't feel your posts were not contributing, and EA already burned SC on the no content thing.

[armlx]

Oh shit, I forgot that townies have rock-solid unchanging reads on everyone at this stage in the game. You sure caught me, champ.

Never rock solid, but not hoppy as that.

[armlx]

Because changing your mind more than once is something only scum would do, right?

Based on those reasons, pretty much.

[armlx]

While a vote does not always equal an intent to lynch, it should definitely mean a willingness to lynch. You never know what will happen.

This is probably the best explanation of my point yet.

[armlx]

Nobody's attacking the reasons, they're just saying "2 vote hops? SCUM!!!!!"

I'm pretty sure EVERYONE is attacking the reasons.

And if everyone else likes the multi-posts, I guess BM wins here. I personally despise i though.

[armlx]

FOS SC

. Your "full analysis" was 95% summary, 5% you injecting opinions without reasoning behind them.

Pretty much TL,DR'ed the whole SC/BM argument. Seemed pretty irrel to me.

[armlx]

[quote=MafMann]
If i had to vote right now id vote untitled but i dont need to vote now
[/quote]

Yeah, but if you don't vote you don't give info. Not voting is just as anti-town as vote hopping everywhere.

[armlx]

right now i dont feel comfortable with an untitled lynch so i refrain from voting him

Its like 13 to lynch you realize?

[armlx]

From what I've picked up, MafiaMann is town, I'm pretty sure I know his role too.

WTF?

[armlx]

I'm definitely with Cyber on the whole quote pyramids thing.

[armlx]

I've definitely ran the "I know Player X's role" on D1 before, but it was such a situational tell + action I can't imagine it being valid in a large.

[armlx]

I don't like armlx generalizing things like that. Who's to tell what standard town behaviour should look like?

Thats what the average town player on MS looks like. You miss the point that EA's reasoning behind each hop was loose at best.

[armlx]

Well that looks dodgy. Ani can't possibly know anyone's role. He is obviously not paying close enough attention to the game to even keep up, let alone deduce anyones role.

He's being replaced too, which makes the situation 10x more awkward.

[armlx]

Skimming is scummy because protown players are more likely to read stuff in order to understand it and properly comment on it. Scum dont need to hunt scum, and can afford to be lazy. This does not necessarily apply in tl;dr type posts, but in general, i feel it's a pretty sound scumtell.

Depends on the level of reading the person has to do, and whether the skimming leads to misreps IMO.

nhat makes one attack he agrees with, so he lets nhat off the hook? Yet he doesn't agree with the attack enough to put his vote on me? And then he starts calling my voting pattern flimsy.

nhat was being voted for being unreasonable. He became reasonable, my vote had no backing.

Although Korts later pointed out where armlx could have got this point of view from, armlx flat out ignored my challenge, which makes me believe he never really had that point of view to begin with.

I felt people would add their own responses if they felt slighted by either of our statements. If your votes had legit reasons behind them, they wouldn't be attacked. That was my point.

Also while looking through his posts I noticed that he's been voting Dynamo for most of the day, but otherwise has completely ignored Dynamo. This is another solid scumtell and I'd be happy with an armlx lynch today.

How is this a scum tell?

[armlx]

Hm, I had not even noticed that armlx was pushing wagons without putting his vote on them... explains my bad feeling I guess.
I'm curious if he has an explanation.
FoS Armlx

After unvoting nhat, I figuredmy first intuitions about the pact were most likely the most accurate and that Dynamo's action was the scummiest thing so far.

[armlx]

No, the treaty has been shot down.

[armlx]

@Lowell, why is it weak?

I'm interested in this as well.

I like how Lowell also says that Dynamo is mentioned a lot and has few votes, but in doing so mentions him and doesn't vote/

[armlx]

I highly doubt anyone would FOSbus a scumbuddy who only had 1 vote, when 12 are required for lynch.

I don't.

[armlx]

So BM you have no regrets about our pact idea and you feel its been helpful beacause it has caused the conversation is that what your saying

Not to answer his question, but I like the pact a lot for the discussion it gave.

[armlx]

I like the case on Dynamo too

So.... you are voting for me because you disagree with my defense, but agree with my defense in that Dynamo is really scummy?

You voted nhat for misrepresenting PeterGriffin, but then decided he didn't misrepresent PeterGriffin because you liked his attack on me? Not buying it.

I figured nhat was just being unreasonable in general, which is not a scum tell usually, as opposed to being deliberately misrepresentative.

Townies do not ignore they player they're voting for.

1. You haven't shown me how its a scum tell.

2. Everything that I have on Dynamo I've said already. The pact hop was EXTREMELY scummy, possibly worse then vote hopping someone like that.

[armlx]

I am in the process of rereading and I just got past that part. I didnt see how his change in thought was that scummy. It is something I am keeping in mind while I finish reading but it doesnt seem like a big deal to me.

No, I'm talking about Dynamo trying to /in on the pact.

[armlx]

Also he seemed to get defensive when hasdgfas called it scummy.

Defensiveness isn't scummy. His other actions are though.

[armlx]

2. You just don't stop digging your own grave, do you? If the pact hop was EXTREMELY SCUMMY then you have absolutely no excuse whatsoever to be ignoring it. Period.

I'm not ignoring it. I've made my point, made my vote, and am working with other discussion that is also happening.

1. Townies do not ignore the player they're voting for because it defeats the entire purpose of voting. If they want more information, they ask questions until they change their mind or are convinced they've found scum; when the latter occurs, they convince the town to join them. This is what's known as "scumhunting", and you haven't been doing it. The only reason townies ignore the player they're voting for is that they're lazy or inattentive or just plain gone, and you have shown yourself to be neither.

You know this is false. Especially as Dynamo didn't really respond to the issues raised against him during the time you are accusing me of "ignoring" him.

[armlx]

BM, the FOS tell is dying out, but similar non-committing tells still exist.

[armlx]

armlx, why the early flip-flop on nhat? I've read your posts but do not see a suitable answer for what I am asking. You claim he was just being unreasonable and not scummy, and then you vote him, and then unvote him. This seems like distancing to me. Disagreeing with someone and calling them town simultaneously, then voting them for a short period and unvoting them as soon as they become "reasonable." However, just because he has become reasonable doesn't mean his past actions are null and void! Scum can clean up their act, yes? I dislike your handling of the nhat situation, and your lack of attention to Dynamo. Can you restate your reasons for voting him/her now please?

The early flip-flop on nhat was due to the fact he had a point about EA. Making unreasonable cases early D1 is less scummy then flip flopping there. I completely forgot about Dynamo in the whole pre-game thing at that time.

His actions aren't null, just down the priority queue.

Dynamo is scummy for his trying to hop on the pact forming wagon, plus ye olde non-committal FOSing scum tell.

[armlx]

why are you not voting for Korts?

Korts didn't band wagon the pact.

[armlx]

EBWODP: Wait, how the hell are the two even related in the slightest?

[armlx]

If his lack of response was the problem, why weren't you pressuring him to respond?

Because he clearly wasn't going to respond any faster due to pressure given his absence pattern before there was pressure.

Those not voting need to vote by deadline minus one week. Or now. Preferably the later.

[armlx]

Dynamo's last post is just a pile of Appeal to Emotion.

[armlx]

I'm posting this in all my games. My computer power cord just broke again, same issue as last time. I'm going to be on LA for a week or two while I wait for a new one to arrive.

[armlx]

Cass, nice false dichotomy on Dynamo/me there.

CK, I thought I had answered your question. Unreasonibility isn't the strongest scum tell, and I felt the EA case was more worthwhile. Dynamo I have explained already and should have been my first vote.

[armlx]

I just said that you two are my top two supects. How is that a false dichotomy?

You said one of us 2 was scum. Not that you believe we were the two scummiest people. Big difference.

Townie claim = irrel, more hammer plz.

[armlx]

I don't understand this response to what amounts to appeal to emotion.

[armlx]

What do you mean? Do you mean you don't understand the votes on Dynamo? Or are you referring to something else?

I don't understand why people are leaving the wagon because of appeal to emotion at L-2/1. I still think Dynamo is scum. His last actions do nothing to help him what so ever.

I can see some reasoning in the people who are switching to Netlava for the contradiction though. Its possible extracting a claim from him as well and then deciding would be optimal.

[armlx]

I don't like how BM's defense doesn't answer the issues and just says he can.

[armlx]

The reason you may not like my defence, is because said defence does not exist. There is very little defence against an attack whose premise is completely flawed.

I don't get it. Are you deliberately trying to deflect attention with spelling errors?

[armlx]

humour and logic are not mutually exclusive you know. Very Happy

But you are trying your hardest to make them so right now. Go ahead, prove EA wrong.

[armlx]

I think regardless of what he turns Net is a seriously good lynch candidate tomorrow.

[armlx]

Remember where you said (elsewhere) basing someone's alignment on another's reveal upon lynch is not setting up lynches? Well, you're not basing it on a lynch result right now. You've just advanced from null to minor scumminess, congrats. A readthrough on you will come along with the BM analysis.

I never said straight up lynch him next. I said he was a good choice to look into for tomorrow's lynch. The two imply very different things, the former that he has already been determined scum, in which case why not lynch him today, and the later that there is still more investigation to be done.

[armlx]

I still don't see why people suddenly think Dynamo is town....

[armlx]

However, his reactions to the allegations very much comply with those of a frustrated townie who doesn't know how to get himself out of trouble

See, I don't see the difference with "frustrated townie" and "frustrated scum". There really isn't one usually. People just assume the former as they see it about 3 times as often.

[armlx]

Raider, what does korts have to gain from a vote on essentially nowhere at this point?

[armlx]

Meh, Korts has a point. Don't know how relevant it is right now.

[armlx]

Much as I don't really like the way that Raider posts little content, I find that in other games that I am in with him, he's the same. I think it's just his posting style, rather than an indication of his alignment.

I sorta agree, but am not 100% sure of this meta as my level of paying attention to it has been minimal.

[armlx]

Meta turning scum tells into null tells is very valid.

[armlx]

Can you explain how that works? I think you are saying that if someone does an action that screams scum but they do it in every game makes it a null tell.

Pretty much. For example, if Killa7 is posting a bunch of irrelevant stuff and not a lot of content, or MafiaSSK is lurking, or DGB is doing a bunch of random shit, or FaerieLord isn't really voting, etc etc etc, its not scummy as they do it regardless of alignment.

[armlx]

BM, do you have reasoning behind your vote, or are you just trying to shoehorn yourself into a tertiary wagon before deadline.

[armlx]

You still havent explained what you meant by your attack on me regarding EA.

Huh? Link to this please.....

[armlx]

I agree with everything hasdgfas has said today. Cream's first post about Dyanmo is "I don't like scummy thing X and Y he did, but he is town".

[armlx]

this post seriously misrepresents me. I never said anything about him being scummy. The reason I 'had no sympathy' for him was because of the self-hammer...

No, your first post in the entire game. Not today. You basically said his play was poor over all, and his appeal to emotion was scummy, but you thought he was town.

[armlx]

I don't know about you, but that's often terms I use to describe actions as scummy.

[armlx]

BM, thoughts on Has v Cream?

[armlx]

I'm interested, why does he deserve that?

[armlx]

Why would he think scum would start day one off playing like shit?

WIFOM. What you just asked me was: Why would scum start off playing D1 scummy?

[armlx]

Don't worry about responding to the points raised against you, though.

This.

Vote netlava

Answer now plz.

[armlx]

It's not a typo - I don't actually think Dynamo is scum.

Except this is the issue.

[armlx]

You opportunistically voted someone you thought was town.

[armlx]

Why would scum intentionally act scummy at the beginning of the game, when nobody has any i nformation about anyone and thus are likely to lynch the player acting the most scummy on their own, rather than someone who has ties to other dead players that they shouldn't have, as would be revealed later on in the game?

This is a dumb question and you know it. You can't just say any action was too scummy to be scum.

[armlx]

So Netlava voted for Dynamo, then later admitted that he didn't think Dynamo was scum, and that he voted for him simply for the sake of a lynch, claiming this as his playstyle.

Its even better as this is actually what he said, not an interpretation of his actios.

[armlx]

But would a scum not defend himself?

Yes. It's easier then the alternative

Wifom I suppose.

This.

[armlx]

The Netlava wagon strikes me as weak.

Why?

[armlx]

I think we established that this was just a typo. Is there any other case?

I stated my intention in my previous post to vote dynamo. I checked the vote count, and it seemed that most of the people left were fresh replacements/inactives, so rather than wait for them, I decided that it's better to move the game along.

Hmm, this is a bit disappointing. I announced my intentions clearly enough. It's not a typo - I don't actually think Dynamo is scum. Sometimes, though, I vote people who I don't think are scum simply for the sake of a lynch. Tis just a playstyle.

But since this is regarded as scummy, then that's fine, I'm won't be doing this in the future. I'll just let my vote sit uselessly on someone who I do think is scummy. I'll gladly wagon my current suspects though (Cass, earthworm, hasdgfas, cephrir, and pimhel).

There is this other case. The one that actually happened.

[armlx]

I can't believe people are overlooking it but doesn't the very fact that he himself said it make you wonder whether it's just poor play?

WIFOM

I find some striking similarities between this wagon and the Dynamo one.

Explain.

[armlx]

Voting for somoene you don't tihnk is scum is a newb tell?

[armlx]

what else can it be? it's not like he wasn't open about it..

It can be scummy. I hear scum like to vote people they don;t think are scum.

[armlx]

CK, is your view on Netlava subject to change, or the lack of info?

[armlx]

My point is that voting people you don't think are scum is scummy.....

[armlx]

I am asking to what ends you based your opinion that scum would act that way, in the very beginning of the game.

You apparently are operating under this assumption that everyone plays optimally, choosing only things that are +EV instead of just looking for what gives them gain wihtout looking much at the backlash. there were gains to potential scum doing what Dynamo did with joining the alliance thing which have been explained many times.

This reminds me a lot of SK Skruffs in Cultafia.

[armlx]

I'll most likely unvote once CK answers my question.

[armlx]

I dont trust anything that moves fast

Anything else to say? I don't remember you posting for a long time.

[armlx]

Ok, vote is not moving. I thought it was something it just wasn't.

[armlx]

seems counterproductive.

It wasn't in context of how CK was saying it. Until he said he was ok with it then, I assumed it was a soft claim of cop w/ innocent on Netlava.

[armlx]

Explaining further wouldn't be really pro-town. I think I already blew it, though.

Apparently I missed something.....

[armlx]

Why would you think they were masons from that?

[armlx]

I'm just interested, wasn't skruffs just spouting BS and SC following it when you said they were masons?

[armlx]

Well yeah. But SC following would make sense even if they were masons.

My point is what changed?

[armlx]

I had another think.

K. That's the answer I would expect from someone telling the truth about it.

[armlx]

It isn't.

[armlx]

But then again, when are masons dangerous at this point in the game? xD

Meh, the reason its not fishing has more to do with how KortS saying that to show how he came to the conclusion you were masons, rather then just throwing out some comment about masons or w/e.

[armlx]

It's just that armlx keeps reverting to calling me KortS. Not game-related in the strict sense.

Yeah, my bad.

[armlx]

Cephrir, wouldn't Net being scum be more indicative of Cream scum as he is protecting a partner, or is this a lose lose situation for him?

[armlx]

See, even in the post you actually wrote it, you realized you shouldn't be saying stuff like that. However, instead of Deleting the post that would possibly cauase a role claim, you actually bpolded it. Yes, you 'strikethroughed' it, but the formatting results in the same draw of attention.

This is actually a legitimate point.

FOS Korts

I still want to see this Netlava business resolved.

[armlx]

Netlava's play is scummy, and everyone has been defending it by saying its too scummy to be scum, which is just bull shit.

[armlx]

I would normally agree with you but after dynamo I think this may be along the same lines and he might just turn up town.

That's just dumb.

[armlx]

Its an extension of the "too scummy to be scum" argument, which is just crap and WIFOM.

[armlx]

EBWODP: Last post was directed at Raider. Quote fail.

[armlx]

I agree with him, but I'll let him explain.

[armlx]

No, SC, connection != scum/mason partners necessarily.

[armlx]

I don't remember saying that the connection had to be scum or mason.

An agreement is a connection.

[armlx]

I still fail to see how Skruffs' analogy linked to the scenario at hand at all.

[armlx]

All of what hascows said on this page is true.

[armlx]

Cyber, I'm interested what about that interests you (I agree it is, but I want to see if we are thinking the same thing).

[armlx]

That's about what I thought.

Hint: the distractor is Skruffs.

[armlx]

Lowell, what is your definition of "fine with" a lynch?

[armlx]

What is weak about the points Korts?

[armlx]

Lowell, basically I'm asking if you think he is scum or are more leaning neutral on him.

[armlx]

Why does Korts come off as the most suspect of the 3?

Define vibes.

[armlx]

@all others- the above post by cass is so wickedly scummy it hurts

The lack of real reasoning in defining why people are scummy is certainly disconcerting.

[armlx]

Korts, where did you mention the FOS tell?

[armlx]

Ah, yeah.

I just realized there's no mention of BA in that last post by Cass either......

[armlx]

I don't disagree.

Booo double negatives.

[armlx]

Strengthen up, when there's a wagon on me, that makes me want to post more!

Except if you are trying to lurk your way out.....

[armlx]

I dont quite understand the first quote

It means when you are being attacked for an action, not posting is not the way to go.

Speaking of not posting, I want your opinions on who is scum.

[armlx]

Karne, that or to support a future Lowell vote.

[armlx]

I'm not sure why this is, but I'm guessing it has something to do with this being the biggest game I've played yet, and I have trouble getting involved in all the discussions and keeping track of everyone in the game

Korts, this would be what you are referring to.

[armlx]

it's just not his playstyle

Examples plz?

him asking other people to tell him who they think are scum

Link plz.

[armlx]

Clearly, its a scum tell to try to get a lurker to contribute?

[armlx]

Why would he say this before the lynch's results were revealed?

The reasoning for Netlava's vote was scummy regardless of the alignment of Dynamo...... Voting someone you claim to think is town is just generally a sub-optimal thing as town and a + as scum.

In both instances, other players were already voting or attacking those players before Armlx 'weighed in'

I definitely voted/attacked Dynamo really early. Like, pre-game early. Your bandwagon accusations are null there.

And talk about taking that first post out of context. Lowell said Netlava was a lynch he could "live with", which is a pretty non-committal phrase. I wanted specification so he was forced to take a side.....

The misrep is reaching unreal levels here.....

[armlx]

The total ignoring of my suspicion of armlx, or raher, the dismissing of it as me being 'jumpy', also strikes me as someone having an ulterior motive.

It strikes me as people realizing your "case" is total BS.

Again, I invite everyone to read D2 of Norinel's Cultafia and compare Skruffs's behavior to here.

[armlx]

Hmm, actually, never mind, I'm forgetting about President Mafia where as pro-town mason he did the same thing to Lowell (town) (feel free to read D1 of that too). Its just a general Skruffs thing.

[armlx]

Why do you think we are all town?

[armlx]

Please point to a game where you are dead as town and acted in a similar manner, vs cultafia, where as a cult leader, you acted smilarly to how you are acting here (those similarities have been pointed out already)

1) Unless you are accusing me of being CL here, the connection would mean nothing. Cult leader strategy is very different then mafia, even more winnable via passivity then mafia.

2) Where have said similarities been pointed out?

[armlx]

Cass likes to pop up and just shoot suspicion around.

[armlx]

Another misrep from Skruffs.....

Not surprised.

[armlx]

Cream's last post about wanting to be on the live wagon over the stalled one just because it is live at this point confuses me. See what Cyberbob said.

[armlx]

Uhh..... so its now "policy" to lynch someone because their actions are scummy SC?

[armlx]

I was ok with the Netlava lynch I have never said I was agianst it.

I dont see a real case on Netlava.

Just saying.

[armlx]

He is trying to take my words out of context.

What context were they supposed to be in?

[armlx]

Raider, your not seeing the case statement was AFTER the major scummy post netlava made, am I right?

If I am mistaken, please correct me.

[armlx]

BM: Self hammer in newbies = IC ban. Its viewed as slightly violating the "Play to win" rule as town, and situational enough as scum its not worth exposing newbies to as "good play".

Raider: I pointed out a contradiction. Nothing else really needed to be said. You, on the other hand, were in the position of defending yourself. More did need to be said.

[armlx]

Raider, the issue at hand is nothing really changed about the Netlava case in between those 2 times except maybe the info of Dynamo's alignment.

[armlx]

Hascows, I disagree with the first scenario (many better ways to do that), but the second is legit. Votes w/o reasons aren't bad if when the attackee says "Why" you can state a legit reason.

[armlx]

So from 8 Sept to 14 Sept is over 5 days. Then it was still almost another day before I only said I agree with the case.

So you were both wrong? Definitely not 14 days.

[armlx]

The BM-Raider argument is dumb. Regardless of how many RL days it was, it looks like an opportunistic flip flop to me.

[armlx]

Show me the flip flop part. You said it is dumb yet are still commenting on it. Its simple show me how I flip flopped.

I was ok with the Netlava lynch I have never said I was agianst it.

I dont see a real case on Netlava.

Just saying.

With no relevant info in the middle.

[armlx]

I have a feeling this is a circular argument...

It is.

[armlx]

I also just can't see what happened in the middle that caused the shift.

[armlx]

I'm not quite sure where Armlx said it, but oh well.

I never directly said it, but the post I made juxtaposing the 2 quotes shows the point.

That's why we need to either string him up, or not.

I lol'ed.

[armlx]

He said he was never against the Netlava lynch, but he was.

[armlx]

Show me the flip flop part. You said it is dumb yet are still commenting on it. Its simple show me how I flip flopped.

I was ok with the Netlava lynch I have never said I was agianst it.

I dont see a real case on Netlava.

Just saying.

[armlx]

Show me the flip flop part. You said it is dumb yet are still commenting on it. Its simple show me how I flip flopped.

I was ok with the Netlava lynch I have never said I was agianst it.

I dont see a real case on Netlava.

Just saying.

Tags fixed.

[armlx]

Plus I said that before you even called me out on it.

Quotes plz.

Your case is just full of fail and yet you will not listen to reason.

Ad hom.

[armlx]

The original post does not look like that is the intent at all.

[armlx]

Btw, cyberbob post is scummy. explanation later

Waiting on this.

[armlx]

Seems contrived.

Seems OMGUS.

[armlx]

Also, does anyone else find it completely strange how the Netlava wagon has stalled? Something doesn't seem right to me about that situation.

This sounds like the sentiment of everyone voting him right now.

[armlx]

Is there a deadline in place?

[armlx]

Cream, do you agree or disagree with said case.

[armlx]

Let's put it this way, Net - my sister, who has played Mafia once, in a Drama lesson, looked over my shoulder as I read your posts and the case and said "He looks like Mafia to me." My kid sister, ffs. The case is good.

Thread won. Lock plz.

Oh wait, not GD.

Lynch Netlava, lock plz.

[armlx]

His response was that I was acting similarly in other games I was a POWER role in, vs him being SCUM. If you look athte comparison, it sounds like he is trying to FISH for MY ROLE - SOMETHING THAT I BELIEVE SOMEONE ELSE WAS DOING EARLIER IN THIS DAY, YES/NO???

Since when is SK a "power role"?

[armlx]

Ok. I thought based on the wording of your previous post you were setting up for and could be caught in a flip flop, but I was wrong.

[armlx]

People completely forget about the previous day. Also, I'd rather not set up two lynches at once.

This sounds like a contradiction to me, and nowhere did hascows say that he was assuredly lynching Cass next.

[armlx]

No, Lowell has a point, actually, that looks kinda like a false dichotomy.

How is that a false dichotomy? In no place does Cow say "If not A, then B" about this scenario. Only "A > B, but B > 0 in scummitude".

[armlx]

How?

[armlx]

I think that this common sense argument is dumb.

[armlx]

See above.

[armlx]

Netlava, claim and/or die plz.

[armlx]

KoC, L-1 is not a good time to claim in large games. L-2 or even L-3 depending on the size is far better.

AKA netlava needs more claim.

[armlx]

This sounds like a dumb argument.

[armlx]

Something about your response reminds me of meta, but I am against using meta to try to determine alignment.

Except the strength of any scum tell can be changed by meta, whether on an individual or mass scale.

Not using meta is just a bad idea. Its better to recognize where it can go wrong and when it does.

[armlx]

Ok, well, that claim isn't going to stop the hammer, in all possibility.

This.

[armlx]

Yeah, 2 groups of 4 + an Sk and Vig seems most realistic here SC.

[armlx]

How did you come to that conclusion?

Its a pretty standard set up. Scum group A, Scum group B, SK is very repeatable, and the fact there's not a lot of room for a 3rd and the game size implies there's a vig.

Do you have a different idea?

[armlx]

2 Mafia groups by themselves is a possibilty, as it would explain the flavor from Day 2, and the deaths tonight,

if

there are Poisoners in the Mafia. However, I can't shake the idea that there is a SK, just because of the MO's, dismemberment in particular.

Poisoner?

[armlx]

@Armlx: I think I mentioned it up there. A Poisoner is scum with a separate NK that takes place the next night.

Sounds broken.

[armlx]

LINK?

This. I've never seen the role as scum ever.

[armlx]

FOS EGL

Nice job helping out a slipping scum buddy....

[armlx]

Its not pro-town to answer that question directed at BA.

[armlx]

In that case, why aren't you FoS'ing the person asking in the first place?

You misunderstand. The point was for BA to explain himself reasonably, not be thrown an out by someone else.

[armlx]

I've seen poisoner as pro-town before, but never as a mafia role and felt that needed to be looked into more. The way its described, it seems like double kills which is pretty rediculous.

The issue is that was a potential slip, showing BA knew more about the kills then he should.

[armlx]

Two groups of 3 with one SK makes sense based on the 25% theory but it SHOULDN'T BE ASSUMED that there are this many or that many alive, especiually if that assumption is the basis for suspicion of one person. Armlx screwed up, again, with that.

Please point to where I said anything about scum ALIVE.

Oh yeah, I didn't, unless you feel like extrapolating my statement about base numbers.

[armlx]

I'm also not sold on someone from one mafia knowing there are two mafias before that writeup, anyway, unless the tracker from one mafia found a member of the second mafia.

Size of their group alone could usually give them that info.

That said, I'm interested in how SC got aggressive in response to Skruffs' question rather then just saying "Obv no".

[armlx]

Sc: I think you explained already, bt iwas going to as why bm could be port or swiss but not the third option, the second mafia?

You named the two mafias we know of. What do you mean second.

Sc- are you a survivor?

I refuse to answer, and I don't see why you need to know at this point.

HoS: Skruffs

for rolefishing.

Confirm Vote: SC

Regardless of the fact i have no clue why Skruffs asked that question, that you couldnt even deny being a NEUTRAL suggests you are really keeping your options open. Fishing for neutrals is hardly scummy imo.

BM

This. SC has 1 post to explain.

[armlx]

To protect themselves from:

A) Other scum

Yeah, the Iceland mafia probably knew there were multiple groups due to their doctor as well.

Oh, and

Vote SC

. Not even a real answer.

[armlx]

Keeping a survivor alive over a mafia member is more of a benefit, would you not say so?

Not given the ease a mafiate can claim survivor and how survivors still are generally more pro-scum then town.

[armlx]

You're blatantly scum, because only scum would be weighing up the best option to claim. If you were town, you'd have no trouble denying being a neutral.

This.

[armlx]

What do you mean, "as well"? IS this in addition to the other mafia, is that what you mean?

I mean on top of the fact that presumably they could figure out there's 2 mafia groups because they should in a balanced set up have less people per group then if it was a single mafia group.

[armlx]

Now Armlx is playing quiet to avoid detection

V/LA this weekend

So typical of Skruffs.....

I'm interested in TM's buddying when Skruffs mentioned him though.

[armlx]

To clarify, I assume you are talking about when your name was brought up?

OH the deflection.

My answer is simply that I have been noticing those who are not speaking up much. I make no attempt to show I am watching Skruffs and questioning the things he is doing.

Really. Posting once a day at least and going V/LA for a weekend is not speaking up much?