Newbie 595 - Game Over!

[snafoo]

Since it would be a shame to vote off a newb on day one, I'd rather vote for an IC.
There's one player who pretty much asks for getting lynched (given his name). So:

Vote: Muerrto

[snafoo]

Are the votes counted by hand or do you use a program for couting?

By hand. I wish I had a program for counting

Mike hasn't said a word until now, so I switch my vote to him.

Unvote

Vote: mike4876

[snafoo]

May we have a prod on Mike4876 please?

It is quiet here... understandably no Starkmoon, just the one from massive, and Demon king is perhaps keeping his head down since people focused on him when he posted.

Prodding!

Yeah, maybe we can wake up the sleeping

dogs

wolves:

Unvote

Vote: Demonking

Geeze, already looks like I can't make up my mind.

[snafoo]

Sorry, guys, I'm not on the internet over the weekend. I probably SHOULD HAVE BEEN, it would have been better than watching the Arsenal-ManU game, but I wasn't.

And yeah,

snafoo

, it really DOES look like you can't make up your mind. There was this old saying I thought was funny when I was in grade school: "Fighting a battle of wits against an unarmed opponent." First you vote for the guy who hasn't posted in the game and should be replaced; then you vote on the guy who hasn't shown up to defend himself. Kick defenseless kittens much?

No, only defenseless mafiascum/villagers.

Actually, I didn't change my vote so I could kick another defenseless kitten

this time

(although I'm spineless enough to do so anytime). But given the lack of speed of this game I tried to initiate some more action.

But to no avail - looking at the recent election results in Italy it should come as no surprise that no one is really interested in hunting down mafiascum anymore.

[snafoo]

All right, I'll get more involved. I'm going to go ahead and

vote snafoo

. His response to my question basically said "I'm willing to go ahead and vote for any person, even if no reason is given for said person's bandwagon." That to me is not how a townie would play.

That's an interesting way to parafrase my words. Please explain your interpretation.

[snafoo]

What has happened so far:

First we had Litral's random for Demonking and Demon's already infamous OMGUS reply.

Now you're in a newbie game as a newbie. That may mean that you actually did a scum vote first mistake.

What does his reply mean? He either is a newb townie or scum frustrated for being voted. Or he used OMGUS as random vote, which is quite common in mafia games afaik. What I found much more intriguing were the responses to Demon. First Litral makes my head spin:

Craplogic 1. You're in a newbie game as a newbie as well. Does that mean you just did an obvious OMGUS vote? This would mean you're scum.

I'm still not absolutely sure what he means by that. Is making an OMGUS vote a scum trait?
But then Litral gets some support.

Um...this is the random voting stage, you took that vote way too seriously

Vote: Demon

At first this post looked pretty innocent to me. But later on I started to doubt Muerrto's motives. Why did he jump to the support of Litral so quick? I think that Muerrto wouldn't normally take an OMGUS at random voting stage so seriously.
Then Super Archivist steps in.

Hello people! I don't feel like random voting at the moment because I like you all so far. Very Happy

When does this "random voting" thing end anyway? Does anyone actually get killed on the first day?

With this message Archivist became my first suspect. To me he was trying to play the 'I know nothing so I can't be scum' card a little too hard (see his later messages as well. In addition, not wanting to vote makes him scummy as well.

Time for me to step in with my first random vote. I suggested to vote for an IC and chose Muerrto. Walnut was the first to step in. He liked my suggestion chose Massive (effectively spreading the votes).
Demon's second post followed (note that he didn't react to any of Litral's and Muerrto's earlier posts.

The way I see it, its better to begin logicly straight away and miss out the random voting stage. So I'll change my point and agree with Snafoo, so I'll point to the person who is neither active or ill.

Of course, the passive person is Massive, so Demon might bandwagon here. This post is obviously scummy, so much so that I still don't buy it. Obvious

fos

here, but I have a feeling that Demon is just a newbish townie. Wouldn't mind lynching him to find out, though.
Note that Demon turned quiet soon thereafter. Did his fellow scum quiet him before he would hang himself? Or did he just loose interest?
Now Massive steps in:

That's disappointing, I really wanted to vote Muerrto, seeing as how he was scum in my last Newbie game! I got my eye on you!

Demonking: Can you speak a little about your vote for me?

Another interesting post. Why can't Massive vote for Muerrto anymore? Because he has 1 vote (from me)? Hmm, I'm not convinced. What if Massive and Muerrto both are scum?
The very next post was by Muerrto:

Since it would be a shame to vote off a newb on day one, I'd rather vote for an IC.

Please tell me this was a joke...

Muerrto doesn't give any arguments why we should not lynch an IC. Instead he suggests that no one could/should/would vote off an IC thinking straight.

Walnut steps in next; there's some confusion about what

knowing

means in the context of a mafia game and the it's Muerrto again.

My vote's good on Demon right now.

You also questioned Litral's random vote for you and OMGUS'ed him. I figured it was a random vote as well but from your further posts and your questioning of his vote I see it wasn't.

Are you simply unfamiliar with the 'random voting stage' that normally occurs? Or were you trying to find an early scapegoat to build a case on?

This was the post that made me suspect Muerrto. What does he mean by "from your further posts and your questioning of his vote"? And why, if he thought that Demon's OMGUS was a random vote, did he jump in so quickly to attack? I found the early scapegoat very funny. Now who was trying to find an early scapegoat to buils a case on? Demon or Muerrto (using Litral's opening)?

Next Archivist tries his best to show that he will not vote on anyone without deep consideration, to which Muerrto replies.

The vote count edit at the top is sweet!

I find it odd that Demonking is voting for massive when he hasn't done anything. Why wouldn't Demon vote for Litral or Muerrto? It seems suspicious...

I hope Demon posts soon, because it looks like he's going to be bandwagoned. I won't vote until I hear more from him.

Little anxious for a bandwagon there...

So you're encouraging Demon to OMGUS vote me or Litral just because we voted him? If he's town he doesn't know if we're scum or not and vice versa so why would voting him automatically make us scummy in his eyes?

Anxious

for

a bandwagon? He seemed to be more anxious

of

one. Muerrto seems to be twisting reality oh so subtly.

Next I vote for Demon, there are some reactions (but no voty-type reactions), Archivist plays the newb spiel once again ("So when someone gets five votes to lynch them, they get killed and the day ends? Fair enough..."), mike is prodded, picks up but still does not post.

Then Massive replies to my Demon vote:

All right, I'll get more involved. I'm going to go ahead and vote snafoo. His response to my question basically said "I'm willing to go ahead and vote for any person, even if no reason is given for said person's bandwagon." That to me is not how a townie would play.

As Litral and Walnut pointed out, I did give a reason for voting Demon. So either Massive misread my earlier post or does this on purpose.

Based on the above, my prime suspect is Muerrto. If I had to give a second scum right now, it would be Massive. Having said that, Massive is not very suspect to me - but if he were a scum partner to Muerrto, all pieces of the puzzle would fall into place.

Somewhat suspect:
Demonking - obviously he either is scum or a naive townie. I tend to lean towards the latter but neither would surprise me.
Super Archivist - not voting, trying to play newb (or is he?).
Mike - silence, even after the prod.

[snafoo]

(Emphasis is mine)

Litral

: Your post, 55, basically makes my point. He moves his vote from Mike4876 (who he voted for for not having posted yet) to DemonKing, who

we know

is not actively following the game. My post [45] says exactly that.

He's deliberately moving his vote onto people who are not in the game.

That's not townie behavior -- townie behavior would ask for those people to be replaced.

Let's see, Demon's last post was on Friday 11 (post #19), my vote for Demonking was on Monday 14. So you're suggesting I knew that Demonking was not in the game less than 72 hours after his last post?
That doesn't add up, even more so when you look at the slowness of this game so far.

snafoo

: Maybe you'd like to rephrase this then?

I didn't change my vote so I could kick another defenseless kitten this time (although I'm spineless enough to do so anytime).

I might if you answer my earlier question first. Here's my question, in case you forgot:

All right, I'll get more involved. I'm going to go ahead and vote snafoo. His response to my question basically said "I'm willing to go ahead and vote for any person, even if no reason is given for said person's bandwagon." That to me is not how a townie would play.

That's an interesting way to parafrase my words. Please explain your interpretation.

Funny by the way that both your posts on me say something like ' that's not townie behaviour'.

[snafoo]

Muerrto doesn't give any arguments why we should not lynch an IC. Instead he suggests that no one could/should/would vote off an IC thinking straight.

Tell me what about being an IC makes us more or less likely to be scum and I'll vote myself...

Did I ever claim that? Instead of a serious response, is this all you can do? Trying to confuse the point?

Until then

Unvote, Vote: Snafoo

for pushing the 'vote an IC' thing waaay too much.

Now you're giving yourself away. I mentioned the whole thing only

once

. How is that pushing? Pushing

way too much

?

For me, this reply proves my suspicion beyond doubt. Thx for the help.

Unvote

Vote: Muerrto

FoS: Massive

[snafoo]

Once? Hehe, I love quoting it makes me tingle...

Since it would be a shame to vote off a newb on day one, I'd rather vote for an IC.
There's one player who pretty much asks for getting lynched (given his name). So:

Vote: Muerrto

This seemed like a joke but since you're still pursuing it...

Now quote the posts where I was pushing the point. Then we'll talk.

If you can't, that proves my point that you are trying to bend the truth.

[snafoo]

Let's see, Demon's last post was on Friday 11 (post #19), my vote for Demonking was on Monday 14. So you're suggesting I knew that Demonking was not in the game less than 72 hours after his last post? That doesn't add up, even more so when you look at the slowness of this game so far.

There were 24 posts between his last post and your vote, 10 of which mention Demonking by name. That's not slow. There was plenty of discussion. There were plenty of people calling for Demonking to explain. He wasn't. He hadn't posted anywhere on site after that last post. So yeah, I think one could have easily guessed that Demonking was not in the game at that point.

You're saying the game wasn't slow and there was plenty of discussion. I don't agree with you there. There's no point arguing this beyond this. All other players have their own ideas about the activity of the game, so they can use their own experience to value your and my remarks.

My interpretation: "I'm willing to go ahead and vote for any person, even if no reason is given for said person's bandwagon."

My long-winded interpretation: "In this specific ocassion, I did not change my vote simply to vote for someone who cannot defend himself, be it due to his or her absence from the game, or due to the fact that the evidence stacked against said person is either irrefutable or complete and utter garbage. But I withhold, for the future, my ability to do so, and consider yourself warned that I am willing to do so. I am willing to bandwagon onto trains that have no meaning, I am willing to vote for people who should be replaced, I am willing to pretty much just vote my whim. Remember this in the future when you try to lynch me for my voting habits."

All right, so maybe my interpretation is a little short and a little focused on one area. I like the long version better, actually. =]

This really made me laugh. I mean not as in being offended or something. But as in being really funny. Gonna love mafiascum.net.

When I wrote this, I thought of using a smilie - since the remark was obviously an attempt at a witty repartee to your kitty remark. But I didn't. And if you think I meant this as some kind of threat, well, whatever.
But we you're fishing here.

[snafoo]

I do want to know one thing, however, snafoo... why are you pairing Muerrto with massive? I cannot understand your argument. Keep in mind that you said that in post 60, so please use material before post 60 to convince us.

That's a very good question. The fact of the matter is, my suspicion of massive was more gut feeling than reasoning.

I made the following thought experiment: imagine that Muerrto would indeed be scum, what playing style would complement Muerrto's style up to that point best?
To me, it would be someone who would be more at the background. Just enough posts so he wouldn't be seen as out of the game, passive start, not voting or accusing at the start. I looked at the other players and massive fit the description exactly.
Then I thought about Muerrto's 'tell me this was a joke' remark and the connection hit me. And the massive 'not quite vote' for Muerrto.

But all this is still not much more than a hunch. And I said so myself in post 60, massive was not very suspect to me.
Maybe I was reading too much into the proceedings at that time.
But both massive's and Muerrto's ad-hominem attacks make me think I have hit a nerve with post 60.

The minor suspicion I had of massive has turned into a FoS.
And Muerrto - well to me it is SO obvious what his role is by now.

[snafoo]

@starkmoon, snafoo and massive: Post please, kthxbai.

@snafoo: Note that your "pairing argument" no longer works in incriminating massive. I'd love to see another post carefully analyzing everyone's posts.

I surely will, need some time to read through the recent arguments first though.

[snafoo]

Peeps, sorry for my absence. I was about to post last week when I got a fever. Was sick last week and too low on energy to play. But I'm better now and will participate again.

[snafoo]

OK, first of all I want to dedicate a post to Muerrto. Why? Well, because his play has been (and still is) confusing me the most.

There's so many things I noticed about him, I don't know where to start.

Well, first of all he seems to get very defensive whenever someone points a finger at him. On day one I FOS him in post 60. Blam: Muerrto votes for me in post #62.

In the first post of day 2, #153, Litral suspects and votes Muerrto. Double blam in #155 where Muerrto votes Litral.


Then there's the infamous 'vote an IC' argument. I made that one in post #15. Instead of making a completely random vote, I tried to come up with an argument that could provoke some discussion. I never used that argument in any later post.
Here's some of the things Muerrto had to say about it (and me):
- Vote: Snafoo for pushing the 'vote an IC' thing waaay too much (#62)
- The fact that he's STILL pursuing that angle (#66)
- This seemed like a joke but since you're still pursuing it... (#67)
- If it was random then why'd he keep it and pursue it? (# 75)
- He may have mentioned it once but when others latched on he rode it (same post)

Who is pushing a point way too much, me or him?

Later posts get more confusing:
- Case in point, obviously pursuing just the IC's makes no sense so obviously he's not doing that. Obviously voting to lynch an IC made no sense so his vote was obviously random. (# 79)
- It was a BAD play if it wasn't random and I think that's exactly what it was. (#88)

If I read these two posts correctly, he is contradicting himself here. In 79 he says my vote was random, in 88 it wasn't but it was bad play.

Much later, on day 2, he jumps again (maybe he found out he had been wrong when rereading):

- Reading back, I'm actually floored Walnut's town. It was more his argument that we should vote IC's although Snafoo started it(he says as a joke). (#196)

Or does he?
- It'll be interesting to see when Litral reads back assuming I'm town, how he takes the 'IC' argument differently. It definitely reflects poorer on Snafoo once you 'confirm' me town (same post)


Then there's the 'vote me' stuff:
- I'm not sacking myself so you can play an extra day (#67)
- Shrug kill me then, lately almost all my newbie games have been newbies trying to teach ME how to play...and being wrong. (#91)

Was the frustration in #91 genuine? Now here's this guy accusing others of bad play here and there and next he makes a very noobish move, asking to kill him because he's fed up. Now how does that help the town win?
It is just very bad townie play (ah, that felt good )

On day 2 he votes himself in his Muerrto/Litral gambit proposal.
- Unvote, Vote: Muerrto. Kill me seriously. If this is just a scum gambit then the town wins. (#171)
- I meant I wasn't doing it like he said 'go ahead lynch me I give up' I was doing it as a valid strategy. He is annoying but I'm not gonna throw the game because of it (#178)

Hmm, but he tried to in #91.

The fun continues:
- Your subsequent over-reaction only confirms my suspiscion. Scum backed into a corner foams at the mouth and becomes rabid. (#184)

Suddenly, in #186 he unvotes. Litral accepts the gambit (post #189, AFTER Muerrto unvoted, but I'll come back to that when I discuss the other players).

Now Muerrto makes a 180 degree turn:
- Litral, right now we should both be assuming we're both town so that IF we both die and we're both town we can contribute NOW as to who could be scum out of the other 5 so they'll know that's legit when they're in LYLO. (#195)
- Not much of a re-read since day 1 was for the majority me and Litral and I'm assuming you're town atm (#196)

He totally abandons his suspicions on Litral and starts mentioning suspicions on SA and me in subsequent posts. What made him switch here?


Then there's the arrogance. Or at least, the remarks that made me perceive he was acting arrogant and like a know-it-all. A few quotes:
- Once? Hehe, I love quoting it makes me tingle... (#67)
- I don't do things to make me defend myself and therefore don't do it. I don't justify my actions or my posts. Meta me if you want, I'm an agressive player, always on the attack. If you slip, I'll catch it. (#72)

What I got out of this when I first read it is he basically says this: 'I'm so great I don't make mistakes. But when you do make mistakes, I will pursue you.'

- This has nothing to do with IC/newbie other than IC gaves me more experience to have seen things like this before. Why do almost all newbies have to turn it into that? You want us to answer questions and give advice but when we disagree you turn it on us and say 'why because you're an IC?'. Did I ever even mention being right because I'm an IC? (#79)

He doesn't mention that he is right, but he seems to imply it (more experience, bla bla).

- Analysing posts is great, doing so correctly is better. (#91)

Of course he knows how to do this ...

- Analysing posts too deeply leads to mislynches. You have to know/figure out with experience what's a scum tell, what's legit, and when to argue a case and when to not.

Experience ... Again implying that he as an IC knows better.

Later on, he makes a remark that sounds very genuine to me:

- My apologies though, I didn't think of it from you guys end. I'll try to contribute more. I don't think I've been contributing less but I simply got to the point where beating the dead horse was getting messy and monotonous. I'm not sure how to respond since I'm basically saying no you didn't and he's saying yes you did.


Then there his role in the vote for Mike. He is the first one to vote for Mike after q21 points Mike out. Then he hammers after the play with Litral.

This all looks very townish to me. However, it was obvious Mike would be lynched at that point. What if Muerrto was scum? It would truly be a smart move of him to go after Mike then. ironically, Muerrto himself points out exactly that possibility:

- This is why you're in a newbie game =) It's called bussing. Mafia vote for each other CONSTANTLY. If I get paired with a newbie who's flailing I cut him loose, no question. Saying mafia wouldn't vote for mafia is definitely WIFOM, horrible too. (#280).


What I'm thinking about all this?
Is Muerrto scum who is using some devious tricks to confuse everyone (well, at least me) and get his way? Or is he a townie who is at times acting rather un-IC-ish, sowing confusion despite his best intentions and genuine in his frustrations?

At the moment I totally can not make up my mind about him. Maybe I'll get a clearer picture once I looked closer at the other players.

[snafoo]

Ok yeah I can't read all that.

So while enjoy the trip down memory lane, could you address the Mike lynch, why you weren't on it, and the occurences day 2?

Don't worry, I will. But I had to get that off my chest first.