Newbie 595 - Game Over!

[Walnut]

I guess my suspicions of Litral could fall into Muerrto's category of overanalysing posts. As everyone says, it is tough to figure out what is a noob tell or honest mistake as opposed to a scumtell. There have been enough mistakes (honest or otherwise) from the initial "we can know who scum are" through missing the bit in Muerrto's post about "case in point" to even your last post where you say that you went bonkers and mixed up two names. It is a bit similar to massive's reason for voting Snafoo, in that it sets you up for later when you do something really scummy to be able to say "Oh, but look at all the mistakes I have made".

Official Vote Count

q21 - 1 (Litral)
massive - 1 (q21)
Litral - 1 (Walnut)

snaoo - 2 (massive, Muerrto)

Muerrto - 1 (snafoo)

Not Voting - 3 (mike4876, starkmoon, Super Archivist)

5 to Lynch

[Litral]

I guess my suspicions of Litral could fall into Muerrto's category of overanalysing posts.

I blame myself for having no life. ... Well I do have one, but I don't want to get back to it.

I mixed up two names because I was referring to your post, which had both names Muerrto and massive - I looked down, saw "Muerrto", and just typed it.

"we can know who scum are" isn't a mistake. I didn't actually say that. I said that "we cannot know who scum are" is false, because there are always hints and stuff.

"case in point" is really a serious mistake, though.

Anyway, that's fair, I guess. My bad.

[Walnut]

The next post was aimed at Snafoo and Litral both and shows my frustration. Call it an appeal to emotion if that helps but I'm in 6 newbie games and if I'm getting grilled on semantics here I'm definitely gonna put less focus in this one.

I know that with only six of the nine players participating most of the time that what has happened so far is largely meaningless. We can look for tiny flaws in posts, more for practice and entertainment than for practical use, until we get the numbers up. Muerrto calls it pointless overanalysis and chooses not to do it; I call it the one game of mafia I am allowed to play and choose to do it. Muerrto has six newbie games (and possibly other non-newbie games?) on the go, while having joined mafiascum.net because I want to play mafia, this is the only option that I have. I actually agree with the one game for newbies restriction, although I would say that the slowness of this game due to lack of players makes it more irritating than it would be otherwise. So to answer Litral- I will look for holes in everyone's arguments but not necessarily think them scummy, because I am aware that we are in a bit of a limbo until the others arrive.

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.

I try to impart that knowledge to the people I play with but most newbies, like the ones here, are more interested in assuming they know better and questioning the IC judgment. Frustrating to say the least. Think I might lay off newbie games for a bit after these 6 end.

.

But... it is mafia, a game based around people deceiving other people. I would be a lot more worried if newbies didn't question your

stated

judgement- if they knew you were town it might be a bit different.

Also, I was serious. Because if I'm lynched I've proved myself right and that's worth it to me. It's the only way I can prove myself.

This, sadly, is sufficiently wrong to make my post about voting for ICs look compelling. If you are lynched (and turn out to be town) you have simply proven that more people voted for you than anyone else. There are any number of reasons why this may happen, but a simple one is that mafia is not a game of 9 people being given some stuff to read and make a decision from in isolation- it is as much about being able to convince people that your suspicions are right and also not appear suspicious at the same time. What it sounds like you are saying is that you are good at the scum identifying part and that is all that counts.

If this game is frustrating you as much as it sounds like it is, a better option than asking to be lynched would be to ask to be replaced. Of course, asking to be lynched is itself a reasonable gambit, especially when there are only one or two votes on you at the time

[Litral]

Is this your very first game of Mafia, Walnut?

[Walnut]

It is my first game at this site. I am playing on another site too.

I played a few face to face games a few years ago. That is quite a different dynamic, as it is a lot easier to read people when they are sitting around a table with you, you don't have a lot of time to go away and think about what they have said, and there is a lot more remembering as you can't go back and re-read what they did on Day 1.

[Litral]

Would it be fair to ask, from you, for a detailed analysis of all the players in the game right now, Walnut? I just read through the thread and I found some interesting things.

[Vel-Rahn Koon]

Dear Modding Vel, I realize it's really unfair to ask this of you right now since you're busy with the kid and work, but can we get replacements for both

Mike4876

and

Demonking

when you're free? The first has never posted, even after picking up his prod, and the second has been inactive for one entire week, even under huge pressure.

Demonking has already been prodded, but never picked it up, so I'm replacing him. Don't hold your breath, I'm already looking for 3 other replacements and nothing so far

Mike is your (the players') problem. I can't force someone to post, all I can do is prod them.

[Vel-Rahn Koon]

Well you guys got lucky. q21 replaces Demonking, effective immediately.

[q21]

Greeting, need to go read the game so far.

[q21]

Reread complete.

The best I can do on explaining Demonking's actions is as follows:

He made a newbie overreaction to a random vote. He took a fair bit of heat for this, which is to be expected. He was disheartened by this and it put him off the game. He left. The game went on. More than this I don't know, I unfortunately can't get inside his head.

First point I'd like to make on the rest of the game is:

FoS: Mike

as lurkerscum. If Vel isn't trying to replace him then he has picked up his prod, which means he's floating around and deliberately not participating. This is scummy in the extreme.

To follow will be a few posts about other things I've noticed.

[q21]

Here is another thing I found more than a little scummy. His post 100. Yet again the underlining is mine.

I guess my suspicions of Litral could fall into Muerrto's category of overanalysing posts.

As everyone says, it is tough to figure out what is a noob tell or honest mistake as opposed to a scumtell. There have been enough mistakes (honest or otherwise) from the initial "we can know who scum are" through missing the bit in Muerrto's post about "case in point" to even your last post where you say that you went bonkers and mixed up two names. It is a bit similar to massive's reason for voting Snafoo, in that it sets you up for later when you do something really scummy to be able to say "Oh, but look at all the mistakes I have made".

And the first paragraph of his post 102.

The next post was aimed at Snafoo and Litral both and shows my frustration. Call it an appeal to emotion if that helps but I'm in 6 newbie games and if I'm getting grilled on semantics here I'm definitely gonna put less focus in this one.

I know that with only six of the nine players participating most of the time that what has happened so far is largely meaningless. We can look for tiny flaws in posts, more for practice and entertainment than for practical use, until we get the numbers up. Muerrto calls it pointless overanalysis and chooses not to do it; I call it the one game of mafia I am allowed to play and choose to do it. Muerrto has six newbie games (and possibly other non-newbie games?) on the go, while having joined mafiascum.net because I want to play mafia, this is the only option that I have. I actually agree with the one game for newbies restriction, although I would say that the slowness of this game due to lack of players makes it more irritating than it would be otherwise. So to answer Litral- I will look for holes in everyone's arguments but not necessarily think them scummy, because I am aware that we are in a bit of a limbo until the others arrive.

[q21]

please ignore that last post, I clicked submit when I meant to click preview. Apologies, the completed version will arrive in a few minutes.

[q21]

First this one because I finished compiling it first.

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?

...(this is where he outlines his suspicions of Massive and Muerrto. Its long so I left it out. If you want to read it all again feel free, its post 60.)...

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.

I find this post scummy. Not because of the fact that he suspects Muerrto and Massive, hence I edited most of his explanation for that out. What I find scummy is that he doubts that someone is scummy but still wants to lynch them (see the underlined bits). The fact that it was essentially me he wanted to lynch or the fact that he has since changed his vote - he was willing to kill someone he thought said he thought was probably town. In a game with only 9 players you mislynching is dangerous from the beginning and you really don't have time to lynch someone just to find out.

Looks like scum trying to get a lynch on whoever looks most likely.

FoS snafoo

Also smaller

FoS Litral

for posts 73 and 74 where he seems to be defending snafoo who I think is scummy.

[q21]

Here is another thing I found more than a little scummy. His post 100. Yet again the underlining is mine.

I guess my suspicions of Litral could fall into Muerrto's category of overanalysing posts.

As everyone says, it is tough to figure out what is a noob tell or honest mistake as opposed to a scumtell. There have been enough mistakes (honest or otherwise) from the initial "we can know who scum are" through missing the bit in Muerrto's post about "case in point" to even your last post where you say that you went bonkers and mixed up two names. It is a bit similar to massive's reason for voting Snafoo, in that it sets you up for later when you do something really scummy to be able to say "Oh, but look at all the mistakes I have made".

And the first paragraph of his post 102.

The next post was aimed at Snafoo and Litral both and shows my frustration. Call it an appeal to emotion if that helps but I'm in 6 newbie games and if I'm getting grilled on semantics here I'm definitely gonna put less focus in this one.

I know that with only six of the nine players participating most of the time that what has happened so far is largely meaningless. We can look for tiny flaws in posts, more for practice and entertainment than for practical use, until we get the numbers up.

Muerrto calls it pointless overanalysis and chooses not to do it; I call it the one game of mafia I am allowed to play and choose to do it.

Muerrto has six newbie games (and possibly other non-newbie games?) on the go, while having joined mafiascum.net because I want to play mafia, this is the only option that I have. I actually agree with the one game for newbies restriction, although I would say that the slowness of this game due to lack of players makes it more irritating than it would be otherwise. So to answer Litral- I will look for holes in everyone's arguments but not necessarily think them scummy, because I am aware that we are in a bit of a limbo until the others arrive.

The underlined bits are heavily contradictory. Within the space of three posts he said that Litral's overanalysis is scummy and his own is not.

Vote: Walnut

I've mentioned 4 people: Walnut, Mike, snafoo and (on outside chance) Litral. If there's no scum among those 4 I'd be astounded.

Finally, apologies for the hexaposting, but I just got caught up and I wanted to get my thoughts on the game so far out.

[Super Archivist]

Hello q21! Thanks for making this game interesting again!

I remember being fairly suspicious of Walnut around page two, but not so much recently.
Of course, you're not cleared from suspicion either...

I honestly don't have much to say at this point. You're all too hardcore at post analysis for me. o_o

[Litral]

Thanks q21 for replacing! Therefore:

unvote

Very nice, and much-needed analysis. I will now gladly explain my actions.

Your main argument against me is that I have defended snafoo, whom you believe to be suspicious. I must state that in no way is this my original intention. My intention was to attack Muerrto's vote for snafoo, which I found to be illogical. Part of me wanted to see that knowledge which he seemed to know:

if Emeril told you how to cook something, you'd listen, yes?

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.

I try to impart that knowledge to the people I play with but most newbies, like the ones here, are more interested in assuming they know better and questioning the IC judgment. Frustrating to say the least.

The other part considered that he might be the other scum we're looking for.

Walnut, my request still stands; I want an explicit argument from you.

q21, what do you think of Muerrto's behavior? I notice you have not commented much on it.

(also I see this is actually your first newbie game, even though you're in two theme games. )

I honestly don't have much to say at this point. You're all too hardcore at post analysis for me. o_o

Uh... not really... try.

[Muerrto]

I know that with only six of the nine players participating most of the time that what has happened so far is largely meaningless. We can look for tiny flaws in posts, more for practice and entertainment than for practical use, until we get the numbers up. Muerrto calls it pointless overanalysis and chooses not to do it; I call it the one game of mafia I am allowed to play and choose to do it. Muerrto has six newbie games (and possibly other non-newbie games?) on the go, while having joined mafiascum.net because I want to play mafia, this is the only option that I have. I actually agree with the one game for newbies restriction, although I would say that the slowness of this game due to lack of players makes it more irritating than it would be otherwise. So to answer Litral- I will look for holes in everyone's arguments but not necessarily think them scummy, because I am aware that we are in a bit of a limbo until the others arrive.

Ok I can definitely see that. If it helps you can be in up to 4 non-newbie games but I usually suggest chilling here till you get the feel for the place. Even if you've played before, it's really different here, in a good way though.

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. As I said in my last post, the only way to prove I'm right is to die. So for now I'm gonna step back from the argument and see what everyone else is thinking.

[Muerrto]

First point I'd like to make on the rest of the game is:

FoS: Mike as lurkerscum. If Vel isn't trying to replace him then he has picked up his prod, which means he's floating around and deliberately not participating. This is scummy in the extreme.

Um...we just found out he picked up his prod and didn't post...

Unvote, Vote: Mike

always. There's never a town reason to pick up your prod and not post.

Should be 1 down but if he's town he's let us all down.

[Super Archivist]

Totally agree with Muerrto.

Vote: mike4876

He may or may not be scum, but either way he's not helping at all. And maybe voting for him will get him to post. =/

[q21]

Thanks q21 for replacing! Therefore:

unvote

Very nice, and much-needed analysis. I will now gladly explain my actions.

Your main argument against me is that I have defended snafoo, whom you believe to be suspicious. I must state that in no way is this my original intention. My intention was to attack Muerrto's vote for snafoo, which I found to be illogical. Part of me wanted to see that knowledge which he seemed to know:

if Emeril told you how to cook something, you'd listen, yes?

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.

I try to impart that knowledge to the people I play with but most newbies, like the ones here, are more interested in assuming they know better and questioning the IC judgment. Frustrating to say the least.

The other part considered that he might be the other scum we're looking for.

Walnut, my request still stands; I want an explicit argument from you.

q21, what do you think of Muerrto's behavior? I notice you have not commented much on it.

(also I see this is actually your first newbie game, even though you're in two theme games. )

I honestly don't have much to say at this point. You're all too hardcore at post analysis for me. o_o

Uh... not really... try.

The suspicion I have for you is based almost solely on your perceived defence of someone I find scummy. I can appreciate the angle you say you're coming from there and as such you're at the bottom of that list of people I mentioned.

As for looking at Muerrto's actions that basically means trying to sort out that multiple page argument between yourself and him. Its long and confusing. It could probably point to either of you being scum, but not the other (unless its some really A-grade distancing). Lots of it is based on misinterpreting each other and there's been some crossposting and apologising along the way.

Nothing of Muerrto's really stood up and said, "scummy" to me. Not that that clears him of all suspicion, I suspect everyone to a certain degree.

As to the building wagon on Mike I think its a good idea, hopefully two votes will make the guy sit up and take notice. If it doesn't I'll add my own vote to him in about a RL day.

[Walnut]

Welcome to q21! Thanks for replacing and thanks for jumping in boots and all, even if you did mistakenly vote for me.

I guess my suspicions of Litral could fall into Muerrto's category of overanalysing posts.

Muerrto calls it pointless overanalysis and chooses not to do it; I call it the one game of mafia I am allowed to play and choose to do it.

In both of these posts I am saying that I am looking closely at Litral's posts and picking up on tiny possible flaws, because that is all I have to go on. I am conceding that, as Muerrto says, this may be overanalysing. I can see the contradictory angle if I was saying that my suspicions of Litral were caused by

his

overanalysis, but I was in fact referring to

my own

(potential) overanalysis in both posts.

I had been speculating about what any Demon king replacement would open with, and I must say you impressed me. The immeditate mention of your predecessor (as it could not be avoided) with the throwaway defence of "He was a first timer who got pressured so left" then moving straight on to lots of analysis, flinging a few FOS and a vote for the last player to be named in a post prior to your replacing was good. The defence is not as silly as it sounds- all you need to join the site is a valid email address, so you could get some fairly inexplicable behaviour, especially in the first few posts of someone's first ever game. Even so, you start with a burden of suspicion based on your replacee's brief contribution, and will have to work hard to clear it.

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 definitely agree. While I am too lazy to count up the exact number of posts everyone has written, you have certainly done your share. The dead horse part is where we differ- to stretch the analogy I think some of us, having only the one horse to ride, are giving its sun-dried skull mouth-to-mouth resuscitation in a desperate attempt to keep it alive. Incidentally, one way to get a vicarious fix of mafia is to read other games, and I have read a couple here and am currently following a couple more. In one of these Muerrto was mafiascum and was partnered by a series of fairly unfortunate newbies who dug a deeper and deeper hole leading to a 2 day game, if I recall correctly. Hence perhaps the frustration with newbies (or perhaps a more definite attempt to stay unassociated with a potentially fatal partner...).

In answer to Litral's request for a detailed analysis of all of the players in the game so far, I am reluctant to do this. One reason why is that we have Starkmoon posting soon and potentially Mike4876, and I would like for them to read the thread and come up with their own thoughts first, and not just be able to say "I agree with so and so" much. Just to check though- the first time you asked for a detailed analysis of all players currently in the game (post 105), then the second time (post 115) you said

Walnut, my request still stands; I want an explicit argument from you.

What does it mean when a general analysis turns into an explicit argument? I think it means that my single vote sitting on you is making you edgy, and I don't mind that.

That said, I did a bit of headscratching about Mike4876, and reluctantly have come to the conclusion that he needs to be voted for. The tricky bit is that just possibly he has a legitimate reason for not posting, and statistically speaking he is more likely to be a townie, and even a silent one gives us an advantage in the win condition. However, if he is mafia, I am damned if I am going to be the fool who let him win by never posting.

Unvote, Vote Mike4876

[Litral]

What does it mean when a general analysis turns into an explicit argument? I think it means that my single vote sitting on you is making you edgy, and I don't mind that.

If you don't mind me paraphrasing Muerrto, I'm afraid this is what he called "grilling over semantics".

It didn't change. I was - and am - worried that you seemed to, well, "flow along", so I wanted to see what you actually thought of all players. Hence, an explicit argument considering all players. I accept your reasons not for doing so, however.

[Walnut]

I don't mind you paraphrasing Muerrto at all. I do sometimes wonder what the alternative to the grilling over semantics/overanalysing is- waiting for someone to make a such a blindingly obvious blunder that it is immediately apparent that they are scum?

I was thinking that it is quite natural that when someone is voting for you, you tend to suspect that they are scum or at least thinking wrong. The little bit of pressure remains there, even though it is just one vote, making it harder to sleep at night, and every now and then in the street you twitch and look over shoulder just in case

By the same token, I am glad that you accept my reasons for not publicising my thinking, but a little curious as to how I seem to "flow along". Would it be possible to elaborate on that at all?

[Litral]

By the same token, I am glad that you accept my reasons for not publicising my thinking, but a little curious as to how I seem to "flow along". Would it be possible to elaborate on that at all?

It would, but you won't like it, since it's just a gut feeling. You voted for me early on and kept it there. You stayed out of the snafoo-Muerrto+Massive debate, and you stayed out of the Litral-Muerrto debate (more like bickering, really), basically pointing out everyone's mistakes equally while not really suggesting suspicion. Possible scum tactic. But it's only a feel.

[Walnut]

No problem with having gut feelings. There is not much certainty, so some of it is likely to come down to that sort of instinctual thing. As noted before, I did feel that there was not a lot to go on, and not a huge point in getting too committed with a third of the players absent, so yep, I can see how that can be seen as flowing along.