snaoo - 1 (massive)
Muerrto - 1 (snafoo)
Not Voting - 2 (mike4876, starkmoon)
Yosarian2 in Kingmaker II wrote: Things never, ever to do in a mafia game, if you want to win, from bad to worst:
1. Bad. Get frustrated and stop posting.
2. Worse. Actually say "I'm frustrated, I'm going to just stop posting".
3. Worse yet: Say "Just go ahead and lynch me". There's never a good reason to say this, and there's certanly no logical reason for you to give up now; you're not even the #1 suspect based on votes at the moment , I think (although I could be wrong, this game is moving so fast).
Since this lesson is from someone no less than Yosarian2 himself, I think you should accept it.Muerrto wrote: Shrug kill me then, lately almost all my newbie games have been newbies trying to teach ME how to play...and being wrong.
The scumtell is called "appealing to authority". It also sucks so much as a general statement.Muerrto wrote: 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.
I guess you could say this is a newbie asking advice. But I find it strange. Plus, several of SA's "newbie questions" contradicted with each other, such as post 11 asking what the purpose of random voting is, and post 13 immediately sticking a random vote on someone while still ostensibly not knowing what random voting is supposed to be.SA, post 13 wrote: What will we have to go on? The mafia hasn't done anything yet...
massive: you have so far casted suspicion on no one except snafoo, and focused on only ONE sentence which, to me, is obviously a joke. I think you should start analyzing everyone else's posts in order to contribute.massive wrote: Your quote: "I didn't change my vote so I could kick another defenseless kitten this time (although I'm spineless enough to do so anytime)."
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."
An OMGUS vote. Muerrto still hasn't explained why snafoo was suspicious, or more suspicious than Demonking.Muerrto wrote: Tell me what about being an IC makes us more or less likely to be scum and I'll vote myself...
Until then
Unvote, Vote: Snafoo
I find this to be strange. It is necessary for town to keep an eye on everyone; missing scum is dangerous and could give them tickets to the endgame. Any dubious action should be brought out into the open. If you only throw arguments against whomever you're voting right now, you give yourself an aura of certainty which only scum has. Muerrto seems to be trying to justify this aura of certainty.Muerrto wrote: Scum don't care who dies as long as it's not them. They try to convince everyone that everyone else is scummy. Causing paranoia is an excellent scum tactic. If everyone's acting scummy for one reason or another, votes will be flying more.
This was written in a period of frustration when I attacked Muerrto for providing weak reasons for voting snafoo. Muerrto was trying to trivialize my arguments by saying that I am inexperienced.Muerrto wrote: 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.
Not explaining yourself is never good for town. If you're frustrated, you should take a deep breath, drink some tea, meditate, zenify, kill some bastards in a video game (it's very satisfying), and then come back. My argument was that him abandoning the Demonking wagon made no sense for a townie, and this was the entirety of his response.Muerrto wrote:Not particularly.Litral wrote: There. Not semantics at all. Want to respond?
Really? Are you sure?Litral wrote:I have in no way said that you are guilty because you hammered Mike.
Soo...Litral wrote:I allowed you to hammer him because I wanted you to take the responsibility if he turned out town.
Yes. Didn't even bother reading it, did you? Or are you trivializing the scumtells I found on you?Muerrto wrote:Really? Are you sure?Litral wrote: I have in no way said that you are guilty because you hammered Mike.
Cease and desist with the personal attacks. My posts aren't 'gibberish', I read every word you said, I believed none of it. You played badly, deal with it and move on. If you're not lynched today I'll be floored and if you're not scum I'd say read over some more games before you play again.Litral wrote:So, okay, we now know the following things from Muerrto's reaction.
1) Muerrto has not read my post or the details of any of the scumtells I found on him. Why? The only reason is that such information is completely irrelevant to him. He does not need to defend himself in order to help the town reach an informed decision. He just has to attack someone ferociously enough and say "oops" tomorrow. Extremely anti-town and unhelpful thoroughly.
2) Muerrto decided to vote for me despite not having read my post and accusations of him at all. If this isn't OMGUS in its pure materia form, I don't know what is.
Unless something else pops up I'm happy with where my vote is.
Look, this is the last time you're going to be insulting my playstyle. If you don't have an argument, stop posting. It is obvious that you did not read my post because you thought I was accusing you of hammering Mike, which is absolutely untrue.Muerrto wrote: Cease and desist with the personal attacks. My posts aren't 'gibberish', I read every word you said, I believed none of it. You played badly, deal with it and move on. If you're not lynched today I'll be floored and if you're not scum I'd say read over some more games before you play again.
Last I'll address this issue because I'm not getting into another argument with a newbie because they think they know how to play...
Yes, I'd have lynched him. I'd have waited till Monday on the possibility that he could only post on weekdays, then I'd have hammered his ass. I would have said this in thread. I would not have asked for him to be replaced. See this post from Vel:Litral wrote:I truly had no idea he was actively lurking; no one knows why the hell one signs up for games and don't play, and I thought he was in this category. I will also admit that I do not have a full comprehension of the prod system, as I thought visiting the site would automatically trigger receiving the prod.
However, I didn't want to lynch the non-poster, I wanted to replace him, exactly because of wanting a full game where everyone posts. If I received confirmation once more that he will not be replaced, I would also have hammered him. As it happens, this is not true.
q21, would you have hammered him? You yourself asked for no one to hammer him until he had a chance to speak. I was acting on the same principle.
If I were lying with my explanation of post 126 then I was scum trying to derail the bandwagon. I would definitely not be looking at whether or not you have unvoted in order to explain my post; I would say things like not wanting someone to accidentally hammer him, etc. The fact that I knew you didn't unvote for Walnut when I posted that shows my innocence.
It quite clearly stated that Mike was our problem. There is a good possibility you were trying to get a replacement for your scumbuddie.Vel-Rahn Koon wrote:Litral wrote: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 bothMike4876andDemonkingwhen 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.
Ok...this happens in almost every newbie game. I never insulted your playing style. You're in a newbie game for a reason, you're new to this site. If you don't like being in newbie games and being considered a newbie, don't play them.Litral wrote:Look, this is the last time you're going to be insulting my playstyle.
I don't know how to play? Is that the best you could come up with?Muerrto wrote: Last I'll address this issue because I'm not getting into another argument with a newbie because they think they know how to play...
I definitely don't know better, huh? Yay, me, the newbie!Muerrto wrote: 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.
Uh huh!Muerrto wrote: Did I ever even mention being right because I'm an IC?
Yes. As I said on another thread, if Emeril told you how to cook something, you'd listen, yes?
Something that I think needs to be mentioned. When you call on your own experience as Muerrto has its not an Appeal to Authority... its calling on your own experience. Quoting Yosarian2 was an appeal to authority. Also it is not necessarily a scumtell. Read this.Litral wrote:@Muerrto: THERE. Finally decided to respond to one of the points, didn't you?
I will counter your argument, as we should be doing in a mafia game instead of CLAIMING SUPERIORITY. And don't say I'm the one starting a superiority contest, just look at your own friggin' posts.
In no way will a mislynch ever help the town with info. Remember that there's only 1 scum now so at least 3 townies will be voting you. The fact that you promote such a mislynch is a huge scumtell, because you're working with reverse psychology, and that's the only explanation for it. Proving yourself right by getting lynched is not a good idea.
I have responded to all the points that have been sensibly brought forth to me, mainly concerning my reluctance to hammer someone who I felt we should've replaced instead. I do so in order to convince the townies that I should not be their lynch. The fact that you won't even care to, instead using:
1) Appeal to authority. About three times.
2) Appeal to emotion.
3) "Just lynch me" playstyle
combines into a myriad of scumtells of such epic proportions.