Mini 624 - Game Over!

[Dark wingstalker]

Actually, I really enjoy knitting. Its theraputic. I'd suggest trying it.

I answered that question: I was skim reading, and I didn't pay enough attention to the game.

To further the answer, so as you understand it perfectly: I screwed up, and wasn't paying attention. I didnt disregard it by choice.

[Inspector Godot]

We have dudes on here now talking about their gut feelings, so we'll see how far that gets us in the game.

I wouldn't vote off a gut feeling unless there was evidence that the person was scum.

[Wumbo]

As far as posting to attack and defend, this is Mafia, not a knitting circle. WTF am i supposed to do? Gossip and chit chat? We have dudes on here now talking about their gut feelings, so we'll see how far that gets us in the game.

I rather enjoy knitting.

I wasn't saying that mafia never hammer, or that they do. I was merely stating that I would be wary of someone who came in to quicklynch, or tried to, after I was put at L-1 or even L-2. To put it any other way is indeed a wifom that can't be used. My warning was just a precaution.

I'm gonna

unvote: Dark WingStalker

for now. I didn't give a 12 hour ultimatum, but I suppose he's spoken his peace enough for me to take alleviate some pressure.

[Litral]

What's the gut feeling?

Meh, it's just a gut feeling based off of nothing. I get them sometimes and they're usually wrong but it was enough for me to list you. To be honest I don't think you're as suspicious as the other two I listed though.

The explanation why I'm not voting DWS and is happy with voting Mr. Chen is because I find it far more useful, in the long run, to lynch someone who will not participate, since they'll have to be lynched at some point anyway, and relatively, lynching DWS will deny us information. The other reason is that the entire case seems to be a matter of technicality - while DWS did seem to misinterpret and misspeak at times, those misinterpretations are not meant to be malicious or anti-town, and to me, not intentional.

[geraintm]

imaginality - i really don'tlike people putting u lists of questions for others to answer. i think t makes a player look like they are participating in a game when all they are doing is trying to force others to talk and incrimate themselves. you should at least answer the questions yourself

to further on my "mafia never hammer" comments:

How so? I said "mafia never hammer" in much the same way Geraint did. Mafia dont, Because its far too obvious a move. That doesnt mean it never happens, but on Day 1 the mafia would be stupid for pushing the hammer themselves, when they could just target a scapegoat.

you still don't get me. i never said mafia don't hammer. what i said was that using the hammer as a way of going after mafia does not work. this makes no assumption on whether the hammerer is scumornot.

I didnt want to make an easy lynch. As geraintm said earlier in the thread, Mafia never hammer.

i really did not say that

[imaginality]

imaginality - i really don'tlike people putting u lists of questions for others to answer. i think t makes a player look like they are participating in a game when all they are doing is trying to force others to talk and incrimate themselves.

Since chenhsi seems to say next to nothing except when he's asked direct questions, I don't think it was out of order to ask him a few. If that was all I've done, you'd have a point, but I've been participating aside from that as well.

you should at least answer the questions yourself

Sure, why not?

chenhsi, please answer these questions:

1. Do you believe you are currently helping the town to find the scum? If so, how?

2. Out of the players who've come under attack so far (most notably Wumbo and Dark wingstalker), who do you find most suspicious? And why?

3. Has anything else anyone has said struck you as odd, questionable, or worth commenting on?

4. What would the chances of a town win be if we all adopted your playing style?

1. Yes. A few examples of how I'm trying to help the town find scum (directly or indirectly):

(a) trying to stimulate discussion at times when the thread was quiet early on (the 'two bandwagons' post 34, also post 50)
(b) starting the Wumbo wagon with my vote on him (post 88) and staying involved in the ensuing discussion (also drawing attention to him again more recently); he is still under suspicion as far as I am concerned
(c) addiing to the pressure on Dark wingstalker for his questionable vote, and challenging his somewhat contradictory attempts to explain himself since (posts 128, 133, 149 etc)
(d) answering other players' questions promptly (posts 41, 142, this post)

2. I think Dark wingstalker is more suspicious. I won't repeat all the reasons raised in the earlier posts, but I think his responses have used more dubious arguments, and his attempts to defend himself also come across as more desperate than Wumbo's did.

3. One or two things, a couple of which might be worth mentioning, a couple of vaguer suspicions that I won't raise yet as they're just hunches at this stage.

Worth mentioning: Litral's post 121:

But for now, vote: Wumbo by this principle: anyone vanilla townie who has claimed is completely useless to the town, and should be lynched, unless there is a far better candidate.

This post got overlooked in the switch to Dark wingstalker, but I disagree with the idea that "anyone vanilla townie who has claimed should be lynched unless there's a far better candidate," and even with the idea that "anyone who has claimed vanilla townie should be lynched unless there's a far better candidate," (if that's what he was trying to say. Particularly I disagree with using that logic to vote Wumbo at that point, because quick-lynching Wumbo would not have given us time to find a 'far better candidate'.

Litral's most recent post also rings untrue for me:

The explanation why I'm not voting DWS and is happy with voting Mr. Chen is because I find it far more useful, in the long run, to lynch someone who will not participate, since they'll have to be lynched at some point anyway, and relatively, lynching DWS will deny us information.

While I agree that more participation is a good thing, it's not true that we'd have to lynch chenhsi anyhow if he continued to minimally participate (e.g. a cop may get an inno on him), and also we would arguably gain more information from a DWS lynch than a policy lynch of a lurker, even if the trade-off is losing a player who participates more.

4. Not sure, I haven't got a completed game here yet so not a lot of evidence to judge the effectiveness of my playing style, certainly there are better players than me in this game, but from what I've seen so far I think it's fair to say that there'd be more chance if we all played like me than if we all play like chenhsi.

[Litral]

Worth mentioning: Litral's post 121:

But for now, vote: Wumbo by this principle: anyone vanilla townie who has claimed is completely useless to the town, and should be lynched, unless there is a far better candidate.

This post got overlooked in the switch to Dark wingstalker, but I disagree with the idea that "anyone vanilla townie who has claimed should be lynched unless there's a far better candidate," and even with the idea that "anyone who has claimed vanilla townie should be lynched unless there's a far better candidate," (if that's what he was trying to say. Particularly I disagree with using that logic to vote Wumbo at that point, because quick-lynching Wumbo would not have given us time to find a 'far better candidate'.

It's a good principle. If you are townie and you claim it, the scum will never bother with killing you, but you're still a suspect in the eyes of the town, generally. Not a good vote though, I admit, since I didn't have much time to read the thread at that point.

Litral's most recent post also rings untrue for me:

The explanation why I'm not voting DWS and is happy with voting Mr. Chen is because I find it far more useful, in the long run, to lynch someone who will not participate, since they'll have to be lynched at some point anyway, and relatively, lynching DWS will deny us information.

While I agree that more participation is a good thing, it's not true that we'd have to lynch chenhsi anyhow if he continued to minimally participate (e.g. a cop may get an inno on him), and also we would arguably gain more information from a DWS lynch than a policy lynch of a lurker, even if the trade-off is losing a player who participates more.

It's not true we have to lynch chenhsi, sure, but it becomes more likely. We would gain information right now if we lynch DWS, but not any more than that. I'm not actually using this as an argument saying "we shouldn't lynch any scummy player who talks", just that I myself would rather not, while also considering how I don't see DWS being scum as more likely than chenhsi being scum.

[Dark wingstalker]

i really did not say that

In response to that whole post, Apolagies. I misinterpreted your post.

[StrangerCoug]

The explanation why I'm not voting DWS and is happy with voting Mr. Chen is because I find it far more useful, in the long run, to lynch someone who will not participate, since they'll have to be lynched at some point anyway, and relatively, lynching DWS will deny us information. The other reason is that the entire case seems to be a matter of technicality - while DWS did seem to misinterpret and misspeak at times, those misinterpretations are not meant to be malicious or anti-town, and to me, not intentional.

Pressure voting a lurker is fine. Lynching a lurker is not.

Unvote: nhat
Vote: Litral

[Litral]

You hope to give pressure without the threat of lynching?

[StrangerCoug]

You hope to give pressure without the threat of lynching?

There's a difference, Litral. If we went after every single lurker and lynched them, scum would win.

[chenhsi]

2. Out of the players who've come under attack so far (most notably Wumbo and Dark wingstalker), who do you find most suspicious? And why?

3. Has anything else anyone has said struck you as odd, questionable, or worth commenting on?

2. No idea, they look the same to me.

3. Not really, I'll look again and see if I can find anything else though.

[Litral]

You hope to give pressure without the threat of lynching?

There's a difference, Litral. If we went after every single lurker and lynched them, scum would win.

And there's a huge difference between what you're saying my strategy is and what my strategy really is.

[StrangerCoug]

You hope to give pressure without the threat of lynching?

There's a difference, Litral. If we went after every single lurker and lynched them, scum would win.

And there's a huge difference between what you're saying my strategy is and what my strategy really is.

Explain then.

[nhat]

Can we get a prod for Tom?

[geraintm]

Pressure voting a lurker is fine. Lynching a lurker is not.

Unvote: nhat
Vote: Litral

nope, fine to lynch a lurker

You hope to give pressure without the threat of lynching?

There's a difference, Litral. If we went after every single lurker and lynched them, scum would win.

makes the assumption that scum never lurk. false

[Litral]

Explain then.

You're saying my strategy is to lynch every lurker. First of all, it's pretty sad if there are enough lurkers to lynch all the way to endgame, and second of all, I'm saying that we should lynch (or at least vote) chenhsi, who while suspicious (suggesting that there is nothing at all to talk about and nothing questionable at all), has the added benefit for lynching of being a lurker. I'm pretty sure my argument was something to this effect previously.

Until he brings up good points for me to read, I'm happy with my vote.

[Dark wingstalker]

Mod, can we get a vote count?

Litral, I think i agree with you about lynching chenshi, hwoever, i'm not going to vote without knowing exactly how many votes are on him this time

I'm sonewhat concerned by the fact he's answering every question with a negative, He has no idea who is scummy, he's not really seen anything thats struck him as odd. Its very evasive.

[Dark wingstalker]

furthermore,he said he was busy when he answered the intial questions from imaginality, and cited that he was too busy for the rest.

Too busy for 2 1 line answers you could type in your sleep? Sounds to me like you were going to use the time to heap the blame on someone else, but didnt quite manage it.

[StrangerCoug]

OK, I feel Litral has defended himself within reason, so I'll

unvote

him.

[Litral]

Tom informs me that he is unable to play. He cannot access mafiascum (thought it was down before) and can only do so through a public computer, and thus needs replacing.

[imaginality]

I asked:

chenhsi, please answer these questions:

1. Do you believe you are currently helping the town to find the scum? If so, how?

2. Out of the players who've come under attack so far (most notably Wumbo and Dark wingstalker), who do you find most suspicious? And why?

3. Has anything else anyone has said struck you as odd, questionable, or worth commenting on?

4. What would the chances of a town win be if we all adopted your playing style?

Chenhsi responded:

1. Probably not... although I will say something if I can find something to comment on...

4. I didn't consider this mean (although I see how you could). The chances? Lower than it could be.

Still trying to think of an answer for numbers 2 and 3, and I'm busy now, so I'll do those later.

and later:

2. No idea, they look the same to me.

3. Not really, I'll look again and see if I can find anything else though.

Not contributing is one thing, but continuing not to contribute when people are asking you to is another, and not taking up the opportunity to contribute that I just presented you with is even more questionable play. Your responses have taken you from lurky to scummy, and I think you deserve a vote. I'm not voting lightly - because I don't like taking my vote off DWS, who I still think is highly suspicious - but with those kind of answers you're really crying out for votes on you. So:

unvote; vote chenhsi

[chenhsi]

Well what kind of answer did you want? I answered as truthfully as possible!

[nhat]

chenhsi, do you have any suspicions whatsoever? It's at 9 pages already, and you've literally added nothing. You refused to voice your opinions on both Wumbo and DWS. What exactly are you trying to pull? Whatever it is, it's not pro-town at ALL.

FOS - chenhsi with the intent to vote if you don't explain yourself

[Hypatia]

VOTECOUNT:

chenhsi

imaginality
Litral

Wumbo

Tom

dark wingstalker

nhat

With 12 alive, it is 7 to lynch.

I will search for a replacement for Tom.

The 26th of July is the deadline for the end of Day One.