Mafia 85 - Murder at the Bus Stop (game over)

[Moratorium]

The difference between what you did and Sir T did was that Sir T said he saw something in Survy's post

right...

and would explain if others didn't see it.

Where? Not that he might not agree to this, but he didn't say that.

unvote
vote Surye

I hope atleast a few people see what I see.

Mod edit
Votecount:
Surye (4): Demon Pineapple, farside22, Megatheory, Sir Tornado
Megatheory (2): armlx, Alabaska J
Sir Tornado (1): BlakAdder
Empking (1): RestFermata
Wall-E (1): Mana_Ku
Cream147 (1): Empking
Slicey (1): Wall-E, Shanba
farside22 (1): martin413
armlx (1): Xtoxm
Xtoxm (1): fouxdufafa

Not voting (10): al4xz, Azuma, Cream147, Jebus, Slepz, DynamoXI, Surye, Slicey, Riceballtail, Moratorium

[Cream147]

unvote

vote Surye

I hope atleast a few people see what I see.

You've piqued my interest. Shame I have no idea what you're talking about. Please explain.

[armlx]

I agree with farside.

[farside22]

The difference between what you did and Sir T did was that Sir T said he saw something in Survy's post

right...

and would explain if others didn't see it.

Where? Not that he might not agree to this, but he didn't say that.

unvote
vote Surye

I hope atleast a few people see what I see.

Ah for some reason I thought he was going to explain when he states the last line.

[Shanba]

/me sighs.

Eh, this was probably the wrong way to go about proving my point, but I strongly believe the meta is wrong on this. It's not like voting without explanations is even anything new, it's just everyone has a gut reaction to it that says it must be unhelpful because it means that they, personally, do not have all the information.

However, it's burying everything else I want to and need to say in order to function in this game, so I'll stop. I'm voting Slicey because of his tentative posting.

Hmm.... not really much to comment on. EmpKing looks pretty suspicious right now, I don't like how he was trying to get everyone to vote.

Hmm... BlakAdder looks suspicious to me, mainly cause I feel like he's attacking Sir T for the way he posts, which I don't like.

he's said he's suspicious of EmpKing and Blakadder, but has yet to place a single vote. He explains this by saying: "I don't think one somewhat scummy post automatically makes them scum. And I don't like unvoting and voting like crazy, unless it's the random voting phase", which is fair enough, but that's only part of what I find scummy. So far, he has said "Hmm..." twice, ">_>" (and variants) 4 times. He feels nervous. When he's asking Wall-E why he's voting for him, he adds "Just curious." at the end, as if he's afraid asking will get him into trouble. This might be excusable if he were a newbie, but he's posting meta opinions like:

I don't like unvoting and voting like crazy, unless it's the random voting phase

and

I'd say pressure people that seem scummy. If you think lurking is a scumtactic, well that's what you think. Evetually, they will have to post though, and we'll see if those posts seem scummy

which indicate that he has a certain amount of mafia experience. Compare with my posting in Basic twelve player mafia, where I was scum. By the end of that game, I was horrifically nervous, and it was showing through in my posts, and the "defeatist" attitude was the reason most of the town had deduced I was scum.

[armlx]

Voting without reasons is bad because its an easy way for scum to spark/follow wagons. Providing reasons removes some of these BS votes from the system.

And your case is a good one.

Vote slicey

Lets get this moving.

mod: not counted, unvote first

[Shanba]

Voting without reasons is bad because its an easy way for scum to spark/follow wagons. Providing reasons removes some of these BS votes from the system.

But as shown here, it really doesn't work at sparking wagons, now, does it? When I explained my vote I immediately get someone agreeing with me who before would not even have thought about following my vote. It's only good for following wagons, and even then it's just as easy to say "I agree with Shanba. Vote: x"

[armlx]

It only doesn't work as it has been firmly meta'ed as a scum tell.

And I realize your point, its just actively unhelpful to do it.

[Shanba]

Nah, people just aren't sheepish enough to follow reasonless votes.

I don't think it's actively unhelpful, as it can be helpful for town in certain situations - for example, I believe scum are more likely to bus the stronger the case on their partners, and, conversely, more likely to defend them if the case is weak. As such, such a vote can work to sniff out partners. Reasonless votes can also get reactions from the person who was voted for, and finally, in a meta where reasonless votes are tolerated (at least for a while), it's often easier for roles like cops to hide their info in thread.

I'm sure I had other reasons too, but I forget.

[armlx]

But the issue is said bussing gets lost in the whirl of townies going "STFU, no case, bai".

I can see purposes for not giving your reasons up front, but when asked, give them.

Cops have better ways to hide their info.

[Lawrencelot]

Demon Pineapple and Slepz have been prodded.

[Slicey]

/me sighs.

Eh, this was probably the wrong way to go about proving my point, but I strongly believe the meta is wrong on this. It's not like voting without explanations is even anything new, it's just everyone has a gut reaction to it that says it must be unhelpful because it means that they, personally, do not have all the information.

However, it's burying everything else I want to and need to say in order to function in this game, so I'll stop. I'm voting Slicey because of his tentative posting.

Hmm.... not really much to comment on. EmpKing looks pretty suspicious right now, I don't like how he was trying to get everyone to vote.

Hmm... BlakAdder looks suspicious to me, mainly cause I feel like he's attacking Sir T for the way he posts, which I don't like.

he's said he's suspicious of EmpKing and Blakadder, but has yet to place a single vote. He explains this by saying: "I don't think one somewhat scummy post automatically makes them scum. And I don't like unvoting and voting like crazy, unless it's the random voting phase", which is fair enough, but that's only part of what I find scummy. So far, he has said "Hmm..." twice, ">_>" (and variants) 4 times. He feels nervous. When he's asking Wall-E why he's voting for him, he adds "Just curious." at the end, as if he's afraid asking will get him into trouble. This might be excusable if he were a newbie, but he's posting meta opinions like:

I don't like unvoting and voting like crazy, unless it's the random voting phase

and

I'd say pressure people that seem scummy. If you think lurking is a scumtactic, well that's what you think. Evetually, they will have to post though, and we'll see if those posts seem scummy

which indicate that he has a certain amount of mafia experience. Compare with my posting in Basic twelve player mafia, where I was scum. By the end of that game, I was horrifically nervous, and it was showing through in my posts, and the "defeatist" attitude was the reason most of the town had deduced I was scum.

You obviously don't know me, but if you did, then you would know I use ">_>" a lot. And I mean A LOT. Like, once every post. I have limited mafia experience at another forum, but I am a little nervous, considering this is my first mafia game here. And the "hmm...'s", well, I really don't know why I put them there. I just did. I didn't even realize I did it twice. I am playing a little tentative, but that's cause this is my first game here, and where I play, it's much less serious (dead people are allowed to talk as much as they want, as long as they don't reveal any info, for example.) As for the Wall-E thing, I didn't really care cause it was only one vote and he didn't really say why he had voted for me at the time.

[Sir Tornado]

Since you all are harping on the pretending to play, I assure you that you're all getting tunnel vision no this fact. Look at the post I quoted in the vote. It's pretending to play, 100%. It's participating because he's told to. Now, how much did I invest in this? Did I lead the charge to have him lynched? No. Did I then proceed to follow the discussion on why he would do that, then weigh in, and unvote? Yes.

You're being so ridiculous.

I can pretend to play in one post all I want, but it is irrelevant as far as I am actually playing in other posts. Now, the thing is, I think you know your vote on me for the reasons you are giving in that post was very weak, and yet instead of agreeing that it was weak and just leaving it there and moving on, you continue to try to defend it. I see this as a scum-tell. The scum are, in general reluctant to back down and agree that they were wrong most of the trivial incidents, like that vote, something which you are doing at the moment.

[Slepz]

Voting without reasons is bad because its an easy way for scum to spark/follow wagons. Providing reasons removes some of these BS votes from the system.

And your case is a good one.

Vote slicey

Lets get this moving.

Agreed, but isn't that a pretty bad reason to vote someone? And what did you mean by let's get this moving?

mod: quotes fixed

[Surye]

Since you all are harping on the pretending to play, I assure you that you're all getting tunnel vision no this fact. Look at the post I quoted in the vote. It's pretending to play, 100%. It's participating because he's told to. Now, how much did I invest in this? Did I lead the charge to have him lynched? No. Did I then proceed to follow the discussion on why he would do that, then weigh in, and unvote? Yes.

You're being so ridiculous.

I can pretend to play in one post all I want, but it is irrelevant as far as I am actually playing in other posts. Now, the thing is, I think you know your vote on me for the reasons you are giving in that post was very weak, and yet instead of agreeing that it was weak and just leaving it there and moving on, you continue to try to defend it. I see this as a scum-tell. The scum are, in general reluctant to back down and agree that they were wrong most of the trivial incidents, like that vote, something which you are doing at the moment.

Sorry, I thought that my unvote was proof enough I thought my vote was weak. My unvote by definition was backing down. Your logic is flawed.

[armlx]

Agreed, but isn't that a pretty bad reason to vote someone? And what did you mean by let's get this moving?

This game isn't getting anywhere. Shanba was the first person to post a legitimately strong reason a player was scummy, and that was 15 pages in. i'm voting on the basis that I agree with him and this game needs to start moving.

[Wall-E]

Shanba, what is your "legitimate reason," in summary?

[armlx]

/me sighs.

Eh, this was probably the wrong way to go about proving my point, but I strongly believe the meta is wrong on this. It's not like voting without explanations is even anything new, it's just everyone has a gut reaction to it that says it must be unhelpful because it means that they, personally, do not have all the information.

However, it's burying everything else I want to and need to say in order to function in this game, so I'll stop. I'm voting Slicey because of his tentative posting.

Hmm.... not really much to comment on. EmpKing looks pretty suspicious right now, I don't like how he was trying to get everyone to vote.

Hmm... BlakAdder looks suspicious to me, mainly cause I feel like he's attacking Sir T for the way he posts, which I don't like.

he's said he's suspicious of EmpKing and Blakadder, but has yet to place a single vote. He explains this by saying: "I don't think one somewhat scummy post automatically makes them scum. And I don't like unvoting and voting like crazy, unless it's the random voting phase", which is fair enough, but that's only part of what I find scummy. So far, he has said "Hmm..." twice, ">_>" (and variants) 4 times. He feels nervous. When he's asking Wall-E why he's voting for him, he adds "Just curious." at the end, as if he's afraid asking will get him into trouble. This might be excusable if he were a newbie, but he's posting meta opinions like:

I don't like unvoting and voting like crazy, unless it's the random voting phase

and

I'd say pressure people that seem scummy. If you think lurking is a scumtactic, well that's what you think. Evetually, they will have to post though, and we'll see if those posts seem scummy

which indicate that he has a certain amount of mafia experience. Compare with my posting in Basic twelve player mafia, where I was scum. By the end of that game, I was horrifically nervous, and it was showing through in my posts, and the "defeatist" attitude was the reason most of the town had deduced I was scum.

Wall-E, he said it this page.

[Wall-E]

I was hoping for a very short, one sentence summary from Shanba. I know what he/she is saying, but I wanted it made much more clear and concise for the public record.

[armlx]

I was hoping for a very short, one sentence summary from Shanba. I know what he/she is saying, but I wanted it made much more clear and concise for the public record.

Ah, the tl;dr version. Fair nuff. I thought you were asking for the post he made...

[Slicey]

Basically, he's voting for me because I'm very hesitant to vote for somebody. >_>

Honestly, I don't really see any reason to vote anyone right now. I think that the Sir T. and Surye bandwagons are stupid. A vote on Empking would achieve nothing. As for BlakAdder, I'm not convinced he's scum...yet. I think he's had a couple scummy posts, but he hasn't definitley convinced me yet.

[armlx]

A vote on Empking would achieve nothing.

Why?

As for BlakAdder, I'm not convinced he's scum...yet

Why do you have to be convinced someone is scum to vote them?

These statements seem to imply you are sure Emp is scum. Is that true?

[Slicey]

A vote on Empking would achieve nothing.

Why?

As for BlakAdder, I'm not convinced he's scum...yet

Why do you have to be convinced someone is scum to vote them?

These statements seem to imply you are sure Emp is scum. Is that true?

I had a feeling you were going to ask that first question. A vote on Empking would not get us any closer to lynching him because I'm the only one who suspects him. It'd be a useless vote IMHO. But y'know what, it's worth a shot.

Vote: EmpKing

I have no idea if Emp is scum or not.

The case against BlakAdder isn't strong enough for me to vote for him. Plus, I find Empking more scummy.

[armlx]

I have no idea if Emp is scum or not.

Why did you mention him as someone who was vote worth? What has he done scummy?

[Wall-E]

A vote on Empking would achieve nothing.

Why?

As for BlakAdder, I'm not convinced he's scum...yet

Why do you have to be convinced someone is scum to vote them?

These statements seem to imply you are sure Emp is scum. Is that true?

Where on earth did you draw that implication from? I didn't scan that at all.