Mafia 82: International (Game Over)

[Cyberbob]

You can get your IC status stripped for it.

That's slightly different, because IC players should be teaching newbies how

to

play rather than how

not

to play.

[EGL]

Whether it's protown or not is debatable though.

[EGL]

At any rate, this game probably needs Sarc in it.

[Cyberbob]

At any rate, this game probably needs me to finish reading it.

Fixed.

[Battle Mage]

You can get your IC status stripped for it.

wtf? This discussion has been done to death over the history of MS, and the conclusion is, Self-hammering is a controversial policy, but one that does have merits. As far as i'm aware, you can't have your IC status stripped for how you play. I've self-hammered twice since being part of the site (although neither of those in the last year). In fact, i dont even think you can have your IC status stripped for repeated modkills.
In other words, what the hell are you talking about?

BM

[Battle Mage]

At any rate, this game probably needs Sarc in it.

Unless i failed to detect the inherent sarcasm within this statement, i'll go as far as to say that you just lost any credibility you might have had in this game. I've yet to see a game on MS which would benefit from having Sarc playing, and even if there was, why would you make that comment? Is it likely to encourage Sarc to play? -.-

BM

*And why is that a funny name?

[Battle Mage]

Unvote, Vote: Raider

Getting kinda bored of today. Netlava is obviously a bad lynch, but i guess the wagon itself has reaped something. Nonetheless, i think we are dragging things out a little...

BM

So, I gotta ask. Why are you voting me?

Armlx noted a seemingly valid inconsistency in your comments, and your defence was 'read the thread'. That's a lazy response, and until you defend yourself properly, i'm happy to vote for you.

BM

[Battle Mage]

Unvote, Vote: Raider

Getting kinda bored of today. Netlava is obviously a bad lynch, but i guess the wagon itself has reaped something. Nonetheless, i think we are dragging things out a little...

BM

FoS: Battle Mage

for weak justification of a vote.

Umm. Can you please explain how that post can be considered 'weak' justification of a vote, as opposed to 'NO' justification of a vote, given that my post offers no real reasoning for my vote atall?

BM

[Battle Mage]

And speaking of poor justification!

Unvote, Vote: Raider

Getting kinda bored of today. Netlava is obviously a bad lynch, but i guess the wagon itself has reaped something. Nonetheless, i think we are dragging things out a little...

BM

Am I to understand that you voted Raider because you were bored? Interesting reasoning. Also, people have criticised me for a lack of reasoning whilst defending Netlava, but come on! Saying it's 'obvious' is just an easy way out. 7 people clearly disagree with you, so you might want to think about expanding on that as well.

Same question as above can be answered by Cream. I have trouble following your wording. There's a major difference between half-baked reasoning, and no reasoning atall. 7 people disagree with me? By my normal standards, that's fairly good odds. 7 people can think again. I have already assessed the Netlava lynch. If i thought it was a good lynch, i'd be on it. Because my vote is not on Netlava, Netlava is not, imo, scum.

This is fairly straightforward stuff.

BM

[raider8169]

Unvote, Vote: Raider

Getting kinda bored of today. Netlava is obviously a bad lynch, but i guess the wagon itself has reaped something. Nonetheless, i think we are dragging things out a little...

BM

So, I gotta ask. Why are you voting me?

Armlx noted a seemingly valid inconsistency in your comments, and your defence was 'read the thread'. That's a lazy response, and until you defend yourself properly, i'm happy to vote for you.

BM

I did explain myself in my previous posts. Armlx just posted with a just saying, I consider that lazy. What is also lazy is when people dont read the thread and then say I didnt respond. If there are still questions after that then by all means ask away.

[armlx]

BM: Self hammer in newbies = IC ban. Its viewed as slightly violating the "Play to win" rule as town, and situational enough as scum its not worth exposing newbies to as "good play".

Raider: I pointed out a contradiction. Nothing else really needed to be said. You, on the other hand, were in the position of defending yourself. More did need to be said.

[StrangerCoug]

Unvote, Vote: Raider

Getting kinda bored of today. Netlava is obviously a bad lynch, but i guess the wagon itself has reaped something. Nonetheless, i think we are dragging things out a little...

BM

FoS: Battle Mage

for weak justification of a vote.

Umm. Can you please explain how that post can be considered 'weak' justification of a vote, as opposed to 'NO' justification of a vote, given that my post offers no real reasoning for my vote atall?

BM

Because you claim boredom and throw out the fact that you think the Netlava lynch is bad, but say nothing about your being suspicious of raider8169.

I also love how you say you didn't justify your vote at all. Seriously, that's not pro-town to say.

Unvote: Korts
Vote: Battle Mage

[Korts]

That's a bullshit vote, SC. Not justifying a vote is anti-town. Saying that that's what he did isn't.

Also, I'd still like Skruffs to answer me.

[raider8169]

Raider: I pointed out a contradiction. Nothing else really needed to be said. You, on the other hand, were in the position of defending yourself. More did need to be said.

What about everything that happened in between the posts though?

First post was on Mon Sep 08, 2008 6:52 pm

Second one on Mon Sep 22, 2008 8:00 am

With many posts inbetween to include a night. You took what I said out of context no question about it.

[skitzer]

Vote Count Thirteen of Day Two

(6) Netlava: hasdgfas, Cyberbob, armlx, Sineish, BlakAdder, raider8169
(4) Cass: Netlava, Lowell, Cephrir, Tom Mason
(1) armlx: Skruffs
(1) BlakAdder: Cass
(1) Skruffs: Korts
(1) raider8169: Battle Mage
(1) Battle Mage: StrangerCoug

(9) Not Voting: slanton2, Rich, Cream147, Citizen Karne, MafiaMann, killa seven, Surye, The Only Ryan, EGL

With 24 alive, it takes 13 votes to lynch!

Last Post Count Thirteen of Day Two

Key:
Green - posted in last 24 hours
Blue - posted in last 48 hours
Olive - Posted in last 72 hours
Red - Posted more than 72 hours ago, prodded
Dark Red - Requiring Replacement
Dark Blue - Vacation/Limited Access

armlx

raider8169

Cyberbob

Cephrir

Netlava

EGL

StrangerCoug

The Only Ryan

Citizen Karne

killa seven

Battle Mage

Korts

Cream147

Surye

Tom Mason

Rich

hasdgfas

Sineish

Cass

slanton2

Skruffs

BlakAdder

Lowell

MafiaMann

Prodding slanton2, Skruffs, BlakAdder, and Lowell.
Knight of Cydonia will replace MafiaMann.

[Knight of Cydonia]

Yo. Reading.

[Battle Mage]

BM: Self hammer in newbies = IC ban. Its viewed as slightly violating the "Play to win" rule as town, and situational enough as scum its not worth exposing newbies to as "good play".

Raider: I pointed out a contradiction. Nothing else really needed to be said. You, on the other hand, were in the position of defending yourself. More did need to be said.

Thank god i dont have a sudden urge to play newbie games.

How can you be banned from being an IC? Won't you just, ya know, stop playing newbie games? lol

BM

[Battle Mage]

Unvote, Vote: Raider

Getting kinda bored of today. Netlava is obviously a bad lynch, but i guess the wagon itself has reaped something. Nonetheless, i think we are dragging things out a little...

BM

FoS: Battle Mage

for weak justification of a vote.

Umm. Can you please explain how that post can be considered 'weak' justification of a vote, as opposed to 'NO' justification of a vote, given that my post offers no real reasoning for my vote atall?

BM

Because you claim boredom and throw out the fact that you think the Netlava lynch is bad, but say nothing about your being suspicious of raider8169.

I also love how you say you didn't justify your vote at all. Seriously, that's not pro-town to say.

Unvote: Korts
Vote: Battle Mage

Lol, we arent dealing in vibes here. This isnt scumhunting. It's statement of fact. I didnt justify my vote atall. That doesnt mean my vote had no reasoning behind it, just that i didnt state the reasoning at the time. In case you haven't been paying attention in all the games we've played together, it's something i do alot, because it gets reactions. Like yours.

I should also note that i have since justified my vote. Whether this justification is satisfactory or not, is something you've yet to assess. But voting me for no-justification is a factually null reason to vote. In other words, your own vote lacks effective justification. Ironic really.

BM

[Korts]

BM, as far as I've gathered, SC's reason to vote you wasn't that you didn't justify your vote, rather that you

stated

the fact that it wasn't weakly justified but not at all. Which is, frankly, BS.

[Battle Mage]

BM, as far as I've gathered, SC's reason to vote you wasn't that you didn't justify your vote, rather that you

stated

the fact that it wasn't weakly justified but not at all. Which is, frankly, BS.

I believe i tackled this issue in my previous post.

BM

[StrangerCoug]

Found his vote reason.

Unvote: Battle Mage

.

Korts and Cass remain my top suspects for now.

Not justifying a vote is anti-town. Saying that that's what he did isn't.

What's the difference between doing something and admitting you did it in terms of scumminess?

[Battle Mage]

Found his vote reason.

Unvote: Battle Mage

.

Korts and Cass remain my top suspects for now.

Not justifying a vote is anti-town. Saying that that's what he did isn't.

What's the difference between doing something and admitting you did it in terms of scumminess?

The difference is the same as the difference between lurking sneakily, and openly lurking. It doesnt change the act, but it's far more up front, i guess.

Also, im still happy with my vote after reading Raider's posts in isolation. I cant see what changed in the space of 5 days and a night phase that would make him completely change tack regarding Netlava.

BM

[BlakAdder]

I'm still here and reading.

[raider8169]

Also, im still happy with my vote after reading Raider's posts in isolation. I cant see what changed in the space of 5 days and a night phase that would make him completely change tack regarding Netlava.

It was closer to 14 days. You would have to read everything in between the posts in order to see what made me change my mind. Feel free to do that when you have some time. I am not sure how well you have been keeping up with the game as you were gone for a while.

[StrangerCoug]

It was closer to 14 days. You would have to read everything in between the posts in order to see what made me change my mind. Feel free to do that when you have some time. I am not sure how well you have been keeping up with the game as you were gone for a while.

I think he was absent earlier than the time he speaks of.