Sushi Mafia! Game Over

[OhGodMyLife]

I'd rather we keep the pressure on M_K so I can pre /in for the game you anted on your bet.

[DrippingGoofball]

I was thinking of something along of lines of Prison Riot Mafia.

[Riceballtail]

I'll take those odds too!

/pre-in for DGB's game

[Slicey]

I voted for Seraphim because I felt he wanted to stay in the random voting stage. He said he didn't, and I believed him. >_>

[Azhrei]

Protip: Saying "Well the random stage is over so unvote" and not doing anything else is scummy.

If we lynch him, it will be a lesson well learned.

unvote, vote: Slicey

Your willing to lynch someone over just that?

On page 6, it's an excellent reason. Besides, I like to pressure these kinds of players, and he's opened the door.

He's not the only one who's done that, you know. Sentata did, just a couple of posts after him. I feel that lynching someone for that would be a tad over the top, unless they gave us additional reason when pressure was applied.

[raider8169]

Protip: Saying "Well the random stage is over so unvote" and not doing anything else is scummy.

If we lynch him, it will be a lesson well learned.

unvote, vote: Slicey

Your willing to lynch someone over just that?

On page 6, it's an excellent reason. Besides, I like to pressure these kinds of players, and he's opened the door.

He's not the only one who's done that, you know. Sentata did, just a couple of posts after him. I feel that lynching someone for that would be a tad over the top, unless they gave us additional reason when pressure was applied.

I agree having it go so far to a lynch is bad however pressure is always good. I do not think enough people would back it to go to a lynch.

[Simenon]

Vote Count

Microphone_Kirby (5)- Pear Bear, OhGodMyLife, Sipylus, Green Crayons, Jebus
raider8169 (3)- Plum, Septia, Talitha
Seraphim (2)- CounselWolf, sirdanilot,
Pear Bear (1)- hp [leaves]
Sipylus (1)- Azhrei
Alvinz95 (1)- Flameaxe
Flameaxe (1)- raider8169
Slicey (1)- DrippingGoofball

Not Voting (Santos, alvinz95, ortolan, Sentata, Seraphim, Slicey, Microphone_Kirby, Riceballtail)

13 to lynch. 12 days.

Prodding alvinz

[Sipylus]

He's not the only one who's done that, you know. Sentata did, just a couple of posts after him. I feel that lynching someone for that would be a tad over the top, unless they gave us additional reason when pressure was applied.

I agree having it go so far to a lynch is bad however pressure is always good. I do not think enough people would back it to go to a lynch.

Depends on what happens as a result of the pressure no?

Is pressure an anyone *always* good in your opinion Raider?

[raider8169]

Is pressure an anyone *always* good in your opinion Raider?

Pressure is not a bad thing, so a quick answer would be yes pressure is always good. However sometimes the person under pressure can snap and town or scum just ruin the game or say something that would get them lynched as town or scum. Too much pressure can be bad in some situations. This is in my limited experience of course and my personal opinion.

[Seraphim]

@ Post 139

The former strongly implies that you do not agree that the random voting stage is over. The latter strongly implies that you do not think the self vote is something to look at.

And I've already explained this. Seeing as you cut out that part of my post, I hope you've read at, as it explains my reasoning. Yes, I could have worded it better, but it got the job done.

Also, I think you're confusing having multiple suspicions("casting a wide net"
) with calling scum partners. I'm saying, this is what looks scummy. It doesn't mean I want them lynched. It means that I have a problem with the post and that it looks scummy. Sliecy was pushing an invalid point. You are pushing several crappy reasons on me. And M_K was rolefishing.

None of these on their own, in my eyes, deserve a vote. Is there a problem with expressing my problems with multiple people? Do you not like where my chain of reasoning is going?

What you are doing is scummy as you seem to be looking for easy lynches later. Let's say riceballtail flips scum. Isn't it easy to say that 'Oh, well, Seraphim did this in the random stage and I called that the two of them were scumbuddies! Let's lynch them now!"?

I'm not saying that any of my suspects should be lynched. I'm saying that they've done something anti-town and that I'm on to them.

About Pressure:

Apply pressure as needed. Too much and you may burst your target and cause mislynches which is why aggressive play is sometimes considered scummy.

[/quote]

[Microphone_Kirby]

I'm guessing that:

Microphone_Kirby (5)- Pear Bear, ortolan, OhGodMyLife, Sipylus, Green Crayons
raider8169 (3)- Plum, Septia, Talitha
Seraphim (3)- CounselWolf, sirdanilot, Slicey

One of these three players is scum, and being bus'ed.

I'll check again at end game. Here's my wager. If I'm wrong, I'll replace in 3 games. If I'm right, I'll mod a game.

Don't bet on it if you're betting me.
In fact, I think the odds say you'll be replacing in a few games, DGB.

[Microphone_Kirby]

A) He joined in march. That isn't exactly "newb" territory anymore.
B) If we all had the mentality of "it was a stupid mistake!", we would never get anywhere.
C) It isn't a null-tell because you've done it as town. If there was a bit more sarcasm there, and he made it obvious it was a joke (which he made obvious it wasn't), I could see it. But when it comes right down to it, it s a scumtell.

RA) No, but would you say Three games on-site w/one of those I bailed out in the middle of be considered "newb"?
I will tell you this, though: I've played at least 8 games off this site, so that probably isn't considered "newb" at all.
RB) ... Too true. If this mentality didn't exist, then I would've been lynched in Kirby Mafia when I feel I should've: Day one.
RC)

Both

mentalities are merely opinion; Null because you did "it" before and "it" being a scumtell. Sure many people share the second thought, but then that makes it merely

popular

opinion.

[Plum]

Crud crud crud. My computer ate my long beautiful analysis/recap post . I'm very chagrined.

Short version:

- MK being even half-serious about Lyncher/Jester speculations in the RVS is anti-town and annoying, but my feelings on it are 'It's somewhere between a nulltell and a mild scumtell'.

- Seraphim's questions, he says, were to probe Azhrei a bit to get more information and more of a read on him, as Seraphim claims Azh's post didn't point out anything that wasn't general knowledge. Fair enough, I guess, though unconventional way of going about it. Overall he reads fine to me as of now.

- I agree that Slicey only noting that we are, well, clearly out of the RVS and unvoting, is, in my mind, different then Setanta's post. Slicey unvotes but doesn't say anything substantial. Setanta comes back (from some sort of V/LA, if I recall, which I might not), unvotes, it seems, for prudence's sake and promises thoughts tomorrow. That's not just, in the immortal words of OGML "

aying "Well the random stage is over so unvote" and not doing anything else", as opposed to Slicey.

- Azhrei disagrees with me on this. Care to discuss it?

- Pre-/in for hypothetical DGB game .

- Sirdan can't seem to be able to see Seraphim's questions as anything but face value as opposed to (somewhat sarcastic, yes?) probing.

Er - I don't have enough to go on for a vote at this point. Much remains null (and void!). Some things do not; as above, I'd like to draw Azhrei and Sirdan into some, hopefully fruitful, discussion.

[Azhrei]

I'm happy to discuss it.

Personally, I think that just unvoting because we're out of the RVS and not really saying much else is yes, a little scummy, but not really something that I would lynch someone on. Which, is something I believe DGB suggested was possible.

I can see your point about Sentata being a little different, as he did promise more tomorrow. That said, I don't think it's really that much of a difference. He's still unvoting and not really posting much else. If we're going to accept that as a reason for voting/lynching people, it's unlikely we'll ever find scum

Unvote

, myself, because I've really no reason to be voting for Sipylus, nor any real reason to vote for anyone else.

[Setanta]

Protip: Saying "Well the random stage is over so unvote" and not doing anything else is scummy.

If we lynch him, it will be a lesson well learned.

unvote, vote: Slicey

Your willing to lynch someone over just that?

On page 6, it's an excellent reason. Besides, I like to pressure these kinds of players, and he's opened the door.

He's not the only one who's done that, you know. Sentata did, just a couple of posts after him. I feel that lynching someone for that would be a tad over the top, unless they gave us additional reason when pressure was applied.

The situations were a little different though, as Plum pointed out. I was back from LA and felt there was little point in keeping my vote where it was.


And I agree that lynching someone for it would be over the top, but I don't see a problem with DGB's(? think it was her) vote. I've no idea if she was serious about lynching him, but from the tone I would suggest possibly not.

I agree having it go so far to a lynch is bad however pressure is always good. I do not think enough people would back it to go to a lynch.

While this is true, it's a case by case basis. In that I don't always see "applying pressure" as a good thing, as scum may use it too.


More later hopefully, gonna go eat now

[Slicey]

I'm not voting for somebody cause I don't find anybody scummy at the moment. >_>

[OhGodMyLife]

Slicey, what do you think of Microphone_Kirby

[sirdanilot]

Plum - is your only point of discussion with me about Seraphim? In that case, I'll just continue the discussion with Seraphim and we go from there.

@ Post 139

The former strongly implies that you do not agree that the random voting stage is over. The latter strongly implies that you do not think the self vote is something to look at.

And I've already explained this. Seeing as you cut out that part of my post, I hope you've read at, as it explains my reasoning. Yes, I could have worded it better, but it got the job done.

I did read it, although I agree that it deserves to be analyzed more in depth, so I will quote it now. Anyway, the fact that it is being discussed now means that it did not get 'the job done'.

(1)I think it should be obvious that these points are obvious. (2)I find the fact that he merely repeated what had been said previous to his post. (3)Yes, it should be obvious that the random stage is over. Which means half of his post means nothing. (4)And of course the self-vote should be looked at and is not important...and that's the other half. In other words, I was merely asking for more information, more content with which myself and the town can use to discover more information and get good reads on any many players as possible.

(1) What a logic. Priceless.
(2) I assume you mean that you found that scummy?
(3) Then why didn't you say that you mean there was nothing of value in that post. Quite honestly I can't deduce that from it. Also, even if that's what you meant, why did you ignore raider, who didn't add anything of value either other than a jokevote (at least I think it was).
(4) The sentence regarding the self vote was a little bit clearer so I can live with that. But again, why azhrei over raider...

(1)Also, I think you're confusing having multiple suspicions("casting a wide net"
) with calling scum partners. (2)I'm saying, this is what looks scummy. It doesn't mean I want them lynched. It means that I have a problem with the post and that it looks scummy. (3)Sliecy was pushing an invalid point. You are pushing several crappy reasons on me. And M_K was rolefishing.

1 The only difference is that I have enough confidence to vote one of my suspects while you don't. Meaning that you are not ready to commit to one target yet and you can pick one at your whim (probably the biggest bandwagon). Me calling RBT 'your scumbuddy' is nothing other than expressing suspicion of RBT.
2 Which is the exact same thing I am saying, that this particular action of RBT was scummy. I haven't mentioned lynching RBT anywhere either. There is absolutely no difference.
3 And you said some very scummy things and so did RBT. I decided to vote you, which is actually better than what you have done (not voting anyone to wait and see).

None of these on their own, in my eyes, deserve a vote. Is there a problem with expressing my problems with multiple people? Do you not like where my chain of reasoning is going?

There's the problem that I have described above. You have put yourself in the comfortable position of being able to vote the biggest bandwagon.

That's

my issue with you.

What you are doing is scummy as you seem to be looking for easy lynches later. Let's say riceballtail flips scum. Isn't it easy to say that 'Oh, well, Seraphim did this in the random stage and I called that the two of them were scumbuddies! Let's lynch them now!"?

What you are doing is scummy as you seem to be looking for easy lynches later. Let's say the bandwagon on MK grows. Isn't it easy to say that 'Oh, well, remember my case on MK in the random stage and I called that he was scum! Let's lynch them now!"?
And then, let's say MK flips town. Isn't it easy to say that 'Oh well, Slicey did this in the random stage and I called that he was scum! Let's lynch them now!"?
And then, let's say Slicey flips town. Isn't it easy to say that 'Oh well, sirdanilot did this in the random stage and I called that he was scum! Let's lynch them now!"?

I'm not saying that any of my suspects should be lynched. I'm saying that they've done something anti-town and that I'm on to them.

Which is exactly what I am saying.

To be completely honest, Seraphim, my suspicion on you regarding the Azhrei case has dropped slightly, but my suspicion on you regarding the 'casting a wide net' has increased dramatically. My vote stands.

[hp [leaves]]

Ouch, big post.

First I would like to hear why you choose to FoS and keep your random vote instead of actually voting, and why you think this is pro town.

Well, I don't have anything to say about this except a barely acceptable meta defense; so I'll just say I'm slow with my votes and thank you for reminding me.

Unvote

Not liking the MK bandwagon

Unvote

I see his comment about jesters as stupid/newb rather than scummy, thus it is a scumtell. I did the same in RealTime mafia when I was town (and newb).

A) He joined in march. That isn't exactly "newb" territory anymore.
B) If we all had the mentality of "it was a stupid mistake!", we would never get anywhere.
C) It isn't a null-tell because you've done it as town. If there was a bit more sarcasm there, and he made it obvious it was a joke (which he made obvious it wasn't), I could see it. But when it comes right down to it, it s a scumtell.

I completely agree and

FoS ortolan

for the meta defense.

Seraphim - Latest bandwagon. You have one random vote and two other votes against you. Hardly something to worry about IMHO. However, it seems that I was wrong about you wanting to stay in the random voting stage and thus I will

unvote

I expect to check in tomorrow, had a busy day today with the funeral etc. So yeah shall offer some thoughts tomorrow hopefully

Unvote

for now, as my vote was random.

Two identical posts ._. And one was posted after the first one was considered scummy.

I'm guessing that:

Microphone_Kirby (5)- Pear Bear, ortolan, OhGodMyLife, Sipylus, Green Crayons
raider8169 (3)- Plum, Septia, Talitha
Seraphim (3)- CounselWolf, sirdanilot, Slicey

One of these three players is scum, and being bus'ed.

I'll check again at end game. Here's my wager. If I'm wrong, I'll replace in 3 games. If I'm right, I'll mod a game.

/in

Protip: Saying "Well the random stage is over so unvote" and not doing anything else is scummy.

If we lynch him, it will be a lesson well learned.

unvote, vote: Slicey

Well reasoned in her other post.

Protip: Saying "Well the random stage is over so unvote" and not doing anything else is scummy.

If we lynch him, it will be a lesson well learned.

unvote, vote: Slicey

Your willing to lynch someone over just that?

On page 6, it's an excellent reason. Besides, I like to pressure these kinds of players, and he's opened the door.

He's not the only one who's done that, you know. Sentata did, just a couple of posts after him. I feel that lynching someone for that would be a tad over the top, unless they gave us additional reason when pressure was applied.

I feel something in this post, but not clear enough. Please remind me to comment on this later.

A) He joined in march. That isn't exactly "newb" territory anymore.
B) If we all had the mentality of "it was a stupid mistake!", we would never get anywhere.
C) It isn't a null-tell because you've done it as town. If there was a bit more sarcasm there, and he made it obvious it was a joke (which he made obvious it wasn't), I could see it. But when it comes right down to it, it s a scumtell.

RA) No, but would you say Three games on-site w/one of those I bailed out in the middle of be considered "newb"?
I will tell you this, though: I've played at least 8 games off this site, so that probably isn't considered "newb" at all.
RB) ... Too true. If this mentality didn't exist, then I would've been lynched in Kirby Mafia when I feel I should've: Day one.
RC)

Both

mentalities are merely opinion; Null because you did "it" before and "it" being a scumtell. Sure many people share the second thought, but then that makes it merely

popular

opinion.

Admitting he's scummy ?_? I don't understand this post at all.

[Flameaxe]

Goofball: Don't you still owe the site Food Fight 2? (hypothetical pre-/in as well)

[Septia]

Sorry for inactivity, I've been pretty busy. Will get into it tomorrow and catch up.

[Simenon]

Prodding Talitha, Hybris

[Seraphim]

@Post 160 and 161

Something about your posts just scream anti-town to me. I can't figure out what it is, but when I do...

@Post 167

I disagree. It got the job done as it forced Azhrei to post content. Or rather, more content than his post indicated. Even if the question is indeed a roundabout and sarcastic way of getting things done...it worked. I don't care if I get a few votes on me if we get scum lynched and discussion simmered to a boil.

1. Isn't my logic epic, though?
2. Yes, sorry. That post was hastily constructed.
3. Because, at that point in the game, pointless post lurking is worse than lurking IMO. Lurkers get replaced. Coasters don't.
4. I didn't say there wasn't anything of worth because I didn't.

Now, for the second part...

1. I can buy the part about RBT. But I can't buy the entire idea of confidence. I think having multiple suspects is a good thing, especially on day 1. Tunnel vision without regard for the rest of the town only hurts unless your suspect is scum.

You see, your entire 'I'll just vote for the biggest bandwagon" case isn't true. I FoSed only one person with a true bandwagon on him at the time and now. I'm getting a town read off of you from our little back-and-forth. I'm also getting a town read from Slicey, though I wish he'd post more. I'm still not sold on a Microphone_Kirby lynch, though his recent posts leave me uneasy.

Also,

Vote: riceballtail

You should post more content as you have been limited to (barely) defending your self-vote and pre-inning DGB's possible game. Oh, and self-voting. Post moar, please.

[Green Crayons]

@Post 109

1. If you can't note this, you probably shouldn't be playing Mafia.
2. Yes, because it merely adds to the uselessness of his post, as stated above.
3. I don't care, so long as they actually post content along with the little, useless reminder.
4. Your sarcasm is noted! Have a nice day! 8D

So you're completely comfortable with voting someone who was attempting to help move the town out of the random voting stage because you qualify all the aspects of his posts - which were helping to establish a break from the random stage (for him at the very least, and helping nudge others into the same post-random voting stage mentality) - as a "useless reminder?"

Something's a useless reminder if it's already well known and agreed upon. Your very post makes it seem like we can't agree upon when the random stage ended, so I don't really see how it would meet the standards as a "useless reminder."

I don't really like anything you have to say to excuse your behavior.

I hardly see how 118 can add anything to your decision, but whatever.

118 = original reason to vote; 122 = reason to keep my vote where it is.

Wait, what what what. How is voting Seraphim for that any easier than voting Microphone Kirby for the role speculation? That's just nonsense. Role speculation is anti town too, and I could also say 'that doesn't necessarily make him scum' but I won't because I am of course looking closely at MK. What interests me more than MK himself, however, is the bandwagon on him though.

Role speculation is pro-scum, not something readily identified as just anti-town. So, you're right: they are both easy votes to follow. One just is more legitimate than the other.

That said, I welcome the pressure on Seraph. I think his later posts are quite informative. But now I can also eye the people that decided to vote for him later in the game.

One of these three players is scum, and being bus'ed.

Vote M_K and we'll see if you're right about this guy.

I agree having it go so far to a lynch is bad however pressure is always good. I do not think enough people would back it to go to a lynch.

Your immediate acquiescence to DGB's reasoning makes me curious if you already thought this? If so, why did you ask?

RC) Both mentalities are merely opinion; Null because you did "it" before and "it" being a scumtell. Sure many people share the second thought, but then that makes it merely popular opinion.

So, then, what to you qualifies an action as a tell, or do you believe they simply do not exist? As far as I can tell, that's the point you're trying to make here.

Protip: Saying "Well the random stage is over so unvote" and not doing anything else is scummy.

If we lynch him, it will be a lesson well learned.

unvote, vote: Slicey

Your willing to lynch someone over just that?

On page 6, it's an excellent reason. Besides, I like to pressure these kinds of players, and he's opened the door.

He's not the only one who's done that, you know. Sentata did, just a couple of posts after him. I feel that lynching someone for that would be a tad over the top, unless they gave us additional reason when pressure was applied.

I feel something in this post, but not clear enough. Please remind me to comment on this later.

You mean Azhrei's minor partnering with Slicey and/or Sent? Because that's what I see.


Can Seraph please use quotes instead of "@ post #?" It's much easier for me to read that way instead of having to scroll up the page or click back several pages. Also easier for me to tell to what specific part of a post he's responding. Thanks.

[alvinz95]

Bleh.