Good Omens Mafia! Game Over.

[Stewie]

I didn't read the book... is anyone who died mafia?

[Stewie]

Well, sorry for not speaking much, but my reason is that I haven't read the book, and you are speculating about who's mafia, so I can't really help in the discussion. Two things I can say:

To Mith: IS does use vigi kill night one, or so I've heard. The only time I've seen it happen is on an ongoing game, and I really don't know if it actually happened or not, but I'm assuming it did. I could go back and see other games he played as vigilante, but that would take too long.

To the rest: is there a character that makes up acronims and expect the rest to know what they mean?

[Stewie]

Stewie, granted, I haven't played with him in ages, but I've played a ton of games with him in the past, and can't ever remember him doing it.

The real point is that if we're thinking the bike kill is Them, it would seem to imply it's a group kill rather than just IS, so the OMG IS WOULD DO THAT! logic is irrelevant.

Anyway, he's dead now, so we'll probably find out soon enough if it was him. Like I said, speculating too much won't really help us with no role claims. We'll just have to wait and see.

Well, that, and that we should always assume the worst -- which would be four killing groups. There could be one kill that is "unexplained" btu I haven't read the book, so I have no idea.

[Stewie]

vote: gaspode

because of his last post.

[Stewie]

unvote: whomever (Fuldu, I believe)

. As mith says, random votes are starting to do more bad than good.

I agree with most of what mith says (except I never liked the acronyms simply because I was too lazy to decipher them ), but I'm not ready to revote yet. Korais and mepmuff have done some pretty scummy things, but I'm not 100% convinced that they're mafia yet, as mith seems to be. I'd like to wait for a little more information before I make a serious vote.

Roland, coron, and mith (?), let's see.

"I agree with most of what mith says ... , but I'm not ready to revote yet."

If you agree with mith, why wouldn't you be ready to vote? Mith seems to have no problem in voting.

"Korais and mepmuff have done some pretty scummy things, but I'm not 100% convinced that they're mafia yet"

Since when do we wait until we are 100% sure to vote? The game would go pretty slow if we did. It'd say >50% sure is good enough for a vote.

To sum it up, it seems that he doesn't want to be commited in voting. Washing his hands, we could say.

[Stewie]

As I said in my last post, I only agree with most of what he says... ... (and nowhere, by the way, did I say that I was even 50% sure, as you say)

Well, as you mentioned before, mith seemed to be 100% sure. You agree with most of what mith says. Most means more than 50%, and more than 50% of 100% is more than 50%, every time, no matter how you look at it. Therefore, you should be sure enough to vote.

I don't feel obligated to follow him like he's a god simply because he's been around longer than me.

But you

agree

with (most of) what he's saying -- why wouldn't you also agree in with him in the vote count? It's not like you'd be blindly following him, but you read his argument and made an informed desicion on them.

Also, while the first vote usually just calls attention to a suspicious person, the next few can get a bandwagon moving, and sometimes push it out of control. I didn't think korais or mepmuff were past the "being called to attention" phase, so I didn't advance either bandwagon.

Again, if we all just sit there and watch until something suspicious enough for a vote comes up, this would be a really slow game. Although I could probably get my children to replace.

And "washing my hands" implies that I want them lynched, but don't want to be an obvious part of the lynching.

That, or that you are NOT trying to start a bandwagon on them, and either say "Yeah, I thought that they weren't suspicious enough to vote for them" if they are town or "Yeah, I thought that there was something suspicious about them" if they are scum.

Part of my logic is that, once in awhile, scummy-looking people turn out to be docs or cops, so I don't want to start a potentially dangerous bandwagon on them yet.

So what are you saying? That we should vote for innocent looking people? Obiously you'd agree in that it sounds like a silly plan. My point is, we have to go after suspicious people, and hope they are not town.

[Stewie]

Stewie, I'm still waiting for your take on Genocide Heart.

What about him?

[Stewie]

Stewie, I'm still waiting for your take on Genocide Heart.

What about him?

You sure do attack Gaspode because "his lack of voting even though he voices his suspicions", while at the same time Genocide Heart does the same thing and you don't even seem to notice.

You apply your logic to only one person and that is scummy in my eyes.

unvote
vote: Stewie

Well damn, we can only lynch

one

scum each day. We could go after him, but that would be a waste of time, since there are quite a few votes on gaspode already.

[Stewie]

Well damn, we can only lynch

one

scum each day. We could go after him, but that would be a waste of time, since there are quite a few votes on gaspode already.

I'm sure there are more than one scum in this game. Or do you usually concentrate on one person at time? Why are you so sure Gaspode will be lynched today?

1. We can always get them tomorrow (the other scum).
2. Yeah, I like to concentrate on one person. If someone more suspicious comes along, then I'll change my vote, but I won't change it from someone equally suscious, unless they have more votes.
3. I'm not sure if he will be lynched today. Where is this implied?

3. Your take on IS was the logical equivalent of Stewie's (because it was).

Uh, no it's not. I didn't vote you for it. In fact, I think that it's not relevant when it comes to deducing whether you are scum or not. The only thing similar is that we both think that IS kills night one as a vigi.

[Stewie]

Why are you so sure Gaspode will be lynched today?

Maybe I read in it too much, but you seem to imply that as there's a good and healthy bandwagon, we should finish it and discuss more/concentrate on others some other day.

Bandwagon ≠ Lynch. I think it's a good starting bandwagon, but I don't think it's a good lynch... yet. Furthermore, I never said, or implied, that I was *sure* that we were going to lynch/bandwagon gaspode, just that it seemed like the best course of action. Sure ≠ suggestion.

Smells of jumping on a bandwagon and justifying your vote for just that player, without looking at anyone else, which is quite scummy.

Not mentioning ≠ not looking.

[Stewie]

Stewie, when does a good starting bandwagon turn to a good lynch?
Not mentioning = no-one else but you knows about it.

1. There isn't a specific time... it just does, at some point. For example, if we keep talking and gaspode says more suspicious stuff. Or if he claims and the claim is bad. There are many situations in which it can go from good bandwagon to good lynch. Of course, he can make a good claim, in which case he becomes a bad lynch and an useless bandwagon. A bandwagon is a way of knowing if a person is a good lynch or not, at least as I see it.
2. Well, although everyone else doesn't necessarely know about it, the information is still in the thread. If it'll make you happy, I'll say that if I had to take my vote off gaspode for one reason or another, I'd probably vote for GH or korais. Not before rereading, of course. But I rather like concentrating on one person, it makes it a bit easier, at least for me.

[Stewie]

Again, sorry for the double post, I don't really know what's going on with my PC and/or the site.

If your wording is so specific that it needs clarifying,

Huh? How would that work?

[Stewie]

Ok, I know this might sound like a replay of what Fuldu said, but whatever:

1. Peachy's logic relies 100% on the fact that Gaspode is scum. If Gaspode isn't scum, then the logic stands no ground.
2. Since Aelyn is scum if and only if Gaspode is scum, then there are two good reasons to go after Gaspode rather than going after Aelyn. One being that if we lynch Aelyn and we are wrong, that won't help us determine whether Gaspode is scum or not, but lynching Gaspode might help us determine whether Aelyn is scum or not. The other one being the fact that there are already about 5 votes on Gaspode, thus starting on him will be much more effcient.
3. I think I heard IS's ghost say we should lynch Gaspode. But if you don't believe in ghosts, then hear me say something similar, yet not exactly the same: we should vote for Gaspode to find out more about him, and eventually determine if we want to lynch him or not.

[Stewie]

And, at this point, gut is the best you can come up with?

[Stewie]

Since Aelyn is scum if and only if Gaspode is scum, then there are two good reasons to go after Gaspode rather than going after Aelyn.

So if Gaspode is innocent, Aelyn can't be scum either?

No... but if gaspode is not scum, then we have nothing on aelyn -- no reasons to believe she is scum. If we lynch aelyn, we gain no information on gaspode. Gaspode could still be scum, and everything previously said about gaspode is still in play. Or, if Aelyn turns out to be scum, then that doesn't mean gaspode is scum too.

However, if we lynch gaspode and he happens to be scum, then it's very likely that aelyn is scum too. If he's town, then it doesn't mean that aelyn is town too, but that there is no reason to believe that she is scum, other than coron's "gut feeling."

And regarding that... coron, nobody is going to follow your gut. Find some kind of reasoning for it, because there is nothing my gut can see about aelyn's posts. They seem pretty normal to me. If you find something that is suspicious, point it out, don't just say it's there. What tipped off your gut?

I am really tempted to switch my vote to coron right now, because of all this "gut feeling" nonsense when there are plenty of coherent things to go after.

[Stewie]

No... but if gaspode is not scum, then we have nothing on aelyn -- no reasons to believe she is scum.

Er, yeah we do. I don't actually find Peachy's argument all that convincing as far as them being scum together is concerned, simply because Aelyn didn't mention Gaspode completely at random; he was acting on an ongoing bandwagon. However, his behavior is quite clearly weird (at least to a few of us). Mafia quite often act weird jumping on and off bandwagons.

My point was that lynching aelyn will tell us nothing about gaspode, but lynching gaspode will tell us lots about aelyn. If gaspode is scum, then aelyn is probably scum too.

If gaspode isn't scum, then peachy's inital argument holds no ground and we should not take it into account when deciding whether to vote for aelyn or not.

My fault, I should have been more clear. I wasn't because if gaspode is not scum, then

I

don't have any reasons to suspect aelyn. If you find something aelyn does suspicious, then that's another story -- but you still couldn't use peachy's argument to get aelyn lynched if we knew gaspode was town.

[Stewie]

Wouldn't the reverse be true to, if Aelyn is scum then his connection to Gaspode would incriminate him.

Not quite... I'm pretty sure I already explained this, and so did Fuldu...

[Stewie]

That's not suspicious. In fact, you've done at least one of those yourself. More specifically, "worthless posts" with "nothing usefu"l. And the "weak arguments" one, too.

And 16th? What? More than one person asked what you find something Aelyn said that was actually scummy, so it's obviously not so obvious.

[Stewie]

Unvote: gaspode, vote coron

It doesn't matter how many reasons you have, 40 times 0 is still 0.

[Stewie]

Er, as long as those numbers are positive.

And non-zero.

[Stewie]

I'll note here that I would probably vote for Coron just based on *his* posting style; the difference is, I could go into detail what elements of his style are scummy

isn't that basically what I was doing?

No, it's completly different. You were saying "he's scummy"

without

going into detail as to what elements of his style are scummy. When you finally did, it was pretty much 0 + 0 + 0... you get the point.

noncommittal,

(bolding done by me) MAY I ASK YOU IF WE ARE PLAYING THE SAME GAME in HOW many posts have I changed my votes? I don't think I've even ever UNVOTED THIS GAME.

[/quote]

I don't think that you understand what "non-committal" means. Voting doesn't have anything to do with it. It means that you weren't committed to the game, you didn't bother to explain

why

you though aelyn was scum, you just asked everyone to go over his posts and "see" what you "saw."

lots of little non-content comments

This is ligitimately true! Too bad I'm always like that EXCEPT for sometimes when I'm scum(see african mafia where I didn't really say much)

And that just happens to be scummy.

[Stewie]

no one bugged me at all when I gave no reasons, when I showed you what I say everyone bugged out. He's just saying shit, I'm saying shit and backing it up with actual evidence from the thread.

Uh... I have bugged you to actually say the reasons as to why you were voting for aelyn, and so have several others. We didn't vote for you, true, but if you still hadn't said anything, it was only a matter of time. Besides, he's not saying shit, he's making an argument, and he's the one that is actually backing it up (I assume you are reffering to mith).

Which activity was I refusing to do?

You refused, for quite a while, to actually explain why you thought aelyn was scum. Like, actually read the posts, copy a section and say "this was scummy because..." We didn't even get you to pick a section and say "this was scummy" until a while later. Note that I also wanted to know why it was more suspicious than Gaspode. Your "little reasons" do not make up for gaspode's mid-size reason.

I'm scum in ALL my games... that's odd especially seeing that it's not even true of this one.

If you are town, you should really try to come up with something more concrete than your gut if you expect people to follow the way you did. Or better yet, join one of the concrete bandwagons already formed.

[Stewie]

How did the gaspode bandwagon have no good reason? How is your gut any better?

[Stewie]

unvote: whomever (Fuldu, I believe)

. As mith says, random votes are starting to do more bad than good.

I agree with most of what mith says (except I never liked the acronyms simply because I was too lazy to decipher them ), but I'm not ready to revote yet. Korais and mepmuff have done some pretty scummy things, but I'm not 100% convinced that they're mafia yet, as mith seems to be. I'd like to wait for a little more information before I make a serious vote.

That's the post that started it all. Can't you see how he is being way too careful? Doesn't this strike you as scummy? It's ok to be careful if the person you want to vote for is close to a lynch and you are not sure, but the two people that he thought were at least somewhat suspicious (since he agreed with mith in most things, he says) were far from a lynch. Why not support a bandwagon, to get something going, rather than wait for something to happen, like scum would do?

[Stewie]

See, that's the play style that REALLY bugs me, oh I'll sit back and wait for something to jump on you about because I'm scum.

Which is exactly what gaspode did.

[Stewie]

Either gaspode or coron is fine for me.

[Stewie]

unvote, vote: gaspode

I'll just vote the one that has more votes from gaspode and coron... and I don't like lynching someone while they are gone when they repeatedly said so. Gaspode, on the other hand, seems a bit quiet since we "switched" to coron.

[Stewie]

Oh, yeah, I miscounted votes.

unvote: gaspode, vote: coron

but

fos: gaspode

for his lurkiness.

That should be 10 for coron and 9 for gaspode, so I'll vote for gaspode if he gets one more vote or something.

[Stewie]

I think that you can give a bit more than that. Saying that you can tell whether someone is scum or not (for the example you gave) would be fine. Basically anything that could give away your role is not ok. Of course, better safe than sorry, but that's my take on it. Besides, Coron may have a complicated role. At least now we know for sure that he isn't just stalling for no reason, and that he's actually waiting for some sort of answer. This does not mean he's town, but just that he's not lying about waiting for an answer.

[Stewie]

Any extraabilities? Any restrictions? Anything else we should know?

[Stewie]

So is it night? Or is it still day?