Mini 859 - Cleansing of Falls Church - Over

[Looker]

As I mentioned, I'll get to it in the weekend.

Stomach's grumblin , I want some Cookie!

Sanjay's Post 266 - I thought I might have found something but when they responded, it was evident that I hadn't. Coupled with the points you made against the assumption, it was pretty clear that i hadn't thought that one through. In short, I fucked up. O well, on to the next one. That sort of thing, y'know?

Zaz's Post 270 - Look at Looker, you are friggin hilarious. That game rocked, dude, you're the best. You make me want to become a mod. Inspiration!

Zaz's Post 292 - Usually when a player says they're playing by gut, it appears to me that this gives them some sort of leeway to be capricious and fickle. They can change their vote or their stance and call it gut. If they're wrong, no biggie, they were playing on gut, not reasoning. TO be brief, I really just don't trust people's guts to have my best interest in mind.

Zaz's Post 309 - Well, to be honest, I've been trying to build this big, mechanized formula that, if I follow it, it will help me win at mafia no matter what. Currently, it sucks. Waiting for four key players within the thread to respond before I respond was a stipulation of the formula; however, the formula is currently being revised, which is why I'm responding to you as opposed to only Cookie & Shrinehme at this point in the game.

EBWOP

Bringing up the idea of a jester, is actually scummy

Why?

-Good way to lynch a player who says stupid things.
-Jester discussion is a distraction from scumhunting, which is good for scum.

To the former, placing forth the possibility x is a Jester when their actions are scummy would be used to

deter

their lynch, [e.g. "No, x just looks like a Jester to me. Y looks like actual scum; let's lynch him."] no?

Latter makes sense.

I think the point he was trying to make would be your ability to manipulate the situation to your liking, whether X be your scum partner or Y, in which instance you've simply distracted the town long enough to hop on a bandwagon which you have no intention to take anywhere.

[DeathRowKitty]

brothernature, if that's all you can come up with, I don't think your sitting and observing is really justified. Unless you explain to me how posting random shit and distracting the town is a scum-tell, you are basically telling me that after all the observing you have observed basically nothing.

When are you planning on posting your thoughts on the game, exactly? Is it a matter of piling votes on you? Because I'm sure there are a bunch of players that would be happy to oblige.

Bandwagon? I'm in!

Vote: brothernature

.

In case I wasn't clear enough, yes, that vote is serious.

Brief PBPA of BN

http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... 23#1891323 - Confirmation post
1 - Well meet your roommate's ex-wife's scumbuddy!
2 - Random votes Shrine
3 - Overly cautious in the RVS; I explained it here
4 - Defends his cautiousness
5 - Says he's lurking
6 - Says he's "sitting back and observing" (observing what?, as SJ pointed out)
7 - Says sj might stand for Sanjay and agrees with me that it would be useful to hear Zaz's thoughts
8 - Says he was messing around in most of his posts and casts a self-declared pressure vote on a lurker (ironic, isn't it, BN pressure voting a lurker). I'd group this post with his overly cautious RVS post as possibly trying too hard to look good, both by lurker hunting after a few others of us did so and announcing his vote was a pressure vote, which takes a lot of the pressure off, as if it's more important that we know he doesn't necessarily think nook is scum that that his vote fulfills its purpose. However, I don't think this was anywhere near as bad as being overly cautious in the RVS.
9 - He reiterates the fact that he's lurking in response to Zaz's points. He says he doesn't like EC for "posting random shit and distracting the town", as opposed to BN's own random shit, which is "more so on topic." I really don't see how BN's posts are more on topic, since all he's done is random vote, unrandom vote, and announce he was pressure voting a lurker (and admit to lurking).

@BN
Who are your top three choices for scum right now?

[Sanjay]

Looker, I hope you realize that having someone justify their actions with a formula isn't that much more satisfying than them justifying their actions with their gut. I love the idea that you are looking for patterns and trying to beat the system, but don't forget that you have to also convince us you aren't scum and convince us that the people you want lynched are scum.

[EtherealCookie]

As I mentioned, I'll get to it in the weekend.

Stomach's grumblin , I want some Cookie!

Sanjay's Post 266 - I thought I might have found something but when they responded, it was evident that I hadn't. Coupled with the points you made against the assumption, it was pretty clear that i hadn't thought that one through. In short, I fucked up. O well, on to the next one. That sort of thing, y'know?

Zaz's Post 270 - Look at Looker, you are friggin hilarious. That game rocked, dude, you're the best. You make me want to become a mod. Inspiration!

Zaz's Post 292 - Usually when a player says they're playing by gut, it appears to me that this gives them some sort of leeway to be capricious and fickle. They can change their vote or their stance and call it gut. If they're wrong, no biggie, they were playing on gut, not reasoning. TO be brief, I really just don't trust people's guts to have my best interest in mind.

Zaz's Post 309 - Well, to be honest, I've been trying to build this big, mechanized formula that, if I follow it, it will help me win at mafia no matter what. Currently, it sucks. Waiting for four key players within the thread to respond before I respond was a stipulation of the formula; however, the formula is currently being revised, which is why I'm responding to you as opposed to only Cookie & Shrinehme at this point in the game.

EBWOP

Bringing up the idea of a jester, is actually scummy

Why?

-Good way to lynch a player who says stupid things.
-Jester discussion is a distraction from scumhunting, which is good for scum.

To the former, placing forth the possibility x is a Jester when their actions are scummy would be used to

deter

their lynch, [e.g. "No, x just looks like a Jester to me. Y looks like actual scum; let's lynch him."] no?

Latter makes sense.

I think the point he was trying to make would be your ability to manipulate the situation to your liking, whether X be your scum partner or Y, in which instance you've simply distracted the town long enough to hop on a bandwagon which you have no intention to take anywhere.

Hurghhhhhhh.
Tonight.
D:

[Looker]

Looker, I hope you realize that having someone justify their actions with a formula isn't that much more satisfying than them justifying their actions with their gut. I love the idea that you are looking for patterns and trying to beat the system, but don't forget that you have to also convince us you aren't scum and convince us that the people you want lynched are scum.

Yes, you're absolutely right, which is why this is becoming something much bigger than this thread, but moreso a sitewide development. It's kind of embarassing seeing as I've been on this site for a while, but I'm still learning how to play mafia. It seems like the more I make mistakes and just be honest about it, the better I get though, so this game should be a bumpy one.

But a quick question, though: Is this more of a waiting game? Because I noticed you can never just jump out and catch scum right off, you have to wait several pages before you can even hope to get something. Is it like that in every game?

Cookie's Post 328 - I know, Cookie, I'm sorry, but I like, you, man. I likez my Cookie.

[Sanjay]

I don't think thinking of Mafia as a waiting game is the best approach.

While you can't catch scum right off the bat, from your very first post you can affect the store of information the town has. Catching scum or getting favorable mislynches is just the payoff of lots of work affecting that store of information.

Tell me more of this formula of yours. You can be vague if talking about it ruins its value, but I definitely want to hear more.

[EtherealCookie]

Right, first, let me explain my posts. After that, I'll answer any questions you have.

#4 - Took shrine seriously, voted for him.

#7 - Should've unvoted here, but I instead chose to stick by a poor reason to keep a vote on him. Slightly annoyed by the game not having taken a serious turn yet.

#10-14 - Deflecting questions, I didn't feel like answering them.

#15 - Just my read on Peabody.

The rest of it just saying I'll get to explaining myself, and then Confid comes along and says I'm appealing to emotion. How? I'm just telling you I'll get to it on the weekend, and I'm too swarmed right now to answer all the stuff.


So, I decided to look through all of Confid's posts.

This vote does not seem protown at all. It practically screams bandwagon.

Unvote, Vote: EtherealCookie

I dislike how you tell me you think it's not pro town, yet you don't explain why. You just say it screams bandwagon. Wow. Doesn't really mean much. After that, he hasn't said very much at all, has he? Just claimed I was appealing to emotion, not really any further comments on me, despite the fact I've had more posts than that single one.


I noticed a post by Brothernature, as well.

And to Sanjay, I really don't like Cookie right now. He's posting all this random shit and distracting the town, making it harder for us to get stuff done. My random shit, however, is more so on topic, just in a jokingly way, most the time.

Really? Since when was spurring a discussion distracting the town? If anything, it gives more to talk about. It lets people examine others on the bandwagon. Also, if you think I'm bad for the town, why haven't you been pushing for me to respond? Instead, you haven't said much about me at all. You've just remained very quiet.

[Sanjay]

I'm starting to think that maybe the reason brothernature isn't posting as much is because we aren't talking about brothernature's favorite topic of conversation.

Everyone! Have you ever noticed how pro-town brothernature is? He probably has the town win condition, don't you think?

[Looker]

Cookie's Post 331 - Which brings up a good point which I should have heeded a long time ago. Certain games are not conducive to the learning experience. I thought that I could jump into any old game and learn how to play mafia, but that is not so. You and your words are easily manipulated, whether by scum or egotistical town, and then you're lynched, having learned nothing more than to keep your mouth shut. Or at least that's how it's been for me so far.

Sanjay's Post 330 & Post 332 - The formula's really stupid, to be honest. It's just a series of probabilities based upon voting patterns and bandwagons; however, just like all other advances of modern-day technology, it's only purpose is to keep me from having to think so I'm

thinking

about ditching it.

And as far as the BrotherNature thing, I wonder why he's voting Nook of all people.

And another thing: Do pressure votes work if they're actually depicted as pressure votes?

[Sanjay]

I'm still not exactly sure about what delaying answering my question did, by the way.

Sanjay's Post 266 - I thought I might have found something but when they responded, it was evident that I hadn't. Coupled with the points you made against the assumption, it was pretty clear that i hadn't thought that one through. In short, I fucked up. O well, on to the next one. That sort of thing, y'know?

Tell me about what you thought you found and tell me about what was made so evident by the responses you read. Which responses?

[Looker]

Faith. That's what it all boils down to. I had faith that the formula would provide, but it didn't. Based on the votes we had when you posed your question...OMG, this sucks. I don't know, Sanjay.

To help with the xplanation, can I ask you a question?: Can you, in anyway at this time, see both EtherealCookie and Shrinehme as key players within this game at this point before any other votes are moved or changed?

[Looker]

I'm really trying to get this out but it's, it's kind of stupid to me now.

[Sanjay]

You're going to be hard to get a read on, aren't you?

[Sanjay]

To answer your question, I'm not exactly sure what you mean.

[Looker]

Crap, a read? What's that? Telling whether I'm scum or town based on how confused I am? How does confusion affect alignment, Sanjay?

But everybody's voting Cookie, he has the most votes, and Cookie's voting Shrinehme, so it's like everyone's converged upon them. Does that make any sense?

[Sanjay]

I can see why they might be interesting, yes. Though for what it is worth I have never noticed anything especially telling about where the bandwagoned player puts their vote.

Go on...

[Idiotking]

IK

– What do you define as ‘gambit’?

I think a gambit or gamble is when people do something that may be seen as scummy or PR-esque to get people to react, when it's not really the case. A vanilla townie acting like a PR to get NK'd instead of a real PR, for example, or a townie doing something that seems scummy so they can see whether others jump on them overeagerly and try to get a premature bandwagon. That sort of thing.

I don't like them because I can never tell what's a gamble and what's genuine if they do that.

[Looker]

@Sanjay - I believe it could be telling once they turned up town, which is undeniably possible in the case of Cookie. Not to defend him individually, but there are several players, including myself, who just aren't the best when it comes to a lyrical battle of wits. We can't weave words like other people do.

But, either way, I know what's best for town so I'll ask this question instead: Do you believe we've received sufficient enough information to pinpoint scum in the event that Cookie turns up town?

[Looker]

NOT to say that Shrinehme is scum, or at least no moreso than IdiotKing, BigBear, etc.

[ZazieR]

I've heard some people say eagerness to get out of the RVS was a scumtell. I don't know if I necessarily buy it as a scumtell, but I thought it was worth asking about, especially because it didn't seem like Far_Cry had a lot to move out of the RVS with.

It's not. Going out of the RVS, means that real discussion will start. Letting the game move along further and giving a chance at finding scum. Games that drag out the RVS don't get discussion going. And if everybody keeps joking around, the RVS will only get dragged out further. In this case, a deadline will be very destructive.
tl;dr: Leaving the RVS asap is good, dragging it out may be fun, but bad for the game.

Post 116 – First, lots of assumptions to destroy a theory. Secondly, why did you vote Confid over Looker,

Sanjay

? Don’t like it that it’s based upon disagreement.

Was that supposed to read "lots of assumptions

do

destroy a theory" or something? Because those assumptions are ones you have to make to support the theory, not destroy it. And I think all of those assumptions are pretty hard to believe.

No, I do mean

to

. Connections can easily be found during the first day, especially during the RVS as many don't take it seriously. My example: Open 155.
3 mafia goons. The first two were attacking each other. For some reason, the third decided to direct the attention away from them, while later saying that his top suspicion was among those two players. His reason for doing this? To generate discussion.
So if Shrine turns up scum, Bear should be looked at.

I wasn't feeling that enthusiastic about my ConfidAnon vote

Why?

[ZazieR]

2. There really wasn't anything to question him about.
Possible Conversation:
-Hey shrine, how do you know you're not aligned with BB?
-I don't.
-Why did you say that then?
-[INSERT REASON/EXCUSE HERE]

The reason/excuse would probably either be "I think BB is scum" or "typo on my part" or something to that effect and wouldn't tell us much.

I was more talking that you first pointed out Shrine's 'scumslip'. But he ignored it and you didn't mention it afterwards. I was wondering why you didn't mention it again after he ignored it, but you later answered that.
And don't give him a way out.

[ZazieR]

Cool. I'm also still curious about why you asked people about how serious they were.

Apparently I was wrong about Looker and his theory, but for the most part I thought stuff was pretty clear.

I'm used to players using smileys when they joke around. But nobody used them here So I checked to be certain beforehand, so that if a post didn't get mention, I'd know it was serious and could analyse it without asking myself if it was serious or not.

[ZazieR]

Just thought of a question:

Confid

, why did you see EC's vote against Shrine as a bandwagon vote, but not Bear's vote aganst Shrine?

[ZazieR]

Post 97 – So the reason behind your vote is? (

Shrine

)

Far_Cry's insults looked more like strategic distancing than genuine emotion.

How?

Post 115 – Why ask EC about Bear,

Shrine

?

Wanted to hear more from EtherealCookie.

My reason for asking was more for the Bear part. Your vote was against Far_Cry at that moment. Yet, instead of asking EC what his opinion is of your top suspect (which was based upon you thinking he was distancing with Nook), you asked him about Bear. So why not one of your top suspicions?

Post 107 – Which is why Bear’s vote after the no-lynch was for you and not for FC? Why didn’t you address this vote from Bear when you thought he was trying to catch scum by voting no-lynch?
Actually, talking about this, how come you didn’t even ask anything about it?
You giving him a way out is also noted. (

Shrine

)

He didn't back up his vote, so it was clear he wasn't planning to go anywhere with it.

Re-phrase the first question?

Your thoughts were that he was trying to draw scum out by voting no-lynch. But instead of voting the one who voted him for voting no-lynch, he voted you. Meaning, your thoughts were wrong. Yet, you didn't ask anything about it at all. Why?

No, I don't feel that it's a bus. I am not Scum,

let alone aligned with him

. I don't really see how his vote could even be interpreted as a bus.

Oh? How do you know?
Also, how come you did comment on EC’s vote against you, but not Bear’s vote against you?

You're interpreting it wrongly. "Aligned" as in, being partnered with him via role [scum partners, ect.].

I commented on EtherealCookie's vote because he put forth a reason for his vote. BigBear gave me nothing to comment on.

Not buying your explanation. The only roles that are connected are: Masons/neighbours, lovers, scum and cult.
Of which the first two don't bus, you say you're not scum and cult isn't possible now. I don't see the reason why you'd point the bolded out.

Post 250 – Why the unvote,

Shrine

?

I'm not interested in pursuing Far_Cry's/your lynch.

What changed?

[ZazieR]

EBWOP

Bringing up the idea of a jester, is actually scummy

Why?

-Good way to lynch a player who says stupid things.
-Jester discussion is a distraction from scumhunting, which is good for scum.

To the former, placing forth the possibility x is a Jester when their actions are scummy would be used to

deter

their lynch, [e.g. "No, x just looks like a Jester to me. Y looks like actual scum; let's lynch him."] no?

Latter makes sense.

No, it doesn't. Because a jester won't help the town ever and will help the scum in lylo if still alive. Which were the arguments brought up here as well.
If somebody acts suspicious, you'll lynch him no matter what (with the only exception an open game with known jester(s))