Mafia 102: No-Frills Game Thread(Town wins!)

[crypto]

My mistake, then. I was under the impression you meant she was for his

lynch

(which clearly wasn't the case).

Why don't we lynch Pom, then?

---------------------

Super Accurate* Vote Count(as of post 475):

RayFrost - 2(mask man, crypto)
Staple - 4(le Chat, bigmc109, muh316, Pomegranate)
crypto - 1(X_~)
X_~ - 1(EtherealCookie)
muh316 - 1(Sando)
bigmc109 - 4(Staple, charter, Empking, SerialClergyman)
charter - 1(hiphop)

Not Voting:Kaiveran, RayFrost

*Not guaranteed to be accurate.

[charter]

Setting up lynches is 100% undeniably a scum tell. This isn't really debatable, I don't know why crypto is trying it. Just thought this should be made clear.

Bigmc is scummy for his opportunistic vote on staple, his setting up a lynch of muh when staple flips town, and for his no lynch idea if we aren't sure someone is scum. No lynching because you aren't sure someone is scum only helps scum.

I am still calling for more people to vote for bigmc. People should start voting him.

I don't get what all the fuss over SC is. I took his statement to mean that Sando chose to vote muh instead of bigmc and continues to do so. Don't see the problem with this. He thinks that bigmc is scum and muh is not, so by voting for muh instead of bigmc, Sando looks scummy. Don't see the problem with this. I don't see what there is to misinterpret.

[crypto]

NO.

"Setting up lynches" is nothing more than a variation of announcing scum teams, players you think have opposing alignments, etc. If I were to post every example of townies "setting up lynches" on this site, the list would exceed maximum post length.

I've done it at least once in all my games. Here's an example from my most recent game. Took me about two minutes of iso. to find.

DRK, vote for GD; we'll lynch Reck tomorrow.

Even then, Staple and Pom both severely outweigh BMC in terms of scumminess. Kaiveran and RayFrost are catching up fast, though. Apparently Kaiveran goes through stages of recovery in which she can mod games but not play.

[charter]

No, setting up lynches by saying "lynch xxxx when yyyy flips scum" is perfectly acceptable. Bigmc pulled "lynch muh when staple flips town".

That example there, without actually checking, I assume you're saying lynch GD, then when he flips scum, lynch Reck. That's fine. That's not what bigmc did at all.

[crypto]

if

Staple flips town, I'll definetely be voting muh tomorrow.

Saying you will be voting for player

x

if player

y

—who both you and

x

have a scum read on—flips town is NOT a scum tell. It is NOT suspicious. It is NOT setting up a lynch, even.

In the example I gave, those two players were unrelated. But I'm sure I can find examples where two players related in the same game.

[EtherealCookie]

Setting up lynches is 100% undeniably a scum tell. This isn't really debatable, I don't know why crypto is trying it. Just thought this should be made clear.

Bigmc is scummy for his opportunistic vote on staple, his setting up a lynch of muh when staple flips town, and for his no lynch idea if we aren't sure someone is scum. No lynching because you aren't sure someone is scum only helps scum.

I am still calling for more people to vote for bigmc. People should start voting him.

I don't get what all the fuss over SC is. I took his statement to mean that Sando chose to vote muh instead of bigmc and continues to do so. Don't see the problem with this. He thinks that bigmc is scum and muh is not, so by voting for muh instead of bigmc, Sando looks scummy. Don't see the problem with this. I don't see what there is to misinterpret.

Uhm.
X didn't set up a lynch for me? His idea was to No Lynch, Cop investigate me, and then Lynch me.

[bigmc109]

Is that really what all this is about? If by "setting up a lynch" you mean "giving my D2 thoughts if Staple flips town", then you're right. I'll admit that "I'll be voting muh" might be

slightlly

strong language, but you're definitely blowing it way out of proportion. If Staple flips town, I'm not running at muh with a noose, but I will be asking him a few questions. My first post on day 2 will not be voting muh.

@Empking: I'm not understanding your question. Can you rephrase it?

[charter]

if

Staple flips town, I'll definetely be voting muh tomorrow.

Saying you will be voting for player

x

if player

y

—who both you and

x

have a scum read on—flips town is NOT a scum tell. It is NOT suspicious. It is NOT setting up a lynch, even.

In the example I gave, those two players were unrelated. But I'm sure I can find examples where two players related in the same game.

Yeah, this is suspicious and is a scumtell. It's hard to believe you've been doing this in every game and no one has set you straight.

Bigmc, you're using someone's town flip to attack someone else (granted this is all speculation, but the point still holds) which is suspicious. Admitting it doesn't make it less suspicious.

[Scigatt]

MOD, what is the status of prods/replacements

I feel like only half the players in this game are participating and it hurting the game bad.

After the forum move. I'll probably throw in a deadine for good measure too.

[bigmc109]

I'm using the same reason as everyone else to attack muh, the difference is I preceded it with "if Staple flips town". Why? Because Staple is the person muh is blatantly bandwagonning on!

[crypto]

Yeah, this is suspicious and is a scumtell. It's hard to believe you've been doing this in every game and no one has set you straight.

Then it's

not

a scum tell. A scum tell means scum consistently do it and town consistently don't do it. That's not the case with this point of debate.

Anyway, I still don't think it's an anti-town thing to do.

[Pomegranate]

Catching up.

[charter]

That isn't what a scum tell is at all. A scum tell is an action more likely to be taken by scum than town. It doesn't matter who does it more often. It matters who stands to benefit more from the action.

Bigmc stands to benefit way more in lynching staple, then using the logic of "oh well, staple is town, muh must be scum" if he is scum than town, hence, it is scummy. This logic is bad and scummy. Bigmc is scummy.

I'm done arguing pointless things with you crypto.

[crypto]

Okay, so it's the scum tells are perfect versus scum tells aren't perfect argument. I nthat case, I still disagree with you and I still think townies do it as much as scum, without actually having numbers next to me.

It isn't pointless. You're lynching BMC when you could be lynching someone much scummier.

[charter]

Uhm.
X didn't set up a lynch for me? His idea was to No Lynch, Cop investigate me, and then Lynch me.

I wasn't really referring to you, but the idea to no lynch, then direct the cop is a terrible idea and scummy.

Crypto, I have no idea what argument you are talking about. There's a really specific definition of what a scumtell is, and what I said was really close to that. I don't know what you're thinking of.

And I don't care if townies do what bigmc did. What he did was scummy and I'm pointing that out. I'm sure I can find an example of a townie doing just about everything.

[crypto]

What Staple has done is far scummier. I don't get why SC (and, apparently, you) choose to arbitrarily label Staple the VI/target instead of BMC.

[charter]

It wasn't arbitrary. I've been going on and on about this for a while now. Staple gathered a bunch of opportunistic votes. I would expect scum to jump all over Staple.

If we're not going to get more than four votes on bigmc, then I'm going to go back to someone else on my list.

[crypto]

Huh? I could just as easily say Staple played scummy and, accordingly, gathered a bunch of votes from clear-thinking townies. That's why I think it's arbitrary.

Let's hang Pom/RayFrost/Staple.

[SerialClergyman]

The best way to explain it is that staple has done very little that would benefit him if he was scum, but lots of universally recognized 'scummy' behaviour. So he's a bit lurky, obviously low scumhunting etc etc. This is not helpful to the town, but hardly pushes a pro-scum agenda either.

So this happens in many games, and in many games he is lynched. Most people think, even if they don't outwardly say it, that even if he's town he was useless anyway and the wagon is rarely looked at because anyone would have voted that guy.

So it's a situation scum love. They have an easy mislynch on their hands. They aren't afraid of a decent defense from the target, aren't afraid of being challenged as to why they are voting him and aren't afraid of any post lynch backlash. It's lynchbait pure and simple.

But if you can identify the case, you can look at those who jumped in and maybe pick someone out. I think bigmc is that someone.

[SerialClergyman]

Just meta'd bigmc. His game as scum he went straight for the vi on day 1 and got him lynched, flipping town. His actions are straight out of his scum playbook.

Charter, don't leave. There's more to do here. We should get more votes as people understand and the inactive get active.

Get on that wagon and ride it to awesomeland, everybody!

[crypto]

The best way to explain it is that staple has done very little that would benefit him if he was scum, but lots of universally recognized 'scummy' behaviour. So he's a bit lurky, obviously low scumhunting etc etc. This is not helpful to the town, but hardly pushes a pro-scum agenda either.

Are you kidding? Lurking and promising to scum-hunt but then laying low, only to emerge for purposes of defense, are trademark (mediocre) scum moves. That's a situation the TOWN loves. It's an easy scum lynch.

As someone who was in BMC's last game with him, I can say that he was much more indecisive then than now.

[SerialClergyman]

It doesn't push a pro scum agenda. It doesn't make him look more town or get a town player lynched, it's just bad play. This actually says little about his alignment.

Were you in the game where bigmc was scum or town? In the game he was scum he pushed the lynch of the VI hard all through day 1. It's eerily similar.

[SerialClergyman]

I guess what I'm saying about staple is for the very reason you just gave, there's no reason for town OR scum to act how he's acting. It's bad either way. So how do you get one alignment or the other from that? The answer is you shouldn't. His behaviour isn't typical of scum, it's typical of a player playing particularly poorly.

[charter]

Link SC?
I was briefly in this game with him, but I don't really remember anything about that game. Died pretty fast.

[crypto]

His play has been transparently anti-town and, I would argue, very scummy.

Lurking absolutely pushes the scum agenda depending on how reactive townies are to it. In some games, the town homes in on lurkers; in others, the town rarely notices. Lurking allows for mafia to float around in the background while townies go make fools of themselves and get themselves lynched.

Staple is scummy. QED.

Fuck I'm a failure.