Mini 872: Mafia in Belgrove - That's All Folks

[Netopalis]

Oh, and just in case I really wasn't explicit enough with the above three cases, it's because the following:

If we allow people to make attacks without reason, then we allow for unjustified attacks.
Any response to one of these votes can be construed as scummy - either action OR inaction.
Mafia know this and know that they can use it as a tool to get rid of a town player for free.
Ergo, it can be a tool of the Mafia.

[Darkstrike_11]

Hi, sorry for the lack of activity, I'm crazy busy at university at the moment. I will try to get a post in by tonight.

btw Ectomancer, there were lots of genuine lurkers at that point in the game, why did you vote for me instead of the others like Gyro? Was it because I already have 2 votes and so it pushes the town nearer to a mislynch?
xx

[Faraday]

Darkstrike_11 (3) (JereIC, kikuchiyo, Ectomancer ]
Malpascp (1) [afatchic]
cyrpto (3) [ Malpascp, U.N. Owen], Netapolis]


Not voting: (5) [Darkstrike_11, Walrus Helmet, Gyro, Mr. Jester,crypto]

With 12 alive it takes 7 to lynch.
Day 1 deadline hits on Tuesday 10th November @ 11am GMT.

[JereIC]

I post from the land beyond V/LA (aka my phone)!

Crypto, have you tried reaction fishing before? If so, can you link to the thread?

Neta, the problem with your argument is that whether or not an attack is justified, we don't know whether it's genuine or not. Townies can make crap attacks they honestly believe, and scum can make very nuanced attacks based on voting patterns that they know to be wrong. In the case you provided, the solution is to push harder on the guy, so he doesn't come out smelling like roses, not to declare the mode of attack itself scummy. That said, who do you think is scum?

Mod:

do you mean November 10?

[Faraday]

The mod has no idea what you're talking about

But yeh, I think year deadlines are a bit much. Fix'd, thanks.

[Ectomancer]

Hi, sorry for the lack of activity, I'm crazy busy at university at the moment. I will try to get a post in by tonight.

btw Ectomancer, there were lots of genuine lurkers at that point in the game, why did you vote for me instead of the others like Gyro? Was it because I already have 2 votes and so it pushes the town nearer to a mislynch?
xx

You hadn't posted in 3 days and you were the only one. Everyone else had posted within 2 days or less.

Try checking your facts pal. Also try putting some information into the game and quit whining about votes on you.

[Ectomancer]

The kind of language that Ecto is pointing out in Netopalis' posts implies Neto is trying not to lynch his scum partner crypto, which is feasible until the crazy argument they are having now. Sorry but I doubt either of you are good enough actors to pull that off.

Not at all. What you are seeing in action is someone trying very hard to not be pinned to an opinion they can't wiggle out of, and to explain an otherwise inexplicable move.

Despite all the chatter, and his claim that his move worked out so well, the fact remains that Neto's unvote was weak and his own statement is that Crypto was at the top of his scum list at the time. All I've seen since then is deflection from that very basic question. Why did you unvote if he was the scummiest player you see? Telling me that you unvoted in order to

motivate crypto

is what we call a cowpatty down here.

[Netopalis]

Alright, fine. I'm sorry that I didn't justify my unvote well enough for you all, which is apparently a cardinal sin around here. I told you why I did it - you can agree with my motivations or not, but continuing to yell at me over it isn't going to magically make some other reason or justification appear out of thin air.

Right now, I do suspect Crypto again. I didn't for a little bit because he was starting to make sense, but now I think that he's continually nitpicking on minutae in order to get a lynch up and *not* because any of the stuff he talks about is actually scummy. I also feel that he's derailing the town.

Second pick: Gyro. Even though he hasn't posted much, both posts are basically attempts to provide discussion without actually saying anything. He essentially relates the state of the game with a small amount of commentary, never really going out on a limb to back up his opinions. He also seems to automatically go with whatever the current prevailing mood is.

Finally, maybe I am wrong about the reaction fishing thing. I am a fairly new player on this site, and the entire culture and method was much different where I played before. I still think that it's a bad play....and I think that, in general, bad play is scummy. That being said, since I've reiterated my reasons 6 times now, I'm not going to do so once again because, again, there will be no new reasons magically appearing out of thin air. It's not like I've been holding back any arguments.

[crypto]

in general, bad play is scummy

Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. Backpedal more, please.

Oh, and just in case I really wasn't explicit enough with the above three cases, it's because the following:

[1.]

If we allow people to make attacks without reason, then we allow for unjustified attacks.

[2.]

Any response to one of these votes can be construed as scummy - either action OR inaction.

[3.]

Mafia know this and know that they can use it as a tool to get rid of a town player for free.

[4.]

Ergo, it can be a tool of the Mafia.

Okay, if this is the best you can do then screw it.

1.

A vote switch at the end of RVS is not an attack.

2.

Any response to anything can be construed as scummy.

3.

A quick lynch via unexplained vote bandwagon four pages into the game is not a concern for the town, sorry.

4.

Ah, so it

can

be a tool. EVERYTHING CAN BE A TOOL. That does not make it scummy, for fuck's sake.

If switching votes without reason is scummy because scum can use it to easily lynch townies, then so is building a solid, logical case. Your argument is awful. So is your failure to convincingly explain how the mechanics of an unexplained vote benefit scum. Lastly, your claim that in your experience scum vote like this more than townies is a load of shit. ABR did the exact same thing as town in a game where

you

were scum and you attempted to bulldoze him for it. ABR is in the top tier of players on MS, and he's also a very effective scum hunter. Those are not debatable assertions. This sort of stuff is standard procedure for him and many other players as townies. You know that.

I told you why I did it - you can agree with my motivations or not, but continuing to yell at me over it isn't going to magically make some other reason or justification appear out of thin air.

You are correct. A much better purpose for continuing to yell at you over it is to shed light on your transparently scummy behavior.

JereIC, I can't remember if I've done much reaction fishing

of this sort

in my completed games, but I have done it in one ongoing game under the username Symbol.

Vote: Netopalis.

[Netopalis]

Firstly, if you read the game that ABR and I were in together, you'll find that I was largely attacking him for voting

without having read the thread

, something which he openly admitted to on page two and never recanted. He intentionally played that game poorly. Perhaps I was colored somewhat by that game, but for me, it seems that logical play has always benefited the town.

In response to your list:
1) A vote switch alone is not an attack. What I am saying is that either reaction that the voted party gives will be construed as scummy and either jumped and lynched that day or used as justification for a later lynch, regardless of their alignment.
2) See above.
3) I'm not so much concerned about a quicklynch 4 pages in as I am coloring a townie as scum and slowly building a case over the course of the entire day.
4) See above

And I understand your point here, but I still maintain that, more often than not, lynches arising from random votes are mislynches which I suspect are at least partially orchestrated by the mafia.

Your argument breaks down here, though. You say that this is not scummy, but you also say that anything can be scummy.

Also, just because something is standard procedure for someone doesn't make it not scummy. Someone may just have a scummy playstyle, something which I feel that Albert illustrates in spades.

Finally, even if you disagree with my game theory, I fail to see how this disagreement = scummy.

[crypto]

I'm voting for you because you are not scum-hunting. You unvote me for an absurd and extremely suspicious reason, then you vote for me for the wrong reason, continually attacking me for things that have absolutely nothing to do with alignment. And that vote stays until you whip some incredible insight out from your mounds of BS.

Now stop trying to persuade me not to vote for you and make yourself useful.

Firstly, if you read the game that ABR and I were in together, you'll find that I was largely attacking him for voting without having read the thread, something which he openly admitted to on page two and never recanted. He intentionally played that game poorly. Perhaps I was colored somewhat by that game, but for me, it seems that logical play has always benefited the town.

Nope, you started flipping out at him before he said that. But that's beside the point, the point being you know that ABR's style is ostensibly instinctual and that he, along with many other players, often votes without explanation

as town

.

Your argument breaks down here, though. You say that this is not scummy, but you also say that anything can be scummy.

No. That is a pathetically disguised misrepresentation of what I said. My vote sure as hell stays where it is.

Also, just because something is standard procedure for someone doesn't make it not scummy. Someone may just have a scummy playstyle, something which I feel that Albert illustrates in spades.

Sigh. Do you really not know the meaning of "scummy"?

And I understand your point here, but I still maintain that, more often than not, lynches arising from random votes are mislynches which I suspect are at least partially orchestrated by the mafia.

Ran-
dom
votes
do
not
lead
to
mis-
lynch-
es.
Get
it
through
your
head.

[Ectomancer]

And now Crypto decides to vote over an argument that belongs in MD. I concur with Neto's assessment that Crypto just kept hammering at this point excessively, to where I was about ready to tell him to stfu already about it.

Netopalis is the epitomy of the term 'dodgy' in that for every opinion he seems to make, he has a contradictory opinion or exception to the rule stashed away.
I don't buy that coming from a different site causes you to contradict yourself.

So it comes as no surprise that Crypto would be suspicious, but he continues beating the dead mafia theory question to death until Netopalis in frustration finally votes him again. Which gives me the distinct feeling that Crypto regreted his earlier unvote and so had to poke poke poke until he had something he felt would look good enough to the town for him to vote Netopalis again.

However, having a protracted exchange in this manner indicates to me that likely they are either both bad scum, or not both scum, and the latter is IMO far more likely.
So while neither looks good in their exchange, I can also not decide that neither looks bad as both being bad is unlikely.

Here's my suggestion Neto and Crypto, drop it. Just unvote and let's move along. We have a few others to investigate today as well and I don't think you deserve the spotlight. So get out of it and push somebody else in (don't care if it is me either, I'll drag someone else in too). However, I would suggest looking in the inactive stack first. I'm not in much need of a prod.

[crypto]

Not really, Ecto. As the argument progressed Neto shifted his position, misconstrued my statements, and went against his own experience. It isn't about theory; it's about the progression of his posts.

[Netopalis]

I'm willing to drop it, since this is getting us nowhere. While I still think Crypto is scum, this entire discussion is wholly unproductive. Looking back, I do understand that perhaps my arguments weren't what they should have been. As I mentioned in an earlier post, what do you all think of Gyro? I think that a few of his posts are more than a bit suspicious....Specifically the way that he never actually says anything in the few posts that he does have.

[crypto]

Your suspicion of me is 100% OMGUS, by the way.

*ducks*

[Netopalis]

Odd that it would be OMGUS considering I brought it up against you first.

[Netopalis]

You know what, Crypto? Let's settle this like real men. With a chess game. Shall I start a thread in TWSOGMM?

[crypto]

I voted for you well before you voted for me. As far as I can tell, you are only voting for me because you don't like how I'm badgering you.

I don't play Chess all that much. I would prefer lynching you.

[walrus helmet]

And now Crypto decides to vote over an argument that belongs in MD. I concur with Neto's assessment that Crypto just kept hammering at this point excessively, to where I was about ready to tell him to stfu already about it.

Netopalis is the epitomy of the term 'dodgy' in that for every opinion he seems to make, he has a contradictory opinion or exception to the rule stashed away.
I don't buy that coming from a different site causes you to contradict yourself.

So it comes as no surprise that Crypto would be suspicious, but he continues beating the dead mafia theory question to death until Netopalis in frustration finally votes him again. Which gives me the distinct feeling that Crypto regreted his earlier unvote and so had to poke poke poke until he had something he felt would look good enough to the town for him to vote Netopalis again.

However, having a protracted exchange in this manner indicates to me that likely they are either both bad scum, or not both scum, and the latter is IMO far more likely.
So while neither looks good in their exchange, I can also not decide that neither looks bad as both being bad is unlikely.

Here's my suggestion Neto and Crypto, drop it. Just unvote and let's move along. We have a few others to investigate today as well and I don't think you deserve the spotlight. So get out of it and push somebody else in (don't care if it is me either, I'll drag someone else in too). However, I would suggest looking in the inactive stack first. I'm not in much need of a prod.

This is a much more eloquent and less infused with sleepiness version of my earlier post. To sum up: STFU both of you!


To create new topics of discussion:

JereIC: your first (random, I assume) vote was for Darkstrike_11 in post #12. Assuming your vote was originally random, have you kept the vote on Darkstrike because you believe he's scum, or just from momentum/laziness?

Malpascp: Your votes have always been shortly after someone else's vote for the same person.
Darkstrike_11 -> JereIC in post 12, malpascp in post 15
crypto -> Netopalis in post 64, malpascp in post 66

All of the votes have been almost completely unaccompanied by a post with content. Why?

[kikuchiyo]

I see no reason to let Darkstrike off the hook here.

IMO, Neto seems way scummier than Crypto in the exchange.

Post 163 makes no sense. If you believe Crypto to be scum and you feel that your discussion has helped in your belief, then how is the discussion "wholly unproductive"?

That said, I would rather focus elsewhere as lynching one of you would let the rest of us lurk the day away. Poor form.

Walrus has asked some good questions.

[Netopalis]

Kikuchiyo: Continued discussion would be unproductive because we're derailing into theory discussions that won't really get us anywhere. The discussion was helpful up to the point where it turned into an argument about playstyle.

[crypto]

FYI, I didn't instigate the theory discussion for the sake of a theory discussion. It wasn't about that.

Anyway, continue.

[Gyro]

Second pick: Gyro. Even though he hasn't posted much, both posts are basically attempts to provide discussion without actually saying anything. He essentially relates the state of the game with a small amount of commentary, never really going out on a limb to back up his opinions. He also seems to automatically go with whatever the current prevailing mood is.

I play like that sometimes, especially on day one. Considering the current arguments don't involve me I really can't jump into them, nor would I want to. But I don't wanna be inactive or considered a lurker so I must give that generic commentary type posts until I can really get involved in something which has been hard considering the entire game thus far has been based on arguing on mafia play methods and such, which I'm not accustomed to.

assuming you'd get upset @ the fos. you're being overly defensive which doesn't look good for you.

Tags Fixed ~ Your sexy mod.

[Netopalis]

At the risk of sounding like a broken record....

You imply above that you want to FOS me. Why is that?

[Gyro]

Seems like a hypocritical comment to make there Netopalis, the broken record one that is.

Yeah, I actually mentioned why I put a fos on you in an earlier post. Not sure if you read it or not, pretty insulting if you ask me.

Seemingly you are trying to pick up the pieces of a mishap you made with crypto accusation along with high defense and been attempting to get on

anyone's

case you can.

It's a shock that you seem to get very fishy of someone who makes a negative comment towards you.

But that's just a fos, not a vote you see. So you should back off on me. You're getting quite frantic son.