Newbie 864 - Game Over.

[Pablo Molinero]

/and I'm in. Rejoice!

[Pablo Molinero]

Vote: Sweep

Because 2 votes are better than one.

[Pablo Molinero]

unvote

vote: Sweep

Go go, Gadget bigger bandwagon.

Hey, that's my line.

unvote, FoS: Col Cathart

for being the dreaded 3th vote on the bandwagon. You prefaced it with "well, I'm just trying to start discussion," because you knew it would spark attention, so why declare your intentions when you're fishing for reactions? If they know a hook is there, the fish won't bite.

[Pablo Molinero]

It wasn't the WHAT you said (I think reaction-probing is quite acceptable in early game), it was WHEN you said it. Instead of riding it out for a full reaction from the town and truly sparking discussion, you got a few negative posts and immediately clarified/explained. While you say you gained reactions like you wanted, what did you gain from them? Did you see anything you liked or didn't like? What was their purpose? Otherwise, to me, it looks as if you're simply trying to look busy. Hence the FoS (that's "Finger of Suspicion" to our new players. Not quite a vote, but a way to formally declare suspicion on someone.)

[Pablo Molinero]

Marcosh: It looks to me, like you're trying to discredit RayFrost. Why? Just because he wants to start a random wagon on you?

I know it looks like I'm just hounding after you, Col, but what kind of question is this? Do you see it as a problem that someone wants to discredit their random attackers? I certianly don't.

I foresee somebody calling that coaching my scum buddy. It will be hilarious to see who does it first.

Ray-Parts SCUM!~! I is genius!

Anywho, (*places IC cap on*) I kinda agree on the RVS-unvote. Newbie games suffer from timid natures for too many times in my experience and I am ALL for using your vote as a weapon and keeping it in play. However, keeping it on the same person if you're not going to pursue them after the RVS seems awfully lazy when there's usually plenty of reactions to go off of in the first 3 pages to make even a slightly-informed vote.

[Pablo Molinero]

I'll be away for the weekend, btw.

[Pablo Molinero]

Firstly to address the panic caused by the wagon in the RVS stage, I was not worried as when has a wagon in the RVS ever led to anything and it is ridiculous to suggest that it ever would.

I do not like this from Ray as other people have pointed out.

I'm a seriously bad town but seriously decent scum player imo

This could be read either way as a town or a scum tell but my reading would be scum currently due to the confident nature of Ray's play and general attitude.

You think scum are confident and/or defiant in nature? I think you're absolutely wrong. Mafia know that their arguments are inherently wrong, so it leads to wishy-washy, timid play a lot of the time. Have you experienced otherwise?

To the town: how long and in what capacity have you played mafia before? I've been on this site over a year with 13+ games to my name and play a great deal in real life. Tis good fun.

[Pablo Molinero]

Selecao, your vote was random, but it's obvious things have gotten much more serious. Standing by it?

[Pablo Molinero]

Eheheheheeee... I just pulled my first real all nighter. So... yeah. Bear with me if I post little in the next few days. It is a hell-week.

[Pablo Molinero]

Yeah, it's about 50/50 if you're gonna get a solid game rolling or not in the first period. And there's always replacements. I need to reread and then I'll act, hopefully later today as the exams let up.

[Pablo Molinero]

So, yeah, the flood let up and I survived the week. Huzzah. Some tidbits from me from what I remember from the game/rereading the last 4 pages:

- I never really bought the Ray case early on. It was far too easy, far too obvious, and people who jumped on it look like lazy town or scum trying for an easy opportunity. Ray's responses have been flippant and odd, but I'm more willing to write that off as playstyle so far.

- Sweep... I dunno, he's played very minimally and sorta shut down when under fire. His vote post against Ray was underwhelming (and suspicious, I agree), but this backlash coming so quick is concerning, too. I want to hear him respond before we go any further (NO HAMMERS!)

- To everyone: remember that lists of who you find scummy and who you find townish are great and all for full-disclosure reasons BUT

you are also giving scum that information, too

. Many, many times, I've seen scum keep alive a suspicious townie to the very end for an easy win. Remember this, and in my opinion, you should try to mentioning only 1-3 people (at very most) at a time in your analysis.

- To the town: do we want a role-claim from Sweep?

EDIT: JEEEEUS! I almost put the hammer down on Sweep (due to a same-time post with Bach. I'm notoriously bad at refreshing my browser.)

I think I'm more or less up to date, so if there are any questions my way, feel free.

[Pablo Molinero]

Where were you, anyways, sweep?

Your point on Bach is a solid point on scum. They try and ride whatever wagon's hot at the moment and throw around their vote with little abandon. Bach was the first one to throw up those flags, as many people seemed to catch on.

Could someone voting for him summarize the sweep case (Parts, you just said you were happy with your vote) in a few simple sentences?

Col.Cathart, what's with the secrecy/caution? Deliberately waiting to add your input makes you look like you're waiting to compose the "smartest" response based on other people's reads and suspicions. As town you should rely on your own reads, while it looks plenty scummy to take the more cautious route. Particularly since I know you're an experienced player.

[Pablo Molinero]

Ray really laid out the case against Sweep and I can't put it any better than he did though It looked to me that Sweep's vote on Bach was more OMGUS than opportunistic. If somebody wants me to lay out my own thoughts I will.

Okay, OMGUS, but do you think OMGUS is scummy?

I'm seeing the case as: sweep votes for popular target, unvotes when it's pointed out for being a weak case. Is that it? ...a newbie player changing his mind? I ain't buying that as lynch-material.

Please elaborate with your own thoughts, too, Parts, seeing as you JUST said that scum "jump on an easy target where they won't have to explain themselves." Because that's what I'm seeing here.

[Pablo Molinero]

Okay, OMGUS, but do you think OMGUS is scummy?

What is OMGUS?

Voting for someone solely because they voted for you.

[Pablo Molinero]

I think the case against him (sweep) is weak and hinges on him changing his mind being a

solid

scum-tell. In my 2nd game ever, I got lynched (as town) on Day 2 for re-evaluating my thinking and changing my stance a few times while scum subtly prodded the idea along that changing one's mind is the worst thing evar. I'm seeing it basically happening again and it's bringing back the bad memories. Now, I feel that changing one's mind could very well be either a town-tell or scum-tell, but it's situational and in this case, I don't see it as the scum-tell version. I will be glad to break down this thought process later.

I have a few ideas formulating on who is scum, but I'm going to do a reread sometime over the weekend before I can solidly go after someone.

[Pablo Molinero]

Parts, does your "pressure vote" still apply?

[Pablo Molinero]

I want to hear from Pablo, Col Cathart, and Evilgorrilaz before we decide on wether or not to lynch Sweep.

As Pablo said the case against me was weak and hinges on exactly one fact.
Your trying to restrict the options here so that I am the only person going to be lynched.

If you truly think Sweep is being falsely accused, there is only so much time left to build a case on someone else.

While you also removed your vote from Ray and didn;t vote for someone else. You may have had a good enough explanation but then all the pressure was directed at me rather than you. Hence along with the vote changes my vote still stands.

Sweep, I'm not sure if you get this: I'm not positive about you being scum. I only put you at L-1 to begin with to see what would happen. But you've since acted the scummiest of anyone here, with your poor logic in your attacks on me, and general panicking. I'm seriously looking for other options. Posts like this where you're misrepresenting my questions don't help, and only make me more comfortable with a decision to lynch you.

However, I still want to hear from Pablo one more time. I don't think there is enough time to build a case on anyone else...but I want everyone's thoughts on this lynch well out in the open.

@Pablo: Why were you ready to put Sweep at L-1? Do you truly believe I've been 'riding wagons' (Post #186)? Since you've gone from ready to put Sweep at L-1 to defending him, who would you lynch in his place?

unvote

For now - I don't want the day to end prematurely until I hear from Pablo again.

@ Bach:

My theoretical L-1 on sweep would have been a pressure vote on what was (at the time) one of the most inactive players who did little to defend himself.

However, I'm getting more of a newbie read with a hint of town in him from his reactions. The town is basically single-mindedly on him right now so he's feeling trapped (I know because I've been there too), and the shot he made against you was one of the few he felt he could take. I think my "riding wagons" comment on Bach is apt, seeing as you jumped on Ray, ikd, and Sweep all as votes. Scum like to speread around their votes and see what sticks. While your recent unvote does earn you a few points, unless you legitimately explore other avenues, it's an empty gesture.

Right now I think I'd be more happy with a Col or ikd lynch. Col's recently helped push the sweep wagon and stayed realtively out of the fray. And this:

ColCathart

Why so scared about the lynch? I saw that kind of reaction several times already... And it rarely comes from a townie. Even more! I reacted just like that in my first game as a scum on this site.

I feel is bad logic. For example, I get very defensive and passionate when targeted as town (and only a little less-so as scum). It's usually playstyle, not scum or town, how someone reacts to their impending lynch, I feel. No one wants to be out of the game and put their team closer to a loss.

ikd, on the other hand, has come in and put up big "re-read analysis" blocks of text up. This is a halmark of some scum players, to come in, look important and busy, and get absolutely nothing out of these blocks of text. He also jumped in on the popular lynch and has been riding it ever since.

All who have not voted yet please vote. We need to see everyones opinion on the lynch before deadline.

No need to rush to vote. Opinions we need, but we still have several days. There will be a lynch. I will place my vote before the end of Sunday.

[Pablo Molinero]

EG and Pablo: I disagree with both of you. As I said, my past experience so far are giving me a clear conclusion, that people scared of lynch, are more likely scum than town. Mostly because scum has much more to lose with every lost member than town. That, and this is psychological effect - if you're the bad guy, every accusation at you makes you much more nervous, than if you're good guy, because the good guy knows he's innocent.

But that's only my point of view. IMO this IS scumtell, and after adding other things he had done (quick follow up on Bach counterwagon, lurking etc.) seals him as a scum in my book.

But the town member may feel that they have just as much to lose as a scum member. Being lynched is bad no matter which side you are on.

This. If you're town and you get lynched, you're putting your team one step closer to a loss, so I've seen town fight just as hard to not get lynched by town. You may have certain experiences, but your point simply is not valid for the whole mafia-playing community.

I will be placing my vote later tonight. As I've said, I'm not happy with a sweep lynch and only a little happier with a Bach lynch.

[Pablo Molinero]

As promised:

Vote: iamkingdavid

As I said before: Big "reread" texts are the hallmark of scum trying to look active, but then there's no elaboration on it and he ends up following the popular bandwagon without a whole lot of critical thinking or great reasons.

I mean, hell, this was his vote-post:

Right now, I'm going to reinstate my Vote: Sweep. Can't put a finger on it at the moment, but something just seems off. And I'd like to hear more from him on the current discussion as well.

To respond to his last post:

btw, I only posted one post that I can remember that had blocks of text. Are you still going on about that? Yes, walls of text can have a negative affect, but they can also help when you're trying to present your ideas. Just having every post as a wall of text isn't always the best thing.

"Walls" of text meaning walls of text in general, not your quantity. You had one big one in your ISO 4 and a smaller one in your ISO 11. Walls are only good when presenting a definitive case against someone and presenting a comprehensive defense. Yours is neither. Instead, it's a smattering of ideas that merely looks busy.

You even went on and agreed with me that large, sweeping analysis is a bad thing because scum gains more info on who to pursue and NK... and yet that's what you've done. Scum don't have to worry about that; lack of true focus is something only scum can afford.

[Pablo Molinero]

I'm still reading the case against sweep as him going after the obvious target and then stepping back and changing his mind (OMG!). I hate

hate HATE

the word "backtracking" when improperly used, like I think it is here. It should be used when someone holding a deep-seated belief suddenly changes later in the game. But here it was a relatively short period of time between sweep's vote-unvote and I think sweep adequately analyzed and explained himself.

His jump on the Bach-vote isn't exactly great, but I can't blame a guy, particularly a new player, for taking the only out he's got. That part reads neutral newbie to me instead of scum/townie.

And as I've said, a townie doesn't have to give reads on EVERYONE EVAR unless specifically asked for a read on someone. Concentrating on 1-2 (maybe 3?) people is the way to go, IMO.

[Pablo Molinero]

Alright, hey guys. I came to this site in hopes of typing up a response 3 times, but I have had things come up and have not been able to. With Parts' unvote, though, it doesn't look like there will be a sweep lynch unless two more people vote him or someone unvotes Bach. So the matter isn't as pressing as it could be. In any case, I'll see if I can get something up after school today.

@Pablo: so how many words does it take to make it a wall? I could consider your post 269 a wall.

Anyway, yeah, I'll be back after school.

I'm not getting sucked into that nonsense. I think you have bigger problems than arguing the semantics of "wall post". Like, say, the actual content of your posts. You've been buying time, trying to look busy all game. We're nearing deadline, a place where "I'll reread later" is a dangerous thing.

[Pablo Molinero]

Indeed, Evilgorillaz has put minimal effort into this game so far. He's brought up all of one good point in my reread of him and the rest have been a lot of "yeah, what he said". I'll get to the rest of your defense later.

btw, I think a Evilgorillaz-ikd lynch choice is much, much more appealing than the sweep-Bach choice.

[Pablo Molinero]

Remember kiddies, the lynch happens mid-day tomorrow. Getting your final say in tonight is critical.

[Pablo Molinero]

As promised:

Vote: iamkingdavid

As I said before: Big "reread" texts are the hallmark of scum trying to look active, but then there's no elaboration on it and he ends up following the popular bandwagon without a whole lot of critical thinking or great reasons.

I mean, hell, this was his vote-post:

Right now, I'm going to reinstate my Vote: Sweep. Can't put a finger on it at the moment, but something just seems off. And I'd like to hear more from him on the current discussion as well.

To respond to his last post:

btw, I only posted one post that I can remember that had blocks of text. Are you still going on about that? Yes, walls of text can have a negative affect, but they can also help when you're trying to present your ideas. Just having every post as a wall of text isn't always the best thing.

"Walls" of text meaning walls of text in general, not your quantity. You had one big one in your ISO 4 and a smaller one in your ISO 11. Walls are only good when presenting a definitive case against someone and presenting a comprehensive defense. Yours is neither. Instead, it's a smattering of ideas that merely looks busy.

You even went on and agreed with me that large, sweeping analysis is a bad thing because scum gains more info on who to pursue and NK... and yet that's what you've done. Scum don't have to worry about that; lack of true focus is something only scum can afford.

Do you have any more thoughts against ikd? Unless i am missing something, all you have on him is being hypocritical and a placing a poor vote on Sweep which he later explained.

Hah. Yes, that's "all" I have on him, seeing as being hypocritical and placing poor votes are plenty scummy.

And before you try and draw the inevitable parallel between ikd and sweep, sweep recanted on his poor vote, stepped back, and analyzed himself. ikd, is still riding the sweep lynch (which I think is a poor choice in the first place) all the way and simply tried to look busy while not doing a whole lot in the our favor.

[Pablo Molinero]

Oi! Deadline! We're going to have a freakin' lynch with 2 votes! Someone settle this, plz.

[Pablo Molinero]

The dead in this game are silent.