926 A Game of Thrones Mafia - Over.

[Raivann]

How is card game? Is it as fun as Magic?

[Seacore]

More fun than magic.

Or at least it was. I haven't played it or even looked at it in many years.

Anyway, I'm happy to discuss the card game with you post game or in PMs, but I don't want to clutter this thread now.

[Raivann]

Ok, just curious.

Why aren't you voting?
Are you waiting for names before you vote?
If so , why?

[Seacore]

I'm not voting because I haven't started scum hunting yet.

I'm waiting for either names or for us to decide that we aren't going to do names.

When I'm scum hunting I like to ask questions and force people to answer them, I feel that doing this now will allow people to avoid voting one way or the other on the name claim, and instead respond to my scum hunting. Conversely they may respond to the name claim and ignore my scum hunting. I find that it's easier to get the town to focus on one thing at a time.

I feel that the name claim could be an amazing thing.

Person one claims: A
Person two claims: B
Person three claims: C
Person four claims: D
Person five claims: B
Person six claims: D
Person seven claims E

etc

BAM, we find two scum.
Do I think it will be that easy? No. But it might happen.
I think fake claims might also, possibly, stick out a little, even if they aren't double ups, but I don't want to go into that as it might coach the scum out of trouble.

[Faraday]

Vote Count 1.5: The

' R.I.P. ELIA OF DORNE'

' votecount.

Bogre (2) - [The Inquisition, Miserable at Best]
Kinetic (1) [Xvart]
TheButtonMen (3) [Mina, MacavityLock, Raivann]
Seacore (1) [Locke Lamora]

Not voting:

(4) [ Heliograph, TheButtonMen, Seacore, Bogre, Kinetic]


With 12 alive it takes 7 to lynch.
Deadline: March 3rd @ 6pm GMT and you need a full majority to lynch.

Checking to see if anyone needs a prod now.
Edit: No one in need of a prod.

[Seacore]

Fantastic level of lurking here people. Catch up and vote on the name claim so we can have a strong last week before the lynch.

[Bogre]

Yay

[xvart]

I answered that question, even if Kinetic didn't. I claimed to have a very prominent character and a Vanilla Role. Thus I don't think that the names will lead us towards PRs.

And I should just take your word for it? How am I supposed to know what "prominent" means?

You've already helped scum enough claiming you're not a PR.

This is true. Why would you (Seacore) come out on D1 and say you are vanilla townie? Do you want the scum to have a better shot of hitting a PR?

I'm not voting because I haven't started scum hunting yet.

We've been playing a week and you haven't started scum hunting yet? Well get to it. We've barely gotten anywhere in the last week and you are working towards getting a vote together for name claiming? At this point, even if we name claim we won't be able to get together on a vote, which I suspect is another reason this whole debate is still raging on. Perhaps you should start scum hunting by looking in the mirror.

FoS: Seacore

I would jump on a Seacore wagon in a heartbeat, but until Kinetic comes back and answers some of things he has overlooked I'm leaving my vote where it is.

xvart.

[Raivann]

If we are to believe Seacore with his VT claim, which I do atm, then Kinetic's theory of everyone having some sort of power role is wrong.

[Kinetic]

If we are to believe Seacore with his VT claim, which I do atm, then Kinetic's theory of everyone having some sort of power role is wrong.

Not one of my primary theories, although yes if he isn't lying that would be the case.

That being said if he is telling the truth then one of the main objections against name claim is pretty thoroughly quashed.

So its sort of a even result towards name claims. One of the possible theories on why name claim would not be too damaging is quashed (lots of power, thus not much chance in revealing singular roles), but at the same time a main detractor is eliminated (power roles are tied to names).

[Seacore]

Yay

5 Votes
Seacore
Miserable
Kinetic
Buttonmen
Bogre

Nay

3 Votes
Macavity
Raivann
Xvart

Yet to Vote

4 non-votes
Locke Lamora
Mina
Heliograph
The Inquisition

Locke, Mina and Inq, if you don't vote soon, I'm going to look very suspiciously at you, I don't care if you vote yes, no or actively abstain, but you're dragging the day on. Helio is a waste of time, so I'm not going to bother addressing him, he flakes and lurks in every game I've seen, and doesn't offer anything much when he does play

[Faraday]

Mina, The Inquisition, Locke Lamora and Heilograph have been prodded. Heilograph/Locke Lamora wasn't technically due for one but while I'm sending them out I might as well as they would be eligible later today

[The Inquisition]

My bad. I had actually made a post yesterday but the internet went down and it was lost in the tubes.

I'll vote yes to the name claim if for no other reason than I think it'll make the quasi-role play thing more fun.

[xvart]

My bad. I had actually made a post yesterday but the internet went down and it was lost in the tubes.

And your post yesterday said what? Anything other than the quasi fun established by name claiming?

xvart.

[Mina]

Hey, I'm sorry for disappearing. This weekend has been really crazy. Then the past couple of days...um, I might have been a little distracted by a Mafia game I'm playing on another site.

Interesting how many people were so anti-nameclaim that they actually voted/FOSed Kinetic for even suggesting the idea...then suddenly flip-flopped on it once the idea began getting support.

Right now, I have to run to a group meeting for my MECH project. But I'll vote

Nay

on the nameclaim. The only semi-convincing argument I've heard in favour of it is that if scum claim, say, Jaqen H'gar on D1, then no one will buy a doctor claim. I think the danger of revealing a role. I'd like to read Freaktown Mafia to get a better idea of where Kinetic is going with this, though.

I'll respond to Kinetic's and Locke Lamora's posts to me and talk more about my actual suspicions this evening, when I have more time...because it doesn't seem like people are doing much of that now. Some of the reactions I'm seeing are very,

very

interesting.

[Mina]

EBWOP: I mean, I think the danger of a town power role giving itself away outweighs the small benefit of locking scum into claims that fit their name. I still highly doubt that the game can be broken with a mass nameclaim. Mafia Modding 101 prepares for a massclaim.

By the way...Seacore, nice job revealing VT on D1 for no reason whatsoever. *headdesk* You would have been better off just saying your character name.

[The Inquisition]

My bad. I had actually made a post yesterday but the internet went down and it was lost in the tubes.

And your post yesterday said what? Anything other than the quasi fun established by name claiming?

xvart.

No. But this is what frustrates me about strategy, claim, etc. discussions is that it leads to those who continually whine that it's not scum hunting. It'd be a fair charge, but in my experience it never, ever actually manages to up the level of scum hunting. Rather, it merely makes the game seem more like a slog which tends to reduce the actual activity of the game.

The tactic, if you are honestly frustrated by the lack of scum hunting, is to make a concerted effort to do so yourself

without

mentioning your frustration. People will tend to follow and respond to what you're doing. Just saying, "scum hunt more please" accomplishes little.

So is your charge against Kinetic and Sea anything more than they're pushing a name claim? are you sure that this is actually scummy in any way?

[Miserable At Best]

unvote

I don't really see a need to have a vote on Bogre at the moment.

Sorry I've been... lacking on activity everyone. I've got some major catching up to do, but I'm unsure if I'll be able to catch up tonight when I get off work. If not, I'll definitely be here tomorrow and for the remainder of that game. My apologies.

[Seacore]

Vote The Inquistion

Actively avoiding making a stance either way is scummy.

I'm pretty sure we can say this name claim isn't going ahead. But Inq discussing people discussing the name claim without actually having a position on it rings my bell.

For the record, I dont' believe a name claim would "break" the game. I believe it would put scum in a difficult position of having to lie and risk doubling up with somebody or telling the truth and then having to argue that Cersei isn't scum.

I'm going to argue again for name claim tomorrow once two people have flipped.

[xvart]

No. But this is what frustrates me about strategy, claim, etc. discussions is that it leads to those who continually whine that it's not scum hunting. It'd be a fair charge, but in my experience it never, ever actually manages to up the level of scum hunting. Rather, it merely makes the game seem more like a slog which tends to reduce the actual activity of the game.

The tactic, if you are honestly frustrated by the lack of scum hunting, is to make a concerted effort to do so yourself

without

mentioning your frustration. People will tend to follow and respond to what you're doing. Just saying, "scum hunt more please" accomplishes little.

First: I didn't accuse you of not scum hunting. You made a point of how you wrote a post yesterday and how it got deleted, and then the only other thing you said was agreeing to the name claim. I figured if it was worth saying you had a post and it got deleted there was probably a little more than one sentence.

So is your charge against Kinetic and Sea anything more than they're pushing a name claim? are you sure that this is actually scummy in any way?

Yes, my suspicion of Kinetic has nothing to do with the act of proposing the name claim. I think mentioning that is fine. My suspicion and vote is for his behavior surrounding the suggestion and the responses provided. Kinetic is fencesitting his own idea, selectively reading the thread and ignoring direct questions to him. He has also gotten much quieter since the pressure has been put on him.

I can see how the two might get easily confused since I am strongly against the name claim at this time but that proposition is irrelevant to the name claim; so I apologize for not making the delineation more clear.

My suspicion of Seacore also has nothing to do with his approval of the name claim. It is because he has claimed, unprompted, that he is VT on page 2 and his refusal to discuss game mechanics

and

scum hunt at the same time. And when I say scumhunt I mean expressing concerns or suspicions since it is early in the game.

I am very concerned that this whole name claim thing is still going through and it is being substantiated by an unverifiable claim of a "prominent character who is allegedly VT." It just seems that there is this house of cards being built with as little information as possible and if one card is wrong, the whole thing topples. Let me reiterate that the name claim might be useful, but I only think we will know that starting D2 when we have some deaths and roles to verify. With that said, I now think the best move is to lynch Seacore and we will definitely be able to verify his claim (if he happens to flip town).

Unvote: Kinetic
Vote: Seacore

xvart.

[Heilograph]

Do I still have time for

yay

for nameclaim?

[Seacore]

Great contribution there heilograph

xvart, my resistance to discussing two things at once is exactly because of players like Inq and Heilo.

It's hard enough to make them actually take a stance and/or answer questions without letting them hide from one train of thought by kind of answering another. I've seen it happen again and again.

[Seacore]

Wait, dammit, this is what happens when you play as you're getting ready for work. I take back everything i've said about inq, I missed

a) that he voted (because he didn't bold) and
b) that xvart mentioned he voted

sigh. Good job seacore.

So I withdraw post 118 and some of 121

unvote

I'll be back soon with a post that's actually read and not skimmed poorly

[Seacore]

Yay

7 Votes
Seacore
Miserable
Kinetic
Buttonmen
Bogre
The Inquisition
Heilograph

Nay

4 Votes
Macavity
Raivann
Xvart
Mina

Yet to Vote

1 vote
Locke Lamora

Looks like it's down to Locke to decide whether we name claim or not.

[Kinetic]

Yes, my suspicion of Kinetic has nothing to do with the act of proposing the name claim. I think mentioning that is fine. My suspicion and vote is for his behavior surrounding the suggestion and the responses provided. Kinetic is fencesitting his own idea, selectively reading the thread and ignoring direct questions to him. He has also gotten much quieter since the pressure has been put on him.

First, I still don't understand the charge of fencesitting, perhaps this is because of differing views on how to define the word. As far as I'm concerned I've always been on the same side of the fence, I think its a good idea. I've merely unsure how much motivation I have at this time to spearhead the idea and push it.

Have you ever seen me state (in this game) that I think that name claiming is a bad idea? I've kept some cards closer to my chest than others, and there are some things I am unwilling to completely confirm or deny, but I haven't ever stated anything but support for the name claim or at least discussion on the topic.

Second, you say that proposing the idea is not scummy, yet my entire point for bringing it up was BECAUSE I wanted discussion and debate on the topic BEFORE any final game-changing decisions were forced to be made. You seem to think this is a good idea as well, yet you seem to both fault me for doing it and praise that it was done. It frankly confuses me.

I'm not selectively reading the thread, I've read the whole thing, however I am selectively responding. No one can or should respond to every single possible issue that may or may not be brought up in the thread. Anyone could be charged with that and I find it a bogus charge that you've added to your list to make it more robust.

Lastly, you say I've gotten "much quieter", yet I've posted nearly every day since the game started (save yesterday), and many days multiple times. You may perceive that I've "gotten quieter", but frankly the facts don't support this assumption.