Mini 931: Supreme Court Mafia (Game Over post 682)

[Green Crayons]

I'm curious to see how close to real life the roles in this game shake out. I couldn't find what the trial court said (only the Michigan CoA), but there seems to be a discrepancy between what happened in the Real World and what's pertinent to this game. Did a little bit of research just to see if we might be able to rely upon some real world facts to help verify claims, but I'm not too sure that we will be able to do so.

[Green Crayons]

I will answer once answers have been collected from all other players.

I also choose not to randomly vote.

Why are you waiting for everyone else to answer before you vote? Are you going to vote based off of answers to your questions (as the second line quoted seems to hint)? Why these questions?

Well, as a matter of full disclosure, I *am* a law student, so if you end up with any law questions, let me know...

If you don't mind me asking: What school/year? Feel free to tell me to stuff it since it doesn't relate to game, I'm just curious.

Setup is interesting I think. The CIA agent is the serial killer obviously, but who are the mafia?

I'm sorry, where did it say that there is a serial killer?

[Green Crayons]

vote: Bub B

- his answers try to both please and give nothing away.

Can you please explain this in further detail? It's seems like an overly broad claim that could, on its face, apply to just about any set of answers to the questions; which, in and of themselves, do not seem to really promote "giving [something] away" in answering them.

To be honest, I don't really even know what is going on in the real world in the suprememe court, I am from UK and we don't get much news on that... (as long as I don't watch fox lol)

Unless if it's a big case that everyone learns about in 8th grade Social Students (

Brown v. Board of Education

, etc.) or a case that is especially important to a lawyer's specific field of law (and even then, it'd have to be an incredibly important and/or recent case), nobody here can recite to you the findings of a SC case off of the top of their head, either. I just did a five minute google look-up to see the history of the case - something anyone from anywhere can do, no intricate knowledge of the US Supreme Court needed.

By the by, you mind find this humorous: Power Rangers Promo. One of the TV stations is playing the original Power Ranger episodes every Saturday morning (and passing them off as "new" by adding some really cheap graphics). And, yes, I

have

been watching them. Brings back memories.

I usually answer last because, if I don't, several people will basically parrot my answers.

What's to stop them for parroting someone else's answers? Regardless of whose answers are being parroted, couldn't you just call the parrot out on his parroting? (

parrot parrot parrot parrot

!)

I'm still curious: Are you going to base your non-random vote off of the answers themselves (as your first post seemed to indicate)? Or am I just extrapolating too much from the juxtaposition of those two phrases?

I'm a 1L at Mercer - are you in law school/looking at it?

Heading off to W&M in August.

[Green Crayons]

Well, sure, they can parrot somebody else's answers...but

I've noticed a unique pattern that sometimes happens when mafia players answer the questions

. I'll explain exactly what I'm looking for at the end.

Well, I wasn't going to answer the questions, but far be it from me to hold up scientific fact finding. I'm on the edge of my proverbial seat for the explanation.

1) How much experience do you have playing Mafia?
2) How would you describe your playstyle?
3) What do you value the most in making decisions in Mafia?
4) Do you expect the Spanish Inquisition?
5) Do you prefer playing as mafia or as town?
6) How many games are you playing in at the moment?
7) What do you consider to be your greatest strength as town? As mafia?

1) Several years off and on.
2) Varied. Long winded.
3) Logic. Reasoning.
4) I don't like that movie.
5) No preference. I did get my favorite role in this game, though, so that's a plus.
6) As of this morning, only this one.
7) For both: the ability to be well spoken. It generally helps persuade people.

[Green Crayons]

Fish: I see. That is to say: I understand your criticism, I agree in the abstract but I don't know if it applies to this situation. But thank you for explaining.

Setup is interesting I think. The CIA agent is the serial killer obviously, but who are the mafia?

I'm sorry, where did it say that there is a serial killer?

I'm still curious where you determined the CIA agent is "obviously" the serial killer?


And hello Yos.

[Green Crayons]

Alright. The reasons that I asked each of the questions...

You have suggested that you have asked questions like this in other games. Have you put forward analysis like this in those games? Has it ever been helpful in catching scum? If so, can you please link to those examples?


-----

I was skimming all the other answers and thought to myself "no one is really reading these". So I figured I'd test my theory and check how closely Netopolis was reading them too.

This is not scummy. Failing to answer:

Setup is interesting I think. The CIA agent is the serial killer obviously, but who are the mafia?

I'm sorry, where did it say that there is a serial killer?

I'm still curious where you determined the CIA agent is "obviously" the serial killer?

...is.


-----

Something else I am going to do this game, just a heads up: I will not be explaining any of my votes. The person needs to figure out what is making them suspicious and provide a defense. If I tell them what is suspicious about them then their defense can be created easier.

This idea is atrocious.

mod:

I wasn't even thinking. My honeymoon is this Thursday (May 4th). It'll last until next Tuesday (May 9th). I

probably

won't be posting during this time. Please forgive me - and let me stay in your game. Seeing as how things are just starting, I would like to think I won't be missing much and I will be able to return without so much as a hiccup in my activity after that. /grovel

[Green Crayons]

Green Crayon: This is a relatively new thing that I've been trying, so most of the games are in progress. There's one really good example, though:
http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=12735

I did a quick scan of your assessment relative to who actually was scum and it doesn't do much to persuade me that your Q&A session is a bellwether for scum catching.

All of that said, I guess I could see Darox's responses being akin to scum pulling the "Haha, yeah I'm scum!" gambit (which, I'll note, is different from why you voted him). I don't know. Question/Response is just so forced and artificial, I find it hard to take any suspicions taken away from them with more than a grain of salt.


-----

I'm afraid you guys are on a need to know basis. And right now, you don't need to know.

Right. So you're hinting that you're a SK-cop (at least that's what I'm getting from this dialogue), but only a sloppy SK-cop would have dropped that fact in the first few pages of the game. So far, you don't seem to be of the sloppy play sort, so that's not adding up for me. Furthermore, the fact that you're being vague and non-committal to just what exactly it is that you're claiming as fact (and so early, at that) further underscores my suspicion. You've already added in another layer of suspicion (that there are two killing groups) and already defamed one claim (the CIA Agent) without actually having committed to those suggestions.

Ultimately, I'm perplexed why you think clouding daytime discussion with cryptic messages (at best) or subtle misdirection (at worse) is going to help the town at all.


-----


I would like pwnman to explain in further detail his Post 52.

[Green Crayons]

On a side note, I'm goign to get pman and pwnman confused all game, I see it now.

I have come to this conclusion myself. I have already done it at least twice already.

[Green Crayons]

I don't think Jack is scum or a SK right now.

I don't think most of the people on his case are scum either, although it would hardly surprise me if at least one of them was.

-2L on page 6 means

at least

one of them is scum. The speed and self-conviction of the wagon undermines its legitimacy.

[Green Crayons]

Separated by individual:

I would like pwnman to explain in further detail his Post 52.

I would like this answered.

-----

I have no idea what to think of Jack.

Also, I really don't like the way Pwnman and jason jumped on the Jack wagon. Pwnman moreso.

vote: pwnman

If you don't know what you think of Jack, how do you have an opinion of someone who voted for something you have no opinion about? This looks like posturing to make a "good" vote.

-----

So how do you know it's CIA?

It seems like this is from a role PM.

If you don't wish to comment there's only one thing to do =(

Vote: Jack

Why are you sad that you're voting Jack?

Also, why are you reversing the temporal order of Jack quotes in Post 130? What exactly is your "*HEAD DESK*" supposed to convey?

-----

If Jack is scum, then Fishey should be the next one who goes to the gallows. While I understand what he's trying to say, Jack's play has gone far and beyond what is "normal" anti-town play.

He is refusing to answer questions

, and (as has been just mentioned) the whole CIA agent thing looks like a scum slip. He then tried to ride out the wave by just playing poorly. Right now, I don't see any reason why we shouldn't lynch Jack

At this point in time (Post 125), to what questions are you referring that he has not answered?

-----

·

Jack is being too literal (lol @: ""question" v. "questions") to actually be helpful.

·

Jason's parroting of Neto's Post 100 - not six minutes after Neto's post - is duly noted. Also noted is Neto's lack of acknowledgment of this parroting, even though we've already had a conversation about parrots and the like this game.

·

Bud's parroting of Jason's parroting is duly noted. Neto's handwave is actually mildly humorous in the face of the fact that people are doing what he was afraid that they would do: mimic his actions.

·

I don't like Jason's Post 120; it's forcing the Jack-wagon for a full blown lynch on D1, Page 5. His Post 124 follow-up is

really

forcing the issue - "how do you know the setup" in the face of Jack already explaining he was just making it up to start conversation makes Jason look willfully obtuse in order to keep his vote on Jack.

[Green Crayons]

Bub: Can you specify what questions, exactly, you're faulting Jack for not answering? For example, Jack explains in Post 104 how he "knew" about the CIA SK. But in your Post 108, you're wanting him to explain, presumably, what he just told you in 104 (a post made an hour prior to your 108). Is there another question that was being posited to Jack that he was failing to respond to which I missed? Furthermore, you fault him for refusing to answer several questions in Post 125, so I'm hoping you would please explain what questions at this point he had not answered.

So how do you know it's CIA?

It seems like this is from a role PM.

If you don't wish to comment there's only one thing to do =(

Vote: Jack

Why are you sad that you're voting Jack?

Also, why are you reversing the temporal order of Jack quotes in Post 130? What exactly is your "*HEAD DESK*" supposed to convey?

I would appreciate it if Dark answered my questions.

[Green Crayons]

When I left I had Bub and DarkLight as two people I was hoping would get more pressure. Glad to see that happened with at least the former. Just checking in to let you folks know that I'm here and have skimmed through the thread. Will give it a proper once over after I eat my dinner and watch some Lost.


Oh, and the honeymoon was perfect.

[Green Crayons]

If you don't know what you think of Jack, how do you have an opinion of someone who voted for something you have no opinion about? This looks like posturing to make a "good" vote.

I'm not sure what the problem is here. Pwnman's vote didn't look natural or like he was really suspicious of Jack's play. I don't need an opinion of the player being voted to see something fishy about the way a vote is placed.

I find it hard to think that you can come up with a meaningful opinion about someone's vote when you don't have a feeling about the player they're voting for. Of course, you're original assertion (that you "[didn't] like the way Pwnman and jason jumped on the Jack wagon. Pwnman moreso.") is far from meaningful. In fact, it's incredibly vague (which further underscores my posturing suspicion). Why did you not like pwnman's and jason's votes on Jack (now that you're clarifying your suspicion: what made it look unnatural)? Why pwnman's more so than jason's?

vote: Bub

. I'm happy with this vote after reading the back and forths.

[Green Crayons]

Ugh, why are we talking about another game? My drunk head does not compute anything outside of this game. Sorry.


Also, why does Yos keep buddying up with me? At first I was flattered that he thinks I'm obvtown. Now I'm with jason and am suspicious.

[Green Crayons]

I am glad you finally have some opinions!

Care to clarify how Jack has not been opinionated until 284/286?

[Green Crayons]

Read him. He very carefully has been avoiding commenting on anyone in this game.

Pretty sure he was the first one to lay out the major points against Bub.

[Green Crayons]

I can't say for certain. Because he hasn't attempted to vote me or otherwise turn too much attention to me, I would assume he doesn't find me suspicious at the moment.

That said, it's not like:

Green Crayons

- Good questions, good answers.

prob-town

...is saying a great deal, either. Pot, meet kettle.

[Green Crayons]

He's made his position known: he believes Bub is scum. He explained this in full detail. Additionally, when asked, he said that he believes Neto is town. To criticize him for not making his opinions known means you're faulting him for not putting out a baseline opinion of all 9 of the other players, including the ones that he finds town, and then continually updating that opinion for your future reference.

Well, congratulations. In this game, just about everyone except yourself meets your criteria of suspicion. It's one thing to want people to voice their opinions. It's another to declare that anyone not telling all of their opinions about every player and continually updating that opinion for your benefit are obviously acting suspiciously. I mean, hell: I know myself to be town but I've only voiced opinions about 4 or 5 other players. That doesn't make me suspicious, it means I'm focusing my attention so that if/when I die people can reread my posts and see what I would like for them to focus on instead of having to filter through a whole bunch of filler. You're really tilting at windmills, here.

Also, nice shift in stance: "He's suspicious for not having opinions!" --> "He's suspicious for not commenting on anyone in this game!" --> "He's suspicious for laying out points against the player he most finds to be scum but not voicing his opinion about all of the other players such as you, GC,

who is coincidentally challenging me on this issue so I though it would be good to throw you in there as an example but I forgot to realize that I have only voiced a six-word opinion which really undercuts my whole point about this guy not providing substantive opinions since my own contribution about GC is pretty much equivalent to being entirely insubstantial

!"

[Green Crayons]

Not sure why people always assume "buddying" whenever someone gets a town read on someone else; has that ever actually worked as a scum gambit?

My main issue is the fact that you

keep

saying that I'm obvtown even though there's no real change in anyone's attitude towards me. Basically, it was pointless cheerleading that makes me feel good about myself... which is suspicious. My ego is large enough as it already is.

And I don't know if it works or not, but I know scum do it plenty. It's something I'll sometimes utilize when I'm scum, and I just finished a game where I spotted scum doing it to another town. Whether or not it works, surely you're not questioning the fact that scum attempt to buddy up with town.

[Green Crayons]

Oh well. Nice sweep scum.