Mini 967 - Mafia War (Over)

[pman5595]

confirm

[pman5595]

*yawns*

hi guys.

Vote: stef

because stef has the same amount of letters as scum.

[pman5595]

Personally, I think Empking is overreacting to something that I think is quite benign.

[pman5595]

There is no such thing as "benign" this early in the game, considering there is a lack of information thus far and even very small tells are worth pursuing.

I agree in principle, but this case does not apply. It wasn't a "small tell", it wasn't a tell at all. I was commenting on how I didn't like the way Empking was making something out of nothing.

@pman: what's your take on the game so far, premature as it may be?

The player I like the least right now is Empking, like I said for trying to make something out of nothing. I don't really have a town read on Katsuki but my gut doesn't say scum. There is something weird going on with Exemption with his hypocrisy over Unsight's post. I would like him to explain that.

unvote: stef

[pman5595]

If you call acting overdefensive to a vote (such as calling the voter an angry child) or trying to minimize a serious vote by saying its because the voter doesn't like cupcakes, or an inability to contribute constructively despite getting not a small number of votes. "nothing" . Then I'd ask you to look up the definition of nothing so you'll stop being suspicious of me.

The thing is, I didn't and still don't see that specific post by katsuki over defensive. The post about cupcakes seemed like an attempt at humor, and it was early enough in the game not to mean anything, at least to me. For the third reason, that was true, at the time of this post. He was not being serious enough (although he has gotten a lot better over the last couple of posts). The funny thing is, why have you never mentioned that before that post? When I have played as scum, there have been many times where I should have been caught using very vague reason as to why I am voting someone, a reason that I had not mentioned before. This seems a case that could possibly be similar to that.

If you don't have a town read on Katsuki then why would you (

continue to

) defend him? If I was in your line of thought I would be more then happy to see how Katsuki responds without speaking for him.

Now that he has started acting a bit more seriously, I do have a town read on him. Before, I thought that the things he said that made people get a scum read on him were not scum tells, so I defended him. I am more than happy to let him defend himself, but if suspicions are put on someone whom I do not find suspicious, I will defend them.

As far as pman goes, I have a small tell in a possible chainsaw defense.

that tell is only valid if katsuki is scum.

[pman5595]

How is "an inability to contribute constructively despite getting not a small number of votes." vague?

It's just saying that he is not contributing enough, which is vague because there is no specific amount that constitutes bad contribution.

[pman5595]

If I keep getting this amount of homework I will not be able to provide content until the weekend (meaning Friday afternoon). I might be able to do something in the next few days but that is when to expect my content.

[pman5595]

sorry about that little absence.

I mentioned policy lynches because if we had to lynch someone without having the slightest idea if they're scum, it would be better to lynch someone who didn't make serious posts until after page 3, than it would be to lynch someone who is contributing nicely. And I'm going to take a look at pman, along with just about everybody.

no. bad. you do not policy lynch unless there are extreme circumstances. Not being able to find scum is definitely not reason to fall back on a policy lynch, especially not 6 pages into day 1. And that is a terrible reason to policy lynch as well.

Vote: Me=Weird

[pman5595]

Mod: Prod on zodiark13 please, it's been 5 days since his last post.

Sorry guys, have to help set up for horse show in a week.

Wait you have time to workout how long it has been since zodiark13 has posted but don't have enough time to post anything that comes close to a defence.

[pman5595]

7. Pman

Defending katsuki, jumping on a bandwagon taking that player to L-2 with the following reasoning: Your logic is flawed, you are scum, you must die. Nothing else.

@pman5595: Bad logic => scum? Also, who else do you suspect? Why?

Me=weird is giving a gut noobscum tell to me. Policy lynching is never a good option, and always a last resort. Him bringing it up as early as he did seems like scum looking for an easy lynch, without much info given from day 1. Also, if Me=weird is scum, katsuki is almost certainly town, as scum just wouldn't suggest a policy lynch on their scumpal. It is bad logic AND scummy. As for others: the little argument between Unsight and AC is insightful, but I cannot figure out which one is scum. I read the points of each and go "oh right, the other is scum" >.> One is most likely scum.

[pman5595]

@pman - What are the "extreme circumstances" that warrant a policy lynch?

blatantly working against one's win condition.

[pman5595]

prod received. Unsight is becoming more scummy, but me=weird is worse. Unsight seems like scum trying to talk their way out of a corner. Very defensive feeling posts.