Mini 988 - Small Town Mafia GAME OVER

[0x1de]

I think there's definitely at least one scum in Nacho, 0x, and Exilon... possibly more.

I see that, but why isn't Concerned in the list. I assume that's because you think he's town.

Why are you pleased with the death of your prime suspect?

Because I won't waste anything by following a bad lead.

What part don't you understand?

It's just that you referred to post numbers, which are no more. Thanks for the clarification.

@0xide: To be clear, you think that bussing on the Butterfly wagon was highly likely, so you're going to vote me with everyone else's reasoning?

Yes. This is my first time out of the newbie games, so the lack of known set-up unnerves me. I guess that there were at least 3 mafia. One dead, one on the wagon, and one wavering.

DavidParker back in a different role. Bound to be confusing. Let's hope you take part more.

[Zachrulez]

@0x

I'm not sure that Concerned's vote on Butterfly was a bus. I found him scummy in a manner that it appeared like he was distancing from what would eventually be a butterfly town flip. This did not happen, so the tone of what I saw doesn't really match up with Concerned scum. I would probably put him somewhere in the middle in level of suspicion.

That is how I see Concerned right now

[jasonT1981]

my nets been out for most of the past few days, not sure why but a lot in the area were having outages, catch up coming soon.

[Exilon]

Ewww Oxide's is getting more and more awful <<

If it's not a strong point, why shout about it? Looks like you are implying things whilst disowning them.

POINTS ARE POINTS, PERIOD. They are all worth mentioning, strong or not. As such, you can also obviously weight them in terms of what you find stronger or not, because other people are not magical guessing witches. "I found this wrong, but I don't find it as relevant as this one. Still a valid point, so it has some weight."
WHAT DO YOU HAVE SOME KIND OF PROBLEM WITH CAPS LOCK CAUSE I FIND IT COOL. People write in different ways. Some like to add a little comical relief to their sentences. some don't. Bla bla.

First up your argument is flawed in several places because it depends on Butters being my scumbuddy. That's like saying "if 0x is scum blah blah then 0x is scum".

I don't understand what you're getting at here.

When you make any argument, there are some things you take as read. The problem comes when you make assumptions that are false to begin with. The worst thing is when you make an assumption and then use the argument to prove the initial assumption was true. See quotes below:

Ox thinks Zach is looking bad (cuz he is voting his

scum buddy

)

Your

scum buddy

, Butters, put Ex at L-2! Why didn’t you consider him to be “eager to lynch?!”

Backpedaling + Ignoring his

scum buddy

who almost got Ex killed

How do Zach and Concerned differ from Butterfly and what voting patterns are you referring to?

I think Cuet would be the right guy to answer this one

, but on any case, you're saying his argument is flawed because he's assuming you're scum, which

"is obviously"

not true. Is that correct or near what you mean?

That would be a right pain to go through. If you didn't see it, then forget it.

Ah, ok. Thanks for the effort. Or lack thereof.

[0x1de]

WHAT DO YOU HAVE SOME KIND OF PROBLEM WITH CAPS LOCK CAUSE I FIND IT COOL.

Grow up. All caps is shouting.

you're saying his argument is flawed because he's assuming you're scum, which

"is obviously"

not true. Is that correct or near what you mean?.

You miss the point. If you build a house of cards but the bottom one is wrong, then the whole thing comes tumbling down.

That would be a right pain to go through. If you didn't see it, then forget it.

Ah, ok. Thanks for the effort. Or lack thereof.

Tell you what, you go back through all those pages and make your own mind up.

[Exilon]

WHAT DO YOU HAVE SOME KIND OF PROBLEM WITH CAPS LOCK CAUSE I FIND IT COOL.

Grow up. All caps is shouting.

AND IS THEREFORE "COMICAL". (btw shouting is not exactly = angry / riled up).

you're saying his argument is flawed because he's assuming you're scum, which

"is obviously"

not true. Is that correct or near what you mean?.

You miss the point. If you build a house of cards but the bottom one is wrong, then the whole thing comes tumbling down.

If that's not what you mean, then clarify. I've understood so far that you say his argument is flawed due to a supposed initial assumption that you find to be wrong, what I haven't been able to understand yet is exactly

what assumption is wrong.

I've been asking for clarification for quite a while now. Saying I'm wrong (or that Cuet is wrong) isn't going to help you unless you can state why (and preferably in a way we can understand.). You might have stated it once in your initial defense of Cuet's post, but the message you were trying to convey clearly didn't go through.

That would be a right pain to go through. If you didn't see it, then forget it.

Ah, ok. Thanks for the effort. Or lack thereof.

Tell you what, you go back through all those pages and make your own mind up.[/quote]

Make my mind up? On what?
Tell you what, you tell me what you're seeing in the voting patterns that I'm not seeing (hence me asking), and what supports your opinion. Then I can decide if what you're saying actually has some merit or is garbage reasoning. (like I'm about to do.).

[0x1de]

I was attacking the argument, not the assumption. Consider a chainsaw defence or a policy lynch, it's not important what the initial reason is, it's the

style

of the argument.

Zach and Concerned seem eager for an early lynch.

You seem so eager for me to justify this because Cueti brought it up. Did you know that I said this on the 10th June? Here. That was on page 5.

Why do you just accept Cueti's claims?

[Zachrulez]

Being wrong doesn't automatically make one scum.

[Zachrulez]

The problem with the argument is that it's not presented as evidence that 0x is scum, but rather as 'proof' to the assumption that 0x is scum.

There's no proof, there's evidence and likelihood. Town's can't be certain. (Except in rare cases.) They can only decide what is most likely and lynch on that path.

[Super Smash Bros. Fan]

Yes, there are exceptions. But newbies playing like veterans is just that - an exception.

Even if they are exceptions, the point is that they do happen.

Even a VI would play better than this...?

Yes, yes they would. VI's not like The Butterfly at least put some effort toward playing the game. They actually care about the game and is willing to help find scum. I saw no motivation in The Butterfly's play to scum hunt, he has done almost nothing in this game. This is the worst kind of VI's in this game, so much that they are scummy.

Did you make an effort to see if Butterfly posted anywhere else?

Yes, he did post in Mini 992 and Newbie 966 (You're hosting that game, how could you not know?).

Analyzed his actions? He didn't post any content, and his play was unreadable.

Noticed above that I said "almost nothing". If he was town, while he gave us very little information to work on, we can at least attempt to analyze it.

Who he suspected? The largest bandwagon that wasn't him.

If he was town, prehaps we could have analyzed his suspects (JasonT1981 and Antonio) and if we were lucky enough, build a case off them.

What information would we have?

We could have at least looked at his suspects (Despite is being OMGUS and lurker hunting) and gain some more information out of them.

You're offtopic.

You questioned me on if The Butterfly sounded like a veteren and I responded. That question sounds similar to talking about his grammar. If that is the case, how is my post off-topic while yours isn't?

Why?

Chainsaw defenese is stronger then bussing because of this:
Bussing is simply killing your partner off to gain town creds and to avoid suspicion. Chainsaw defense requires more strategic scum planning and wanting to save your scum partner for another day. Your chainsaw defense on The Butterfly was definently scummy and of course it's noted. Thus it is a stronger connection then bussing.

You meant that?

Yes, that's exactly what I have been trying to say to you for the PAST few days.

Fist of all, that was on page 1 or 2 or something.

That doesn't mean we can't use that as evidence, so don't make excuses.

Second of all, the fact that the first quote is 100% sarcasm kinda ruins the contridiction there.

I'll explain why you contradicted yourself:

You said that you weren't going to participate in RVS voting, but then said "I'm done with my RVS.". On top of that, the first post from my perspective indicated that you had hidden agenda with that post.

[Zachrulez]

EBWOP, some minor cleanup.

The problem with the argument is that it's not presented as evidence that 0x is scum, but rather as 'proof' to the assumption that 0x is scum.

There's no proof, there's evidence and likelihood. Towns can't be certain. (Except in rare cases.) They can only decide what is most likely and lynch on that path.

[0x1de]

Chainsaw defenese is stronger then bussing because of this:
Bussing is simply killing your partner off to gain town creds and to avoid suspicion. Chainsaw defense requires more strategic scum planning and wanting to save your scum partner for another day. Your chainsaw defense on The Butterfly was definently scummy and of course it's noted. Thus it is a stronger connection then bussing.

I don't agree with this at all. Both are opportunistic, and bussing is the only one that might be planned for.

[Exilon]

I think that evidence someone is scum is the same thing as showing 'proof' under the assumption that a person is scum.
In any case, to have an evidence, you have to assume that a certain player is scum, for example.

They are presented in different ways, but they're both effective, in my opinion.

[jasonT1981]

bloody hell, all these text walls are making it hard to catch up. Right now my top 3 suspects would be Ox, Ex and Nacho.. Part of me thinks the Ox/Ex arguing is being used to distance each other if they are both scum.

[Zachrulez]

bloody hell, all these text walls are making it hard to catch up. Right now my top 3 suspects would be Ox, Ex and Nacho.. Part of me thinks the Ox/Ex arguing is being used to distance each other if they are both scum.

Here's a more summarized conclusion for easier reading:

Vote for Nacho.

[jasonT1981]

Nacho still is my number one suspect... however if he is not scum... Ox/Ex are the pairing. I would put anything on it

[Zachrulez]

I'm not that interested in lynching 0x today.

I wouldn't be broken up over an Exilon lynch though.

[0x1de]

Nacho still is my number one suspect... however if he is not scum... Ox/Ex are the pairing. I would put anything on it

What, even a vote?

[Zachrulez]

Nacho still is my number one suspect... however if he is not scum... Ox/Ex are the pairing. I would put anything on it

What, even a vote?

Score for wit. I cracked up.

[Zachrulez]

I think there's definitely at least one scum in Nacho, 0x, and Exilon... possibly more.

That's great, Zach.
Why?

Day Two Vote Count #2

(as of post # 470)

Cuetlachtli - [0]

Exilon - [0]

Zachrulez - [0]

jasonT1981 - [0]

0x1de - [2]

Exilon, Cuetlachtli

Nachomamma8 - [3]

Zachrulez, Super Smash Bros. Fan, 0x1de

Super Smash Bros. Fan - [0]

DavidParker - [0]

Concerned - [0]

Antonio - [1]

Concerned

Not Voting - [4] Antonio, DavidParker, jasonT1981, Nachomamma8

Oh heeeeeeeey, it seems like Exilon agrees with me.

[jasonT1981]

lol yea, im re-reading day 1 today/tomorrow to see if I missed anything. hence why no vote.

[Nachomamma8]

Even if they are exceptions, the point is that they do happen.

I don't know about you, but I play Mafia by the rules, not the exceptions.

Yes, yes they would. VI's not like The Butterfly at least put some effort toward playing the game. They actually care about the game and is willing to help find scum. I saw no motivation in The Butterfly's play to scum hunt, he has done almost nothing in this game. This is the worst kind of VI's in this game, so much that they are scummy.

...no. Just... no.

Yes, he did post in Mini 992 and Newbie 966 (You're hosting that game, how could you not know?).

If only you realized what I was trying to say here...

If he was town, prehaps we could have analyzed his suspects (JasonT1981 and Antonio) and if we were lucky enough, build a case off them.

You would trust Butterfly's reads if he was town?:

You questioned me on if The Butterfly sounded like a veteren and I responded. That question sounds similar to talking about his grammar. If that is the case, how is my post off-topic while yours isn't?

You said:
Butterfly could be asneaky veteran mafia player.
I said: Does {Link} sound like a veteran to you?
You said: No, but grammar should be the least of his worries. I agree that he has got to improve on his game, but in Mafia, we should be more concerned about his play, not his grammer.

Chainsaw defenese is stronger then bussing because of this:

Chainsaw defense is a stronger tell when a mafia member isn't so far gone. It was apparent that he wasn't going to improve (thus, he wasn't going to survive long), so why would I incriminate myself just to save him for one more day?

That doesn't mean we can't use that as evidence, so don't make excuses.

YOU VOTED SOMEONE BECAUSE OF THEIR AVATAR, MEANING YOU'RE OPPORTUNISTIC SCUM. AND DONT SAY THAT IT WAS THE RVS EITHER, OR OTHERWISE YOU'RE JUST MAKING EXCUSES.


For now,

Vote: Zac hrulez

Until he actually explains why I'm scum.

[Nachomamma8]

Actually, nevermind. Zach isn't scum.

I doubt both scum were on my wagon, and I doubt both scum bussed Butterfly.
Antonio is town because Butterfly tried to pass the lynch off on him.
Meaning, 0x is the scum who didn't bus. So,

Unvote, Vote: 0xide

The scum who did bus is probably DavidParker or Concerned.

[Cuetlachtli]

The scum who did bus is probably DavidParker or Concerned.

DavidParker is dead. Maybe you're the VI.


Anyways....hey Zach, did you consider this post before you hammered Butters?

Butterfly post your reads on EVERYBODY before you are hammered. k thx.

[Nachomamma8]

NOTE: DavidParker has offered to replace in for foobert.