Mafia 119: MURDER AT HOTEL DEATH(GAME OVER)

[curiouskarmadog]

omg, walls of text...hope to get to this tomorrow

[RedCoyote]

Vote Count

silverbullet999(0) -

Jack(3)

- a2rudeboy, curiouskarmadog, SnakePlissken

evilpacman18(1)

- PranaDevil
curiouskarmadog(0) -
LynchMePls(0) -
horrordude0215(0) -

vollkan(1)

- evilpacman18
a2rudeboy(0) -
Pomegranate(0) -
SnakePlissken(0) -

PranaDevil(3)

- LynchMePls, Jack, silverbullet999

Not Voting(3)

- vollkan, Pomegranate, horrordude0215

With 11 alive, it is 6 to lynch

Deadline: November 1st, 2010, 2:00 AM, Central Standard Time

[PranaDevil]

It's not a strawman Vollkan, to say something is scummy means you have to show why scum would do it more often than town. LMP has failed to do that at any point. What he's essentially saying is "I don't like what you said, therefore I refuse to accept it as the truth, and thus it is scummy". I mean... seriously? How is that not being noticed here? Just because LMP feels that it was a "craptastic response", not that he has once explained why, nor why it is somehow false (Has LMP gone to check on the UKFF to find out? 'course not, he's just bullshitting), it's taken as fact.

But meh, I'm officially giving up on this game, half of the players aren't even attempting to play mafia, while the majority of the rest have done a vanishing act.

[vollkan]

It's not a strawman Vollkan, to say something is scummy means you have to show why scum would do it more often than town. LMP has failed to do that at any point. What he's essentially saying is "I don't like what you said, therefore I refuse to accept it as the truth, and thus it is scummy". I mean... seriously? How is that not being noticed here? Just because LMP feels that it was a "craptastic response", not that he has once explained why, nor why it is somehow false (Has LMP gone to check on the UKFF to find out? 'course not, he's just bullshitting), it's taken as fact.

But meh, I'm officially giving up on this game, half of the players aren't even attempting to play mafia, while the majority of the rest have done a vanishing act.

The strawman is that he wasn't accusing of you of being cautious but, rather, of a justification which makes no sense.

[LimMePls]

He was at 4 votes in a large game and you were going to be gone for 24 hours. How on EARTH could you be afraid of a quick lynch? It's preposterous. Your refusal to clarify it from that craptastic response is bad.

Are you suggesting scum are more likely to be more cautious than town then?

No, I'm saying your explanation is nonsense. There should have been 0 worry about a quicklynch if you were going to be gone 24 hours and he only had 4 votes on him.

It's looking like you weren't wrong, what I'm challenging is that it was an 'assumption' at all, and not informed minority. You made this comment D1, and I assert there is no way you should have had enough information as a townie to assume 1 scum team.

So you were of the assumption it was two teams right off the bat were you?

A few questions, seeing as you chose to ignore the one I had asked there, I'll ask that again too:
Is more than 1 scum team normal in a large normal game on this site? This is the first large normal I've played in, and outside of themed games, all games have only had one scum team that I've played on here thus far.

Would scum normally be told if there are two scum teams? In my experience they are only told of their own team, though admittedly the only games I've played on here with two scum teams have been Kise's Square/Enix themed games.

Absolutely I assumed it was two teams. I've been in 1 Large Normal and at least 5 Large themes (that I remember off the top of my head) and in all but 1 there were 2 scum teams (the one had a scum team and a super strong SK). So yes, I'd say more than 1 scum team in large games is standard for Large games.

The scum aren't told there is more than 1 team, but they can use the size of their team and the strength of their roles to easily tell if there is only 1 scum team. For instance, in star wars, which was a 22 player game, we (the Empire mafia) were only 3 players (although all with PRs), so we knew right away that there must be a second scum team out there.

You let it fall away because you brought up suspicions and then did 0 pushing, questioning, or scumhunting of it at all. You'd bring it up, and then move on to other things. You even specifically used the words "leave him for now". The only time you got "massively pissed off" about it was near deadline, and all the hate was moving towards NC. Very easy for scum to sit around at that point and go "but guys, why aren't we voting this guy" who is your scum buddy. I don't like the way you played towards Esp at all, it reads like distancing scum.

Everytime you check through a thread you unvote first? That would be ridiculous. If you don't do it everytime, then why did you do it this time? This is part of what I meant when I said I wanted you to elaborate on this. It looks suspicious.

Go check my ISO of the time frame, I unvoted and then wound up being away for a while. When I can't guarentee to be able to check through the thread instantly, and I want to check through it, then yes, I will remove my vote so if it takes a few days there's no chance of my vote being on a potential bad lynch.

Is this somehow scummy then? Because it to me seems like perfectly logical behaviour.

It looked strange to me when rereading the game, which distorts time a bit. I'll have to go back and look at it. This by itself may not be a sign of scum.

It's really simple. You said Looker was pointing out things that needed pointing out. At the time you said it, the thing that Looker had pointed out was the watcher claim. If that isn't what you meant by Looker's "pointing things out" then YOU are the one who needs to explain what you meant. "Pointing things out" is vague, so I had to infer what you meant. And since what Looker was pointing out directly at that point of time in the thread was the watcher claim. It's not a misrep if you don't make yourself clear in the first damn place. Nice try though.

Pardon?

All Looker had pointed out was the watcher claim? Are we telling lies here? I think we are, considering the post I linked you to was me stating that Looker had pointed stuff out in his previous long post, which, as it happens, was before I pointed out Looker was "obv. town".

Which means not only had I explained what I meant already to CKD, I had also pointed it out to you in that post.

Nice try though.

No you haven't. Try again. What specifically was Looker pointing out that you thought was pro-town?

I thought it was obv. It reads like this in my head "LMP is making a good case, but CD isn't scum cause I know he isn't, but I'm going to say that I'm going to go read his posts further, so that if I need to push CD as a mislynch I can. I'll even add language about doing the ISO when I 'have enough free time' so no one holds me to it. It'll be really nice to have an updated vote count so I know if this is a really viable mislynch or not". What ever came of "have a further look at your posts"? You never commented on it after this post and before CD's mislynch. Did you never 'have enough free time' for it? You did apparently find time to distance from the CD wagon once it was about to happen here:

So what you mean is you made it all up? Gotcha.

LOL. Very cute. No, I didn't make it all up. That is what your words read like. I ask anyone to go back and look at it.

Yet somehow, between "I'm going to have to take a further look at CD" and his lynch, we have 7 posts from you and not one mention of that further look into CoolDog. We do have this:

zwet, why are you only commenting on the CoolDoG wagon after it's too late for anything to change? If you felt he was town why didn't you speak up when he was due to be lynched?

Irony, how delicious.

I felt he was scummy, but felt Looker was more scummy by that point, yes earlier he seemed obv town, but that day he needed to actually do something rather than be as useless as Jack has been all game.

So you appear to dodge the central issue. You said I was making a good case on CD, and that you'd look into it 'if you had time'. 7 posts later (clearly you have time because you are able to make a Looker-scum argument) you still haven't commented on CD. Did you ever do that reread of CD? If not, why did you say you would?

@Everyone else: This is pretty strong evidence of distancing from a CD mislynch. I think it's really scummy behavior, and is enough to swing him all by itself.

You're informed scum that knew there was only 1 scum team.

Point. I made it.

As I said above, from my knowledge (which is two whole themed games) scum aren't even told whether it's 1 team or more than 1 team. So how would scum even know if there was only 1 scum team?

Sense, make some.

Asked and answered. Your assertion that scum wouldn't know there is more than 1 team is hilarious. It's pretty obvious how scum would know.

Best ending ever. After an entire post I devote to showing scummy behavior, you're going to claim I didn't give a reason? That is absurd. Nice deflection.

You didn't give a reason, you posted a lot of stuff that was nothing more than fluff that you have failed to explain WHY any of it is scummy. Why would scum be more wary of a quick lynch than town?

Why would scum unvote before checking the thread but town wouldn't?

You have failed miserably to explain WHY the behavious is "scummy" you've just pointed out a ton of stuff that is essentially "why do you play like that? I don't" and sorry, but I'm not going to bow down and follow your playstyle, I'll play how I choose to play, and I tend to play a bit more cautious than most. But how that's scummy I have no effing clue.

All of this is just completely ridiculous. How can anyone call that post fluff? Simply absurd.

But meh, I'm officially giving up on this game, half of the players aren't even attempting to play mafia, while the majority of the rest have done a vanishing act.

And now you're giving up. This is easy people.

[PranaDevil]

He was at 4 votes in a large game and you were going to be gone for 24 hours. How on EARTH could you be afraid of a quick lynch? It's preposterous. Your refusal to clarify it from that craptastic response is bad.

Are you suggesting scum are more likely to be more cautious than town then?

No, I'm saying your explanation is nonsense. There should have been 0 worry about a quicklynch if you were going to be gone 24 hours and he only had 4 votes on him.

Regardless of whether you believe it to be nonsense (There has been lynches quicker than that elsewhere, hence why I was being safe, ask Snake, he's on the UKFF as well), how is it scummy? If it's not scummy, why is it part of your case?

Absolutely I assumed it was two teams. I've been in 1 Large Normal and at least 5 Large themes (that I remember off the top of my head) and in all but 1 there were 2 scum teams (the one had a scum team and a super strong SK). So yes, I'd say more than 1 scum team in large games is standard for Large games.

The scum aren't told there is more than 1 team, but they can use the size of their team and the strength of their roles to easily tell if there is only 1 scum team. For instance, in star wars, which was a 22 player game, we (the Empire mafia) were only 3 players (although all with PRs), so we knew right away that there must be a second scum team out there.

I repeat, this is my FIRST Large normal (and my last most likely), you are basically saying that because my only experience of large games is two Kise run themed games that I should somehow assume that there wouldn't be a single scum team.

I'm used to NORMALS having just one scum team. Regardless of whether I'm wrong or right about that, it's NOT scummy by itself. As far as scum/town tells go, it's completely null.

What it IS as a tell, is a "New to large normals" tell if large normals are normally 2 scum teams.

No you haven't. Try again. What specifically was Looker pointing out that you thought was pro-town?

CKD, just look at his last long post.

Opens with a solid point on zwet,

follows up with pointing out Espy had, indeed, pointed out Snake's claim well before he had

(I didn't even put much thought into Looker pointing it out because Espy had already shown it quite clearly by then anyway, why is Looker getting grief for that and not Espy?)

Good first line in response to Vezo as well (I would say that though as it's something I agree with anyway as I said pretty much the same thing earlier), not sure what he means by the next line though.

You also asked leading questions of him (how many scum are in his mafia) that could only ever be answered with what amounts to no more than "How the hell do I know how many scum we have?" Because either he honestly doesn't know, or he would have to pretend he did anyway, it's a pointless question.

All in all, I see zero scum motivation for Looker's actions

, he's been showing himself as obv. town so far and I'm not liking the pressure on him.

Bolded to show my major points in that post, the first pointing out where Looker had, indeed, been pointing things out that needed pointing out (as everyone was blaming Looker for something Espy had already done by that point), and the last one showing that there was no scum motivation in that post, nor had I actively noticed any from Looker at that point.

Do keep up.

LOL. Very cute. No, I didn't make it all up. That is what your words read like. I ask anyone to go back and look at it.

No, you made it up, if that's what it "sounded like" to you, then you have issues, you can't say I said one thing, but meant another. What I type is what I type, not some made up crap that you've decided that it must insinuate.

So you appear to dodge the central issue. You said I was making a good case on CD, and that you'd look into it 'if you had time'. 7 posts later (clearly you have time because you are able to make a Looker-scum argument) you still haven't commented on CD. Did you ever do that reread of CD? If not, why did you say you would?

I didn't have the time. Guess what? Looker was a bigger priority for me to make a case on at that point in my eyes. Are you suggesting that, when I didn't have much time to make a full case, that I should go after one that YOU feel I should make, as opposed to the one that, at that point, I believe to be more useful?

Do you not see how ridiculous your argument is? It's basically: "He had time to make one case, he must have had time to make more as well". Sorry, but the world doesn't work that way. Time is not infinite, and when I have non-mafia stuff to do, I have to say that mafia will normally be done last. Not first. If being busy away from the site is somehow scummy then I'm fucked if I know how.

Asked and answered. Your assertion that scum wouldn't know there is more than 1 team is hilarious. It's pretty obvious how scum would know.

Except for the whole fact that it's not always guarenteed scum would know, at least not until day 2 or 3 (Unless scum were lynched right off the bat, then the team opposing the lynchee's team would know).

Throw in the above, namely that THIS IS MY FIRST LARGE NORMAL and your entire reasoning here is just fucking moronic. "He's never played a large normal, but he has to know what is the usual set up for them anyway otherwise it's scummy". That's what you are saying, and it's just fucking stupid.

All of this is just completely ridiculous. How can anyone call that post fluff? Simply absurd.

It's fluff because NONE OF IT MAKES A CASE

Where are you showing that any of it is "more likely to be done by scum than town"? Where are you showing where the scum motivation for anything I've done is?

It isn't there, it's non-existant, it's just a massive fuck ton of bullshit.

Here's your entire case on me:

"He hasn't played in large normals and assumed scum would be a single team, that's scummy"
"I don't like why he unvoted in case of a quick lynch, must be scum"
"He unvoted Espy to check the thread then disappeared for a while through being busy, scummy"
"He felt Looker was pro-town, that's scummy"
"He had chance to check over Looker and not CD? Must be scummy"

THAT'S IT!

There's no more to your case on me, and none of that is scummy behaviour, cautious behaviour? Yes. Lacking in the general knowledge of Large Normals? very much so. Being busy through real life stuff? Hell yeah. But... where is it scummy? Show me WHY it's scummy, nobody has bothered to do that so far.

You've made a poor case on me, and a bunch of people are diving on it as an easy mislynch, yet not a single person who is voting me has given any solid reasons why I am somehow being seen as being scummy, not one. Why are my actions more likely to be scum than town? What scum motivation have I got for any of it? Seriously, I can't see ANY of this being presented.

And then you wonder why I'm getting fucking frustrated and pissed off with this absolute fuck up of a game?

[silverbullet999]

*looks above*
*slightly confused look*
*scribbles on ground some more*
*it reads*
What happened to giving up?
*stares and waits*

[PranaDevil]

If I can convince just one player to actually PLAY mafia, and realize that things have to be scum motivated to be scummy, then it will at least make it worthwhile.

As it stands I'm expecting everyone to stick their fingers in their ears and go "lalalalala", because hey, why do things need to be scum motivated for them to be scum? Just disagreeing with someone is enough to make someone scum according to everyone in here.

[Jack]

lalalalala

[silverbullet999]

*sticks jack's fingers in his ears*

[RedCoyote]

Prodding horrordude, SnakePlissken, and Pomegranate. a2rudeboy has until tomorrow per his V/LA request.

[SnakePlissken]

I'm back sorry bout that should have V/LA'd over the weekend as I was covering UFC 120. Been a bit busy, but then I thought this game had all but been given up on.

Mod can we have a vote count please?

[SnakePlissken]

EBWOP - Dont worry I have seen it above.

This game is now a lot harder with everyone giving up. Lynch, Im not entirely happy with the lets lynch Prana as hes giving up so its an easy lynch. THats almost as bad as lynch the lurkers surely?

[LimMePls]

^^That is absurd.

If that is the case, then anytime scum starts to get wagon they just fake giving up and they never get lynched.

Why is giving up a town tell?

[LimMePls]

He was at 4 votes in a large game and you were going to be gone for 24 hours. How on EARTH could you be afraid of a quick lynch? It's preposterous. Your refusal to clarify it from that craptastic response is bad.

Are you suggesting scum are more likely to be more cautious than town then?

No, I'm saying your explanation is nonsense. There should have been 0 worry about a quicklynch if you were going to be gone 24 hours and he only had 4 votes on him.

Regardless of whether you believe it to be nonsense (There has been lynches quicker than that elsewhere, hence why I was being safe, ask Snake, he's on the UKFF as well), how is it scummy? If it's not scummy, why is it part of your case?

Absolutely I assumed it was two teams. I've been in 1 Large Normal and at least 5 Large themes (that I remember off the top of my head) and in all but 1 there were 2 scum teams (the one had a scum team and a super strong SK). So yes, I'd say more than 1 scum team in large games is standard for Large games.

The scum aren't told there is more than 1 team, but they can use the size of their team and the strength of their roles to easily tell if there is only 1 scum team. For instance, in star wars, which was a 22 player game, we (the Empire mafia) were only 3 players (although all with PRs), so we knew right away that there must be a second scum team out there.

I repeat, this is my FIRST Large normal (and my last most likely), you are basically saying that because my only experience of large games is two Kise run themed games that I should somehow assume that there wouldn't be a single scum team.

I'm used to NORMALS having just one scum team. Regardless of whether I'm wrong or right about that, it's NOT scummy by itself. As far as scum/town tells go, it's completely null.

What it IS as a tell, is a "New to large normals" tell if large normals are normally 2 scum teams.

No you haven't. Try again. What specifically was Looker pointing out that you thought was pro-town?

CKD, just look at his last long post.

Opens with a solid point on zwet,

follows up with pointing out Espy had, indeed, pointed out Snake's claim well before he had

(I didn't even put much thought into Looker pointing it out because Espy had already shown it quite clearly by then anyway, why is Looker getting grief for that and not Espy?)

Good first line in response to Vezo as well (I would say that though as it's something I agree with anyway as I said pretty much the same thing earlier), not sure what he means by the next line though.

You also asked leading questions of him (how many scum are in his mafia) that could only ever be answered with what amounts to no more than "How the hell do I know how many scum we have?" Because either he honestly doesn't know, or he would have to pretend he did anyway, it's a pointless question.

All in all, I see zero scum motivation for Looker's actions

, he's been showing himself as obv. town so far and I'm not liking the pressure on him.

Bolded to show my major points in that post, the first pointing out where Looker had, indeed, been pointing things out that needed pointing out (as everyone was blaming Looker for something Espy had already done by that point), and the last one showing that there was no scum motivation in that post, nor had I actively noticed any from Looker at that point.

Do keep up.

LOL. Very cute. No, I didn't make it all up. That is what your words read like. I ask anyone to go back and look at it.

No, you made it up, if that's what it "sounded like" to you, then you have issues, you can't say I said one thing, but meant another. What I type is what I type, not some made up crap that you've decided that it must insinuate.

So you appear to dodge the central issue. You said I was making a good case on CD, and that you'd look into it 'if you had time'. 7 posts later (clearly you have time because you are able to make a Looker-scum argument) you still haven't commented on CD. Did you ever do that reread of CD? If not, why did you say you would?

I didn't have the time. Guess what? Looker was a bigger priority for me to make a case on at that point in my eyes. Are you suggesting that, when I didn't have much time to make a full case, that I should go after one that YOU feel I should make, as opposed to the one that, at that point, I believe to be more useful?

Do you not see how ridiculous your argument is? It's basically: "He had time to make one case, he must have had time to make more as well". Sorry, but the world doesn't work that way. Time is not infinite, and when I have non-mafia stuff to do, I have to say that mafia will normally be done last. Not first. If being busy away from the site is somehow scummy then I'm fucked if I know how.

Asked and answered. Your assertion that scum wouldn't know there is more than 1 team is hilarious. It's pretty obvious how scum would know.

Except for the whole fact that it's not always guarenteed scum would know, at least not until day 2 or 3 (Unless scum were lynched right off the bat, then the team opposing the lynchee's team would know).

Throw in the above, namely that THIS IS MY FIRST LARGE NORMAL and your entire reasoning here is just fucking moronic. "He's never played a large normal, but he has to know what is the usual set up for them anyway otherwise it's scummy". That's what you are saying, and it's just fucking stupid.

All of this is just completely ridiculous. How can anyone call that post fluff? Simply absurd.

It's fluff because NONE OF IT MAKES A CASE

Where are you showing that any of it is "more likely to be done by scum than town"? Where are you showing where the scum motivation for anything I've done is?

It isn't there, it's non-existant, it's just a massive fuck ton of bullshit.

Here's your entire case on me:

"He hasn't played in large normals and assumed scum would be a single team, that's scummy"
"I don't like why he unvoted in case of a quick lynch, must be scum"
"He unvoted Espy to check the thread then disappeared for a while through being busy, scummy"
"He felt Looker was pro-town, that's scummy"
"He had chance to check over Looker and not CD? Must be scummy"

THAT'S IT!

There's no more to your case on me, and none of that is scummy behaviour, cautious behaviour? Yes. Lacking in the general knowledge of Large Normals? very much so. Being busy through real life stuff? Hell yeah. But... where is it scummy? Show me WHY it's scummy, nobody has bothered to do that so far.

You've made a poor case on me, and a bunch of people are diving on it as an easy mislynch, yet not a single person who is voting me has given any solid reasons why I am somehow being seen as being scummy, not one. Why are my actions more likely to be scum than town? What scum motivation have I got for any of it? Seriously, I can't see ANY of this being presented.

And then you wonder why I'm getting fucking frustrated and pissed off with this absolute fuck up of a game?

I pretty much disagree with everything you're saying in this post. I'd really like it if other players would comment on the case and your defense.

[PranaDevil]

Isn't it amazing you give absolutely NOTHING in the way of an actual response to show why you disagree?

Much easier to continue talking bollocks by avoiding answering the questions in the post, and avoid stating WHY something is scummy.

[Jack]

I'd really like it if other players would comment on the case and your defense.

I commented already (post 908).

[curiouskarmadog]

3rd in line to update.

[LimMePls]

I'd really like it if other players would comment on the case and your defense.

I commented already (post 908).

This is mind numbingly frustrating.

[SnakePlissken]

^^That is absurd.

If that is the case, then anytime scum starts to get wagon they just fake giving up and they never get lynched.

Why is giving up a town tell?

I didn't say it was conversely though, thinking you can get a quick lynch because there is no defence for it would be cheap lynch move for the scum.

[LimMePls]

^^That is absurd.

If that is the case, then anytime scum starts to get wagon they just fake giving up and they never get lynched.

Why is giving up a town tell?

I didn't say it was conversely though, thinking you can get a quick lynch because there is no defence for it would be cheap lynch move for the scum.

WHAT?

[evilpacman18]

UNVOTE: vollkan
I'll come back to this when people are more willing to listen.
VOTE: Jack
just iso'd him. 74 posts and next to no content. Most of his posts are useless one liners. Definitely not pro-town play.

[Pomegranate]

UNVOTE: vollkan
I'll come back to this when people are more willing to listen.
VOTE: Jack
just iso'd him. 74 posts and next to no content. Most of his posts are useless one liners. Definitely not pro-town play.

That's slightly better (although he doesn't seem to realize that Jack isn't being lynched today).

[a2rudeboy]

@Pom- And who are we lynching today? Pacman's vote puts Jack back at l-2, if PD were to switch his vote back to where it's been the majority of the game, that would be l-1, and I'm sure someone around here would be willing to hammer. As far as I'm concerned, Jack is the scummiest slot in the game right now, for reasons I've previously mentioned. Why, if Jack could be a future lynch is he not today's lynch?

[silverbullet999]

*shakes head*