Newbie 1024 -- Minimalist Mafia (Game Over)

[Yenros]

/confirm

[Yenros]

Vote Mujex

because random.org says so.

1) PST (GMT -8)
2) 1 other newbie game here.
3) I get on every day at least once (around this time, and sometimes again in about 8 hours), and I post when I have something to say.
4) Man

[Yenros]

In my first game we had both questions and random votes, and the random votes got more discussion going then the questions did.

[Yenros]

Beefster, you forgot to unvote. Also, how is that question bad? The scum already know the alignments, so they wouldn't have to find out the alignments like town does.

Unvoting is nice, but unnecessary.

[Yenros]

Seems to me that seeking alignments isn't any kind of tell. Town is trying to find alignments to lynch scum. 3rd party might depending on what their goal is. Scum are trying to pretend to scum hunt.

[Yenros]

As I've only played one other game, I can't really answer your question yet. Also, I'm wondering the same thing as Trendall, how could that answer possible tell you someone's alignment?

@ Jay, now seems like a very odd time to place a random vote. Why wouldn't you place it when you answered Trendall's questions (timezone, availability, gender, ect.)?

My original vote was random, and this seems slightly suspiciuos to me, so for the time being,

Vote Jay

.

[Yenros]

@Jay: If you wanted a vote on reason, then you could have been like Kayi or trendall, who both prefer to vote on reason rather then random, and chose to have no vote until they have reason.

[Yenros]

I find Jay's random vote suspicious, because he could have placed it when others were, but instead holds off and places it now, when others are placing votes with at least a little reason now. Also, he says he does not like random votes, in which case it would have been more reasonable to not place a vote. Finally, he does so with no other content. At this point it is a minor thing, and the only thing that really seems suspicious to me at this point in the game.

[Yenros]

@ Mastin: when I asked Beef about his vote on Kayi, it was because I didn't understand his point. Also, where you say I'm now doubting Kayi, I don't see the doubt, I try to answer her question as best i can with only one game, then I don't understand how it can show alignment and ask. In both cases they are "I want to learn and understand" questions.

@ Kayi: I didn't answer the last one because I just got on to see it. As I stated in my post about time and all, I only know for sure I will be on about this time everyday. I don't know how to better explain, but I will try. It's the fact that now, when we have more information, Jay is choosing to put a random vote, no comment on anything else that had gone on, like Beefster and Kayi, he's doing nothing more then defend himself.

@ Jay: You just said that you didn't want to recieve a phantom vote, so you random votes? If you are afraid of the end of the day, then why would you random vote, and not try to find reason so that someone you actually find suspicious is lynched? And like Trendall said, if you were so worried why wouldn't you check with the mod about deadline or phantom votes?

[Yenros]

@ Kayi and Jay: I think you (Kayi) misunderstand. I'm not getting on him for just responding, I can understand getting on only after being addressed, because I only get on about once a day, and in 24 hours someone has typically said something to respond too. I'm saying he merely came in and random voted with no content after the rest of the town has started moving to content such as Beefster's voting you. When I'm on, yes I defend my self, but I'm also trying to find scum, and not focused only on a defense. And on that note...

@ Mute: At first you would seem like someone who needs to be replaced, but you are actively lurking. You only posted when someone mentioned you might need a prod or replacement, and despite what has come up you don't say anything about any of it.

FoS Mute

@ Jay (again): Your last argument on me is, like Mastin said, a "too townie for town" argument, and that doesn't mean anything because townies act like townies, and when you said "I've seen it before," that doesn't mean it applies to all cases, because, again, townies will also act like townies. You are applying an aspect of both groups to just one. That's like saying about humans "I've seen woman who talk, you are talking, so I think you are a woman."

[Yenros]

@ Jay, it's not just you that doesn't quite understand, Kayi said he still doesn't either.

@ Mute: I can't really defend myself, because I don't get what you mean. Suspicion was placed on my vote on Jay. So I defended my reason. I don't know what else to say on this note at this point, so if you could elaborate for me. Also, Kayi may have said what she did, but she has been posting. You have been lurking, and when you do not post there is no way for us to gauge you and figure out whether you are scummy or not.

[Yenros]

@ Mute: You either didn't read my post or completely ignored what I said before bringing up my lurking. I didn't dodge the question, I said I don't understand, and asked you to explain. I tried to answer then with what I thought you mean. I still don't quite get what you mean, so could you please try to explain for me.

[Yenros]

@ Mute: I did take a solid stance. I think Jay is scummy. I honestly have no idea how to get a game started, and get conversation going, so I didn't know what to do there, but when I saw Jay's random vote I thought it was scummy. I took a stance on it, and tried to explain why I thought it was scummy. What I don't get now is why you found my not understanding you suspicious. When I said that the first time you say I dodged the question and vote me for dodging the question, instead of just explaining it too me. Without understanding what you are saying there is no way for me to defend against it, which is why I tried so hard to explain my position to Jay and Kayi, so Jay could try and defend himself.

@ Lat: When it comes to Kayi, I kind of agree with her about not trusting anyone right away. You have to look at everyone as neutral, and let their actions dictate whether you think they are scummy or town. You have to think they are scum when you are reading your posts, but when you question them you have to give them the benefit of the doubt and allow them to defend themselves. As for your second point on Kayi, I agree when it comes to something small like that. The time to post longer explanations is when you are questioned on it.
As for Beefster, I find his vote, unvote, and revote of Kayi suspicious. Mainly the fact that he unvoted when called on it, but also the fact he voted for alignment fishing, something scum would have no reason of doing, unless the game wasn't just town verse one mafia group. Also, the fact that he doesn't seem to be reading the thread. I find that anti-town.

[Yenros]

@ Jay: like Lat said, that's WIFOM. Scum could think exactly what you said, and decide to do it to try and look town by saying scum don't want attention. So such an argument doesn't really point towards either side, well at least not in a newbie game, in a normal game using a WIFOM argument may look scummy. Also, scum don't have to post random votes to slip by unnoticed. Kay and Mastin didn't random vote, and if it wasn't for our discussion on your vote I don't think their lack of random votes would have been mentioned. The thing is, you are right about scum not wanting to draw attention to themselves, but that is how the town catches them, when they slip up and post something that does draw attention to them.

@ Kayi: I agree with mastin about that not being meta. Meta, at least as far as I understand it, is using someones past game play styles to determine if they are scum or town in the current game. In your last post you said, "It all grants a defense," what do you mean by that?

[Yenros]

@ Kayi: My point was that he is not even using META on you. If he had a case, that was entirely based on meta, it would seem very opportunistic, because it is possible for someone to change their style. But Mastin has a case against you, and the other game seems just thrown in last moment to me.

@ Trendall: When it comes to hammering, my personal thought based on my game and what I've read, I think you should wait until it's almost deadline to get as much discussion as possible. Of course there are exceptions, such as if discussion comes to a stop or the majority of town say we should end the day and hammer.

[Yenros]

@ Mute: I agree with Mastin about your vote on Beefster. You don't vote someone for giving up on defending themselves, but because you think they are scum. Every town player we lose makes it harder for us to win and easier for the mafia.

[Yenros]

@ Mastin: Redcoyote is the mod, and probably won't be prodding himself.

@ Beef: I'm not sure if this is actually useful, but how could you forget who your vote had been on when that was what started everything on you?

@ Mute: You said that you didn't find Beef any more suspicious then anyone else though, wouldn't it be better to vote someone you actually find suspicious? I could actually understand you voting that way if it was closer to deadline and the town consensus. Also, Jay asked you about Lat, but you never explained your reasons behind Jay or Kayi either. Is it things that others posted and if so what, or something else?

[Yenros]

I think I actually agree with Trend on Beef's actions now. Seems to me that, at l;east in theory, a town player that is likely to be mislynched would want to get out as much info for the town as possible before being lynched.

[Yenros]

I don't think we should assume anything, it goes into WIFOM trying to figure out why they may have chosen not to NK, or if the scum were blocked by a Doc.

[Yenros]

I agree with Lat about this. it's not scummy to change your mind when someone posts an argument. If that were the case then no one would be able to defend themselves, because no one would accept anything they said and stick entirely to their decision. Posting the arguments and reasons so people understand our position is how we try and find and lynch scum while trying to avoid lynching town. Otherwise it becomes like the witch hunts and the inquisition, where once they picked you were either deemed guilty and killed, or died and found innocent after death.

[Yenros]

EBWODP
Also I'm in favor of no lynching, but would like to hear from Mastin first,

[Yenros]

I actually agree with Mastin, it's likely we will loose our doc tonight, not certain, but likely. If he is the doc, then he could limit the mafia's power by blocking their kills. As for NL being a bad idea now, I'm not sure. Seems to me like it could still be a good idea for the same reason it was before the claim.

[Yenros]

@ all, I will be unable to get on tomorrow for thanks giving, and possibly Friday as well. I should be back by Saturday though.

[Yenros]

Why would the scum no kill repeatedly though? And why would we no lynch repeatedly? Neither side wants a draw.

But neither side wants the other to win either, I'd say.

Yeah, and if scum don't want town to win they NK someone.

[Yenros]

Welcome Nacho, can't wait to hear from you tomorrow.

I'm going to do a reread now.

[Yenros]

I think the no-lynch reason still stands, it's more of a question of doing it now or later. Right now I'm thinking we leave it for later, so Mute can have a voice since it is likely he will be NK'ed as doc.

Only having a short window for this each day I'm not done with my reread, but I should be tomorrow, so you will get it all then or the next day.

[Yenros]

@ Mute: If they managed to get a kill tonight I don't think it would be enough to doubt your claim. Right now there are 8 people, and 7 for you to choose from, only 5 of which are town. This means there are 35 possible outcomes between your pick and theirs (supposing they choose to attempt a NK and choose not to NK you), only 5 of which would stop a NK.

[Yenros]

Didn't get much out of rereading. Right now I have 2 suspicious.

I'm suspicious of Jay for the reasons I've stated previously. Though, I don't think the fact that the vote is on Mute meant anything as there is no way anyone could know unless they saw something in Mute's posts, though I don't.

I'm a bit suspicious of Trend for ISO's 10 and 11, posts 175 and 203. First is his reasoning for not hammering Beef, which either one alone would have been fine, but instead he goes from not wanting to look like opportunistic scum to just wanting to wait till deadline is closer. The other thing, in the same posts, is going from the superlative,

I see Beefster's most recent vote as him trying to turn the bandwagon on him around to the

most easy target

, which seems to have become me over the past page or so.

to simply

I meant that I was an easy target, not necessarily the easiest target.

@ mod & all: I have finals next week, and so my time on here will be erratic. I expect I will be able to get on at least tomorrow and Tuesday, but probably not Sunday, Monday, or Wednesday. I will have normal access on Thursday

Noted. Keep an eye on the deadline and try to post when you can.

[Yenros]

Mastin, I disagree with your reason to bring up the fact that Jay's vote was on Mute. I do still think that vote was scummy, but not for who it was on. There was no way Jay could know who Mute was. That's like saying Mute is suspicious, because he helped lynch Beef who is proven town. The difference being that Mute is believed to be town, while Beef was proven town. I am still suspicious of Jay, but I find your mention of that suspicious. Something else I noticed is that at the end of page 14 Trend voices suspicion. Also, in your case on Trend, I don't like your second point on Trend. If you read his posts, he says

I should probably answer my own questions. I'm in GMT, but I'm a student with a very bizarre sleeping pattern, so I'll probably be online at all kinds of crazy times. This is my third game on this site, and

I've played a bit in real life, a few games on forums with friends, and a

couple of hundred

games over at Epicmafia.

Hopefully I should be able to post quite frequently. I've always got internet access, so I can't think of a time when I would ever not be able to post. And, I am male.

You point suspicion on him for liking both equally because he has only played town here, he has played games elsewhere and said so.


As a side note, it's Correlation implies causation not Hitler built autobahns.

@ Nacho: If you look at my previous post, I have finals this week, and so my availability until Thursday will be very hectic, doing my best.

[Yenros]

Wow, lots of new info. Only enough time for a skim, but after my last final tomorrow (early), I'll get a better read and better post. At a glance though, what trendall says in post 419, I'll have to look into it tomorrow, but it looks like you are using the relativist fallacy, Mastin.

[Yenros]

Okay, I'm back.

A lot of new stuff during finals.

Relativist Fallacy: simply put, applies to me but not you, or vice versa. I'll say that when I mentioned the fallacy earlier, I was thinking the "nothing" comment Trend had quoted, but upon further reading I disagree with Trend about that.

Mastin has a lot of fluff in his posts, though he is getting better about this. He seems to use gut way to often, like Neruz said seems like an escape. There is also his post on Jay's voting the doc before it was known he was the doc. I can understand gut, in fact it is mostly gut that makes this not sit well with me. He kind of misunderstood my post when I brought this up earlier, and used the word reason (here). I was referring to the reason it was mentioned, not implying that it was based on logic. It just feels more like a "feeling the water" kind of comment. All in all, his posts are hard to read, they are getting better. Right now not I'm not suspicious enough to vote him, but

IGMEOY Mastin

.

Trendall I pointed out my thoughts on here.There is also his post on lynch or no lynch after Mute's post, like Mute recently said, it seems a little aggressive.

Like Trend, I would like the "why's" for Mute's post, especially the first two parts on trend, which I don't see anything scummy with.

Based on this, I believe Trend is the most suspicious, followed by Mastin. I do think I will look into Nacho, but for now

Vote Trendall

[Yenros]

Trend, that really looks like OMGUS when you don't explain, so may Io ask why?

Mastin, I always thought active lurking was when someone was posting just enough to keep from getting prodded, but not posting content.

[Yenros]

Trendall, you never answered me or jay.

@Trendall: I can see where you are coming from, but could you explain your Yenros vote a little more, just in case I'm missing something. I assume it is because you have answered many of those suspicions/arguments already, but... I'm not sure.

Trend, that really looks like OMGUS when you don't explain, so may Io ask why?

Mastin, I always thought active lurking was when someone was posting just enough to keep from getting prodded, but not posting content.

@ Nacho, I'm actually rereading parts of day 2, and have been interrupted twice.

[Yenros]

going to finish rereading day 2 tomorrow, also I noticed in my last post I left out that the questions was in reference to this

I'm done with defending myself against these ridiculous arguments. I also think that Mastin is probably town.

UNVOTE:
VOTE: Yenros

I also feel I should point out that the interruptions were RL, since reading that last part makes it sound like Nacho was one of those.

[Yenros]

@Trend: You aren't voting me right now. When you voted me yesterday it was after I voted you and with you said you are done defending yourself and voted me, which makes it look like OMGUS, you were asked by me and Jay about it, and you posted after we asked you.

@ Kayi: i'm not trying to lurk, doing my best.

As for the meta, I can see why some people might like it, but it seems to me that meta is similar to WIFOM, because it could mean something, but just as easily could be them trying to change their style.

[Yenros]

Almost done with the reread. I haven't seen anything new when it comes to the Mastin part.

One thing for Trend. reading your vote on me again, the post doesn't read as pressure, it reads as though you didn't like my points against you. You actually say you are done defending yourself against the arguments. If you read Jay's point on it it reads as though he interpreted it the same way (I don't want to speak for him though). In which case it looks like you are changing your reasons for the vote after the fact.

Have arrived at the case against Nacho, a little more then a page left. Also going to read Mastin's Meta on Trend tomorrow.

[Yenros]

Just finished my reread, didn't notice anything new. I did have to check and double check Nacho's comment about his being not a case, but after looking at the differences I did see what he meant about it not being a case, but Mastin's seeming more like a case.

Also read Mastin's Meta stuff on Trend. It's an interesting read, but I'm still not so sure about how much one should trust meta.