Newbie 1081: Showdown in Newbtown (Game Over, Mafia win)

[startransmission]

Cheers everyone! I'm startransmission, your local Newbtown IC. IC basically means I've played a few games in my day, and will help inform new players on some of the basics of the game when the situation(s) arise. But be aware, being IC has no effect on whatever alignment I might have. I have a win condition and am playing to fulfill it. That said, I'm looking forward to this game, and wish everyone a good one.

Although I don't really get the concept of RVS or why it is so important

The Random Voting Stage is considered by many (myself included) to be a good way of getting conversation started. At the beginning of the game there is little information, so throwing some votes out there gets people talking etc. Who people choose, for what reason, and how people react can be valuable at this early part of the game. For example,

Anyways, I don't like RVS very much, so I'm not voting until I see an actual scummy post.

Already the RVS provides us an interesting post. Once

could

argue that Fatso not wanting to engage in the RVS is a sign that he wants to fly under the radar, that he wants to keep his hands clean until later in the game when perhaps a wagon is already built for him to jump on. That might be going a bit far, but it's an example of how the RVS can start dialogue.

Vote: Banana Stickers

For me having to refer to him as BS for the rest of the game.

[startransmission]

Another way of getting conversation started is the RQS, or the Random Question Stage. I don't find it as valuable, but it's a nice way for players to get a feel for one another.

1. What's your Mafia experience?
2. What's your favorite band?
3. What role/alignment do you prefer?
4. Do you find it harder finding scum, or convincing other people that you've found scum (the latter assuming you correctly identified someone as scum)?

1. I played and modded for a year or so on another forum before trying mafiascum. Been playing here exclusively since. I've finished twenty or so games, more than half of those newbie games. I find some purity in the F11 setup.

2. Depends on the day of the week, and today it's Rush.

3. How much I enjoy being scum is too dependent on who my partner is. I prefer town, I get more enjoyment out of scumhunting than I do pretending to scumhunt.

4. For me it's harder to find them. I second guess myself a lot, so when I'm convinced myself I usually don't have a hard time convincing others.

[startransmission]

Oh, and Happy Birthday Banana Stickers! Didn't realize that when I voted you...

[startransmission]

One question to the SEs/IC:
How do you vote in RVS? Rather one vote to stick to it or switching ones?

Typically one vote suffices in RVS. Randomly moving around your vote won't lead to much, usually a change of vote from your initial random vote is for a reason, thus rendering it non random. The RVS shouldn't really last too long anyways.

I would say that the vote Bulvious laid down on Fatso effectively ends the RVS. The potential debate between them interests me greatly.

[startransmission]

Me? In what way am I backing off? I really don't see it. Was just asking about RVS, as it seems to be a common factor in a game.

I think Bulvious was referring to Fatso.

[startransmission]

Late night at work, will post in the morning. Much comments.

[startransmission]

This post is coasting through RVS. You answer the questions, tell us about your playstyle, and then this, which is full of unnecessary filler, and you completely ignore the biggest problem with Fatso's play, the appeasement.

One quick thing. This is really a matter of opinion, but I really feel the OMGUS vote is far scummier than the folding in to the RVS pressure.

And

that

said I don't find Fatso scummy enough to warrant his wagon going any further at this time.

[startransmission]

One quick thing. This is really a matter of opinion, but I really feel the OMGUS vote is far scummier than the folding in to the RVS pressure.

(This is referring to me, right?) How was my second vote OMGUS in ANY WAY?

Your vote on lynchking seemed to be a direct response to his vote on you. That's OMGUS. Not necessarily scummy, but I find it more egregious than your folding to the RVS pressure.

I think all the comments I was going to make have kinda been made. I hope Fatso now understands why RVS is valuable, and why his reluctance to participate is not the primary reason for the pressure placed on him.

Waiting to hear more from BS and h3llo.

[startransmission]

Hey guys, long day ahead of me, will post later today.

[startransmission]

The mafia is at a HUGE disadvantage then, aren't they?

Considering the advantages they already possess, no, not really. Keep them guessing.

[startransmission]

A quick word about my schedule. Saturday and Sunday make up 30 hours of my work week. After work on those days my coworkers and I usually hit up a bar. By the time I get home I've had a very long day and am a bit drunk to boot. Posting for me is... erratic on the the weekends. I try to make an effort on Saturdays, but am not always successful. So, Monday thru Friday is where I'll be most active, which kinda sucks as weekends are when activity usually spikes in most games.

I'll read up on what I've missed and share my thoughts shortly.

[startransmission]

If you don't mind my asking, what job do you do?

I run a kitchen. Saturday and Sundays are brunch days, and the way way we do brunch and the amount of volume we do make for an exhausting weekend.

[startransmission]

Right now I'm most interested in Sarafish. I'll refer to her as SF from now on. She's not necessarily my only suspect right now, but she's definitely worth discussing. Almost everything she says raises an eyebrow.

Sarahfish's posts detailing how she feels on each player was fairly pointless and I could see scum feeling the need to make a post like that in order to try to appear helpful. I'm also concerned that she has no scum reads because it's often hard for scum to fake scum reads.

I agree, it was my first reaction upon reading her post. It was pure fluff, and I noted that she handed out townie cards more than anything. That always concerns me.

I see in her profile that she's a 12 year old girl. Or at least claims to be. Part of me worries that that is an attempt to justify a VI meta, a wolf in sheep's clothing kinda thing. And there have been spots of her posting that encourage my suspicion of that,

I was? Oh I see what you mean, I guess I was doing this without realising but you did need to post more

The above being an example. I know it's weak, but something here really gets my gut.

sarahfish89 wrote:

Question: Apart from me, who do you think is the most scummiest at the moment? Same with townie. (other people can answer too)

I don't like this question, at all. To me, this is a question scum would ask in order to find out who the night kill needs to be and who to turn people against. That's... Bad.

And that's why I usually won't answer those questions, at least not on the first day, and usually not on the second either. But right now I'm torn between seeing SF as newbtown or newbscum. Either way I think the kind of fishing that you're perceiving might be giving her a little too much credit. It's certainly not something to disregard however. If she's scum I would more be likely to consider the questions intent to be more a of topic changer from her (as h3llo brought up) vote than what you're worried about.

Her defense of Fatso is interesting as well. She may well be ingratiating herself to Fatso, or they are partners. Considering that she handed out either townie or null cards to everybody, it's hard to say. Fatso's reaction was natural, I always feel the same way when my play/opinion is congratulated or defended in a game. She says she's read enough games on this site to know that many newbies feel about RVS the way Fatso does, and they end up being townie. I don't think I buy that, or at least it rings very untrue.

I think what my main concern is regarding SF is that I get a phony vibe from her. None of her actions are so specifically scummy that they couldn't be made by a newbtown player. But she says she's not a newb player, but somebody who's played elsewhere for a year and that's read more than one game here. She would have been... 10? 11? when she started playing mafia. Not impossible, but not likely either. Combined with the way that she explains her actions, including her vote on lynchking, that my gut feels is as or more likely to be relaxed dishonesty as it is words from a newbtown player.

Also not at all a fan of BS's disappearance. If her VLA was in fact an attempt to duck out of the first few days of the game and slide back in, I think in the end it will have backfired for her. However her RL may very well be what's actually holding her up, and I won't vote for her for being busy. I very much want to hear her thoughts. But the timing

is

fishy. Naturally the same argument could be made about my timing. Never said I wasn't a hypocrite.

[startransmission]

Also not at all a fan of BS's disappearance. If her VLA was in fact an attempt to duck out of the first few days of the game and slide back in, I think in the end it will have backfired for her. However her RL may very well be what's actually holding her up, and I won't vote for her for being busy.

It should be noted that my vote is already on her. Didn't remember that tidbit when I posted. I won't change my vote, there's not a good enough reason to. However if my vote weren't on her already, I wouldn't move it on her only because her VLA came at an unfortunate time. By the way, that VLA is over, my opinion may change if she doesn't post in the next 24 hours. At that time my vote on that slot won't be random anymore, no matter if there is a replacement or not.

Speaking of potential replacements.

@MOD, this game needs an updated and corrected vote count, as well as an update on Lynchking's status

.

[startransmission]

The mafia is at a HUGE disadvantage then, aren't they?

Considering the advantages they already possess, no, not really. Keep them guessing.

I've done a little reading since. Just to clarify why I thought it would be such a huge disadvantage, I was unaware that the RB could still NK if the goon had been lynched.

Please read the rules of the game before starting, it's important. Not trying to sound like a dick, as I've made a similar mistake. After a dozen or so games I was lynched and made a bah! post. Not allowed in that particular game, though it was allowed in all others until that point. I didn't read the rules as I assumed I knew them. While most newb games have identical rules, it can't hurt to double check and make sure. Friendly tip!

Welcome back Lynchking. I eagerly await your thoughts.

[startransmission]

SF, please use the "preview" button before you post. A readable and decently formatted post makes people happy. Doesn't have to be perfect, just something that's easy to make sense of.

I am 12, but that's not important really. What does me been 12 have anything to do with me being Mafia, although that's probably got something why I'm not good at Mafia.

No, your age isn't important to your alignment.

Budding up is scummy and I know that so why would I do it so much is it's scummy, I wouldn't do that if I was their partner and was scum. Also this is only out of the games I've read and you've played and read more than me so I could be different for you.

WIFOM, and newbie card.

Yes, I played since I was 11, I would find you a game as proof but we've had a forum wipe. Also may I add, that the games I play are more relaxed and quite different from here. So I'm finding it hard to find scum.

Ok, my gripe isn't that I don't believe you've played elsewhere. It's that I suspect you're misrepresenting yourself. I do understand that this site plays mafia far more seriously than other sites. I myself played mafia elsewhere before I played here, and was thrown off by how seriously things are taken here.

Maybe I'm just a horrible player for basing this vote entirely on the fact that the target can't make analysis what-so-ever. Additionally, the defense is all weak and there's still no scum-hunting.

No, those reasons are valid for throwing down a vote. The fact that she could in fact be a child that's used to a lighter version of mafia is staying my hand, for the moment.

@SF- Could you please post links to the games you read on this forum before this game started?

[startransmission]

Hey guys, sorry for the delay. I've had way too much on my plate the past few days.

There's been a whole lot of discussion, which I'll need to read through and try to contribute to, later today.

Hrm. Patience is dwindling.

Also, my vote on BS is now no longer random.

[startransmission]

I'm saying why I wouldn't do it, I wasn't even buddying though, I was defending fatso because I thought that voting because they didn't like RVS wasn't a reason just to vote somebody.

Ok, that's fair. The problem I had is that you insinuated that Fatso not linking RVS was not only not worthy of a vote, which is a valid opinion to have, but that it implied he was town.

Fatso - Quite a few posts, saying they didn't like RVS hasn't really helped them but I don't think it's really a scum-tell as I've watched a few games on here and lots of newbies don't like or get it and RVS but they have turned out townie.

So I skimmed over the games you linked. And by the way,

@SF- Could you please post links to the games you read on this forum before this game started?

I hope ongoing games are fine, if not, sorry.

[*]You are not allowed to discuss this game outside of the thread unless I tell you otherwise, nor are you allowed to discuss other ongoing games in this thread.

Linking ongoing games is not allowed. I don't think it's a big deal, but for future reference etc. Anyways, the damage is done so I'll say that I looked at the games you linked. There is an example or two of a player stating their distaste for RVS. In one instance that player did in fact flip town. So, I can see how you would hold the opinion that not liking the RVS is not a scumtell, and hence defend Fatso against the scrutiny.

The games I play, we don't really scum hunt, day one is bandwangoning and random reasoning and most other days are follow the leader (which, when I'm playing, I always tell them not to). So, this may sound really crappy but I don't really know how to scum hunt. (Link to my game that I'm hosting, these kind of games are play a lot.).

Ok, this is what newbie games here are for. I've played a brand of mafia like you've linked before, and understand how the differences here can be disconcerting. Scumhunting ability comes with time, just pay attention to what people say, and if you have questions, ask them. If you have suspicions, voice them. The discussions that will sprout from that will be invaluable to improving your scumdar. Scumhunting isn't an exact science.

[quote="sarahfish89"P.S startransmission, can I pm you after, I've died or the game has finished, on how to look for tells?[/quote]

Of course. Naturally I'll be bringing up what I see as tells as the game goes on. As will other players.

[startransmission]

Sarah, why is there an 89 in your user name?

I'd imagine that's the year of her birth.

What are people's opinions of lynching the scummiest lurker?

I'm not opposed to policy lynches on D1. But's that's barring a better case. A policy lynch should be a last resort, and is in a way a white flag on towns side. It means a good enough job wasn't made to isolate a truly scummy player. I think it's too soon to settle on a policy lynch. That said, my vote

is

on BS.

I'd like to see some activity from either mod. Prods seem in order, if not replacements in some cases, not to mention vote counts.

QFT. This is the first game I've played on this site where I've become cross at the lack of moderating. I've seen bv310 online. Very soon a point will come where a lack of modding will potentially affect the WC of all players. If nothing is said or done within the next 24 hours a deadline extension should be granted- if not already.

[startransmission]

Wow. This game has hit a wall. No activity whatsoever. Good for scum, bad for town.

I have some questions to ask tomorrow. Fatso's one to alnkpa above is a good start.

[startransmission]

Out of the two, I would say if Lynchking doesn't post more soon I would lynch them but I wouldn't mind a BS lynch

Why? Even thought they've each posted little, I would say that BS is scummier.

Why? Other than not voting, what has BS done that's worse?

Wow. This game has hit a wall. No activity whatsoever. Good for scum, bad for town.

I have some questions to ask tomorrow. Fatso's one to alnkpa above is a good start.

And your going to solve this problem by not asking your questions?

Either you're not paying attention to what I'm saying or you're making a clumsy attempt to feign aggressiveness.

I'm not entirely sure anyone has been doing much scum-hunting for some time, though. It's mostly been "Let's lurker lynch" - all fine and good, but that's something for the future.

I disagree. I think what questioning there has been was directed at a player who could easily fall into a policy lynch of a different nature, or who is actually scum. And the accusation of "Let's lurker lynch" is a bit of an overstatement. Zdenek asked a valid question, and people answered it. While a few players, myself included, agreed that barring conclusive evidence a policy lynch was acceptable, at no point did town settle on a policy lynch. I'd rather you not point fingers at others for not scum hunting and start doing some of your own.

It appears a lot of people are good for a Banana wagon - but what that COULD mean is yielding no information what-so-ever on the lynch. We kill her, high chance is, she'll flip town, and because everyone was pretty mutual about it, it would hardly mean anything other than that deadspace is gone. I agreed to the policy, but that's in eleven days. For now...

For now... what? Pressure on BS is absolutely warranted. Will she be replaced? Likely. When that happens I'll unvote.

h3ll0, what do you think of the willingness to push a lurker lynch? Doesn't it seem odd that so many people would want to agree to that when it's usually a 50/50 sort of split in the average game?

Why are you asking this question to h3llo? It seems more of an observation than it is a question with the intent of garnering information. The worthlessness of the question is bolstered by the fact that you follow your question with your own opinion. It's a leading question.

Exactly. This "policy lynch' thing has done nothing but distracted all of us from actual scum-hunting.

Bullshit.

Normally you get SOME people contesting it - but there's none of that in this game. Could it be that two of the scum are the most ardent in pushing the most useless wagon and keeping that on-topic?

Another leading question to h3llo. So you're saying that both scum are pushing a policy lynch. Whose? BS's? So you're accusing me and Fatso? Are we keeping something off topic? Would you say that BS has been my focus? Why aren't you contesting a lurker lynch?

Alnpka is actively lurking - to me, this is significantly worse than someone who is likely to be replaced

So... one policy wagon for another? But it's

active

lurking, I get it. So why not vote for Zdenek? He's far more guilty than Alnpka of active lurking. And he's offered no more content than Alnpka. Fatso, not you or h3llo, has directed a good question to Alnpka. And Alnpka responded well. What's

your

question for Alnpka? An accusation does not make for the scum hunting. Why not place a vote if you're so suspicious?

Good catch. I want to see Alnpk's reaction to that.

Good catch?

[startransmission]

Reading up on this and another game, will post shortly.

[startransmission]

After March 28th, we've been discussing policy lynching, BS, and Sarahfish's experience.

What information has that garnered for us?
Are we any closer to finding scum because of it? Seemed like more of a delay to me.

Player's opinions on policy lynches is pertinent. It hasn't become such a source of conversation that it detracts from anything else. BS was a player that warranted some pressure. There are plenty of inactive players in this game, my vote was on her randomly at first, but after her vla was over it made sense to keep my vote on her in hopes of pressure. Other players felt that she was the scummier of the lurkers and pressured her as well. It's all moot now, but again, none of that detracted from the game. The fact that it resulted in nothing is circumstantial.

As for SF. I laid out why I was suspicious of her. I questioned her. I wanted to see how she reacted to see if my hunch was correct. To see if she made a slip or was legit. My feeling coming away from that interaction is that I cautiously consider her to be town. That's important, if a wagon were to be developed against her I would not jump on it for the reasons that players currently hold against her. I would argue that my interaction with SF was informative, and may have repercussions later in the game.

I don't really care what you'd RATHER I do. Perhaps I'd RATHER you not assume I was excluding myself from those three or so days where we accomplished nothing. I was as guilty as others. My accusation was as much of a splash of water in the face of my own daze as I hope it was for you. And I find it awfully difficult to believe you TRULY think I haven't begun scum-hunting.

I understand. I just disagree that we accomplished nothing, and I bristled at your accusation that I was keeping discussion off topic. Again, what topic was I preventing players from discussing?

Why are you asking this question to h3llo? It seems more of an observation than it is a question with the intent of garnering information. The worthlessness of the question is bolstered by the fact that you follow your question with your own opinion. It's a leading question.

Actually, I asked two questions, I never gave my own opinion. Perhaps the second question was a tad on the biased side - but I'm no journalist, either.

It wasn't the question itself or the fact that it came off as rhetorical. It was that you directed it at h3llo, and it was leading. The response from h3llo didn't go a long way to assuage the suspicion of buddying/partnership.

BS is a dead fish now, and lingering around the pond watching her float and prodding it with a stick isn't going to make the clock stop until the fish decides to move again - which to me means we should move on.

While the pressure on her was not the distraction you make it out to be, and was in fact appropriate, at this point you're right.

Accusing you and Fatso? When did I say that? I asked if it COULD be so. I was asking what h3ll0 thought about it, and I find it odd that you try to invalidate my questions merely because they might not have the best answers in regards to you.

As I've said, the question was leading. It implied that Fatso and I are in cahoots to prevent town from useful discourse. You directly ask the leading question to h3llo, who agrees without question. Again, the appearance of a partnership grows.

Needless to say, I find it VERY interesting how upset you seemed to get when my focal point changed to him from BS. You didn't even argue the credibility of anything I said. You just seemed to question my intent rather than fact.

Who you have your attention on is not what upsets me, as I hope I've made clear.

[startransmission]

Either you're not paying attention to what I'm saying or you're making a clumsy attempt to feign aggressiveness.

Then why don't you tell me what you are saying, because you said:

I have some questions to ask tomorrow.

and then you didn't say anything about things that happened prior to your previous post.

I say I'm going to ask questions the next day, and you attack me for not asking them immediately. The keyword in my post was

tomorrow

. And when tomorrow came, I asked my questions. I didn't really have anything further to add on what happened prior to that post, as prior to that post most of what was going on I was engaged in directly.

Anyway, it is doubtful that we'll be lynching the IC today.

Not without a case, which you haven't got. Your accusations are false and hypocritical.

I twice asked you to clarify the following:

Startransmission is scum for active lurking.

Twice I got no answer. Anything to say to that?

I've always thought that active lurking is a pretty good reason to vote someone. What more do you want, an essay about why active lurking is scummy, a wall quoting startransmission's posts that show him not contributing? I can do both, but I fail to see the point. You can go look at his ISO and judge for yourself.

The problem here is that I have not been active lurking. And if I were guilty of that, you would be guiltier. I'd invite any players who feel you may have a point to do what you suggest. ISO both of us, and compare post count and post content. I know I beat you in the former, and believe I beat you in the latter as well. The value of my posts are fine to question, but not contributing? I have questioned and engaged far more than you have.

I fully agree with about active lurking being a scumtell. Nevertheless you could have outlined his lurking in one or two sentences.

Ok. I dislike when people say that they have many comments or questions and then fail to provide them. I dislike when people feel the need to say that they will post later, and then when they do, they barely contribute to the game. Startransmission has done these things.

Either you're terribly ignorant, trying to get a rise out of me, or a liar.

I wanted to pursue a lynch other than one of the two lurkers before the end of the day, so that takes LynchKing and Banana Stickers off the table for the time being.

So I'm not one of the two lurkers now?

I think Fatso is probably town because of his chattiness.

Alignment has nothing to do with chattiness, but I'm fine with it giving you a good gut feeling.

Sarahfish has done some scummy things and came under pressure for them.

Hrm. And where has that pressure come from? Who has been engaging and questioning her?

It's true that she's not scum hunting, but that could just be a sign of her newness.

An important thing to ascertain, don't you think? But according to you me trying to do so is not contributing, and according to Bulvious it's me trying to keep things off topic.

I don't think that pushing startransmission's lynch will be fruitful.

Because you don't think I'm scum? Because you have no case? Because my lynch wouldn't be informative? If you have a case on me, my IC status won't mean anything.

[startransmission]

Sorry about the chain posting, have to catch up from the weekend. Welcome chkflp, I look forward to your opinions.

[startransmission]

We didn't PREVENT progress. We did not progress. And I still don't think the pressure on BS was rewarding what-so-ever. We accomplished finding out it was moot in recent days - but that's it.

I won't argue that the BS pressure didn't wind up pretty much worthless, but it was still worth doing. And BS wasn't my focus, SF was. My vote was on BS already from the RVS so it was natural to leave it there- all things considered. I don't think town spent oodles of time and effort on her, people merely voiced their concerns. A vote was cast, that's not without it's value.

Also, can someone explain to me why people don't think it's possible to use experience from many, many, many, games in the real world online?

I've never actually played in RL, so I can't say how any similarities/differences there are. They

are

different, so despite what RL experience you have you should temper it with the knowledge that things may be a touch different here. Hell, online mafia is a different sack of kittens from site to site, let alone RL and online. But yeah, I'm sure your experience won't be without its benefits.

Why are the people who say we focused too long on pressuring BS still focusing on it?

Nobody is focusing on BS right now.

[startransmission]

I have some questions to ask tomorrow.

Then when you post again, you say nothing about anything that happened earlier, and you try to explain it away with:

I say I'm going to ask questions the next day, and you attack me for not asking them immediately. The keyword in my post was tomorrow. And when tomorrow came, I asked my questions.

as though you could predict the future about there being things available for you to ask questions about. This by the way is where you said that you have questions and then later it turned out that you didn't have any.

I can absolutely predict that I'll have questions. Whatever questions I may have wound up asking had nobody posted before the next day probably would've had to do with Alnpka and/or Fatso. As it turned out Alnpka was questioned and received pressure independently, and the exchange between h3llo and Bulvious was far more interesting to me. So that's where I directed my questions.

Most of the people active in the game, certainly you. But you never voted her despite presenting a reasonable case; certainly one that if you actually believed it should have led you take your vote off the inactive BS.

I never voted her because I didn't think there was a strong enough case. I was suspicious, I voiced those suspicions, and I questioned SF about them. I didn't feel a vote was necessary, especially considering that she was responding to me. The result of the pressure on her (including votes from others) and her response to it was my feeling that she was more likely newbtown as opposed to somebody posing as a 12yr old girl in order to create a meta. It actually got to the point that I would've argued against her potential lynch.

Another reason startransmission is scummy is his failure to comment about h3ll0's recent play in his catch-up posts.

Yes, I should have addressed it yesterday, I just don't have a strong opinion yet. I've made clear what I feel about the interaction between Bulvious and h3llo in posts 153 and 154. That interaction has put them both at the top of my suspect list. You've settled on the process of elimination, which I suppose if fine, but it's not good enough for me. In my mind I can't eliminate either of them as possible scum. As for the debate between h3llo and yourself, I don't find anything terribly suspicious from either of you. There is disagreement as to what each of you consider valid towntells. Null tell. There's him saying that you said lynchking was pro-town, when in fact you did not. You call this a misrep, but I don't see a scummy intention. The same goes for accusing you of fence-sitting. While that is inaccurate, I feel that his point was he didn't like you calling a player suspicious but not pursuing it because of IC status. An intentional misrep? I'm not thinking so at the moment.

In the end I don't think you present a strong enough case to convince others, at least not me, and I'm already suspicious of him. His reaction to the pressure from you doesn't clear him of being scum in my mind, but it doesn't do anything to incriminate him either. What I will do, need to do, is reread both Bulvious and h3llo from start to present. I'll see if anything jumps out at me.

[startransmission]

Startransmission has been an eye-opener for me as well, but not in the good way. I don't quite understand how you can justify keeping an RVS vote on someone and try to say that it becomes valid after they disappear. Then what happens when there's a replacement and they play most satisfactorily than BS? You're null. Yes, you say you'll remove the vote, but what good does it do to keep your vote there? This reminds me of an ongoing game I was just NK'ed in where one of the players completely

refused

to vote D1 because the mislynch rate is more often than not.

I have never once advocated a no lynch, and have fiercely fought against them in the past. I don't see the comparison of me not moving my vote to a player who wouldn't vote.

In other words, I think you're trying to get away with simply not voting for as long as you can so we have little to nothing to go off of if we were to do a VCA (Vote Count Analysis) or even try to pair you with someone through votes.

I don't throw my vote around. Never have. I will vote for somebody in the RVS (that would be BS in this game) and typically not move that vote until I find/create a wagon that I find worthy. I did not find SF worthy. Had my RV been on somebody else I would not have found BS worthy, but my vote was already there so it wasn't a calorie burner to keep it there for reasons that became non random.

Yes, there are other ways to interact, but you (as an IC) should know very well that voting is a key component to D1 and not doing so is less than optimal.

I have never not voted on D1. I have never (in my recollection) ended a day without my vote and my reasoning being on the person I'm most suspicious of.

I too find your "Oh, yeah, I'm working a lot so I'll get back to this" interesting in the sense that it's obvious you're not even trying. Can you kindly point me to who "already answered" things for you?

Not trying? I guess this goes back to the debate between me and ZD but I feel I have been trying. I have been active, I have voiced my concerns, and have asked questions that I feel are pertinent. For me, I get more information on players by doing that than throwing my vote at everybody I have a concern about. Again, it's fine to feel that my posts don't have any value, but I would disagree. As far as "already answered" things... what are you referring to?

I can't say that I particularly agree with your rushing RVS either as it can give us vital information to start D1 with. Do you know who else doesn't like RVS lasting too long? Scum. I understand if it's been a week and you want to get the show on the road... but you said it at the bottom of

page one

. Jump the gun much?

Did I rush RVS? I don't think I did. What I did do is point out that I liked RVS as a way of getting a game going. I also introduced the RQS, and pointed out that I found that a less valuable method of getting a game going but worth doing anyways. And where do you get that scum don't like RVS lasting too long? That's never been my experience. RVS is designed to get a game going, the sooner it does that the better. Most experienced players appreciate a brief RVS, it benefits town. And yes, when a player votes for another player for reasons that are not random, that does typically end an RVS.

You also Fluff a lot of worthless information out there. The comments "bullshit" and "What catch? :dumbeyerollemote:" are superfluous in every sense and most of the rest of your post here can be assumed.

The rest of my post can be assumed? I don't understand that. And my comments aren't superfluous, they convey how I feel about what was said in a post. My opinion on that post(s) was important for me to express.

Particularly your "leading question" comment to Bul, which I see brought out at least a little bit of interesting conversation. If you flip scum, I think know who I'll be heading for next.

What? Me accusing Bulvious of asking h3llo a leading question gives you insight on who my partner would be if I was scum? Care to elaborate?

Accusations of partnership have never been all that bad... unless you're scum and that's your actual partner. Or you're scum and you want us to think that's your partner after the flip. I'll ignore the fact that you think PL discussion means anything in a NEWB game, but your defense on your BS vote and Sarah conversation are less than great.

I'm pointing out what I see as a possible partnership between Bulvious and h3llo. It's a fairly glaring example, and I'm not the only one who feels that way. As discussing it

could

lead to one or more scum, it's worth doing. It's putthem both at the top of my potential scum totem pole. I'm not sure where you're coming up with the theory that I'm scum and one of h3llo or Bulvious is my partner...or I'm trying to make it look that way... your point here is convoluted.

Unvote

When I see or build a case that's worthy of a vote, I'll place a vote. Not before.

[startransmission]

I'm going to elaborate more on the following when I'm not drunk and tired, but in the meantime,

Thus far I like Workdawg's play and find it very pro-town, thus.

Do you? I don't necessarily disagree, but I find this interesting.

Zdenek, is this the case you've been hoping for to get your bead on ST? You failed to give a case previously "just cos it wouldn't have a result."

Is that what he said? I know why one would think that's what he implied, but did he use those exact words? He may have... not in the mood to ISO at this late hour. Just doesn't seem right, I hope you're not putting words into peoples mouths.

Really though, Startransmission. While it doesn't appear Zdenek's case against h3ll0 was great, Chkflip's and Zdenek's joint case against you is very convincing.

Oh is it? Very convincing? Also interesting.

But at this point I'm still willing to believe that ST is merely a busy man lacking in time. Chkflip, to shorten up your post a little bit - three of the biggest reasons ST is scummy?

Keeping options open, while asking somebody else to build a case for him.

And also

ST:
When I see or build a case that's worthy of a vote, I'll place a vote. Not before.

And when exactly will THIS occur? Because at the moment you aren't actively building any cases, and you certainly aren't trying to get scum to slip. So what ARE you doing? Reacting for the moment, it appears.

I told you very clearly when I'll place a vote. I'm not "actively building any cases"... well I don't consider throwing votes at people scumhunting/building cases. Anyone can do that. Not trying to get scum to slip? The entire point of my interaction with SF was to feel her out (sounds dirty, I know) and try to get her to slip. Her reaction led me to lean town where she was concerned. Hence my not voting for her.

There's more to say, but it's late. Tomorrow morning/afternoon. Before work!

[startransmission]

Oops, just saw that I put Zdenek at L-2. I'm concerned that none of the two scums are voting him right now and am rather save then sorry:
UNVOTE: Zdenek

So you don't think Zdenek is one of the two scum? So why are you voting for him?

If this were a pressure vote, it still makes no sense to remove. As was pointed out, it would be unlikely that both scum would hop on the wagon one after the other, and if they did it'd be worth the town loss to narrow down our suspects. And now that you all but admit that you don't think Zdenek is scum your vote has little to no value.

[startransmission]

Ok. Slept in a little later than I wanted to so I don't have as much time as I'd like to get into this, but I wanted to do this before I left.

Bulvious has had a foot in the door of every potential wagon this game has had. Starting with Fatso, whom he voted for in his first post for reasons that I had brought up earlier. The reasons were valid enough, and the ensuing discussion proved interesting enough that I never challenged the vote.

After town mostly agrees that Fasto was likely newbtown Bulvious moves his vote to H3llo. He cites meta and his distrust of lurkers. Considering what I suspect now is a potential partnership between h3llo and Bulvious, I can't help wonder if this interaction had motives different from what was stated. The vote on h3llo could be an example of distancing, while at the same time giving a partner a kick in the pants to get his head in the game. Bulvious even asks him who h3llo would vote for if the deadline were imminent. Maybe I'm reading too much into this, but it's what crosses my mind on review.

He mentions his dislike of BS. Again, valid reason. He rails against SF for not scumhunting and eventually votes for her, joining the wagon with h3llo. There's little interaction between Bulvious and SF, mostly Bulvious pointing out what a terribly player SF is, and SF kinda agreeing.

Sensing that the SF wagon is likely a dead end, he then steps back and asks h3llo what he thinks about the general willingness to lynch a lurker, and if that was a ploy by scum to keep town off topic. I've gone into why I hate this. It's a leading question to a specific player, it throws a blanket of suspicion on players. It's also hypocritical, as Bulvious has been the most vocal in his dislike of lurkers and his willingness to lynch them. He then moves his suspicions to Alnpka... for lurking.

Active

lurking, granted.

At this point Zdenek begins his debate and attack on h3llo. You'll find that the primary defender of h3llo is Bulvious. While I agree that Zdenek did not present a strong case, reading back I find Bulvious's defense to be strong, and consistent throughout.

His endorsement of Workdawg seems premature to be honest. This is a matter of opinion, but I can't see how he can make a statement like that with such a small body of posting to base a judgement like that on. What has Workdawg done? Voted for Zedenek for reasons that boil down to him being rubbed the wrong way by Zedenek.

And then he says he finds the case against me presented by Zedenek and Chkflip to be "very convincing". Chkflip did not, IMO, present a strong case. The bulk of it was already expressed by Zedenek, but Bulvious did not comment on it until another player echoed it and placed a vote against me.

Then

he finds the case "very convincing". And then, when chkflip unvotes me, he apparently loses interest in that "convincing" case and switches his vote to Alnpka, whom Zedenek had just voted for. He reminds everyone that he was suspicious of Alnpka before, but he's not followed up on that suspicion. But now that a wagon is a possibility, he's on it.

I feel strongly that either Bulvious or h3llo is scum. Maybe both. A couple of factors, being suspiciously opportunistic amongst them, leads me to

Vote: Bulvious

There's more to comment on, but I'm out of time. Will post tonight, tomorrow afternoon at the latest.

[startransmission]

I've had a last few days that have been incredibly busy with both work and personal stuff. Sorry about the lack of input.

There's a lot to catch up and comment on. Will do so today.

[startransmission]

Also, I find it quite odd that you say I've had my foot in the door of all of the wagons.
Granted, this is just skimming the votecounts, but other than Sarahfish, my vote is the only one clocked in on those people. Sarahfish did go up to 2, and then to 3, but as soon as Workdawg joined in and cleared the spot (at least in my opinion) my vote went away.

You've had you foot in the door of all

potential

wagons. Were you scum it would be sloppy to actually place your vote on the players in every instance.

My thoughts...

It seems to me that Bulvious just pressures with his vote and when someone stands up to that pressure, he moves to someone else. Overall, I still think his motive is scumhunting. His other posts seem to verify this to me.

This is where I'm torn. It's true that if Bulvious is scum he has picked his targets well and kept himself from pushing anything too hard. That's something that a townie would do as well if he were using his vote as pressure and his motive is scumhunting. But as Bulvious pointed out, he hasn't actually placed his vote on many players this game, just voiced his suspicion. It's an easy way to keep your hands clean when the focus/suspicion on a player evaporates. The primary reasons I'm inclined to consider Bulvious scum is the buddying, the leading question to h3llo and the subsequent (and unnecessary) attack on Zedenek's h3llo case. And his feeling that the case on me was very convincing. The case presented was not new, but when another player echoed it and pushed it, he then chimes in on it. He doesn't place a vote, and when that pressure on me goes away, so does his intererest in that "very convincing" case.

Sorry to see Fatso go.

Alnpka chose a poor time to go VLA. I need to look at the debate between Bulvious and Alnpka, and form a more solid opinion on Alnpka. Analyzing the debate may give me a better feel for Bulvious as well. Not sure what to make of DMSIS and Work, I'll look closer at them as well.

[startransmission]

Case in point: Hunting in partners is stupid. Assuming I'm scum because I defended someone is dumb.

I agree that hunting in partners, particularly on D1 is stupid. But my suspicion of you is not purely based off you defending people (though that doesn't make you town either) or your potential partnership with h3llo. I think though, that I've put more stock into it then I should. I will always harbor some suspicion of players who push/voice suspicion of all players who garner focus/suspicion. Up until the point of my vote for you, you had done that. But, as I pointed out in when I voted for you, your reasons were often valid. When you considered an old complaint about me that chkflip parroted as a "very convincing" case I found it the first time where your reasoning was questionable. You hadn't really bitten when Zdenek prepared a very similar argument and vote against me earlier. But now you were. And when it turned out the vote by chkflip was going nowhere, you disregarded the case again. The fact that the case was against me was irrelevant, it was that it was yet another potential wagon you expressed interest in and for motives I found questionable. It put your past suspicions of other players in a potentially different, potentially scummy light. It went from viewing you as a pro-town player putting pressure on other players to an anti-town player keeping his options open.

Your defense has been sound. Your actions since my vote haven't strengthened my suspicion. I think I listened to my gut a little much and perhaps convinced myself to see things wrongly.

Unvote

I'll separate my next post to avoid a wall o text.

[startransmission]

Workdawg

After voicing my concerns about SF and questioning her about them earlier in the day, I walked away from that feeling she was town. Not protown by any means, but likely newbtown. So I don't look at WD's slot with any additional suspicion then I would anybody else, and in fact might give him more the benefit of the doubt.

When he comes in he points out that he tends to post walls o text. I never found the tendency to do so scummy. Posting a ton of fluff can be used to create noise in the thread, but I don't see WD doing this. His case against Zedenek kinda bugs me. He points out that Zedenek is succinct in his posts, and that his tone rubs him the wrong way. Not acceptable reasons to place a vote by any means. He argues that Zedenek doesn't offer reasoning behind his cases until asked to do so. That's... kinda true. I don't find that a scumtell by any means, no more than the opposite of posting walls o text. And he accuses Zedenek of not presenting a case against me, which he did. Not a great one but one nonetheless. WD somewhat admits this later on.

His ensuing questions to Bulvious regarding sheeping Zedeneks Alnkpka vote were valid. His continued interaction with Zedeneck is well reasoned. I don't find him to be at all wishy washy. He's asked people appropriate questions. He continues to explain his logic, and explain the problem he has with others. He's not been an overly aggressive player, but I don't find that scummy.

While I hate giving out town cards, with WD I'm leaning town. I agree that his case in Zedenek is not strong, but he's standing by it. Those who are on his wagon who feel strongly otherwise have not convinced me with their cases. DMSIS and h3llo in particular. I'm torn on Zedeneks vote switch to Alnpka, then back to WD. While I understand his desire to put his vote somewhere useful, I hope he's placing it on a player who he feels is the likeliest to be scum, not just the likeliest to be lynched.

Ok, off to work. I know everyone's tired of that excuse, and I'm tired of giving it. But circumstances suck right now. I will get into DMSIS, h3llo, and Alnpka next. I will have a vote and my reasoning before deadline, provided a hammer doesn't come down before.

[startransmission]

ST, while I appreciate your post - the hell man? Input please? What do you think? Aln, Work, or Zdenek? Or no lynch?

Certainly not a no-lynch. Again, I will have a vote and my reasoning before deadline. Shit, and I need to get into Zedenek too. I'm rather conflicted about him.

[startransmission]

Closed last night, opening this morning. I have a short day though, will be here to post well before deadline. Please resist the urge to hammer prematurely.

[startransmission]

Back from work and am pleased to see the day hasn't ended quite yet. Preparing post, might be 45 minutes or so.

[startransmission]

I don't find Alnpka to be a viable lynch at this time. Solid points against him have been brought up, and his responses have been...soft. His VLA may have been genuine, but the timing is fishy. He promises to answer questions, yet has not done so. So, some anti-town play, but nothing definitive. His lynch, I think, would offer town very little information.

Zedenek. His case on h3llo was weak. His ideas of town-tells are questionable. His persistence to wagon up on lurkers is not anti-town, but when it comes as early and often as it did with him it's not exactly helpful. What strikes me is that a lot of the criticism on him has been based on his attitude, on how people feel about the way he comes off. I'll agree that he can be a bit brusque, but brevity is not scummy. Some, ZD for example, would say it's towny. He casts a wide net of suspicion on players, but seems willing to commit only when it appears the wagon can go through. On D1 that's not super scummy, but it rubs me the wrong way nonetheless. I think I very mildly lean town, though I admit that his lynch would be an informative one.

DMSIS. Tunneling on WD. I don't find his case terribly convincing, but he seems convinced. Very little to go off of. WD targets him for not participating, and since then it's been a back and forth. I don't know that DMSIS is wrong. But I've laid out my opinion on WD, and WD's response to DMSIS hasn't made me more suspicious of him.

Out of the two leading wagons (Al and ZD) I think ZD's is the most beneficial to town. Obviously if he's town his lynch will hurt, but there's more to mine from his lynch. If it comes down to deadline I will drop the hammer.

On to h3llo in the next post.

[startransmission]

EBWOP:

Out of the two leading wagons (WD and ZD). Alnpka is not a leading wagon.

[startransmission]

h3llo. His response to early pressure from Bulvious was adequate. His suspicions of SF was justified. What bothers me about it is he makes a point of criticizing SF for not scum hunting, but by that point in the game he had done little himself. He responded to Bulvious, made some...observations, and gave his opinion on active lurking. Nothing to glean from any of that. And there's the little interaction with Fatso, which involved some confusion about who posted what when... the whole thing made my eyes glaze over and amounted to nothing. Then there's the post where he answers a question oddly directed at him by Bulvious, and congratulates Bulvious for noticing the lack of input from Alnpka. This put previous interactions with Bulvious in a different light for me, and it's where I first began to suspect a relationship between the two. That's not me looking to hunt in pairs, that's just a gut feeling that I still can't shake. If anything, it's buddying which I find scummy, but wouldn't be on Bulvious's head

What follows is a debate between ZD and h3llo. ZD pushes a case against h3llo. h3llo fights back and does a fair job. That's not hard to do, as the case against him, or at least the way it's presented, isn't the strongest. What bothers me is the vote at ZD, which is a

touch

OMGUS. Though if he really felt that ZD was just mudslinging I suppose I can see it as that would be a reason to find ZD scummy. When ZD presents a case that h3llo does find "concise" (and it was) his response to it was decent. Or it least it seemed honest. What bothers me is that he then responds to Fatso's opinion that he looked a little scummy with a vote. He couches it in his feeling that Fatso is fencesitting, though I don't see it that way at all. That's twice now a player has voiced concern over h3llo and has been rewarded with a quick vote from h3llo.

He continues to defend (notably from Bulvious) his opinion on why he finds Fatso to be fencesitting. To be fair he seems to honestly believe it, and offers what he feels are examples. He softclaims town. He stays on Fatso and says he doesn't think Kard has done enough to erase the scumminess on the Fatso slot. Then, with an explanation that I do not buy

at all

and he puts WD at L-2. It seems to come out of the blue. An excellent time to place a vote on a growing wagon, especially with the deadline fast approaching. Not to be heard from since.

Summary- Not much to hold up as a solid case. There's hypocrisy- criticizes players for not scumhunting, while doing little himself. He even admits as much. His case on ZD is weak, as is his case on Fatso. There's a touch of OMGUS- in two out of his four votes he votes for a player (ZD and Fatso respectively) soon after they vote/voice suspicion on him. Buddying to Bulvious. Wagon hopping- his vote for WD seems opportunistic. The reasoning is weak, the timing fishy, and the subsequent disappearance combine for a scummy act.

Vote: h3llo

I know it's not a rock 'n roll case, but as opposed to ZD I'm more inclined to lean scum on h3llo. I think his lynch would be informative as well, no matter his alignment. I don't think I will I hammer ZD. The more I sit here and type and think about it, the less willing I feel. Not that that'll save him, it appears to be the wagon of choice at this late hour.

[startransmission]

I don't think I will I hammer ZD. The more I sit here and type and think about it, the less willing I feel.

While I won't be thrilled with his lynch, I do prefer it over a no-lynch. So, obviously I'd hammer out of principal.

[startransmission]

Lame. Good Job scum. Damn, SF ended up as scum. Huh.