00s Band Mafia (Game Over!)

Gaoth · Post Post #125 (ISO) » Fri May 13, 2011 3:31 am

@Regfan Yeah, I got a little excited about finding out if Parabollocks was an alt, but this was because I was trying to determine how I should be viewing his play style. I referenced a past game (which I know some of the other players here were in) to illustrate my opinion on the role claiming. I have yet to offer speculation on the policy lynch situation because they were referencing an argument on the sign up page, a page which I never visited, and at that point was having trouble finding. However, I will offer my thoughts on it now, because I found it!

So, Chesskid wants a PL on C-Worl for past actions. Pine wants a PL on Chesskid for wanting a PL on C-Worl. IMHO, Pine's defense of C-Worl seems very buddy-buddy, especially since they have been distancing themselves in game. I know, Pine said he would PL Chesskid on principle, regardless of alignment, but it would have been very easy to just let it go (IT WAS THE SIGN UP PAGE FOR CRYING OUT LOUD!). The fact that Pine carried it out so long says to me that he is trying to protect C-Worl. This screams scumbuddies, especially since I'm assuming that the set up is similar to the 90's game with two differing (fairly small) mafia factions.

On that note, I am guessing the set up is 12-2-2, and we are one weak-ass town, or its 10-3-3 PRs in both (obviously the more likely situation, since set up blatantly states there are PRs out there.

I think we should put some pressure on Pine.

UNVOTE Gorilla, VOTE Pine

Resistance is Useless!

Parabollocks · Post Post #126 (ISO) » Fri May 13, 2011 3:39 am

Not sure how i feel about the above post.

FoS: Gaoth

Gaoth · Post Post #127 (ISO) » Fri May 13, 2011 3:50 am

Fair enough. Please understand that I was just worried that you were an alt of a guy i got into it with in the 90's game and wasn't excited about that prospect. Basically you're not and I was just misguided.

Parabollocks · Post Post #128 (ISO) » Fri May 13, 2011 3:53 am

I'm not worried about whether you think i'm an alt or not, i'm worried about your case at hand, it's clearly fairly weak and i would like further explanation as to why we should get more pressure on pine besides PL joking fodder.

Pine · Post Post #129 (ISO) » Fri May 13, 2011 3:56 am

Gaoth, C-Worl is my friend. I was defending him against the PL threats before role PMs even went out, threats that were NOT based on past actions. Pay attention.

Also, I stopped pushing the chesskid PL on like page 2, and followed through with the vote on chesskid when he voted for

me

, not C-Worl.

The very specific speculation on the setup suggests to me that Gaoth is on one of the scumteams, and seeing that he only had one partner, assumed a 12-2-2 setup.

Nintendo's claim is somewhat believable, though I think of Blink 182 as being a late-90s band. Wikipedia disagrees with me, though, listing their mainstream period as 1999-2005, and that song specifically as 2001. Meh.

UNVOTE: Nintendo
VOTE: Gaoth Provide content, dude. Not parroting of stuff we left behind pages ago.

Parabollocks · Post Post #130 (ISO) » Fri May 13, 2011 3:58 am

UNVOTE:
VOTE: C-Worl

thoughts, Pine?

Gaoth · Post Post #131 (ISO) » Fri May 13, 2011 3:59 am

My case is the buddying, and subsequent distancing between him and C-Worl...there is a fair amount of pressure on C-Worl, i thought maybe we should throw some on Pine. He has been fairly defensive about all his posts. Being defensive about posts isn't scummy in and of itself, but pair defending joke posts with the aforementioned buddying/distancing, and i think there is a reasonable case for Pine.

P-Edit: Seems a little reactionary/OMGUSing....just saying.

Pine · Post Post #132 (ISO) » Fri May 13, 2011 4:05 am

Ehhh...C-Worl and I have fought like cats in a bag in the past, Para. When he was convincing me to /in for this game, we agreed to try to avoid direct confrontation (that's the source of the "distancing," though how you can accuse someone of distancing and buddying in the same post is beyond me.) He hasn't done anything overtly scummy, except that he has seemed to court my defense. The "I'm Town" bit is explicitly

meant

to be a Town tell, and because it is

meant

to be such, it's useless. I'd actually say it was scummy, but C-Worl is prone to do that sort of thing...try to send a "Hey, I'm Town this game, are you?" message.

@Gaoth: If there's a reasonable case to be made on me, make it. You haven't yet, you've merely summarized and paraphrased the criticisms of others, most of which have been completely dropped.

Parabollocks · Post Post #133 (ISO) » Fri May 13, 2011 4:09 am

Well i have to say i don't really like either of your responses, my vote stays on C-Worl until he responds.

nintendoaddict1 · Post Post #134 (ISO) » Fri May 13, 2011 4:31 am

gorilla wrote:but you never said you were going to answer them later, you just asked if they want you to claim

I must have just missed the questions, then. I'll have to do a re-read of the last few pages.

Talapus · Post Post #135 (ISO) » Fri May 13, 2011 5:49 am

Wow nintendo, that is some really odd play style on your part. If it's because you're new to mafia in general then hopefully you'll learn something from it. But not really arguing your case, then saying you'll discuss it more tomorrow so you can get sleep while being a L-4 is not the way to go. But then comeback in 13 minutes later and claiming outright with no real argument or discussion??? I don't really get that. In all mafia games players will get frustrated sooner or later as the finger of suspicion points their way. But when at L-4 you have more then enough time to at least try to talk things out and argue with other players for a bit in hopes to change their minds intead of just coming in and claiming.

It looks like we still have 2 or 3 players who have yet to even say anything in this game so far too which makes it hard to draw any conclusions as to there alignment yet. But at least for now I will

UNVOTE

as my first vote was obviously just a reg joke vote. Although I've not played with any of you here before on this site I do think it's important that we not solely base our opinions or attitudes on players because of previous playstyles in other games. Helpful sure, but as we can see from some of the discussions it's getting us into questionable arguments that may or may not help is later in the game. Day 1 is always hard, but I'll at least wait to hear from everyone before I throw another vote out there.

DemonHybrid · Post Post #136 (ISO) » Fri May 13, 2011 5:57 am

Gaoth wrote:@Regfan Yeah, I got a little excited about finding out if Parabollocks was an alt, but this was because I was trying to determine how I should be viewing his play style. I referenced a past game (which I know some of the other players here were in) to illustrate my opinion on the role claiming. I have yet to offer speculation on the policy lynch situation because they were referencing an argument on the sign up page, a page which I never visited, and at that point was having trouble finding. However, I will offer my thoughts on it now, because I found it!

So, Chesskid wants a PL on C-Worl for past actions. Pine wants a PL on Chesskid for wanting a PL on C-Worl. IMHO, Pine's defense of C-Worl seems very buddy-buddy, especially since they have been distancing themselves in game. I know, Pine said he would PL Chesskid on principle, regardless of alignment, but it would have been very easy to just let it go (IT WAS THE SIGN UP PAGE FOR CRYING OUT LOUD!). The fact that Pine carried it out so long says to me that he is trying to protect C-Worl. This screams scumbuddies, especially since I'm assuming that the set up is similar to the 90's game with two differing (fairly small) mafia factions.

On that note, I am guessing the set up is 12-2-2, and we are one weak-ass town, or its 10-3-3 PRs in both (obviously the more likely situation, since set up blatantly states there are PRs out there.

I think we should put some pressure on Pine.

UNVOTE Gorilla, VOTE Pine

Resistance is Useless!

Not better. Your vote is a "pressure" vote after all of that?

nintendoaddict1 · Post Post #137 (ISO) » Fri May 13, 2011 5:59 am

Talapus wrote:Wow nintendo, that is some really odd play style on your part. If it's because you're new to mafia in general then hopefully you'll learn something from it. But not really arguing your case, then saying you'll discuss it more tomorrow so you can get sleep while being a L-4 is not the way to go. But then comeback in 13 minutes later and claiming outright with no real argument or discussion??? I don't really get that. In all mafia games players will get frustrated sooner or later as the finger of suspicion points their way. But when at L-4 you have more then enough time to at least try to talk things out and argue with other players for a bit in hopes to change their minds intead of just coming in and claiming.

2 hours and 13 minutes, check the time stamps. And am I not allowed to sleep? And I claimed because I didn't know if I'd get quicklynched in the night. (I tend to sleep in and today was no exception.)

C-Worl · Post Post #138 (ISO) » Fri May 13, 2011 6:06 am

Parabollocks. I never said stupid = scummy. In fact the fact I didn't vote at the time should give you an indication. If I told you what I got from that the person I'm watching would change their actions accordingly. How was I redirecting, he over reacted to my statement and I called him on it. The argument at the time was whether what he did was scummy or not. So my statement was part of that argument. I fail to see how it redirected anything.

I refuse to allow irrelevant to allow scum to hide in plain site. Smart people don't jump at the first thing they see. (Though I will jump sometimes to see reactions) Best thing to do is bide your time and build your cases slowly. And yes, I'm the middle man. I find that making myself an easy target helps draw scum out faster. The vote for Nintendo was to find out more about Chesskid than anything else.

BTW, his unvote makes him town.

Talapus · Post Post #139 (ISO) » Fri May 13, 2011 6:08 am

nintendoaddict1 wrote:
Talapus wrote:Wow nintendo, that is some really odd play style on your part. If it's because you're new to mafia in general then hopefully you'll learn something from it. But not really arguing your case, then saying you'll discuss it more tomorrow so you can get sleep while being a L-4 is not the way to go. But then comeback in 13 minutes later and claiming outright with no real argument or discussion??? I don't really get that. In all mafia games players will get frustrated sooner or later as the finger of suspicion points their way. But when at L-4 you have more then enough time to at least try to talk things out and argue with other players for a bit in hopes to change their minds intead of just coming in and claiming.

2 hours and 13 minutes, check the time stamps. And am I not allowed to sleep? And I claimed because I didn't know if I'd get quicklynched in the night. (I tend to sleep in and today was no exception.)

My bad on the 2 hours part but obviously you were still awake. So why not come in and argue instead of just coming in to claim? That actually makes your playstyle look even worse.....just saying.

nintendoaddict1 · Post Post #140 (ISO) » Fri May 13, 2011 6:17 am

Talapus wrote:
nintendoaddict1 wrote:
Talapus wrote:Wow nintendo, that is some really odd play style on your part. If it's because you're new to mafia in general then hopefully you'll learn something from it. But not really arguing your case, then saying you'll discuss it more tomorrow so you can get sleep while being a L-4 is not the way to go. But then comeback in 13 minutes later and claiming outright with no real argument or discussion??? I don't really get that. In all mafia games players will get frustrated sooner or later as the finger of suspicion points their way. But when at L-4 you have more then enough time to at least try to talk things out and argue with other players for a bit in hopes to change their minds intead of just coming in and claiming.

2 hours and 13 minutes, check the time stamps. And am I not allowed to sleep? And I claimed because I didn't know if I'd get quicklynched in the night. (I tend to sleep in and today was no exception.)

My bad on the 2 hours part but obviously you were still awake. So why not come in and argue instead of just coming in to claim? That actually makes your playstyle look even worse.....just saying.

Still awake does not mean I was near a computer. I told you why, I didn't want to come back in the morning and find that you guys had lynched me while I was asleep.

Pine · Post Post #141 (ISO) » Fri May 13, 2011 6:20 am

C-Worl wrote:BTW, his unvote makes him town.

No it doesn't. Scum would be smart to get off a dying wagon too.

C-Worl · Post Post #142 (ISO) » Fri May 13, 2011 6:31 am

Pine wrote:
C-Worl wrote:BTW, his unvote makes him town.

No it doesn't. Scum would be smart to get off a dying wagon too.

It wasn't really dieing. Only one person unvoted. Me. Judging from his last post the wagon had grown. It would've still been easy for me and others to hop on and quicklynch. No, Chesskid jumped off bc of the speed of the wagon (I'm assuming) and the people on it (once again, I'm assuming) which is a strong town tell.

chesskid3 · Post Post #143 (ISO) » Fri May 13, 2011 6:34 am

Good assumptions.

Pine · Post Post #144 (ISO) » Fri May 13, 2011 6:45 am

Three people (you, me, and chesskid) had unvoted. The wagon was dying.

C-Worl · Post Post #145 (ISO) » Fri May 13, 2011 6:47 am

Pine wrote:Three people (you, me, and chesskid) had unvoted. The wagon was dying.

You unvoted after Chess and Chess unvoting does not show Chess that the wagon is dieing. Before his unvote only 1 person had unvoted. Your argument is bad. Stop tunneling chess, he's town.

Pine · Post Post #146 (ISO) » Fri May 13, 2011 6:52 am

Oh. You're talking about chesskid. I thought we were talking about Talapus. Reread in that context, it makes sense.

I blame the microscopic text on my phone.

Parabollocks · Post Post #147 (ISO) » Fri May 13, 2011 6:54 am

C-Worl wrote:Parabollocks. I never said stupid = scummy. In fact the fact I didn't vote at the time should give you an indication.
If I told you what I got from that the person I'm watching would change their actions accordingly.

How was I redirecting, he over reacted to my statement and I called him on it. The argument at the time was whether what he did was scummy or not. So my statement was part of that argument. I fail to see how it redirected anything.

I refuse to allow irrelevant to allow scum to hide in plain site. Smart people don't jump at the first thing they see.
(Though I will jump sometimes to see reactions) Best thing to do is bide your time and build your cases slowly.
And yes, I'm the middle man. I find that making myself an easy target helps draw scum out faster. The vote for Nintendo was to find out more about Chesskid than anything else.

BTW, his unvote makes him town.

Wouldn't you notice the sudden change and question his motives?

"you suck."
"no you suck."

REDIRECTING.

imagine this, you're about to hit by a car, do you just stand there like a dummy, or do you try and jump out of the way?

being the middleman doesn't make you a target at all, it makes you the middleman, your response is terrible you're almost trying to sound like "oh i was planning all of this i knew what i was doing all along don't worry about me acting scummy it's just a ploy to catch scum."

it's not working very well even if it's the case.

C-Worl · Post Post #148 (ISO) » Fri May 13, 2011 7:05 am

@Para, Townies change too when they're confronted. If anything it blinds. (You're more likely to do scummy things when you don't realize you're under the radar.)

I know what redirecting is. I fail to see how I was redirecting.

Ok.

Parabollocks · Post Post #149 (ISO) » Fri May 13, 2011 7:06 am

Yes, townies change too when confronted, but that's when you decide if your townie read stays from the reactions you get or confrontation, and vice-versa.