Mini 1185 - Artemis Fowl Mafia Game Over

[vollkan]

Vote: Katsuki

because I find your obsession with cupcakes extremely odd.

[vollkan]

Greetings to everyone I have played with before. To those with whom I have never had the pleasure, I look forward to getting to know you better.

With that, let's skip the RVS this game and getting straight down to detective work.

At approximately 6pm, eight out of thirteen players had confirmed. Of the five players who had not confirmed, four of them had posted on site since role PMs were dispatched. However, there is one person who was posting on site, but had not confirmed his role PM: MehPlusRawr. Over ten hour after that, he had posted yet again, but had still failed to confirm his PM. To me, this is a mystery. After all, when you're on site and you see that juicy, delicious "A new private message is waiting for you in your Inbox" box pop up on screen, who can resist clicking on it and reading the PM? And after you've read the PM, it only takes a second or two to confirm. So why wouldn't MehPlusRawr? My hypothesis is that scum have pregame talk and MPR decided to go check out the quicktopic and chat with his scumbuddies before confirming. That, or he had an overly complicated role and did not understand it, which is also more likely to be scum because they have a higher concentration of normal and factional abilities. Thus...

Vote: MehPlusRawr

I applaud any reasonable means of bypassing RVS and, since this is at least a line of argument which is worth pursuing, I'm happy to run it up the flagpole.

Unvote, Vote: MehPlusRawr

[vollkan]

EBWOP:

Unvote, Vote: MehPlusRawr

[vollkan]

*that was meant to say Vollkan

That's okay - we can't expect proper spelling from somebody silly enough to be part of the Cupcake Cult

[vollkan]

Actually, y'know, I just glanced at the pm, saw my role, and exited it. I then promptly forgot about the game until I just got a reminder that it started.

...and you've been playing mafia for how long? Since when do you NOT have to confirm your role PM, and since when do you not do it right away?

Welp, I had a roughly 6-month hiatus from mafia, and the two games that have started since I came back both had in-thread confirms. I don't have a "reply with a /confirm" reflex.

There's no random vote because it's really not RVS any more.

You haven't played any games for six months other than this one?

VOTE: VOLLKAN

THE MUFFIN SCUM

WE GOTS SCUM ALREADY
ELLI GET OVER HERE, NEED YOU ON THIS ONE.

LEI IS TOWN BY VIRTUE OF BEING A CUPCAKE.

LLD IS MY ARTEMIS AND TOWN BEYOND BELIEF.
ALIGNMENT-CONFIRMED MASONS FTW.

MPR are you town? If so, vote vollkanmuffinscum.

Someone's ingested waay too much frosting

For not spelling his name the way it should be spelled. And for not liking RVS. Why didn't you do something yourself to get us out of RVS?

My view (see here for a MD example) is that RVS and is generally useless. Every alternative that I've either personally tried (self-voting to draw out stupid reflexive players) or have seen (RQS) doesn't work much better (or worse) either. AGM came up with something genuinely novel, so I was willing to try it. No matter how you start the game things move eventually, so it isn't a big deal, but if there is a better way to do it I am interested in learning it.

(Also, the attitude that anybody who doesn't care about RVS but doesn't bend over backwards trying to find an alternative is scum is incredibly frustrating)

Let me put it in terms you'll find easier to understand then?

"HERP DERP I'M VOLKAN. HEY AGM, YOU'RE STARTING A SUPER SRS WAGON? AND I CAN JOIN WITH IMPUNITY? LET ME HOP ON THAT BITCH."

In other words, his joining you on your confirmation time crusade was the most opportunistic vote I've seen on Page 1. Ever.

It was totally trying to ride your coattails.

You realise that "OMG HE IS OPPORTUNISTIC SHEEPING" doesn't have much application when the voter freely admits that's what they're doing? You want it in bold:

I was totally riding AGM's coattails

(Though, the "impunity" thing is just BS. You're seriously suggesting that, having proclaimed my view that the line of argument was reasonable, I'd not come under scrutiny if it was: a) Proven to be crap; or b) Remained on the wagon in circumstances where it became scummy)

[vollkan]

That's a logical fallacy. Just because you admit something doesn't mean that there isn't a scum intent behind doing it.

It just means you are freely admitting that you're scummy.

Which is fine by me.

You've missed the point.

The "scum intent" you were asserting was "opportunism". You think opportunism is proved by the fact that I was following AGM.

My point is that the following of AGM was not "opportunistic" in any scummy, exploitative sense - but was simply me announcing my agreement with AGM and following him alternatively. What are you suggesting that I do? Announce my agreement with AGM that the matter is worth applying pressure over, but then proceed to vote Katsuki for being a cupcake?

Unvote, Vote volkan

A live demonstration of my prior point. Will LLD and Katsuki call this scummy when it agrees with them?

Tonight at 11.

But that's different, because Ellibereth was agreeing

with LLD

. Agreeing with LLD isn't scummy or opportunistic. Because...well...LLD likes LLD

Elli, that's three votes you've placed so far this game, with no explanation. Why so CES/Jack?

AGM, not like my questioning Elli means anything at this point?

Kidgloves for Elli. See above.

[vollkan]

But seriously, volkan, first question post 39, something feels disingenuous and off mhmhm.

What I mean is it wasn't clear to me whether he is saying that he recently took six months off, or whether this is his FIRST GAME after taking six months off (the difference being the reasonableness of forgetting to confirm)

[vollkan]

This is his third game post-hiatus. The previous two had in-thread confirms.
And fairly easy to verify too...

Well, in that case he's made a reasonable explanation so

Unvote

.

Ok one was actually a replace-in but still.

Which I assume wasn't reply by PM.

[vollkan]

yeahyeahyeah
what I don't get is why you had to ask him in the first place since it's already clear and even if not something you can look up.

I read it differently (as saying something more like "two other games since I came back had thread confirmation"). As for why I didn't check, it's generally better for accountability purposes to make people declare meta facts about themselves, even if it can be easily checked.

[vollkan]

And here's the seriousness. If you dislike RVS so much, then DO something about it.

Well, for starters, you've ignored entirely my response on this very point:

My view (see here for a MD example) is that RVS and is generally useless. Every alternative that I've either personally tried (self-voting to draw out stupid reflexive players) or have seen (RQS) doesn't work much better (or worse) either. AGM came up with something genuinely novel, so I was willing to try it. No matter how you start the game things move eventually, so it isn't a big deal, but if there is a better way to do it I am interested in learning it.

To add to that - go back and have a look at every one of my games over the past two years (IIRC, it's been that long since I gave up on self-voting). Count for me please the number of times that I've come up with my own alternative to RVS. If you don't want to do that, then let me tell you the answer: zero.

I think RVS is rarely useful, and often a waste of time. But, fortunately, it is also generally short-lived because something ALWAYS comes up - whether by luck or the actions of other people. So, I do as best I can to engage in serious discussion when it arises.

UNVOTE: volkan
Well, I guss it's time for him to claim... already? L-2 now, with my vote in essence on him.

Krew+7

,

Unvote, Vote: Krew

Let me very clear as to why, so that I don't get howls of "OMGUS" from the more lobotomised of you. Aside from ignoring my response he proceeds to push the wagon beyond the point of no return by demanding a claim. If he was town genuinely trying to ascertain my alignment, I would have expected a response ordinarily, but especially given that he was trying to force a claim. Coupled with the fact that he initially voted me for random reasons, then slides in the seriousness afterwards, I think it merits 7 points. Joining a wagon for random reasons, then adding on some weak serious reasons and, of all things, UNVOTING before demanding a claim reeks of trying to slip in under the radar.

[vollkan]

yeah a lot of people hate RVS because they prefer not to have to force themselves to be casual; they want to get into pointless semantic arguments so they can nail someone for a verbal slip-up

we call that lot of people "scumlors"

Acosmist+5

1) You are saying having a meta dislike of RVS automatically makes a person scum?
2) If yes, why?
3) If no - then suppose a player with said dislike read AGM's post and thought "Hmm, that sounds like a good idea". What should they do?
4) Why are you pulling "pointless semantic arguments so they can nail someone for a verbal slip-up" out of your arse? I don't think I've done that at all this game, so inserting it in your attack just seems to be a way to make me seem scummy for no basis whatsoever

[vollkan]

1 yep

What was my alignment in the MD thread I linked?

2 cuz RVS is a pure mirror into alignment and that terrifies scum

How many times have you seen scum caught as a result of RVS?

3 lolumad

So, I ask a serious question which goes to something at the heart of my now-very-serious wagon, and the best you can come up with is "lolumad"?

4 I was attacking you waaaaat

If it had nothing to do with me, then what on earth was the relevance of "pointless semantic arguments so they can nail someone for a verbal slip-up"? Just poisoning the well?

so what's the +5 about, am I a magical weapon? am I vorpal? Will I vig you at night for being scum?

For the uninitiated, I rank my suspects from 0 (absolutely town) - 100 (absolutely scum). Everybody starts at 50. Because I basically don't believe in towntells and am skeptical about most scumtells, it is very common for people to stay at 50. 50 does not mean "no opinion" - it means "I don't see scumtells" from this person. Absent claims, deadline compromises, etc. I will

always

vote the person with the highest score.

[vollkan]

I can see you're really upset about this. I honestly think you ought to sit down calmly, take a stress pill, and think things over.

I can't work out if you are being ironic or serious here...I'm being asked to claim based on a wagon that has absolutely terrible arguments underpinning it. Of course I am going to respond.

MD thread?

See my fourth post. I linked it. Here - [url=http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... 4#p3038254]. A non-game example of me declaring that I don't think that RVS (or RQS) is useful

Serious question? Do you want me to speculate on a counterfactual? If x, then answer y; if ~x, then answer z. Well, I said x, right? So why am I answering z? I'm not. Obviously.

I wish I could be as naive as you, thinking every argument in this game has been substantive so far.

:headdesk:

Mafia 101:
In order for something to legitimately be a scumtell it must be such that it is demonstrably more likely to come from scum than town. If you can't do that, it isn't a scumtell. My counterfactual was to make you explain how you go about claling my page 1 following a scumtell

Whether or not every argument has been substantive is irrelevant here - my wagon's at the srs end of business

so what do you do when you're scum? Roll a die? How do you add points to reads when you're lying through your teeth? How does one fake a scumread with such mathematical precision? I'm curious, because I want to know how you do it. In theory. If you ever were scum, and, say, got really upset by some offhand remarks and gave someone, I dunno, let's say, +5 on your scumometer. In that unlikely series of events, how would you BS your way to that?

It doesn't impact on how I play; it's just a means of ranking.

[vollkan]

UNVOTE: volkan
Well, I guss it's time for him to claim... already? L-2 now, with my vote in essence on him.

Krew+7

,

Unvote, Vote: Krew

Let me very clear as to why, so that I don't get howls of "OMGUS" from the more lobotomised of you. Aside from ignoring my response he proceeds to push the wagon beyond the point of no return by demanding a claim. If he was town genuinely trying to ascertain my alignment, I would have expected a response ordinarily, but especially given that he was trying to force a claim. Coupled with the fact that he initially voted me for random reasons, then slides in the seriousness afterwards, I think it merits 7 points. Joining a wagon for random reasons, then adding on some weak serious reasons and, of all things, UNVOTING before demanding a claim reeks of trying to slip in under the radar.

Does that look like a demand? That is me being unsure. I was surprised that you got to L-1 so quickly, hence the "already...?" and was asking if it was too early for a claim.
Also, I don't understand how much more clear I can be. My vote on you WAS. NOT. RANDOM.
I also unvoted so as to prevent a quicklynch. Would you like my vote to go back on you?

If you thought the wagon had moved too fast, that's something you ought to have raised. Under no circumstances is passively going "I guess he should claim" acceptable - either you were demanding I claim in circumstances where you were plainly not taking my responses seriously, or you were trying to meekly let the wagon build despite apparently being aware of how terribad it is.

[vollkan]

I do not say the wagon is terribad. Just... quick. But I still think you are scum.
"and was asking if it was too early for a claim."

You're missing the point. A wagon builds to L-1 with obscene speed. I post a rebuttal which, thus far, nobody has even attempted to counter (other than Acos's rather embarrassing quasi-trolling effort...). You apparently know that the wagon is quick, and yet you not only don't draw attention to this or use it any way to question the wagon, but you don't even go back to reflect on the comprehensive response that I gave.

There are at best just two elements to the case against me:
1) Opposing RVS and not doing anything about it is scummy
2) Following another player, especially when you try to do it with impunity, is scummy

1) is wrong even on first principles (it implies that you can't think RVS is useless without thinking of a more useful alternative, which is just logically untrue). And, moreover, I've already pointed out several times that I consistently have an attitude of "meh" to RVS. I can't see any alternatives, but I'll float along and just hope it ends fast.

2) simply ignores what I did. Far from following with impunity, I was explicit in my view that I thought AGM's argument was reasonable. At the risk of repeating my early counterfactual, what was I meant to do? Say "Well, AGM's got a decent idea here, but I'm not going to support it because that would require that I follow him"?

- And, yes, the above is repeating what I've already said, but nobody seems to be paying any attention to it.

[vollkan]

1. I don't like meta, so I guess this is moot to me. I still think you should try to get out of it if you don't like it >.>

"I don't like meta" doesn't cut it. I don't care how much you dislike meta, you can't seriously tell me that I am scum in this game for an attitude that is reflected in a non-game context.

Even within this game, what on earth is the scumtell that you are alleging? Why is it scummy to dislike RVS but, not knowing of any viable alternative, to not try and do something to get out of it?

2. And why didn't you check when MPR posted a defense?

I asked him to clarify his defence and, when he did, I promptly unvoted. Whether or not I ask him to confirm his meta versus me searching for it myself is irrelevant (let alone to the point of constituting a lynch-worthy scumtell)

[vollkan]

Quasi-EBWOP:

Even within this game, what on earth is the scumtell that you are alleging? Why is it scummy to dislike RVS but, not knowing of any viable alternative, to not try and do something to get out of it?

Especially given that when an alternative did present itself, in AGM's idea, I supported it.

[vollkan]

We've driven this shenanigan far enough.

Unvote; Vote: Kwanton

Reason?

--
Acosmist v DeathNote just reads like a reasonable response from DeathNote to trolling. Null alignment-wise for both of them.

[vollkan]

We've driven this shenanigan far enough.

Unvote; Vote: Kwanton

Reason?

--
Acosmist v DeathNote just reads like a reasonable response from DeathNote to trolling. Null alignment-wise for both of them.

Wave your hands! Dismiss it! It's just trolling!

"If I keep saying that, the bad man will go away and I won't have to answer the laundry list of questions I left hanging!"

Pretty sure I answered every question you have asked me.

Observant people: note the contradiction between this latest post and one further back. You'll see the one.

*gasp* In a previous post I called it "quasi-trolling" and now I am calling it "trolling". I can see why people think you're a god at this game - you get right to the core issues

You can shove that noted up your ass cause that is not what i said at all.

"reasonable"

yep that's the first word that comes to mind

"reasonable"

Then we agree

[vollkan]

this point system you have

What happens when you are scum? Walk me through exactly how you utilize it as scum

The major difference comes in at the level of what I choose to treat as scumtells (and what I don't). Most of my scum play revolves around me making arguments which I know I can present plausibly and seemingly logically, but which I personally know to be inaccurate.

On a more minor level, I can sometimes manipulate the points themselves as scum. However, because my system needs to maintain a level of credibility for it to be at all useful for me (as in, if my points are seriously inconsistent within or between games, the system becomes unusable), I have had to greatly limit my ability to do this (in fact, I tend almost always to give points of 5 (minor), 7 (medium) and 10 (serious)). If I want to push a mislynch on somebody, I'll most often do it at the level of the arguments themselves rather than by manipulating the points.

[vollkan]

Will I vig you at night for being scum?

That's the question that you are hand-wringing over me not answering?

No, I was talking about the magical -5 that I got somewhere along the line...but ok, Mr Guilty Conscience!

I explained why you got +5. What is the contradiction?

[vollkan]

The "tunneling from one player to the next" is how I play. I usually end up tunneling every player at least once. Now I'm off to figure out my next target.

1) Do you have other examples of you playing that way?
2) Similarly, asking somebody to contribute hardly qualifies as "tunnelling". If what you're saying is that you play a game of whack-a-mole with lurkerks (voting each one in turn until they say something), that's not at all a productive way to play

And bob, you mentioned but never actually answered my question. Why the mention of a quicklynch? How was it optimal play for town in any way?

I didn't mention a quicklynch. I'm not sure what you mean. It might have ended up a quicklynch but I wasn't purposely trying to make it so. I wasn't paying attention and thought the general consensus was that it was time for a vollkan lynch. I skimmed over the case on MPR, realized my vote was misplaced, and figured everyone else was onto something with vollkan. He was at L-1 and no one seemed to be unvoting so I figured people were content with his lynching.

I'm fairly embarrassed at how I was handling this game. Obviously I'm paying more attention at this point.

Then why didn't you ask people to explain the quicklynch wagon? Not paying attention doesn't excuse a failure to ask questions. if you thought there was a consensus, why not ask why?

vote: Sleepy

Reason?

[vollkan]

The "tunneling from one player to the next" is how I play. I usually end up tunneling every player at least once. Now I'm off to figure out my next target.

1) Do you have other examples of you playing that way?
2) Similarly, asking somebody to contribute hardly qualifies as "tunnelling". If what you're saying is that you play a game of whack-a-mole with lurkerks (voting each one in turn until they say something), that's not at all a productive way to play.

1. My only completed game is a newbie game, and my playstyle hadn't developed into the tunneling until after the game. But I have mentioned this style in other games.
2. That wasn't tunneling. It was pressure.
Off to read Kwanton.

On 1), maybe I am misunderstanding you, but it seems to be completely misleading to claim that you "play" a certain way, when you don't appear to have any track record of playing that way. Please quote for me where you "mention" this playstyle. Needless to say, my BS-senses are tingling.

[vollkan]

Will I vig you at night for being scum?

That's the question that you are hand-wringing over me not answering?

No, I was talking about the magical -5 that I got somewhere along the line...but ok, Mr Guilty Conscience!

I explained why you got +5. What is the contradiction?

Sure, why not? I don't get why you think my questions are less than fully serious. I mean, there's ONE reason you could PURPORT to misunderstand them...

Is your read on me null or 55? Null is 50, ain't it?

I can't see a single way that a question like "Will I vig you at night for being scum?" is a serious question. It's on par with Fate-esque questions like "Are you scum?" and so on.

My read on you is 55. And yeah, 50 is null

[vollkan]

The "tunneling from one player to the next" is how I play. I usually end up tunneling every player at least once. Now I'm off to figure out my next target.

1) Do you have other examples of you playing that way?
2) Similarly, asking somebody to contribute hardly qualifies as "tunnelling". If what you're saying is that you play a game of whack-a-mole with lurkerks (voting each one in turn until they say something), that's not at all a productive way to play.

1. My only completed game is a newbie game, and my playstyle hadn't developed into the tunneling until after the game. But I have mentioned this style in other games.
2. That wasn't tunneling. It was pressure.
Off to read Kwanton.

On 1), maybe I am misunderstanding you, but it seems to be completely misleading to claim that you "play" a certain way, when you don't appear to have any track record of playing that way. Please quote for me where you "mention" this playstyle. Needless to say, my BS-senses are tingling.

I cannot quote it to you, because all the games that I've used this style are currently ongoing.

Krew+5

Okay...so:

- First, you tell me that you "play" a particular way
- Second, you tell me that, whilst you don't actually have any record of "playing" that way, you have "mentioned" this in other games
- And, now, you are telling me that, despite you having just brought up said "mentioning", you can't actually quote it because it's in an ongoing game. Needless to say, if you weren't going to be able to back this meta defence up, you shouldn't have made it to begin with. (To say nothing of the fact that there is no way in hell that I am going to accept a meta defence based on ongoing games, unless you have actually flipped in those games).

Also, the "don't discuss ongoing games" rule doesn't have any application here. The rule is directed against DISCUSSING ongoing games. Quoting from an ongoing game is fine, since it's something that everybody could access if they wanted to. The rule just requires that there be no substantive discussion of that other game.

[vollkan]

What's this volkan? Trying to get me modkilled, eh?

Okay, the mod and I evidently disagree about how this rule works. So, instead, please just tell me if there is an example from any of your flipped games. If there is, I will find it.