Mafia 62: Suspicion in Sicily - Game over!

[Phoebus]

I dont know u or mole couldnt careless if u dislike him or not

Then stop making statements which point towards you having made such an assumption.

I am getting irritated at you only for your obtuseness.

You claim to carry on discussion.
You vote me for

"disliking"

mole
Now you say that you don't care whether I like or dislike him.

Plus, you say you don't know either of us from Adam.

Putting all of this together leads me to think that you're either very stupid or being intentionally so. Tell me which it is, so that I can decide whether or not you deserve a vote.

And yes! I'm defending VitaminR because I am his scumbuddy! Lynch me!

OR

I think he's making a valid point and here's a good one -

I like him too

! But wait...you don't care.

Just like you didn't care whether I liked mole or not but were convinced that I did not, I'm pretty sure you don't care why I'm "defending" VitR but are convinced that we're scum together.

Right?

Argh, I've been poked... I'm back people, it's just that this game doesn't have much activity outside random voting and rubbish wagonning...

This sort of statement prefacing a post makes red flags fly in my head.
It's an absolutely ludicrous attitude for a townie.

Scum sit back, lurk and let confusion prevail.
It's townie responsibility to stop the madness and discern something out of it.
What are you playing at, saying that before mentioning anything else at all? *eyebrow*




Everything alright DP?
Is this some new laid-back, "wary of the n00bs" style of playing after your sabbatical?

[Raffles]

It's an absolutely ludicrous attitude for a townie.

What? Is there a codes of standards that all townies has to obey? Jeez if you want us all taking the exactly same actions, someone could have told me in the newbie game... What's wrong with saying it before mentioning anything at all? If I said it other way round, would it not have tripped your scumdar? Care to give me a model solution so I could follow it all the time?

[AlexPaoletti]

I don't think he's saying there's any kind of "code" you must follow. However, a townie should always be trying to help the town. The attitude you portrayed does not show that; it seems foolish and scum-like. Something scum-like coming from a townie is definitely ludicrous.. unless, of course, you're scum.

[kinkster]

I dont know u or mole couldnt careless if u dislike him or not

Then stop making statements which point towards you having made such an assumption.

I am getting irritated at you only for your obtuseness.

You claim to carry on discussion.
You vote me for

"disliking"

mole
Now you say that you don't care whether I like or dislike him.

Plus, you say you don't know either of us from Adam.

Putting all of this together leads me to think that you're either very stupid or being intentionally so. Tell me which it is, so that I can decide whether or not you deserve a vote.

And yes! I'm defending VitaminR because I am his scumbuddy! Lynch me!

OR

I think he's making a valid point and here's a good one -

I like him too

! But wait...you don't care.

Just like you didn't care whether I liked mole or not but were convinced that I did not, I'm pretty sure you don't care why I'm "defending" VitR but are convinced that we're scum together.

Right?

Argh, I've been poked... I'm back people, it's just that this game doesn't have much activity outside random voting and rubbish wagonning...

This sort of statement prefacing a post makes red flags fly in my head.
It's an absolutely ludicrous attitude for a townie.

Scum sit back, lurk and let confusion prevail.
It's townie responsibility to stop the madness and discern something out of it.
What are you playing at, saying that before mentioning anything else at all? *eyebrow*




Everything alright DP?
Is this some new laid-back, "wary of the n00bs" style of playing after your sabbatical?

you just seem to be getting so uptight over 1 vote, yes i originaly voted for you because of ure whole lets lynch mole hes not gonna post so well get rid of him attitude

how uve reacted to it all is why im keeping my vote with you, and regardless of what u say u defended vtr when u had no real reason too, i for the time being think that was a mistake

[Mr. Flay]

Eighth Vote Count of the Game:

Toaster Strudel - 6 (Ancalagon, hollywoody1221, AlexPaoletti, Panzerjager, ~N9V~, Rand Althor)

kinkster - 3 (Yosarian2, Primate, VitaminR)
Phoebus - 2 (Raffles, kinkster)
Panzerjager - 1 (Cubsfan4ever)
Cubsfan4ever - 1 (Phoebus)
Rand Althor- 1 (Toaster Strudel)
Raffles - 1 (Jalyn)
spectrumvoid - 1 (Dragon Phoenix)

Not voting - 2 (spectrumvoid, scotmany12)

With eighteen alive, it will take ten votes to lynch.

[Raffles]

The way I see it after I've been playing a few games, I think I see a pattern.

Everyone goes about using a same way to hunt out a scum. That is to get everyone to act the same. Anyone who step out of this line exhibit something so-called "a scum tell", and is suspected of having a hidden agenda.

I disagree and have a healthy dislike for this tactic (which seems to be universal throughout the site). For one thing, if this were the case, the best thing for the scums to do is to forget their hidden agenda. This means that the probability of exhibiting "scum tell" is determined by the player's experience, but independent of the alignment. Which implies the probability of someone getting lynched is solely based on experience. This implies that no matter what game, it is noobish player that will get lynched and whether that person is a scum or not is solely dependent on luck.

Given this, it is far more likely that the scum would survive, because there are always less of them and they have NK ability.

Second and more general point is this rule does not allow you to experiment with different playstyle. I for one have found out a noobish play attracts far more votes than a scummy play. But I'll leave it at that as the game is still ongoing.

[hollywoody1221]

On the whole, I agree with what Raffles just said. In the two games I've played on here, a player gets lynched more often for being an idiot (or just acting like one for a moment) than they do for being scummy. But, I still am staying on ToasterStrudel because she (he?) is making comments that I find unhelpful, and detrimental to our cause, which is to lynch the mafia, obviously. S/he is preventing us from doing that, and is, therefore, not an ally of mine.

[Ancalagon]

I agree. Raffles does seem a bit scummy, I'll have to look at a reread of the evidence, but TS is just playing horribly so far.

[Yosarian2]

The way I see it after I've been playing a few games, I think I see a pattern.

Everyone goes about using a same way to hunt out a scum. That is to get everyone to act the same. Anyone who step out of this line exhibit something so-called "a scum tell", and is suspected of having a hidden agenda.


I disagree and have a healthy dislike for this tactic (which seems to be universal throughout the site). For one thing, if this were the case, the best thing for the scums to do is to forget their hidden agenda. This means that the probability of exhibiting "scum tell" is determined by the player's experience, but independent of the alignment. Which implies the probability of someone getting lynched is solely based on experience. This implies that no matter what game, it is noobish player that will get lynched and whether that person is a scum or not is solely dependent on luck.

Given this, it is far more likely that the scum would survive, because there are always less of them and they have NK ability.

Second and more general point is this rule does not allow you to experiment with different playstyle. I for one have found out a noobish play attracts far more votes than a scummy play. But I'll leave it at that as the game is still ongoing.

Well, EVERYONE is supected of having a hidden agenda, of course. But "being different" isn't a scum-tell. Of course, on the other hand, most day 1 scum tells are pretty thin, and at best are "X is slighly more likely to be scum" type tells. But some people have all different kinds of playstyles, and that usually expected.

You're talking in such general terms, I'm not quite sure what your're speaking of. Is there one specific bandwagon that you're saying you don't like? Do you disagree with a specific scumtell someone is using here?

[Yosarian2]

On another note, I'm still fairly happy with my kinkster vote.

[Raffles]

Nope, that post was written without any loss of generality, and it probably belongs more in mafia discussion thread rather than here, but I thought it might be an appropriate response for Phoebus.

I note that there may not be much to go on on the first day, but still, I find the following to be true.

1. People with rather unconstructive game play gets lynched first, regardless of scum or not. (NOTE: This is usually justified by saying "it's not helpful to the town". A stupid justification if you ask me.)

2. If 1 is not present, then people are accused for most hideous reasons. Usually something nit-picked from few posts and saying "this is not how a townie should act - die scumbag!" Which I also find is a silly justification.


My thoughts are that scum-tells are "codes of conduct" that has been made to easier identify the rule breakers, to make things easier for people to decide who to lynch. I believe that the name is misleading and prohibits creativity.

[Yosarian2]

Nope, that post was written without any loss of generality, and it probably belongs more in mafia discussion thread rather than here, but I thought it might be an appropriate response for Phoebus.

I note that there may not be much to go on on the first day, but still, I find the following to be true.

1. People with rather unconstructive game play gets lynched first, regardless of scum or not. (NOTE: This is usually justified by saying "it's not helpful to the town". A stupid justification if you ask me.)

(shrug) People who aren't trying to help the town are more likely to be scum then people who are trying to help the town, in general. As a general rule of thumb, good guys tend to be more vigerous scumhunters, bad guys would usually rather hang in the background. And yes, there's about a billion counter-examples to that, but a positive effect of acting like that is that it encourages people to do more to help the town and try and find scum, which inherently increases the town's odds of winning.

2. If 1 is not present, then people are accused for most hideous reasons. Usually something nit-picked from few posts and saying "this is not how a townie should act - die scumbag!" Which I also find is a silly justification.


My thoughts are that scum-tells are "codes of conduct" that has been made to easier identify the rule breakers, to make things easier for people to decide who to lynch. I believe that the name is misleading and prohibits creativity.

The best scum tells are the ones that would be a good thing for scum to do, if they could get away with it.

For example, lurking would help the scum, if they could get away with it, because it makes it harder to connect them to each other and harder to build a case against them.

Trying to out pro-town power roles would help the scum, if they could get away with it.

Pushing for a no-lynch, or pushing for a known good guy to get lynched, would help the scum if they could get away with it.

Defending a scum partner would help a scum, if they could get away with it.

Quitely getting on the wagon of a good guy that's already going full steam without getting noticed would help the scum, if they could get away with it.

And so on. Those are the best scum tells, IMHO; yes, there's always a WIFOM factor, but nonetheless people who do things that hurt the town are less likely to be town, and people who do things that help the town are more likely to be town.

There are also psychological scum tells (things that people believe scum are more likely to do for psychological reasons, rather then stratigic reasons), like "scum often comment on the nightkills"; I don't find those to be as reliable, and are usually best used just as a minor side-note or in order to give the town something to argue about, but eh, if that's all you've got early day 1, run with it.

If you don't like "scum tells", then how do you suggest we try and find scum?

[Yosarian2]

Anyway, getting away from general stratagy (I can apparently get pulled into a stratagy discussion WAY too easily...), Phoebus has a point. It's the job of good guys to keep the game moving and try to find scum, while it's the job of scum to mostly just not get lynched, so scum ARE more likely to sit back and do nothing, while town are more likely to try and get the game moving.

I hate "I didn't say anything because nothing other then randomness was happening" posts, because if everyone did that (and sometimes they do), then nothing ever happens, and the town usually does quite badly because of it. If nothing is happening, and you're a good guy, it's your job to MAKE something happen. So yeah, I agree with Phoebus that that post of yours raises red flags.

[Dragon Phoenix]

No access 18-25 March - business trip. If I need to be replaced, so be it. Apologies.

[Raffles]

But this is my point. If I make something happen, it seems to raise red flags anyway. I might do just as well post "I'm a scum".

[Toaster Strudel]

But this is my point. If I make something happen, it seems to raise red flags anyway. I might do just as well post "I'm a scum".

What are you complaining about? You have ONE vote, I got SIX! Also in the name of trying to "make something happen."

When you're vanilla, you're supposed to stick your neck out and make things happen, even if you get lynched for it. If you're vanilla, better you getting lynched than accidentally outing a power role.

Raffles just posted that he is a scum. He's using some twisted strategy to give himself permission to make nothing happen.

unvote, vote: Raffles

[Dragon Phoenix]

I must say that that post does not sit well with me either.

Unvote spectrumvoid
Vote Raffles

[Phoebus]

Raffles

What? Is there a codes of standards that all townies has to obey? Jeez if you want us all taking the exactly same actions, someone could have told me in the newbie game... What's wrong with saying it before mentioning anything at all? If I said it other way round, would it not have tripped your scumdar? Care to give me a model solution so I could follow it all the time?

No. I don't expect you to be a carbon copy of anyone else. That would make this game predictable and boring. However, I do expect a less lackadaisical attitude from a townie than yours.

So I quote the following for its truth content:

I don't think he's saying there's any kind of "code" you must follow. However, a townie should always be trying to help the town. The attitude you portrayed does not show that; it seems foolish and scum-like. Something scum-like coming from a townie is definitely ludicrous.. unless, of course, you're scum.

I also read Post 205 and I can understand your sentiment. Like you and Yos, I believe that the merits of such actions would probably be better discussed in gaming discussion thread.

However

, with regard to this game and Mafia in general, I ask you If you are going to sit back and do nothing in a game and wait for others to do it for you,

why are you playing the game in the first place

?

Some possible answers -

A] You enjoy the game and are a townie. In which case, I would expect you being more active and less laid back.

B] You enjoy the game and are scum and are being classic scum, which I suppose you shouldn't be doing since you disdain classical behaviours.

C] You don't care for the game and are just bored and want to post on some BBs.

Now I know that the third option is highly unlikely but it's good to cover it regardless.

But this is my point. If I make something happen, it seems to raise red flags anyway. I might do just as well post "I'm a scum".

The way I see it, you are limiting yourself to just Day 1 in a game.
While townies work alone, this is a team game where people, even dead, can count win if their faction wins.

Anything and everything you do will lead to further information, even if it kills you. Further information on how people responded to you during your trial.
Good play (on both sides, I suppose) would be a little more foresighted than emphasizing survival on day one. Survival is essential to enjoyment, yes. You should fight to survive in general. Yes. But fight. Don't sit back and like I said before, if in your fight you lose, there is still information to be had. In death, you can help your fellows.

This is why I don't think that a townie should be sitting back and doing nothing. It's a tad too selfish to be doing any good.


------

Now we switch you over to Obtuse Central

you just seem to be getting so uptight over 1 vote, yes i originaly voted for you because of ure whole lets lynch mole hes not gonna post so well get rid of him attitude

how uve reacted to it all is why im keeping my vote with you, and regardless of what u say u defended vtr when u had no real reason too, i for the time being think that was a mistake

I am not getting uptight over one vote.
I couldn't care tuppence for your vote.

What is annoying me is your idiotic determination to know what I'm doing when I'm giving you every possible explanation, which you are just not interested in accepting.

I really take you for an idiot if you think someone would be so blatantly obvious to defend a person

who had just replaced in

because they were scum mates. Perhaps you do it. I'm not so idiotic.

I thought that perhaps we were getting our wires crossed but I see now that you are just being mulish for the sake of it.
I have no truck with stupid people.

So forgive me if I don't pay much attention to what you say any more.
Unless you are receptive towards explanations and willing to look beyond tunnel vision and narrow views.

[Raffles]

But this is my point. If I make something happen, it seems to raise red flags anyway. I might do just as well post "I'm a scum".

Raffles just posted that he is a scum. He's using some twisted strategy to give himself permission to make nothing happen.

unvote, vote: Raffles

I must say that that post does not sit well with me either.

Unvote spectrumvoid
Vote Raffles

Now that's what I call, point proven.

[Primate]

On the whole, I agree with what Raffles just said. In the two games I've played on here, a player gets lynched more often for being an idiot (or just acting like one for a moment) than they do for being scummy. But, I still am staying on ToasterStrudel because she (he?) is making comments that I find unhelpful, and detrimental to our cause, which is to lynch the mafia, obviously. S/he is preventing us from doing that, and is, therefore, not an ally of mine.

It's posts like this that make me think that, for all you talk about who is your ally, and for all you are concerned about the town as whole, you aren't actually in the town, and you aren't actually our ally.

That said, though, I think Kinkster is more deserving of attention (and particuarly, pressure) right now. I want to put a bunch of votes on him and see what he does.

[Raffles]

I don't see why not.

Unvote, vote Kinkster

[Yosarian2]

Now that's what I call, point proven.

Not at all. You're not being attacked because you're "trying to do something", you're being attacked because you seem to be more interested in keeping yourself safe and not doing anything that might get you in trouble then in helping the town. As I said before, the #1 primary goal of town is to find scum; the #1 goal of scum is to not get lynched. So when a person seems more worried about trying not to get lynched then trying to find scum, it's a sign they might be scum.

[~N9V~]

Hmm, I must say that post was horribly scummy smelling. But then again, I didn;t like TS's post saying for everyone to jump on the Cubsfan wagon.

My vote stays though, with a

FoS: Raffles

[hollywoody1221]

t's posts like this that make me think that, for all you talk about who is your ally, and for all you are concerned about the town as whole, you aren't actually in the town, and you aren't actually our ally.

That said, though, I think Kinkster is more deserving of attention (and particuarly, pressure) right now. I want to put a bunch of votes on him and see what he does.

So, Primate, you're basically coming out and calling me scum for (as far as I can tell) agreeing with Raffles on a general statement. Then, Raffles basically follows you within about 10 minutes of your post, following your lead of the vote on Kinkster. I completely understand your vote on Kinkster, but this is just kind of strange.

[Primate]

That's not what I'm doing at all. I'm calling you scum for milking the fact that you have the towns best intentions in mind more than it needed to be milked. I also disliked your #153, in which you say that you're trying to lynch someone who you believe to be unhelpful as opposed to someone who is actually scum. I think it's a pragmatic point, and one with an element of truth, but I also think it's wrong the way you seem to be using this argument as a center. In #163 you reiterate the point that she isn't helpful, and continue your attack. #163 also contains a quick, baseless, jab against yosarian, which, again, I disliked. And then, in #206, you pretty much equate unhelpful with scum, something that is not the case. I think your actions make sense as a scum that had what he thought was a good idea during the early stages of the game, a legitimate defensible way to cause mislynches and be partially exempted from the responsibility for those mislynches. You've been riding this idea since.

So, Hollywoody, who do actually think is

scum

?