Mini 518: Underground Mafia, The Nightmare is Over!

[Mexal]

confirm

[Mexal]

Vote: Korlash

I just want to note that I will be gone this weekend. I will be back on Monday and active as usual.

[Mexal]

I'm still on vacation(I will be back tomorrow and active), but for now, there was something that needed to be addressed immediately. A mass claim is NOT a good idea. Actually, it's probably the WORST possible idea you could have come up with.

unvote, vote: sudo_nym

[Mexal]

I just got back from vacation. I will reread and find out where we stand tomorrow at work. But for now, there are two things I wanted to respond to because they irked me in my brief read.

What the hell, man? Did I not put the disclaimers in there, or did you just not read them? Your post tells me that you didn't read the whole thing, merely skimmed it and hoped we wouldn't notice.

We noticed.

unvote, vote: Mexal

I know, it seems a little OMGUSy, but at this point, this is the most legitimate reason I have to vote for anybody.

It doesn't matter if you put disclaimers. How does that change the point you were making? Basically what you were doing was throwing that idea out there to see if anyone latched onto it without thinking the idea through to see if it was good or not. If someone latched on to it, you could push it. If someone didn't, you had your disclaimers.

Your post doesn't seem OMGUSy, it

is

OMGUSy. No point downplaying exactly what you did when it's evidently clear.

And I kinda think its reaching to insinuate that I was trying to make it look like my incite. I personally thought it an interesting idea, but at the same time wanted to show him I was not as dumb as Mexal and fully understood where he was coming from.

Not as dumb as Mexal? Are you serious? I skimmed through the thread in 5 minutes and posted against an idea. You've spent the last 3 pages talking about how you dislike pressure votes since it's not a 100% exact way to find scum yet you criticize me for voting someone for pushing out an idea that clearly hurts the town? Tell me exactly how my reasoning above wasn't valid?


I'll post more later when I've actually read the whole thread.

[Mexal]

Ok. I'm catching up so some more things to post. I will note that I'm not the type of person who takes notes early then makes a massive post later. I'll wait til I have 2-3 things to talk about then I'll post. I'm not normally behind so this is my way of keeping up. So expect another post after this shortly if there is something else of note in the last 2 pages.

Miztef, you seem rather antsy to me. Seeking to hurry things along is very rarely in the town's interest, it's not surprising that your reactions have been met with a degree of hostility. It could just be impatience, but if it is, then you are correct.

There is a limit where taking too long is detrimental to the town. That line is definitely not now but be aware it exists.

As mentioned above, I am havious doubts that you saw the mass claim and missed Sudo_Nym's disclaimers. I mean if there was just one disclaimer, I could see overlooking it, but holy crap, that entire message was like one giant disclaimer with the full claim explanation buried somewhere in the middle. Sudo even put the word "stupid" in italics. Sure, there's a possibility that Sudo_Nym was trying to get away with innocently floating the mass claim idea, but ultimately, I agree with Korlash calling you on it and his FoS on you seemed to be a good response -- strong enough to send a message, but not overreacting. You did state your dislike of the mass claim, but people pretty much have to do that, as fighting for a mass claim would be suicide at this point. Given that Sudo_Nym was the player you attacked, I can understand his vote on you.

I didn't miss the disclaimers. I explained my reasoning above though I will mention one more thing about it.

I was able to guage his reaction. What did he do when I voted for him and said his idea was dumb? Turned around and voted for me. His defense was that he put disclaimers that it was a stupid idea, yet even with that, he still mentioned it. Why? If you know it's a stupid idea, why bring it up for discussion? Not to mention that when I called him on his self professed dumb idea, he then turns around and votes for me. I don't like it.

It looked like you were noticeably irritated that people were jumping on Mexal ("he's on god damn vacation"?). It certainly looked to me like you were jumping in to defend him and give him some excuses.

Sure, maybe Mexal didn't read closely, but Sudo_Nym was careful to include numerous disclamers. Given that you had to read a bunch of those disclaimers to even get to what Sudo_Nym was saying, I find it hard to buy the argument that he didn't read it carefully enough because he was on vacation.

Either Mexal had a really sloppy/hurried read (in which case his comments had limited usefulness anyway), or he just took an opportunity to jump on a wagon. I can't tell if you were being the voice of reason there, or helping out a scumbuddy.

Even if you did want to keep people from jumping to conclusions about Mexal, why didn't you just let Mexal answer in his own defense? You could still have posted afterwards, and we would have gotten a better read on him in the meantime.

This entire section was directed toward Mitzef yet it was about me so I'll respond.

I don't like what you're doing here. I bolded the part I don't like.

You assume that my response was dictated by a misreading and if it was, it wasn't useful. It wasn't a misreading. Then you say that I was taking an opportunity to jump on a wagon when I wasn't. The only response to his idea was a positive post from Korlash. So to say that I was jumping on a wagon is incredibly misleading of the actual situation since there was no wagon formed...or even thought about. At the same time that you're suggesting I started a wagon, you're also leaving open the idea that my vote was dictated by how poor/hurried my reading of the thread was. It wasn't. In essence, your entire post there is a discredit to my vote of sudo_nym.

That is mighty interesting. You criticize Mitsef for possibly defending me (which wasn't very true considering my post was exactly what I wanted to post) yet at the same time, you're subtetly defending sudo_nym. Interesting.

[Mexal]

I've noticed that in games where I'm mafia, people tend not to suspect me for a good while, cause I tend to play more cautious. When I'm town, people tend to jump at me right away, since I play however I feel like ><.

Sorry Miztef, but this statement really jumps out at me. I have never understood why someone would say something like this. So am I supposed to assume now that you're a townie because you're expressing your opinions more freely? How do I know that you're not scum trying to play townie?

Even your subsequent explanation:

However, as scum, I tend to play more cautiously, and keep myself under the radar. That's why in game's where I'm civilian, I tend to be attacked quite early on, and many times I stay the center of attention for long periods of time.

It still doesn't make sense to me how I should interpret this. Are you claiming yourself to be a townie then?

It's interesting to me that you haven't been voted yet (if I recall correctly), yet you're claiming that everyone is jumping on you.

Anyways, I usually don't vote until I have more information. I'll be around to see how this discussion continues.

I agree with this post.

Miztef, what exactly is the point of making a WIFOM argument at this stage of the game, especially when you're under limited pressure? What were you trying to achieve?

[Mexal]

At the same time that you're suggesting I

started

a wagon, you're also leaving open the idea that my vote was dictated by how poor/hurried my reading of the thread was. It wasn't. In essence, your entire post there is a discredit to my vote of sudo_nym.

Sigh, this is why I hate no editing Anyway, I didn't mean to say

start

since Jitsu never implied that I started a wagon. He said I jumped on one...meaning one was already formed.

[Mexal]

First off I am sorry for calling you dumb. I admit it was unneeded and uncalled for. I had a bit of pent up rage from another game and that is never good. Ok that out of the way, if i have been "talking about how you(i) dislike pressure votes" wouldn't that make sense then that I jump at people who do put pressure votes on? It seems to me like your confusing logic here...

Also it's not that you voted him, it's that you just plain ignored half of his post and threw the second half out as an attack. I think taking things out of context is scummy.

Take the sentence "If I am mafia I would not vote you!" If you just take the "I am mafia" part and use it as an attack... Yeah... You see where I am going right? Granted, his statement is pretty different from the example sentence. But it is more or less the same concept.

Have you even read a single thing I've said? I have said several times that I read everything and made my post anyway. I have said several times that disclaimers are meaningless. Why are you still pushing this?

What exactly are you talking about in regards to pressure? I put a vote on someone for a perfectly valid reason. I did not go throw a vote on a player who had 3 votes on him to see him react. Therefore my pressure has absolutely nothing to do with what you spent your time arguing against. Someone has to put the first vote down. Someone has to exert that initial pressure. That has absolutely nothing to do with you argument about pressure votes therefore I wouldn't expect you to use that as a reason to justify your criticism of my vote. So no, it doesn't make sense.

[Mexal]

You know that caught my eye too. But I chalked it up to just a bad use of wording/mistake. we have been talking a lot about wagons here. And

technically

I believe you could call it a one vote wagon if it comes down to it.

And I can't remember if anyone had voted him before you... to tired to check ATM... Hopefully I can get another of you younger and fitter players to do it for me.. and bring me tea.. and a cookie... =D

What caught your eye?

One vote

is

a wagon. But you cannot jump onto a wagon if one isn't started.

And no one voted for him before I voted hence why I posted what I posted. Seriously, if you're going to make a post to me, at least have some semblence of what you're talking about.

[Mexal]

Wow I totally need to check before I post...

Ok... First off I was in no way trying to push it, I was merely stating why I reacted as I did. I see now that I made a mistake by saying it was a pressure vote but thats what I thought it was.

Who said you were pushing anything? I merely stated you reacted positively to the suggestion.

So why are discalimers meaningless? I think in that situation they were perfectly logical. Someone asked him about it, so in order not to look bad, he answered. But admitted he knew it was wrong.

Why make the post in the first place? Why say there are things you can do that are efficient if you think those things are stupid? Hell, why even post that if you don't expect someone to question you on it? That's why disclaimers are pointless. You can easily suggest something with a disclaimer then when someone latches on to it and pushes it, you can follow it up. So even though you made a disclaimer, you can easily back away from the disclaimer since you're the one to post the idea in the first place. In other words, he's spitting out shit to see if it sticks even though it's a HORRIBLE idea for town. Get it yet?

And as for your "perfectly valid reason" I personally think your reason is shitty and false. And if you did not expect me to use it as a reason to justify my criticism for your vote why did you even bring it up? I logically assumed because of your sentence that you were saying your vote was a pressure vote. My mistake there.

Because I don't automatically believe when someone puts up disclaimers, my reasoning is then invalid? Hardly. If I believed everything everyone did then I wouldn't be very good at this game now would I?

So can you answer me why you think an "initial pressure vote" is any different to me as any other "early pressure vote"? as far as I see it your trying to convince

me

personally that your vote does not follow my thinking of votes themselves. I find that a bit odd, but I suppose I would try to skirt my actions away from attacks other people have already done.

What I'm trying to convince you of is that I voted someone because I thought their post was bad. You're arguing against people who are voting people for the saking of pressuring yet you're criticizing me for voting someone because I dislike them. You should, instead, be praising me for not putting a 4th vote on to see the reaction but rather voting them for an actual reason, whether you believe in it or not. I don't really know what you want or how you plan to go about finding scum but I will vote for and pressure people I dislike.

[quote="Korlash]
In short, I believe your reason for the vote is meaningless. "Disclaimers are meaningless" may make sense to you, but to take what someone said out of context and use it as an attack is not a good plan. I believe that if you feel a vote is good to put on someone you should not care what my feelings are on the matter. And I believe that the world is round, forever spinning with an infinite WIFOM games being played all over! Yeah.. deep I know...

[/quote]

He originally posted that he had ideas that were more efficient. When asked, he said his idea was stupid and that it revolved around a mass claim. He then somewhat justified his terrible idea by explaining how it could work. I then voted for him for suggesting a mass claim. Explain again how I took him out of context?

[Mexal]

Ignore that post above. I messed up the tags in several places so it's kinda out of order. I fixed the tags in this post.

Wow I totally need to check before I post...

Ok... First off I was in no way trying to push it, I was merely stating why I reacted as I did. I see now that I made a mistake by saying it was a pressure vote but thats what I thought it was.

Who said you were pushing anything? I merely stated you reacted positively to the suggestion.

So why are discalimers meaningless? I think in that situation they were perfectly logical. Someone asked him about it, so in order not to look bad, he answered. But admitted he knew it was wrong.

Why make the post in the first place? Why say there are things you can do that are efficient if you think those things are stupid? Hell, why even post that if you don't expect someone to question you on it? That's why disclaimers are pointless. You can easily suggest something with a disclaimer then when someone latches on to it and pushes it, you can follow it up. So even though you made a disclaimer, you can easily back away from the disclaimer since you're the one to post the idea in the first place. In other words, he's spitting out shit to see if it sticks even though it's a HORRIBLE idea for town. Get it yet?

And as for your "perfectly valid reason" I personally think your reason is shitty and false. And if you did not expect me to use it as a reason to justify my criticism for your vote why did you even bring it up? I logically assumed because of your sentence that you were saying your vote was a pressure vote. My mistake there.

How is it false? Because I don't automatically believe when someone puts up disclaimers, my reasoning is then invalid? Hardly. If I believed everything everyone did then I wouldn't be very good at this game now would I?

So can you answer me why you think an "initial pressure vote" is any different to me as any other "early pressure vote"? as far as I see it your trying to convince

me

personally that your vote does not follow my thinking of votes themselves. I find that a bit odd, but I suppose I would try to skirt my actions away from attacks other people have already done.

What I'm trying to convince you of is that I voted someone because I thought their post was bad. You're arguing against people who are voting people for the saking of pressuring yet you're criticizing me for voting someone because I dislike them. You should, instead, be praising me for not putting a 4th vote on to see the reaction but rather voting them for an actual reason, whether you believe in it or not. I don't really know what you want or how you plan to go about finding scum but I will vote for and pressure people I dislike.

In short, I believe your reason for the vote is meaningless. "Disclaimers are meaningless" may make sense to you, but to take what someone said out of context and use it as an attack is not a good plan. I believe that if you feel a vote is good to put on someone you should not care what my feelings are on the matter. And I believe that the world is round, forever spinning with an infinite WIFOM games being played all over! Yeah.. deep I know...

He originally posted that he had ideas that were more efficient. When asked, he said his idea was stupid and that it revolved around a mass claim. He then somewhat justified his terrible idea by explaining how it could work. I then voted for him for suggesting a mass claim. Explain again how I took him out of context?

[Mexal]

I swear, talking to some of you is like talking to a wall.

Because he was asked, by another player (a possilbe towny) to explain his other ideas. When you are asked to do something and do not do it then you look a little scummy. So I find it hard to imagine why you keep missing this very important issue here.

Why was he asked? Because he infered he had a more efficient way of finding scum. Did you not read this part of my posts? Selective reading is a great thing but it doesn't help your argument. While I might not include everything that I read in my posts, I do read it all and do weight it when I make an argument. The fact that you keep overlooking the fact that sudo_nym made a statement that BEGGED people to ask him what his ideas are is really worrying me. There isn't one person here who wouldn't have asked someone what they were talking about after they make a statement claiming they know more efficient ways of finding scum.

actually the fact that you don;t believe him is good. The fact that you are ignoring the fact he originally thought the idea bad enough not to say and only brought it up BECAUSE HE WAS ASKED is what makes your reason invalid. Certain situations have certain limits to them, such as when you are on vacation I can easily see you making a mistake and overlooking things, thus I am more inclined to let a few mistakes pass by. Just like when you are forced to say something I do not hold my personally feelings on if I think it was a good or bad idea as the basis for my vote. I hold only how scummy/town it appears to be, and yes I add disclaimers into the mix for this.

See above. This is the last time I will even bother with this. If you can't get it now, then seriously, I'm wasting my time.

I wouldn't say so much I am arguing against people who are voting for people, i am more about arguing over the effectiveness of said vote. By all means vote vote vote... But do not base your strategy on a blind, reasonless vote... (that is my argument, not my statement towards you. I am not trying to say your vote is blind/reasonless.)

Blind, reasonless? Do you read a single word that I say? At all? I swear to god, talking to you is like talking to a one trick pony. You read what you want to read, state what you want to state and ignore everything else that was said. I pointed out my reasons in like 5 posts. The fact that you've ignored them and keep defending sudo is bothering the hell out of me.

You keep missing the fact he A) Did not originally say it, and B) he said it was a bad idea and instead are pushing that he is trying to in a sense hide behind a false disclaimer so he can jump one way or the other. He is not saying a massclaim is good, he is not lobbying for a massclaim, he is not trying to judge our reaction, he is merely answering a question of an idea he had in his head. You seem to be adamant that he is some massclaim wanting mafia that is trying to hide behind a disclaimer. I'm all for getting info from people but I feel like you are pulling a whole lot of unnecessary suspicion on yourself because you seem to be only focusing on your opinions and not what he actually said.

How do you know what is going on in his head? Seriously? Are you sitting there talking to him offline trying to figure out how to defend him? Because I don't know what's going on in his head. I can only post the way I see it. You, for some reason, are sudo_nym's conscious or something. You know for a fact he wasn't trying to do anything devious. You know for a fact EXACTLY what he was trying to do. How? You can say it's obvious, but it's not. If you think that everything that people say is meant exactly how they say it then you have NO BUSINESS playing this game and definitely no business arguing with me over it.

Mexal, let me point something out.

I can think of a few things that would be more efficient, but they rely on people telling the truth (not something that's likely to happen).

He implies that he has an idea, however, it is moot, because the scumbags are going to lie, and so are the powerroles, because it wouldn't benefit them to tell the truth.

Then we have...

Really? I'd like to know what you've got in mind.

He was called out on it. To NOT say his silly idea right now would obviously be scummy, and he'd be lynched more or less on the spot.

So he explains his mass claim idea, explains WHY it won't work, and why no one is gonna do it... yet... you still think he's suggesting it. He wasn't.

What the hell is your problem? Let it go. Sudo obviously wasn't suggesting a massclaim.

Vote:Mexal

I swear to god, the stupidity on this thread is monumental. Read all my posts above. I KNOW HE WAS ASKED!!! Do you know why he was asked? Because he TOLD EVERYONE THAT HE HAD MORE EFFICIENT IDEAS! Do people not read my posts? Do people not even read their own posts? My frustration level is through the roof right now.

And seriously, what is my problem? What kind of question is that? Because I find something potentially harmful to the town, I have a problem? Because I'm arguing with people who don't bother to read a single word I say, I have a problem? Good lord man.

PS, not having read the entirety of the Korlash/Mexal debate as closely as I should have yet, I get the impression that you both are really having different conversations. To me, it sounds like little more than a shouting match at the moment. Both of you need to chill and present your arguments precisely and briefly, because I for one am not following at the moment (and I really don't think you're following each other).

We're having the same conversation. Unfortunately though, people seem to miss the parts of my posts they don't want to read so they continually make the same argument against me which is in defense of sudo_nym's idea. I know exactly what he's saying.

1. Sudo_nym put up disclaimers therefore it's ok to post a wild idea that's decidedly anti-town.
2. Sudo_nym told everyone what his idea was because he was asked.
3. Sudo_nym wasn't possibly thinking about manipulating us, or throwing out an idea to see if people latch onto it because he made disclaimers before hand and was asked to post it.

That's the defense and it's a defense I've ripped apart several times, yet people don't read those parts of my posts and automatically fall back to 1, 2, and 3. The best part is, it's not even sudo_nym doing the defending but his lackies who cannot possibly know what he was thinking unless they're partners. Now I'm not saying they are, but come on. How can Korlash know that Sudo_Nym was completely honest about his comments? How can oJEo defend him and even quote the post where he implies he has ideas yet disregard the idea he actually posted?

Well, this has been an interesting turn of events, hasn't it? When I first read Mexal's posts, I was offended at him for attacking me, but then I decided to reread with an open mind and a fresh perspective after considering his comments, like I promised. The Mexal voters out there will not like this, but it is in the town's interest to consider all theories and not look at things from only one side. So here is my analysis on Mexal's counterpoints.

Don't ever get offended. It's not personal. I will attack you. I will attack everyone. I'm a very aggressive player and it's amazing what you can find out when you exert the right amount of pressure. Your posts were misleading, I called you out on it.

At this point, I can't be sure if it was an honest mistake on Sudo's part, or if he was really trying to slide one in there. Given how most of us seem to have only a few weeks or months of experience, it could well have been a newbie mistake, but you did not seem to seriously consider that possibility. You seem pretty sure that he was not making a casual mistake -- what made you so sure?

I'm not sure. There are 2 reasons to do what I did.

1. To see the reaction of Sudo_Nym. And I saw it. He voted me right back. That's somewhat telling in itself. I don't like retalliation votes like that. Maybe if he found something to use against me, sure, but too immediately OMGUS me? It's suspicious. His original action might have been an innocent mistake but his reaction was very telling.

2. The reactions of others. It's amazing how Korlash came to his defense and came to his defense hard. It's also amazing how Korlash keeps ignoring the fact that the whole situation could have been engineered. It's like he can't fathom someone being subtle in this game.

I think I would have felt less suspicious of you if you had objected to the massclaim without voting immediately, and then saved your vote for today when you returned so that you could explain your reasons a little better. Also, you seemed to take Sudo's massclaim idea a lot more seriously than did everyone else. Even with several newbies in the game, I think it the chances were nil that it was ever gonna fly (it only takes one veteran player to explain why it is so bad), so your quick and very brief objection coupled with a vote without much an explanation did look somewhat scummy to me.

It's early in the game. People put down joke votes. You have to start the discussion somewhere and I wasn't going to be around to actually participate. A vote with a justification was the best I could do with the limited amount of time I had and to be honest, it was a good thing to do. You don't not vote when you point something out like that, especially when there are no votes on him. Votes put pressure. Votes get reactions. Votes start wagons. To just post my disagreement with it would understate how I felt about the idea.

If you have been really trying to help the town by potentially exposing Sudo, I think you would have earned a lot more town points if you had focused more on presenting the "Sudo is playing us" theory in a less antagonistic way than counterattacking those who attacked you (myself included).

I attacked you because your entire section in regards to me was misleading. You made assumptions that were wrong then drew up two scenarios based on those assumptions without leaving room for there to be other reasons/causes for my posts. You deserved to be attacked.

Also, it seems clear to me that Miztef did try to defend you in post 71. Miztef has hardly been racking up townie points this game, so I still really wonder why he so quickly jumped to your defense. He seemed genuinely annoyed at the rest of us who attacked you. From your posts after that, particularly your response to Anata's post, you seem to have suspicions on Miztef also. Why did you not attempt to distance yourself from Miztef's comments defending you in that post or when I raised the theory of you two as a scumpair? I would never have thought to consider the two of you as a scumpair before his post 71.

Why would I distance myself from Miztef? Was Miztef's "defense" of me any stronger than Korlash's defense of Sudo_Nym? I think not. He was merely pointing out that I was on vacation and that could be the reason for my misread that everyone seemed to be saying I was making. The fact of the matter was he didn't defend me because I didn't misread. Of course you wouldn't have thought of us as a scum pair, I was on vacation so I hadn't posted yet.

It's likely that one of you and Sudo_Nym is scum and the other is not, but I don't know who to believe at this point. I'm not ready to completely take my suspicion off of you at this point, but you've raised enough doubt for me to back off and take a more neutral stance on you and Sudo_nym. I am not throwing my support behind you; I am simply acknowledging that your counterpoint is plausible. It is always best for the town to consider all possibilities.

If you can make a stronger case against Sudo_Nym, I'd like to hear it.

How can I make a stronger post against someone when they've posted twice since I voted...once to OMGUS me and the other to say people are stealing his defenses?

[Mexal]

Ok, now that I'm at work, I've had a little time to review what I've said. I still think it's all valid.

That being said, I'm going to back off it for the moment and take a peak at some other people in an effort to avoid running around in circles all day.

[Mexal]

Alright. I said I'd move on but I just can't.

Wow I really hate when someone answers something in a post, then later on answers another thing with "Look at my above answer. Why do people keep asking me this? blah blah blah." in the same dang post. what? are we suppose to read your post long before you post it, yet alone write it? I mean talk about stupidity.

Uh, I was pointing toward my previous post. My answer was there to that question. Why should I have to rewrite everything I said twice? It's not so hard to read the post before, get the answer, then know it when it's addressed in the following post.

I could say the same about you. The fact that you read what he did as a post to judge how effective a massclaim would be, and not just a stupid idea like he said it was means you would rather create semi-likely scenarios instead of accepting what I saw as a perfectly good explanation/reason. People lie, yeah, so it is not always good to trust what they say. But to throw out an explanation/reason and assume what someone did is scummy is well... a bit anti-town in my opinion. It's basically saying that no matter how I answer you post you are going to come back at me with some type of attack that goes against all my reasoning. Thats great. Totally fool proof plan there Sherlock.

How long have you been playing this game? I mean seriously. The idea of a massclaim is anti-town. This has been pointed out several times. So when someone makes a suggestion that is anti-town, isn't it smart of the town people to question it? I assume people are scummy when they say scummy things. A mass claim is not pro-town. So why should I assume the person suggesting it is pro-town? That makes no sense.

I honestly don't get what you're saying. How do people figure out the scum in this game? They read into the actions they do and make a case based on them. They point out how the action is anti-town then post about it. What exactly did I do that's different then that? I want to know exactly how you plan on finding scum if you don't actually acknowledge anti-town things as possibly coming from a scum. Are you just going to hope you randomly stumble on top of one? I mean, do you think one is just going to admit that they're scum? If not, then what is your plan on finding one because the most obvious way, especially on day 1, is to take something that's anti-town, pressure the person, see his reaction and judge who defends him and why. It's day 1 for fucks sake. I don't exactly know what your goal is here but it's not scum-hunting.

I will admit I tend to think the best of people. Thats not always bad, but not always good either. So I can see how I could be missing a valid point from your side of things. I still don't why you would bring that up as a reason for a vote, but whatever.

Here's a mafia lesson for you: don't think the best of players. People lie, manipulate and attempt to win the game. There should be 3 scum out there so right now meaning there are 3 people manipulating you right this second. Don't think the best of everyone, think of everyone as guilty and clear them based on their actions.

And dang... I just read your last one directed at me... Damn man are you that much of an idiot? I am just posting how I read it too, and I read it a hell of a lot differently then you did. Logically I know a massclaim is stupid, thus when someone says "This is a stupid idea but... massclaim?" I tend to see they were telling the truth. Whether or not he was trying to judge a massclaim doesn't matter. That has an equal chance of being a mafia ploy AND a town plan, assuming he is mafia for that means you cannot see both sides. It's pretty obvious no one else is supporting the idea so I have no fear in it coming to fruition. So yeah, I tend to defend him for it. Mostly because I did not want to see a townie (In this case you) come in and attack him with a stupid argument and have another person (In this case me ><) constantly hound you over it.

This makes no sense to me. If you logically know that a mass claim is stupid, then why exactly would you accept when someone puts out a stupid idea, even if they admit before hand that it is stupid? What happens if people agreed with him? I mean, you did. You said you liked the idea. What would have happened had some other newbie said the same thing and then started a mass claim? Who benefits from that? You don't get it. Scum try to manipulate events that help them and hurt the town. They don't do it in an incredibly obvious way. They're subtle and the sooner you realize that, the better you might get at this game.

I understand that the move could have been innocent. People make innocent mistakes all the time. But neither you nor I should assume that someone who makes an anti-town post should just be making an innocent mistake. You make that assumption and you lose. It's safer to question it, pressure the person and see how he reacts. And I did see how he reacted. He's made 2 posts since my vote. One to OMGUS me which is a SCUMMY reaction and the 2nd to say others are stealing his defense. He's said nothing about the current situation, nothing about other people in this game. Don't you find that strange? All this pressure and he's done nothing to alleviate it because he has you championing his cause. You are a detriment to the town because you don't give him the opportunity to answer for himself.

Also if you are not prepared to argue your points to their full extent every single post you are in the wrong game pal. Stop thinking you know everything there is about who should play and how they should play. Unless you " know what is going on in my head" Don't you dare tell me how to play this game.

I shouldn't have to argue the same exact point in every single post. It's repetitive and unnecessary. If I say something in the previous post, it should still stand in the following post. I don't plan to repeat myself often just because you can't understand a single word I'm saying.

[Mexal]

I understand this, but if you are innocent, it's in the town's best interest if you can calm down so that we can get a truer read on you. A highly frustrated person almost always looks somewhat scummy, regardless of what the truth is.

Not necessarily. It's in the best interest for the town to find scum. If I do it based on an aggressive playstyle, then it's still in the best interest of the town. Being frustrated does not equal scum. I mean, could you honestly create a case against me right this second? I think you have a fairly good read on me and to be honest, it's not my concern to dictate my play in order to help you read me. I'll answer your questions if you ask them. I'll defend myself if accused. And I'll actively try to find scum by my methods. If you can't get a read from me based on that, then I'm not really sure how to help you.

Let's suppose for a moment that you are indeed telling the truth and Sudo_Nym is scum. If that were true, don't you think Sudo_Nym did a pretty good job of introducing the massclaim idea in a subtle and believable way that (us) newbies could accept? So when you come storming in, claiming to see through his lies and acting so aggressively, the newbies are either stuck trying to figure out who to believe, or are latching onto your frustration instead of seeing the bigger picture. Of course, you would naturally be frustrated because you see the truth and can't get anyone else to see they are being played.

This isn't about truth. It's about suspicions. I don't know the truth. I know what I suspect. I know what I read and I know how he reacted. It's up to you to see if what I say is plausible and then decide for yourself. I can't dictate what you see, how you play but I can try to point out things that I find bad and put pressure on those people. Understand that reactions are as big a tell as the thing they originally said and I think I was robbed of that defense/reaction by Korlash. I saw enough though to warrant my suspicions.

That being said, I'm not entirely focused there. I will look elsewhere. I don't get tunnel-visioned unless I'm 100% sure I'm right and in this situation, I'm not. It's day 1 and it's impossible to be positive but to me, it's the best thing I've seen. That and your accusations of Miztef. Those have merit as well.

[Mexal]

Mexal - You seem like an angry person to me, but your scumhunting has been very solid and your arguments coherent and valid. Still I think your frustration has gotten the better of you occasionally. A large volume of your posts are "don't you get it" or "didn't you read what I said" or some such. It's pretty clear some people are not getting what you are saying, i just get really tired of reading through all of the idiot-thrashing in order to get to your content, which is usually pretty good.

Lol. I'm not an angry person...actually pretty far from it. I just get frustrated when I have to say the same thing over and over again. You would be frustrated as well. I understand what you are saying in regards to my posts. That's the problem when it's directed to a single person. Everyone should read it, but my posts have been in direct response to Korlash so it's hard for me to not try to get the point across. I'm done with it though. It's getting rather pointless and I think people will get my point if they want to get my point.

I noticed the fallacies by Jitsu. I haven't figured out what to make of them yet. That isn't the first time he's misrepresented a situation. He did it earlier when he interpreted my post and gave two scenarios in which I would make the post, both of which were false and both of which painted the situation in a different light then it was. Then he was "surprised" I attacked him. I don't know. For now, he's trying and for that, I'll give him a pass but I did notice them and I have pointed them out.

I would like to hear from everyone else on that list as well. I get tired of lurkers real fast.

[Mexal]

Mexal voted for Korlash randomly (he was the first one), and then later unvoted and voted for sudo_nym. Again, I’m not sure why, and I would like to hear an explanation. He also agrees that a mass claim is a bad idea.

What part of my reasoning are you unsure about? I was under the impression that it was pretty clear why I voted for Nym, whether people agree with it or not.

Things got a bit crazy and I lost track of things. From what I understand, sudo_nym sort of proposed a mass claim which several people did not agree with. However, since sudo_nym was prodded before he proposed this, I’m not sure if he agrees with this as well.

He was only prodded because he pointed out that he knew more efficient ways of finding scum. If you made a statement like that, wouldn't you expect to be prodded?

Just for the record, I'm not sure what I believe about his explanation. I'd like to hear more from him about everything else in the game. My vote will stay for now though.

[Mexal]

I am currently comfortable when my energies are going toward this game..that being said, later on in this Day, I will post a top three scum list, 7 pages in, it would just be a waste, for my opinion will probably change as we get closer to a deadline.

But it gives us something else to talk about. Your opinion is allowed to change and part of that comes from discussion. Feel free to post your list.

[Mexal]

I am currently comfortable when my energies are going toward this game..that being said, later on in this Day, I will post a top three scum list, 7 pages in, it would just be a waste, for my opinion will probably change as we get closer to a deadline.

But it gives us something else to talk about. Your opinion is allowed to change and part of that comes from discussion. Feel free to post your list.

I will do it, maybe in a page or two...but I feel if I post anything now, it will only distract from who i feel is the scummiest and needs more pressure.

Don't worry, we already know you think Miztef is the scummiest and you want to pressure him. He will not be forgotten, I promise you

[Mexal]

Mexal- Like I said, I appreciate the aggresive gameplay, though I don't do so myself. His style lends itself to natural scuminess, but he strikes me as being innocent enough. I'd say probably town, but could go either way. If he is town, he probably doesn't have a power role- most people (even the aggressive ones) tend to lay off a bit more when they have a power role; though this rapidly denegrates into WIFOM.

How does my style lend itself more toward scuminess? What do you find scummy about my actions thus far?

I honestly cannot believe you commented on the potential of me having a power role. Right now, I'm speechless. That was so stupid it's not even funny which makes me think you're town. And that scares the hell out of me.

[Mexal]

Look at the join dates of the players in this game. Several have joined in October, and a bunch more in September and August. You seem to be one of the more experienced players, having joined this spring. Almost everyone else has less than 5 months experience. There are many relative newbies in this game and is is not unreasonable to expect that we have newbie scum in our midst. Given, as you say, that you understand that others may not have done as much prereading as you did before your first game, you've all but confirmed my point. It is far from certain that everyone would have known that townies with power roles generally lay low.

You're making two assumptions here which you would be good to avoid, both in this game and in the future.

1. Join date = experience level. I joined in July but I've been playing for quite awhile on another site. The only reason I joined MS is because I needed something to fill my time while I waited for a new game to start elsewhere (then again, I can finish 15 games on that site before I finish one here ). A better representation of experience level on this site might be number of posts...at least more so than join date.

2. Townies with power roles generally lay low. This is simply not true. It could be true and sometimes it is, but it's not always true and while you said generally, you're still making the assumption that it's true in this case. Be careful with that.

I am not confirming nor denying if I have a power role. What I'm trying to do is let newer players know that this kind of discussion is NOT pro-town, especially when it's based off of assumptions. You're doing the work for the scum so stop it please.

[Mexal]

Or maybe Sudo_Nym is some kind of special role that helps mafia but does not get to communicate with them at night? Is that possible?

Yes it's possible. It's called a symp or traitor depending on where you play.

Anyway, I don't know what he is. As I said, I'm leaning toward town because I can't see a scum playing this way.

unvote

[Mexal]

I'll say something else. I believe anata to be scum from her recent post about me, but because she was so extremely crafty and careful about her wording, I don't feel that I can make a strong case against her. Thus, I feel that she is either highly experienced (with a lot of experience playing mafia elsewhere) or is highly skilled. And her join date is this month.

I don't agree with this at all. Her post lacked any real insight. It was more a summary of what has happened with a few comments. There was no real conclusions drawn or cases made. She might be scum, but I don't think that post says anything about her level of skill or experience.

I think you are reading what I said the wrong way. I did not assume that join date = experience level.

Uh...reread this.

Look at the join dates of the players in this game. Several have joined in October, and a bunch more in September and August. You seem to be one of the more experienced players, having joined this spring. Almost everyone else has less than 5 months experience. There are many relative newbies in this game and is is not unreasonable to expect that we have newbie scum in our midst. Given, as you say, that you understand that others may not have done as much prereading as you did before your first game, you've all but confirmed my point. It is far from certain that everyone would have known that townies with power roles generally lay low.

That looks like you assuming join date = experience.

Since the join dates of players this game are mostly recent, we cannot tell if the players here are experienced or not. Therefore, in this game, it is even worse than normal to say anything that could benefit potential newbie scum in our midst.

True.

Anyway, please take my responses as constructive criticism. I'm pretty sure you're town so anything I criticize is mostly to help you improve.

[Mexal]

If the town does have some kind of cop or investigative role (which I don't know is true or not), is it true that this point that investigating Sudo_Nym tonight might not be the best play? Given that Sudo_Nym's play doesn't seem to fit pro-town or standard mafia, it's feasible that he might have a special role of some sort. If that's the case, whatever result we obtain may not be very reliable.

Let the cop decide.

Vote: Jitsu I felt earlier on that he may have been trying to act like he was analyzing everything to sort out the scum. But I have a vibe telling me that he is acting. Im not 100% sure of this, but he is one of the few people that haven't been considered the slightest bit scummy, and I kinda feel he has.I figure at this point, a random lynch on someone that seems scummy would be a good idea. I dont think voting sudo_nym out at this point would really hurt anything either. (Note: My vote for jitsu isnt really trying to campaign to get him out. I just wanted to state my concern. If nothing else shows up against him, I will probably unvote. )

This doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me. You vote for him because he's not considered scummy? Not sure I'm following your reasoning here. Why do you think he's scummy? Is it because of your vibe or anything specific he's done? Also, if you're voting for someone who seems scummy, how is that a random lynch?

Finally, when you put down votes, it's meant to lead toward a lynch. To say that you're not campaigning his lynch, yet still voting and that you'd remove your vote if no one agrees with you makes you seem like a sheep who will follow the crowd. Your vote is a good thing, your reasoning behind it and lack of conviction behind it is not. So in other words, the ending of your post is scummy.

@Jitsu - I don't understand your reasoning behind the whole "Powerroles tend to sit back more" thing. If I were mafia, I would definitely not pick the person who was casting the most attention on themselves. If worst comes to worst, if the power role is going to get lynched, they can claim. We probably have at least doctor and a cop, but of course we can't assume it. I agree with you on 179.

I don't get this? It seems like you're validating his statement yet claiming you don't understand it.

@Mexal, I can't help but to agree with you. Unvote. Townie points from me.
However, I'm not entirely convinced that Sudo_Nym wasn't being sincere, I just... didn't really think of that possibility. I have a terrible conscience and cannot lie very well, and as such, often assume the best in people. You made a pretty good argument

It could have been innocent. My point was that to assume it was innocent because he made disclaimers, especially when it's an anti-town idea, would be bad.

[Mexal]

I understand his idea. It was that "power roles tend to not be aggressive." I should have been more clear - when I said that I didn't understand his reasoning, I meant that I didn't agree with it. Mafia often NK a lurker because a shining light will attract more moths. I made that metaphor up on the spot. Also, mafia will rarely kill someone who is directly attacking them, as it will cast too much suspicion on themselves. This allows the power role to survive longer. Which is good.

We're getting into dangerous territory now. I disagree with this entire paragraph. Anything involving the discussion of night kills will lead to WIFOM. Lets try to avoid that please.

[Mexal]

I'm not saying that Sudo_Nym is a traitor, but this is a possibility we shouldn't ignore. There is at least a small chance that Sudo_Nym could be trying to breadcrumb his role to the mafia somehow, regardless of what he actually is. The wiki text also seems to reinforce the idea that an investigation on Sudo_Nym could mislead us, even if the supposed cop were sane.

Traitors generally come up town if investigated.

Sudo might be a traitor but he's done a poor job thus far. The point of a traitor is to help the mafia avoid being lynched, not get lynched themselves for anti-town comments.

[Mexal]

1.Sudo
2. Anata
3. Mitzef
4. Korlash
5.Jerubaal
6.oEJo
7.CKD
8. Jitsu
9.Abstract
10.Jayalay
11.Mexal

Why? Just a few posts ago, you had scummy vibes from Jitsu. Now you find 7 other people scummier?

Also, what has Abstract and Jayalay done to look town in your opinion?

Finally, why do you find Anata scummy?

[Mexal]

Sudo might be a traitor but he's done a poor job thus far. The point of a traitor is to help the mafia avoid being lynched, not get lynched themselves for anti-town comments.

Alright, let me turn this around and the question another way.

Sudo has apparently done a poor job of being a townie, a poor job of being a regular mafioso, and a poor job of being a traitor.

It's certainly possible (and maybe even probable) that he is still a townie playing poorly.

But let's consider the remaining possibilities for a second: other than a Jester, which would seem to be unlikely in this setup, is there anything that Sudo has been

good

at?

No, but it's early.

[Mexal]

About the Mexal comment, I actually didn't realize Mexal was still very keen on me, I only skimmed through his posts (as there are a whole lot of them, and I was focusing mostly on things that pinged my scumdar).

I wasn't trying to speak for him here, I am only giving my impression on what I think his opinion of you is based on the last few comments he's made about you. Of course, it is better if Mexal gives his own opinions.

I still think he's scummy.

[Mexal]

NabakovNabakov

: Miztef unvoted, but he already pointed that out. I think you also missed Sudo_Nym's unvote for Mexal in post 145.

Also, I was assuming that the Korlash voters were red because you weren't counting Gunslinger's earlier vote for Korlash that wasn't bolded. Now that Gunslinger has a real vote, I'm curious. Are they red for some other reason? If this has already been explained, I apologize.

I would appreciate some comments on where you stand on people so far. Like, who do you find scummy and why? Who do you find town and why? I saw you commented on Sudo, but that was one little thing and you've been gone awhile.

I assume you're caught up now that you're questioning the vote count.

[Mexal]

I want to address the sentiment in this paragraph as well as in some other jerubbaal posts (and maybe some others). Maybe the game is played very differently on this site than I've played it before. If it is, I'm not sure I completely agree with the benefits to that (this mostly deals with my second point).

All we have is feelings. Gut instincts. There are no absolutes, unless you are on the mafia. To talk about absolutes in mafia, is absolutely foolish. If you need to absolutely believe that someone is mafia before you vote for them, I'm not sure how you will ever vote.

Sure there is some evidence out there, like inconsistent arguments and poor plays, but still all we have is a feeling about those plays. Those plays alone don't make a player guilty or innocent.

You made a comment like this after I said that I had a gut feeling about you based on your scumhunting praising of Jitsu. I even pointed to the exact sentence. That is what you would call "hard evidence". Just because I used the word "gut" in my post, don't assume the suspicion is any less worthwhile than when others do the same thing and not use the word "gut".

I agree with this to an extent. I think you shouldn't dismiss someone's suspicions because it's based on gut. At the same time, I don't think it's a valid reason to vote someone. If you can't come up with a reason why your gut feels the way it does, then I just can't back it up. It's too easy for scum to just say...I have a gut feeling, lets lynch him. There are reasons your gut feels the way it does and it's your job to translate it into writing so the rest of us players can understand it.

Addressing a second assertion that I disagree completely with: I would like to hear everyone's opinion and gut feelings on everything and everyone. In the first round, it has very little value. But as the game moves on and we begin to learn more and more about who people actually were, I would love to have a very rich history of every player commenting on multiple things that every other player did, even if those comments were just "gut feelings". When someone turns up mafia this is by far the best evidence we have.

I'm also a little disappointed in the lack of voting. I wish everyone had a long trail of voting history after they died. The way to gather the most information for later in the game is to put real pressure on people now and then look back later when we know more and analyze how they reacted. I don't necessarily mean the people getting the votes either. I mean their potential scumbuddies who are forced to make a decision about bussing them or trying to derail the wagon or try to start up a new wagon.

My point is that I think that everyone should have a bold vote down at all times. I'm not saying I want to string someone up, but let's force everyone to make a real decision, not just say whatever they want (without consequence).

Honestly, you've missed pretty much all the discussion the past few days. I don't think you have any right to criticize us for our play in that time since you haven't participated in any of it. If you want us to vote, pressure us to vote. If you want us to post our thoughts, pressure us to do it. Just because you come out of nowhere expressing your disappointment that we're not adhering to principles of gameplay that you expect us to...the same principles you're not adhering to since you haven't even been here for days, hardly means we have to listen to it. I would agree with your sentiments had you been around. I like votes, I like lists...to an extent. But the fact that you've barely participated in this game, barely posted any suspicions yet you're still chastising us doesn't sit right with me. If you want to be taken seriously, start by helping the town find the scum.

[Mexal]

Sorry, I'm still pretty busy, I'm trying to put together some opinions.

I would like to comment on the second part of your suggestion. Is it a good idea for us to list people we think are town? In the games I've played we don't do that because it puts a big NK target on their backs.

They're a NK target anyway. The scum already know who is town and who isn't, so I don't think it matters all that much.

In your last post, you stated you wanted people to post lists with opinions on everyone. Wouldn't that list include pro-town opinions as well? If so, then expressing who you think is town, or least suspicious isn't any different then what you were telling us we should do.

Besides, while it might put a target on their back (it's already there anyway as I'm sure the scum can figure out who looks town and who doesn't) it also helps the healer (if there is one) possibly heal a target or the cop (if there is one) investigate a target.

[Mexal]

I apologize that my post came off so harsh. I'm just trying to sort out the general strategy used here and compare and contrast it to what I'm used to.

Where do you play?

It wasn't harsh, it just seemed hypocritical since you were doing none of what you were telling us to do.

[Mexal]

The mafia does know who is town and who isn't, but I would much rather they take someone out that I may have thought was on the mafia then someone I was pretty sure was town. I agree, in general, they will have a pretty good idea of who is a suspect and who people think is town, but I don't want to help them out.

I see why I seem hypocritical about this point. I said I wanted everyone to give an opinion on everyone and everything. I should have made some qualifying statements. I would rather avoid making lists that list everyone or saying someone who isn't on anyone's radar is probably town. These are unnecessary observations. If someone is taking considerable heat and you say you think they are town, that is perfectly fine and a good play, in my opinion, because you are defending someone in the spotlight. Something the mafia doesn't want to be forced to do.

So I would revise that to say that I would like it if everyone gave their opinion on all the hot button topics and people. I realize this is something I have not done yet in all cases.

To be honest, I haven't got much of a scum read on anyone at this point. Most of the fighting seems to be around theory and not actions and seems to be between two townies. That is mostly because there isn't a lot of action (voting, trying to derail bandwagons).

Ask me about a specific event or fight and I'll give my opinion.

I play on the ActuarialOutpost. It is in a small subforum where we play one large mafia game every few months. We use some pretty different rules in some regards. I'd be happy to discuss them further in PM (if that is allowed).

The problem is, you're making the assumption that mafia are just going to NK people based on their level of suspicion in relation to others. The fact of the matter is, it doesn't always happen that way. Mafia kill for all sorts of reasons, some of which include: the player having a possible power role, player having suspicions in regards to scum, the player providing little to no information when dead (ie: quiet people who've had very little interaction), possible leaders, ect. To automatically assume that someone will die due to the fact that other's find him town is simply not good play. It's good for everyone to know where people stand so that you can use that information later in the game.

I will agree with you though that we do need to get some voting in and move this game along. While you're incorrect when you say most of the discussion is between two people, or about theory, you are right when you say there isn't enough actual pushing of suspicions. Most of the discussion you see about theory comes from us trying to justify certain player's actions to determine whether it's truly scummy or not. I'd also like to point out that pretty much everyone but you and Jayalay has taken part in those discussions so to say it's mostly between two people is just blatantly misleading.

For now though, I'm going to

vote: Jayalay

because I think she needs some pressure to start speaking and I truly dislike quiet people who give us very little to work with in judging their alignment.

[Mexal]

I like Jitsu's post above.

unvote, vote: Anata112

Jayalay, I haven't forgotten about you. Post some content please!

[Mexal]

This is... blah. I am basically getting a town read from everyone. Well done, scum.

Seriously? There isn't a single thing that is bothering you right now?

[Mexal]

Let me see... Anata seems to be in the current spotlight... which I find funny because of how people originally said her post lacked anything real and was all a summary and I do not see how that can say anything about a person's affiliation all. But for the little bit she has been posting I like the idea of people pushing for more from her. Granted some better reasons may help like say... from Mexal. I mean WTF man... For like two full pages (of my reread) I was in total agreement of how pro-town you looked and I agreed you had a sort of... kinda ICish feel to you. Then you go and more or less join a bandwagon on the basis "what he said"... I would have expected at least something from you... Your vote just doesn't sit right with me...

I'm not one to rehash what other people say just to make myself look like I'm contributing. The fact of the matter is, I agreed with what Jitsu said. I didn't think it was necessary for me to add anything to it.

[Mexal]

Well I just think someone who makes such good points cannot put a small bit of input in himself to solidify his own vote... I mean "I agree with that they said" is so vague and unhelpful it is more or less worthless... And then you basically come back and say you didn't want to "rehash what other people say." All I asked was you at least pointed out what he said that you agreed with. Thats all. Maybe a reason why you agree would be nice. Otherwise I just take it as vote hopping...

You can take it anyway you want. As I said, I agree with his post...ALL points. If there was something I didn't agree with, I would have pointed it out. As you said, I make good points so if I felt there was something to comment on, I would have. I was waiting for Anata's response to all the points made before I truly commented on it all and when she came back, she didn't really touch on any of them. So my vote still stands and I don't think I need to rehash what Jitsu said just so you can feel like my vote is justified. I said I agree and that should be enough right now.

[Mexal]

Honestly, at this time, I'd lynch Miztef, Anata or Gunslinger. I think we should lynch one of them then re-evaluate where we stand tomorrow.

[Mexal]

speaking of gunslinger...

once the pressure piled on, he disappeared...

I noticed that as well. But then again, so did Anata.

[Mexal]

I dont have a problem with Anata much at this point.

Explain? What about Jitsu's post do you disagree with?

[Mexal]

meaning that I think my vote is currently on the scummiest person in this game..

which one (of jitsu's post)?

Uh, saying you don't have a problem with someone and saying that they're not the scummiest are two VERY different things. If you don't have a problem then you don't think they're scummy. If you think they're scummy but not the scummiest, that's a different thing altogether.

As for his post, the one where he rips apart Anata's post and Jeru and I followed up with votes. What other post would I be talking about in regards to Anata?

[Mexal]

Clearly, if Anata is guilty of anything it is being lazy...On a different note, I find it interesting that she got 3 votes back to back so quickly when this game has two quite scummy players just floating around. Please explain to me, how being lazy is scummy. Granted it is not very pro-town, but scummy? How is Anata’s laziness any different from Oejo or Gunslinger? I think Jitsu made some good points, but I think that a lot of this case revolves around game theory versus actual scum actions and assumptions. I can agree with some of Jitsu’s points without being compelled to place a 4th vote on Anata. I think she has adequate amount of pressure on her at the moment (as jitsu said about Gunslinger and Mitzef). Does this mean I wont change my mind about her later and vote her? No, I just want to keep my vote on who I actual think is scum.

I dont think Anata is scummy at this point (dont have a problem with her). Her actions (or lack thereof) have been noted.

I think Anata is correct being suspicious of 3 votes back to back. Not so much of Jitsu, but Mex and Jub..there posts were of the “I agree” flavor. Do I find that scummy? Not alone, but I think it is note worthy. It is called developing a voting record. Seems to me that I would be asking some follow up questions with my vote, if they truly were wanting to do some scum hunting…or if they were just for pressure purposes I would say that (like Jitsu did).

How is she clearly guilty of being lazy? I think I'm missing something here. I don't get what is lazy about anything she did. Please explain it to me.

The votes coming like that are meaningless. You need 7 votes to lynch and she only has 3 on her. Now if she got 4, 5 and 6 quickly, that'd be something to worry about. But getting 3 votes quickly means nothing. She can question them, but if that's all she does and doesn't bother to actually address the post that we agreed with, then who's the one looking scummy? She tried to push suspicion on the votes while sidestepping the post about her. Don't you find that strange? Where has she been since then? Where is her response to all the points Jitsu made?

As for you, what points of Jitsu's do you agree with? I mean, you have no problem with her at all (meaning you don't find her scummy) yet you agree with some of the points that make her look scummy. I'm curious which ones and I'm also curious which ones you don't agree with.

I know exactly what a "vote record" is and I understand noting strange votes. I don't blame you guys for questioning my vote. So by all means, go for it

[Mexal]

@mexal: Anata did mention she can not post till monday. I made the mistake of thinking she was lurking as well.

Ok. Well, today is Monday so I guess we'll get her responses today. No big deal.

[Mexal]

jitsu's post didnt just revolve around Anata. he shed light on other's he thought were scummy and he discussed some game theory. Votes are not meaningless, they imply that you think someone is scummy, you want to add pressure, you are trying to get other's reactions, etc etc...are you saying that your vote on Anata is meaningless? Why are you not wondering where Gunslinger has gone?

I would like to hear your case against her in your words.

You're sidestepping my questions. I asked you some very pointed questions and you are ignoring them, focusing on the irrelevant.

Votes aren't meaningless but focusing on the first three votes when the other 4 aren't on the person is pointless. You're not going to gain anything from it until the person is lynched or close to a lynch. So while questioning the speed is ok, trying to shed suspicions on the votes really is immaterial. The fact of the matter is, she's not lynched yet, nor is she even close so again, you're focusing on the wrong thing.

As for my case on her, it's Jitsu's. I've said that multiple times. I don't want to have to go through his post again just so I can rehash the same exact points he made. It's pointless. I can do it but it serves zero purpose when I'm telling you that's what I'd do.

[Mexal]

LOL, I am side stepping questions? You are avoiding them.

Dont tell me what is irrelevant and what is not.

What is your case against Anata? If you cant form your own case to back your vote, what is Jitsu's case that you are backing? Also, why are you ignoring Gunslinger (second time I have asked)... I will quote Jitsu's posts that I agree with, if you really need it. But I have already told you what I agree with...I agree with the other's he finds scummy and some of his game theory (not assumptions). What other questions have I "side stepped"?

Yes.

I asked you what do you agree with, what you don't. I asked you why you think Anata is lazy. I asked you if you found it strange that she's casting suspicion on the votes while ignoring the main points of Jitsu's post. I asked you if you found it suspicious that she avoided all the points of his post. None of these questions you've answered.

As for my case, once again, WHY DO I HAVE TO REPEAT what another says? I can go through her post and do the exact same thing Jitsu did, but why should I have to when I already claimed I agree with his post? Why do you want me to be a parrot? What difference does it make? If you want to criticize my case, criticize Jitsu's. If you don't want to criticize his, then why make me repeat it all over again just so you can call Anata lazy?

As for Gunslinger, I haven't ignored him. You mentioned above he disappeared when he got heat and I agreed. I also mentioned that I would lynch him. What else do you want me to say? When he posted, I questioned him. He's made 6 posts in the game and the points have been covered extensively by others. Why do you need me to rehash those too?

[Mexal]

you want me to quote parts that I agree with, but you are not willing to post a case to back up your vote?..."do you want me to be a parrot?" I want to hear your case…YOUR CASE, yeah, be a parrot,…but put it in your words. What points did Anata not address to your satisfaction? Have you asked any follow up questions?

I will even make it easy for you, I am not even asking you to “add anything”…just give me 3 bullet points of your case against Anata that warranted your vote. Quit riding Jitsu’s back.

You do this, and I will post what I agree and disagree with(but again, I have already stated what I agreed with, but if you need the actual quotes I will post).

There is a point to this, so just make your case.

And yet again, YOU IGNORED MY QUESTIONS. Every single time I ask you a question regarding Anata, you ignore it. You're really getting on my nerves.

As for the rest of your analysis, I think it's total crap. Most of the stuff you mention is totally pointless and too much of it was a rehash of the random voting stage where nothing much was going on.

But more telling is all the stuff that was missing. You talk about the massclaim, but only to get it wrong about how it started and question the extremely obvious reasons for Mexal and Jerubbaal's votes on Mexal. There is not an ounce of commentary on the aggressive posts, disagreements, and the noticable swing of several players to Mexal's side of the argument. At that point in the game, that exchange provided enormously valuable information and after it was all over, likely formed some of the basis for some the reads people currently on each other.

While I don't expect anyone to cover every aspect of the game in a summary like this, and not every analysis can be completely comprehensive, you talked about a lot of things that had little impact on the game, and did not comment on just about everything that has had a big impact on the game.

One could simply say that you're a townie that has done a really, really sloppy job on reading and keeping up, and that you're lazy. Perhaps you were just looking for posts where people voted and reported some information about it. I admit that is a possibility.

But given that you seemed to know who was involved in the massclaim and you comment on votes that took place during it without mentioning any of the really telling events that happened, I have to think you read at least some of those posts. And if you did that, why didn't you go back and reread more carefully, as it should have been pretty obvious something was going on since votes were actually being placed then (unlike a lot of this game so far). I think it is possible that you intentionally distorted your analysis.

Also, I get the impression that you may have been trying to help out Sudo by deflecting suspicion from him. You didn't seem to understand the reason for any of the votes on him, yet you seemed to notice the votes themselves. When people were talking about their suspicions on him, you replied that it was possible that he could be scum hunting. When you thought I prodded him for the mass claim, it was suspicious enough to move me up to the top two on your most scummy list with Miztef (post 153), but Sudo_Nym, who actually said it, was probably scum hunting? I'm speechless.

I agree with this. Happy now? The simple fact is that she made a rehash of what was going on but ignored the main parts. She was distorting the facts and casting suspicion without sound reasoning. Not to mention her inability to read. Is that enough for you?

[Mexal]

It's possible that everything she had done was laziness. I highly doubt it though. Why make a post if you're not even going to address anything that we're discussing? Why be lazy and then come back and say you were trying to document everything that was going on? Seriously, it makes no sense for her to be lazy and make a post like that. Why is she allowed to be lazy but Gunslinger isn't? Why aren't I allowed to be lazy when rehashing Jitsu's post? Why is it Anata is the only one allowed to be lazy? You're protecting her and you're pushing off everything she has done as laziness...nothing as intentional. I don't know if you've played with her before, but without knowing her, I don't see how you can even think that. The reason I didn't mention it as apart of Jitsu's post is because I dont' think he believed it. He is new and he doesn't have the conviction in his cases more experienced players do. He was making excuses for her just in case he was wrong because he's not 100% sure. But I don't think he truly believes she's just lazy...I know I don't.

All that being said (quoted) I think Anata is a newbie/lazy/trying to look town. I don’t think that being lazy=scummy. I think being lazy =useless and not very helpful. Trying to look town is different. This is a scum move to be sure, but it could also mean other things….all of it are assumptions. It is note worthy, but not enough for me to vote

I don't buy it. You are making the assumption that she is lazy. You don't know her, you don't know her style yet you can accurately say in 10 posts that she's being lazy. How do you know this? What about her analysis suggests this? The fact that she doesn't know the reasons behind Sudo? The fact that she's leaving out major events in the game while focusing on the minute? Why can't that be calculated? Why can't she be a newbie scum trying to look town by focusing on details that are irrelevant to the main conversation because one of the people in the conversation is scum with her? Is that so far out of the realm of possibility that we automatically assume she's lazy?

I also think Mexal vote is interesting. He added little. We know he can post large content filled post, but only provides a “I agree” post. Where are the follow up question? Jitsu, was applying pressure, if you were doing that too, don’t you have some questions for Anata to answer? I asked him to provide a small bullet point case, but he just quotes a huge block of Jitsu’s post. He cant even do that. Jitsu, I feel might be scum hunting, what are you doing? Even Jer, added something. I get the feeling that he also thinks that Anata is scum, because he thinks Sudo is. However, Mexal I am not sure. He agrees with Jitsu's post, but doesnt understand why I thought Anata was being lazy...this doesnt make since, please explain Mexal...and again, can I just have your case in three bullet points, I read Jitsu case..I want your case (even if it is Jitsu's case) in your words..why is that so hard?

Why do I have to post follow up questions when Anata doesn't even address the post that was made against her? Why do I have to be the focal point of all discussion in this game? Why is it my job to drive this game along by posting follow up questions to everyone? Isn't it possible that my goal was to see who defended Anata? Isn't it possible that I wanted to see what other people did? You keep making these assumptions that I'm the one supposed to be leading the town but by doing that, how do I get a full picture of the game? If I want to post follow up questions, I do it. If I want to post a case, I do it. If I just want to follow a case, I'll do that as well. My playstyle is what it is. Don't expect me to be the master leading all the dogs around by a leash. It's funny that you're attacking me for this considering how much content I've provided for this game. This is one of the reasons I DIDN'T make a case. This is one of the reasons I didn't follow up with a crapload of pressure. Simply put, I wanted to see who defended her and now I know.

For those currently voting Anata, my question is, why go after Anata if you think Sudo is scum?…What if Sudo comes up town? How does that effect your thoughts on Anata? I bet it does to some degree.

Why do we have to think Sudo is scummier? We obviously think Anata is scum so why can't we vote for her? I'll let you know my thoughts on Sudo when Anata is lynched

What if Anata comes up town, how does that effect your thoughts on Sudo? I have a feeling it really doesn’t.

What's your point?

Seems to me like Sudo is the one you really want to be voting, if Sudo comes up scum, this is looks quite bad for Anata.

Any reason you're trying to get us to remove our vote on Anata and move it to Sudo?

This all being said, I think Mitzef is the lynch today. He is scummy all by himself (as is Gunslinger)…I would also not be against pressuring (even lynching) Sudo more as it could provide much info.

He might be scummy, but he's not the lynch for today, especially with you defending Anata rather strongly.

How does Sudo provide more info than Anata? You seem to believe that we're only voting for Anata because of Sudo. On top of that, you're defending her. What info would we gain from lynching Miztef? Gunslinger? Sudo?

I think Gunslinger and oejo need to post more.

I agree.

Is this enough Mexal?

Sure is. Thanks for proving how adamantly you are against a Anata lynch

[Mexal]

Mexal, I'm actually really disappointed by your long rebuttal. The whole thing essentially a list of "why the hell can't I do this," and "how the hell can you say that," and long lists of rhetorical questions. This is simply not helpful posting. It takes a lot of wading to get to your actual points. The whole post is just this flood of questions.

The questions weren't rhetorical. I'd love answers to them. They are all perfectly valid, especially considering the discussion being made. You didn't understand the point of my questioning Sudo either when I first went off on him. Why is it so hard to believe that I might be doing the same with curiouskarmadog? You're once again making assumptions of my intentions, the very thing that got you in trouble the first time with Sudo and the very thing you accuse me of doing later in your post.

I apologize if this is reductive, but I seem to understand that your post is primarily attacking ckd's assumption of Anata's laziness for the explanation for her action rather than questioning her motives. Laziness was my first reflex to explain her action as well, simply because her posting was completely inept. Whatever the post's goal was, to mislead, clarify, confuse, state suspicions, whatever, it was badly done and accomplished absolutely nothing other than to create suspicion. While incompetence cannot be used to excuse anti-town action, it is also not inherently scummy. I was content to place a pressure vote and wait for a response. I think laziness and ineptitude is certainly a possible reason, but you seem entirely convinced that she could have no other reason for posting as she did than to mislead and create suspicion. You actually go so far as to put words in Jitsu's mouth regarding this whole matter.

The reason I didn't mention it as apart of Jitsu's post is because I dont' think he believed it. He is new and he doesn't have the conviction in his cases more experienced players do. He was making excuses for her just in case he was wrong because he's not 100% sure. But I don't think he truly believes she's just lazy...I know I don't.

Let Jitsu speak for his own beliefs. If he does not state otherwise, I'm not going to assume that Jitsu is qualifying his suspicions simply because he's not sure. I was completely fine with your "I agree" post, but I really don't like it that you're going back and filling in what Jitsu "really" thought.

CKD believes that Anata was lazy in making her post. Your first reflex was that she was lazy. You, Jitsu, Korlash and CKD all believed that Sudo's post about the mass claim was completely innocent. Your first reflex seem to always be for the good. Mine isn't. Everyone here is scum until I find something that I like and clear them of that. I'm not perfect but I'm not bad either. While you might be able to attribute that post to laziness, I will not, especially not without answers from her. She had ample opportunity to answer the questions posed to her by Jitsu. Instead, when she came back, she focused on the 3 votes placed on her in quick succession. She didn't touch on any of the points brought against her. While you might be able to put that off as laziness, I don't. I put it off as avoidance of the issue at hand. Did I put words in Jitsu's mouth? Maybe. But that was my interpretation of his post, just like your interpretation of my Sudo post was that I was misreading it, just like your interpretation of my rebuttal post was that it was full of rhetorical questions and poor logic. We can play this game all day since this game is about interpretation, especially on day 1. We don't have ANY hard evidence. There are no vote analysis, no night actions, no confirmed town/scum. All we have is what people say and if we're constantly putting off things that look scummy down as being lazy, being stupid, being new, then we're never going to get past day 1. Call me frustrated because that's exactly what I am at this point.

I've been impressed with the clarity and sense in your logic so far, Mexal, but this last post is really a disappointment. I think ckd might be somewhat inappropriate in overstating laziness as the likely cause for Anata's ineptitude, but I think you're also out of line in suggesting that the only possible interpretation for ineptitude is scum. It's a really easy argument to follow when a person never proves logically capable of defending themselves, or really even perceiving the arguments against them. Inept =/= scum. Inept needs to be answered and explained, but your logical leap is inappropriate. It's possible your interpretation is correct, but to refuse to acknowledge any other reasonable interpretation is entirely inappropriate.

The problem is, everyone is inept. Gunslinger is inept. Sudo is inept. Miztef seems inept. Anata is inept. Korlash even seems inept on some points. This is pretty much a newbie game and if everything that looks scummy is considered inept, then how am I supposed to find scum? If I don't like something, I'm going to post about it, regardless of the experience level of the player. Random.org does not discriminate. It wouldn't be the first time a newbie played a scum role poorly. It's not the easiest thing to play in your first game, especially when you cannot talk with your partners during the day to help work out what you're supposed to be doing. This is the most likely time you'll notice mistakes by new scum...when they have no help from anyone else. So while you might see my post as a disappointment, I do not.

[Mexal]

God, I hate replacements. Everything we just went through has been destroyed by that. So we need replacements for jayalay and Anata now. Wonderful.

[Mexal]

Those questions weren't rhetorical? There was something like 20 or 30 questions in just the first three paragraphs or so. That seems absolutely crazy. If they're real questions that you expect answers to, that seems kinda insane. Go back and count those.

So? I asked a lot of questions. He wanted follow up questions, he got them.

I certainly sympathize with the frustration about incompetence, but over the internet, I suppose that's going to be unavoidable in most games. It does seem like about half of the people here just don't get the game. And I'm not criticizing you about pressuring incompetent moves. I voted for Anata as well. I'm criticizing you for assuming that the only possible reason for stupid moves is scum.

Until Anata tells me it was just laziness or an inability to read, I can assume that it was scummy. To assume it was laziness with absolutely nothing to back that up is not very smart.

In my first newbie game (my only completed game so far), a dumb noob that lurked for the first week or so of the game shows up, posts a bunch of really scummy crap, and just clearly does not get the game at all. So we up and lynch him pretty quick (scum actually hammers, but nobody seems to blame him or suspect him for it), and he turns out to be townie. Just really, really stupid townie. Part of me wonders whether it's not more difficult to tell a stupid mafia from a stupid townie or a good mafia from a good townie. There has to be some sort of standard to go by.

It's day 1. There is no standard. 90% of the time you'll lynch a town player on day 1. You can still win the game though.

It just seems somewhat opportunistic to me to attack the dumb ones all the time, as even if they were entirely well-intentioned townies, they couldn't give any real reason anyone else should believe that. If we just say kill the stupid ones, that's half the group, and I see little to discern between, say, Gunslinger's stupidity and Anata's stupidity (I guess the situation has changed now that she is gone, but the point is still valid).

Not really. Get rid of the dumb ones then you can focus on the smart ones by connecting them to the dumb ones. It's day 1, you only have information from the people that talk. You won't have any kind of voting record til day 2/3 nor will you have any kind of ability to truly connect people.

I think it bothers me a lot that you basically called ckd scum because he suggested that laziness might be a better explanation for ineptitude than scum. I don't think that laziness is necessarily a better explanation, but I think it at least needs to be acknowledged as a possible explanation.

I questioned his motives. He's yet to come under pressure so I questioned him. What's the problem? He attributed the entire post to laziness and saw absolutely nothing wrong with it. Then he went into HUGE defensive mode over her while basically criticizing Gunslinger for the same thing. I caught Zindaras (who's a very good player) doing the same thing. He defended a town player and it got me onto him becuase there was absolutely no reason to go to the level of defending that he did, nor push a suspicion that wasn't valid. CKD ignored the arguments against Anata while focusing on the 3 votes on her. That was my point. It doesn't mean he's scum, it means he should be watched and if Anata turned up scum, then he's a fairly good person to look at.

The thing which bothered me most was you posting what you thought Jitsu "meant" instead of what he said. Even though Jitsu said that it could easily just be laziness, you basically said, well, he doesn't really mean that, he's just not confident enough yet. If you're agreeing with someone's argument, you can't really say that oh, I agree with the argument that he really meant, not the argument he presented. A lot of people pushed you to clarify your agreement (for largely stupid reasons, I think), but you never qualified anything. If you didn't think that laziness was a reasonable explanation, as Jitsu suggested in the argument, you might have qualified that.

You've done it to me, several times. It's mafia on a forum. We interpret what people say the way we want to interpret it. Sorry Jitsu if you actually thought she was being completely lazy.

Myself and others might be quicker to presume the innocence of a certain gesture, but that's not always entirely a bad thing. You have expressed very sincere doubts about a great host of players, and they simply cannot all be valid. At the very least, you have advanced arguments against Sudo, Anata, Miztef, Gunslinger, and ckd, none of which appear to have been answered to your satisfaction. It is very simply not possible that all of them are scum (or this is one f***ed up scenario), so you must be jumping at shadows somewhere. The ckd scenario confuses me the most, as, unless I misunderstand you, you seem pretty confident that ckd is scum because he defended your attack against Anata. I think his analysis is decent, if somewhat optimistic regarding Anata's motives for certain actions. I certainly did not think that it led to the level of certainty you seemed to express in affirming his guilt. If we find out that Anata (or whoever is replacing her) is guilty, then it seems to add much more credibility to your case, but for now it feels like building a house of cards. Your whole case hinges on Anata's guilt, which is still an unknown, at least for the time being.

What's your point? So I express suspicion on a lot of people. I fail to see the problem in this. How else do you find out scum? Do you want me to focus on just one or two people and push them the whole time? Or would you rather I pressure everyone who does something scummy imo to get as much information as possible for later in the game? You decide.

To everyone else, this day

is

really starting to piss me off. All the chaff has stopped posting, and the few of us who are still here are simply butting heads. Please post something semi-useful and prove to us that you're not all idiots. I am beginning to see more of Mexal's first post to me, saying that there is a point when dialogue begins to hurt the town instead of help. It's getting to the point where some sort of decisive action is important, as the arguments are all starting to fold in on each other. Until some of you guys actually post something different, I feel like we're just beating a bunch of dead horses.

This is just the start. We're on mafiascum and it's why I hate this place. I have one other game I'm in and the day 3 has lasted over a month and the person who will get lynched was the same person who we wanted to lynch the first few days of day 3. People are afraid to lynch on this site for god knows what reason. They don't understand that there is a wealth of information even if you're wrong and if you keep discussing the same crap over and over, you'll just go in circles.

On a side note - do you find that it's usually scum under fire who replace out or bored townies, or is it really a neutral thing and shouldn't impact our decision much? I could easily see it going either way, a townie frustrated with being accused of being scummy all the time or a scum convinced that they're going to lose anyway. Just curious what experience seems to say in this matter.

I've seen both. There are games where a person has replaced under pressure but they're yet to die so I don't know what their alignment is.

[Mexal]

I think everyone is scum

As for the lynch for the day, I wanted Anata. Now that she's being replaced, I doubt any of you would agree to that. So I don't know. Probably Miztef though I'd have to do a reread of him before I decide on that.

[Mexal]

Everyone, I have a really gigantic post coming, but I am still reading over it to check it for inconsistencies. I'll have it up in a bit.

Unnecessary to tell us you're proofreading you post to make sure it's perfect. Just so you know.

[Mexal]

Whoever replaces Anata is still the same role, so, in some way, he/she is still very responsible for the misplays of Anata. I'm not willing to scratch her off the list just yet.

Of course. I agree. Unfortunately, the new person who comes in will still have a clean slate. I've seen it countless times. Mainly because they can't answer for what Anata did. So either we lynch Anata now or we consider the person coming in anew. And I have to say...I absolutely hate that. I think it ruins games more than it helps it but that's MS policy. You can be on day 3 of the game (like I am in a different game) and have someone replace in. I HATE it.

[Mexal]

You weren't lying when you said that was a gigantic post. I'm impressed

Mexal is mostly right about my view on her. I do believe it is more likely that Anata is scum than just a clueless townie, though I still feel there is a small chance it could be the latter. I thought my case against her was pretty strong (well, as strong as any other typical case for lynch on a Day 1), but I did moderate my opinions of her a bit in my posts, because I had made mistakes so far, and I wanted to see if anyone would believe me (given that Mexal had expressed doubts about my Anatascum theory before). I think Mexal picked up on that a bit.

This makes me feel better. I was starting to feel sorry that I put words in your mouth but I'm glad I read you correctly. Makes me feel more confident in my opinion of you.

She is a scum with some prior experience that made an attempt to cast suspicion on me that completely backfired. After I attacked her, she thought she could use the suspicion of the three quick votes, my uncertainty of her laziness, and the long delay to turn the tables on me, but it failed when I countered with another strong post (#267). I think it left her nowhere to hide and she panicked. She feared she would be lynched, even though that was hardly a certainty. So she quietly dropped out of the game.

More likely in my opinion.

I do think that Jerubbaal is right about something. Several people I see as pro-town are really beating each other up when we should be working together to pressure the scum and/or decide the best lynching strategy.

I completely disagree. Regardless of what your read is on a person, you should always question things you find wrong. Don't completely trust a person until the game proves you right otherwise you might get burned.

As for the rest of your post, it's a good sum up of what is going on. I see your points in regards to Miztef and could get behind a lynch of him. Honestly though, I rather lynch Anata due to the fact that I think she's scummy, I think she provides information and I don't want her to be replaced. An example of why would be in a game I'm playing, a few months back I put a lot of pressure on a guy who was scum. He couldn't handle the pressure so he disappeared and lurked for 2 weeks. When he was sufficiently prodded, he came back and fucked up the game. One of the players wanted him to get replaced which would have then caused us to have to go through the entire day 1 all over again. I thought that person was scummy for it and he turned out to be our healer. Regardless, I don't like replacements of people who back out after facing an onslaught of pressure and I rather lynch them then people actively participating in the game.

Also, I see the points on Gunslinger and I agree with them. Unfortunately though, I haven't decided what I make of it yet. I can't see how CKD can find them scummy yet not find Anata's points scummy either. So uh...I don't know yet.

[Mexal]

Not addressing arguments placed against you doesn't seem like a subtle, crafty thing to do, it just seems dumb.

I could make it crafty and subtle. Have you ever seen the movie

Thank you for smoking

? It's very easy to make a rebuttal while ignoring the entire point of the argument but making it seem like you're arguing the same thing until you control said argument. CKD tried to do it by ignoring everything I said to him while continuing to harp on the fact that I wouldn't post a reasoning behind my vote. People do it all the time...Korlash did it earlier in this game when arguing with me. Of course, that was more he didn't understand what I was saying but had I not pushed it, I don't think anyone else would have truly noticed he wasn't arguing anything I was talking about, but more what he wanted to talk about since for awhile, they were defending his point.

[Mexal]

Mex, you want information? I am actively pushing for a Mitzef lynch....if he IS town, wont that make me look mighty suspicious? This guy is all types of scum.

No, you wouldn't be anymore suspicious if Miztef turned out to be town. Not now anyway.

Btw, I don't fault Miztef for being opportunistic in his situation. If it was me or Anata, I'd go after Anata as well.

[Mexal]

His reasoning sounds like WIFOMy crap to me. He praises both Mexal and I and then tries to use some lame WIFOM argument to suggest that "at least" one of us is scum? Sounds to me like he is just trying to sow a few last seeds of miscontent before his potential lynch.

It's not WIFOM.

[Mexal]

I really can't believe there isn't any penalty for getting a replacement. So someone could sign up for every game and then just withdraw when they find out they didn't get a special role? Sucks.

Yes and people do it all the time.

[Mexal]

My win condition is to lynch scum, not obtain information from a lynch…what is yours?

Interesting win condition. Mine is that I win the game when all the scum are lynched, not specifically to lynch scum. I believe Anata is scum. I've said that enough times. I also believe it gives us the most information for later in the game. That's a side benefit of lynching Anata. The game doesn't end on day 1 just so you know.

How am I protecting her when you probed me for the information?

Because your entire argument for her was that she's lazy while pushing Miztef like he's the Unibomber. Your response for all the inconsistencies in her post was laziness. That's it. Then you moved on.

“Why do I have to post follow up questions when Anata doesn't even address the post that was made against her?” This particular point is not about Anata it is about you. So say you didn’t like how Anata deflected attention by mentioning the vote. But aren’t you doing the same thing here. Avoiding direct questions to you by deflecting back to Anata? By your own standards isn’t that scummy?

No. I didn't avoid the questions. I told you flat out that I did not want to make a case against her because I agreed with Jitsu's post. Just because I decided PUBLICALLY that I didn't want to spend my time making a case that's been made doesn't mean I was avoiding it. Just because I didn't post follow up questions when no response WAS EVER GIVEN to the case doesn't mean I was avoiding it. Avoiding it would to pretend it was never said and discuss other points. I never did that. I told you repeatedly I did not want to make a case. You seem to be forgetting that.

I also not your appeals for emotion. “Why do I have to be the focal point of all discussion in this game?” Wow. At this current time, if the entire game was poled, do you really think you would be the focal point? You are either really narcissistic or appealing for emotion. If you really are town, it is your job to scum hunt. I find you increasing scummy after this post. You are defending your actions of not asking direct follow up questions to Anata because you want us to believe it is not your job to ask follow up questions…however, you have asked me over a dozen questions. Anyone else feeling this is suspicious? Why is it so hard for you to post your case against Anata in your own words? I want bullet points IN YOUR WORDS. IT can be the same “reasons” as Jitsu….but I want it from you, not a quote from Jitsu.

You don't like my appeal to emotion? Sorry, but it's entirely your fault. You pushed me to it by repeatedly asking for the same thing when I repeatedly told you I did not want to do it. My whole post reeks of frustration because frankly, I was frustrated and that's what happens when I reach my breaking point. You think it was a ploy to put that much emotion into a post? Interesting.

I asked you a dozen questions because you warranted a dozen questions. Why ask Anata a dozen questions when she never even answered the original questions? Maybe I would have asked follow up questions if she bothered to address the original points. Doesn't that seem conceivable?

It's not hard for me to post a case against Anata. It's the fact that A. I wanted to see what people did and B. I didn't feel the need to rehash what people say. I'm not a parrot. I told you I agreed with Jitsu's post, that should be enough. You were going after me BEFORE Anata was even lynched. Had she turned out to be town, then maybe you'd have a point. Had she turned out to be scum, you'd look like an ass. But she didn't turn out to be anything because she wasn't lynched. So your entire tirade was premature at best. It's like you're already sowing seeds of doubt on me before you even know what she is. Or do you know what her alignment is?

these two quote go together. As stated above your case has a lot to do with Sudo alignment. Another reason you state you want to lynch Anata is for information. Well, seems to me that lynching Sudo (to you) would provide more information than the other way around. I also think it is funny that you don’t want to lynch Mitzek because it wont provide enough info. I think it will provide tons. For instance, you seems to be completely ignoring him, why is that? I am actively pushing a case against him, wont that provide info to you about me? I am noting the blind eye you are turning toward Mitzef, does that say anything about your alignment at this point? No…but if Mitzef comes up scum, it doesn’t look good for you.

Sure it would. But it only provides info about you and jerubbaal I could get that info by lynching Anata while also getting info on Jitsu, jerubbaal, you, Miztef, AA...but meh, it doesn't matter. You don't get that this game is longer than a day.

As for Miztef coming up scum, how does it look bad for me? Because I don't deem to comment on him besides the fact that I find him scummy? Maybe.

Sweet Christ. I am surprised one no broke down this post yet. SO you think Mitzef is scummy? Where the crap did that come from? I skimmed your post and I cant find one post that you voted for Mitzef, mention you thought he was scummy, or even questioned or probed him. You have only really ignored him (unless I missed a post) and a couple posts agreed with him. Why do you think Mitzef is scummy? Why have you waited to tell the town this until now? If you think he is scummy, why are you voting for the person he wants to lynch? Why is he not the lynch for today? If you think I am defending Anata, I think you are ignoring Mitzef. I think just as much information can now be discovered by lynching Mitzef. I am not pushing for a Sudo lynch or Gunslinger lynch at this point….I want Mitzef to hang. You think he is scum too, where is your vote for Mitzef?

Lets answer these one at a time.

Yes. I think Miztef is scummy. It's been there the whole game. You assume I don't read the thread but I do and I've read your case on him. I agree with it. I think he's scummy because he started out strong, back peddled, played to people's expectations of him as opposed to his own style, made an excuse for his playstyle based on others thinking he's always scum (which was a WIFOM argument btw). I waited because I thought others needed attention. You were giving him attention so I didn't. I am voting for Anata because I find her scummier. That doesn't mean I don't find him scummy. I didn't say they were partners, I said I found them scummy. If Anata is town, then maybe Miztef is scum. If Anata is scum, maybe Miztef is town. They don't have to both be scum to both be scummy. It's day 1. I've explained multiple times why I believe Anata to be the lynch for today. If you've read my posts like you seem to have, you already know. Read them again. If the town rather lynch Miztef then Anata, then I'll lynch him. But I think Anata is scummier and would rather lynch her.

I think that about covers it. Are you having fun yet?

[Mexal]

This is annoying. Miztef is scummy...very scummy. CKD's last post proves it. But there is a nagging doubt that I have that he's town...mainly because he's so scummy it hurts. He's such an easy target that it just bothers me. I've made similar cases on people before...most recently in a game on SA where I was scum. There are town that make it incredibly easy to make a case on and Miztef seems like he's one of those. But...he could be scum so meh. It's day 1 and it's hard to get a better case than that which really bothers me.

Annoying...

[Mexal]

How can a Anata provide more information than a Mitzef lynch?

I have posted this several times. Reread my posts if you don't remember.

I moved on? Then you really need to read the post again...did you read the bits where I said some of her actions were scummy, or could be scummy?

Yup, must have missed it among the laziness defense. Then again, I do remember you claiming Anata didn't bother you so meh.

Why are you afraid to post your own case against someone you deem scum in your own words? I have asked 4 times now.

You seem to think I'm afraid of something. I'm not. I choose not to. Why can't you get past this? You're stuck on this like it's a big deal. It's not. It's my choice and I have said this more times than I can count. Why don't you ask again? Maybe the answer will be different.

You ignore my questions and comments in this posts. You state it is not your job to ask follow up questions, but you have asked me many. You had no questions for Anata? Now that we are getting a replacement for her, you are going to keep pushing a case, that the replacement cant defend?

Which questions did I ignore? The focal point? You tied that directly into me being narcisstic or appealing to emotion. I said I was emotional. Your other question wasn't directed at me so I didn't answer it. The final question is why I can't post a case in my own words. I think I've posted about that already but maybe I'm mistaken

As for Anata, you're a fucking idiot. Sorry, but you are. You're FORCING me to push a case on Anata. And this all started BEFORE she asked for a replacement. So your point is invalid.

We could also mention that once the pressure was turned up, she conveniently asked for a replacement and that everything against Anata then becomes invalid. And it seems you're ok with this. Interesting.

What orginal questions did you ask ANata?

When did I ever say I did? Now you're misrepresenting my words and the situation. Keep trying.

It makes you look like his scum partner because you have just stated you felt he was scummy, without providing a case against him. Without voting him ever..the only thing you have done this game in reference to Mitzef is agree with him. You have voted other people in the game you thought scummy...you have applied pressure to other people in the game you wanted us to believe was scummy...Why have you not attakced Mitzef once? Asked him just one question? You could be his scum partner, because you are afraid to vote him..or even present a case against him. Or even acknowledge that just has much infromation can be found in a MItzef lynch as an Anata lynch.

I could be. Save this for tomorrow if we lynch Miztef and he turns up scum

Let me get this straight...if the town wants to lynch Mitzef you will lynch him? Currently the only people voting Anata is Jit, you, and MItzef

there are 3 people voting Mitzef...me, AA, and jerb..

if you take Anata and Mitzef out of the equation (because they are the lynch canididates today)..that is 3 versus 2....why dont you back up your words with a vote.

You're trying so hard to lynch Miztef. Would you feel like an ass if you were wrong? My vote isn't on Miztef because I think Anata is scummier. I don't need to vote yet. Voting now wouldn't prove anything anyway except make Miztef the more likely lynch since I'd be the swing vote. I don't want to do that yet. I'm having too much fun with you atm.

[Mexal]

This is annoying. Miztef is scummy...very scummy. CKD's last post proves it. But there is a nagging doubt that I have that he's town...mainly because he's so scummy it hurts. He's such an easy target that it just bothers me. I've made similar cases on people before...most recently in a game on SA where I was scum. There are town that make it incredibly easy to make a case on and Miztef seems like he's one of those. But...he could be scum so meh. It's day 1 and it's hard to get a better case than that which really bothers me.

Annoying...

It is so scummy it hurts? Like someone is so pro-town he must be scummy?

not only his he scummy, it NOW provides the town with tons of information...why are you afraid for the town to have this information?

He is an easy target NOW I have presented my case. Why is he an easy target?..because he has played scummy the whole game...hey, here is a great idea, maybe he has played scummy, because he is scum.

Just out of curiousity, how many games have you played?

He's not far off when he says someone can be so pro-town that they're probably scummy. I play a fantastic scum. I know several others that come across as the most pro-town player you'll ever see. There are other ways to catch these people though as you won't do it normally by just their posts.

Again, you think I'm afraid of something. I find that mildly humerous. You nailed it right on the head on why he's an easy target...because he's so scummy it's obvious. Experience tells me that 80% of the people like that are town. But that has never stopped me from lynching them in the past and I doubt it'll stop me now. I rather lynch Anata though

[Mexal]

I really don't like this strain of argument. You seem to be arguing against yourself here. Originally, you posted on the importance of being able to hold people accountable for their actions, even if they made really stupid mistakes, i.e. mistakes that seem too obvious for scum. You directly argue against the assumption made by many that laziness could be an excuse for bad posting, and in this last quote, you're making the WIFOM point that Miztef is too scummy to be scum. You're doing exactly what you criticized others for, assuming ineptitude instead of scum.

You're also forgetting where I said that it has never stopped me from voting them in the past and it won't stop me here. When the person is inept beyond belief, it starts to look like he's actually inept instead of making scum mistakes. A few mistakes...maybe. Every single post another mistake? Seems a bit much to me but meh. It's gut more than anything else and I'm backing it up with my thinking.

What is it about Miztef's scuminess that is qualitatively different than Anata's also obvious scuminess?

A few things.

1. Even after his posts get ripped apart...every single one pretty much, he comes back with yet another post that's easily ripped apart. Why? Wouldn't it just be easier to fade into the background instead of setting yourself up even more?

2. He didn't disappear. Like above, he kept coming back for more. Anata didn't. She made a post that was full of inaccuracies after claiming it was comprehensive and then when questioned on it, she avoided the points being made and focused on something else. Then she disappeared. Miztef, while trying to answer the things thrown at him, has looked even more scummy. He keeps coming back for more while Anata asked for a replacement.

Those two things really get me. Everything Miztef has done is scummy. Everything. I wouldn't be surprised if he didn't do a scummy thing in every single post he made and yet he's not afraid to continue to post knowing full well that everything he says is scummy. Whereas Anata made one post that was very scummy (at least to me and Jitsu) then when pressured, asked for a replacement.

don't bite. I'm not saying that someone who appears to be entirely pro-town can't possibly be scum, but at the same time, I don't see any possible way that you can stand on that reason to make a case. That's almost the definition of WIFOM: he's so pro-town, he must be scum.

He didn't make a case. He posted that he thought either me or Jitsu was scum based on the fact that people thought we were town. He even called us town so I don't really know where you're going with this.

You suggest that their are other ways to catch pro-town looking scum, and that's very true. Seems like these generally come in on later days, when we have cop investigations to help out and such. For the first day, I really don't see what else we have to go on other than scummy posting and your vague instinct that Miztef is too scummy to be scum.

Of course we have to go on scummy posts on Day 1. I've stated that already. I'm not against you lynching Miztef cause he looks scummy. I even said I'd participate. I don't understand the point of this paragraph?

[Mexal]

I don't even have a good defence against most of the evidence against me. Basically, I was completely off my game (if I ever had one) this game. I cared little what I posted, and didn't think about it too much. I just got back to the site after a 2 month vacation, and this is my first game (although I've joined 2 others now as well).

I've seen this excuse before and the person was scum. I didn't like it then and I don't like it now.

vote: Miztef

[Mexal]

EBWOP: I forgot to unvote.

unvote, vote: Miztef

It seems CKD that you have saved Anata for another day.

[Mexal]

I swear to god, you're like a fucking broken record and I can't stand it anymore.

When things don’t go your way you resort to insults. Nice play. I am “forcing” you present a case for someone you think is scum. Why do you “chose not to”? Why is my point invalid? Your vote is still on her…present your case, replacement or not. IF you case is invalid, then so is your vote.

Why do you assume I am ok with this? You are the one saying it is invalid, not I.

Why do I choose not to? I think I've posted this at least 15 fucking times. Can you not read? Ask again. Lets see if the answer changes.

Your point is invalid because you said I'm pushing a case on her AFTER she asked for replacement because I KNOW she cannot defend herself. Yet I called her scummy and agreed with Jitsu's post BEFORE she asked for a replacement. Therefore, your point that I'm only pushing a case cause she can't defend herself is wildly inaccurate and invalid. Should I spell it out in individual letters for you?

How can you even say that my vote is still on her when in the very same damn post, you see it's not? Are you dense? And what do I care if you're ok with it? Obviously I don't care or else I'd adhere to your constant barage of repetitious questions.

Also, you tell me ONCE AGAIN to present my case on her, replacement or not yet you're criticizing me for presenting my case on her when she asked for a replacement? You're contradicting yourself. You should have given up while you were ahead.

And yet again, you're trying to make my vote on Anata seem invalid. You must have a massive hard on for her or something.

Ahh, so now you are backtracking, the town wants to lynch Mit, but you wont vote..interesting. Will I feel like an ass? No. Will you feel like an ass if he comes up scum?

The town? 3 people does not equal the town. AND I HAVE VOTED. YOU EVEN QUOTED IT IN YOUR OWN POST! Good god.

Will I feel like an ass if he comes up scum? No. Because I admitted he was scummy. Why would I feel like an ass?

“Saved her” from what? You don’t even have a case against her. If you remember Mexal, you made me comment on Anata.

Of course I made you comment on Anata. You avoided it in the past and when you did comment, you found everything she did as pure laziness. You're saving her from being lynched. There was 3 votes on her, now there is none. That's saving someone. As for my case, it's Jitsu's as I've said so many times that my fingers hurt from typing it. The case is still valid whether you fail to recognize that fact or not. She didn't defend against it and your defense was laziness. Therefore I see nothing invalid about the case on Anata, whether it's

my

case or not.

Are you done yet because the more you talk, the worse you get. You might think you're putting pressure on me but all you're doing is making me angry and I don't like being angry.

[Mexal]

was commenting as I read the posts, your vote came after I commented.

LOL, "my case is Jitsu's" no, that Jitsu's..I wanted yours...but now you have voted Mitzef..I would like to your case against him..

Or do you just want to quote my posts too? You called him scummy, why is he scummy to you?

This is the very last post I will make to CKD this day because if I don't stop now, I swear to god I'll just ask for a replacement based on the pure fucking idioticy of this one player.

I ALREADY POSTED WHY I FOUND HIM SCUMMY! WILL YOU READ MY FUCKING POSTS?

Here are some quotes for you since you can't seem to read even though you respond to my posts.

Yes. I think Miztef is scummy. It's been there the whole game. You assume I don't read the thread but I do and I've read your case on him. I agree with it. I think he's scummy because he started out strong, back peddled, played to people's expectations of him as opposed to his own style, made an excuse for his playstyle based on others thinking he's always scum (which was a WIFOM argument btw). I waited because I thought others needed attention.

I've seen this excuse before and the person was scum. I didn't like it then and I don't like it now.

I'm done. I'm sorry for ruining the game for everyone. It was going great until CKD decided he forgot how to read.

[Mexal]

And then there's Mexal. First of all, calling a player a fucking idiot is never acceptable under any circumstances. This is a friendly game- one that has us at each other's throats, admittedly, but it's meant to be fun. And this actually has some relevance, as I've found that the players most likely to fly off the handle in a mafia game are generally scum getting frustrated with attempts to lead the town by the nose.

Or it's a town player who's getting so frustrated that he's repeating himself over and over and over and over and over when all the answers are in the posts that the other player quotes. How would you feel if I asked you the same questions 15 times when they've been answered 15 times?

[Mexal]

Ok, between Anata and Miztef I would vote miztef simply because a replacement does change things. Almost none of the stuff you have on Anata can in anyway be linked to her replacement... I mean a simple" You did this? Why?" could get you very good scummy answers, while the same question to a replacement gets you an "I don't know why she did it." And kills your point. Personally I have not seen a lot come from Miztef or Anata and thus why I have not voted them. Granted I have only been skimming these last few pages so I may have missed a few things.

So basically what you're saying is that you want to lynch Miztef because Anata will get a replacement and everything Anata said or did is irrelevant right?

This is why I hate replacements...

[Mexal]

I decided to do some checking up on a few things.

It might be interesting for some of you to know that Anata has joined newbie game #498 and she had made 5 posts since Monday morning.

She admits she is a newbie there, but she seems to be defending herself fairly well there -- see post 58.

http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... &&start=50

I am still rereading, but I don't like this at all. It is possible that she was an overwhelmed newbie townie, but she wasn't under THAT much pressure. I think the heat got to her and she bailed.

I like you more and more each time you post Nice job!

[Mexal]

Well this is really damning. It kinda shoots down that whole just lazy/dumb thing that myself and others have been pushing. She does seem to have aroused everyone's suspicion, again, in this one, but she is at least addressing the arguments that are placed against her. She never did so much here. Nice find Jitsu. We seem to be in kind of a lull right now, waiting for replacements so we can decide between our two likely lynch candidates, so maybe now is the time to do some serious meta-work.

I would be pleased with either a Miztef or Anata lynch at this point, but honestly I'm leaning a bit toward Anata after Jitsu's last find. I'll stay where I am for the moment, but if there's enough momentum gathering for an Anata lynch, I'll happily jump on.

Hehe, you know me I'm always up for an Anata lynch.

[Mexal]

I'm not seeing that in the rules on the first page.

I've never seen anyone modkilled for meta-gaming a player based on other games on the site.

[Mexal]

jesus,

there could be many reason while she left this game (and joined other)..one could be she is scum and couldnt handle the pressure..

mostly likely she has a boring role(vanilla town) and is lazy because she doesnt want to take the effort to defend such a boring role..

at any rate, Jitsu, I assume you didnt know it was a modkill-able offense...you really should PM the mod and let him know it is there..

Anymore excuses you have for her?

Btw, on a side topic, anyone who doesn't play the game because they got a vanilla townie shouldn't be playing the game in the first place. The vanilla role is VERY MUCH apart of Mafia and if you can't stand that role (odds are you will have that role more times than not) then you shouldn't be playing. Playing that role is the only way you'll ever improve at the game and you should embrace the challenge of it instead of relying on the crux of a role.

[Mexal]

I'm not seeing that in the rules on the first page.

I've never seen anyone modkilled for meta-gaming a player based on other games on the site.

Global Rules.

viewtopic.php?t=6470

Do not talk outside the game thread about an ongoing game except where allowed to do so by your role.

Do you mean this one? If so, I take it to mean don't talk about the current ongoing game that you're in outside the thread. Meaning, don't go discussing the game where players in your game can see it and might get spoiled. I've seen rules like that before and they tend to address that issue, not the one you're talking about. Regardless, Jitsu wasn't aware (if your interpretation is correct) and shouldn't be modkilled for it.

[Mexal]

most likely she just didnt have a defense and didnt want to bother arguing over a vanilla role...

It's not most likely so stop saying that. It's likely...as likely as she was scum and couldn't handle the pressure of mounting a defense because she didn't know how. You can call it an option but to say it's most likely is misleading.

[Mexal]

most likely she just didnt have a defense and didnt want to bother arguing over a vanilla role...

It's not most likely so stop saying that. It's likely...as likely as she was scum and couldn't handle the pressure of mounting a defense because she didn't know how. You can call it an option but to say it's most likely is misleading.

Just curious..

how many games have you played? How many games have you read?

I have played around 15-20 on 3 different sites with 3 different sets of customs. As for games I've read, maybe 10 on top of that?

Why?

[Mexal]

how many times have you seen someone asked to be replaced in a game (when they were mafia or a power role) and then go start another game?
vs.
versus seeing someone who had a boring townie role, asks to be replaced, and start another game.

many people play this game just to be mafia or power roles...I agree with you that they shouldnt play...but it is very common for people to quit when they get bored of their vanilla townie role..

the fact that she quit here and started another game, does in no way indicate she is scummy...

I'll put it this way. I've seen people replaced with every kind of role, vanilla, cop, scum, doc, ect. Hell, I've had a game where every single person was replaced in pretty much, including myself who replaced in as a cop. I have never once checked though to see if they immediately started another game after they asked for a replacement. So I can't answer your question.

[Mexal]

fair enough...I think it is safe to say that at this point, you have tunnel vision on Anata and think I am scum defending her.

I have tunnel vision on Mitzef...and dont understand why you cant see he is the lynch of the day...yes, I know you have voted him, but I just dont understand why you are not atacking him like you are attacking someone who has asked for a replacement and is not here...

our views are simply different...where do you want to go from here?


ooc/
what do you do in DC that you can post in the middle of the day?

Not really tunnel-visioned. I've recognized other suspects and I'm voting one. I haven't attacked him because you have and I don't see the need. I see the inconsistencies in his posts and to point them out again and wrap him in logical traps just doesn't seem worth it since I know it'll be easy. This is no knock on Miztef, it's just that he's new and I'm not. I'm voting him now because it's impossible to ignore the inept nature of his posts, regardless of the fact that I don't necessarily believe he's scum. He could be and it's day 1. Honestly, I'm fine lynching him, even before all the replacements join the game.

I'm not really attacking Anata. I think she's scum. I don't see what the big deal about it is. I thought she was scum before the replacement so I don't really believe it has anything to do with it. She had her opportunity to address the concerns raised against her and she chose not to, both in game and by requesting a replacement. I rather lynch her than Miztef specifically because she did request a replacement and it'd do two things. 1. Eliminate the need for a replacement and 2. Eliminate the need to judge the replacement separately from Anata. If she's town, we learn a lot. If she's scum, we learn a lot. Miztef will be here tomorrow, she won't. It just seems like the more prudent move to eliminate someone who we think is scum without the need to revise all our suspicions because of a replacement.


As for the OOC question, I work at Thomson Corporation dealing with transactional law filings (companies buying other companies) for a product called Westlaw Business. I'm in front of a computer all day without a firewall so I can do whatever I want.

[Mexal]

First, why do you think you'd get lynched for that? Strange statement to make for posting your thoughts.

But let's suppose for a minute that she actually is scum. One possibility then, is that both her and Miztef are scum and they are bussing each other to some degree (both have attacked or raised suspicion on the other at some point). If I understand bussing correctly, one or more scum cast suspicion on another scum to damage their reputation in order to look more townie. However, scum pointing fingers at each other, though possible, would seem to be a bad play on Day 1, as there is a decent chance that the town will believe at least one of the two.

Nah. I don't buy this at all. Day 1 is a good time to distance but uh, no need to really bus. It's unnecessary when there is someone equally scummy in Gunslinger that they could have focused on.

The other possibility is... and I can't believe I'm saying this... That Miztef is innocent and has been framed (first by Anata, and then *possibly* by CKD -- remember that CKD has been saying that we should be taking Miztef seriously for a good while now). Could it actually be possible that Miztef has just been a bad townie player and has actually been innocent all this time?

Yes it's possible and it's what I was saying earlier. I don't think framed is the right word, more like the case is being pushed. I mean, to be framed, it implies that you didn't do anything and people are making it up. The fact is, he is scummy, whether town or scum. So I don't think he's being framed. He's just an easy target and one I'd expect scum to attack if he wasn't scum.

[Mexal]

Let it be known, I am willing to take most of the responsibility for the Mitzef lynch Day 2. That is how sure I am he is scum. I have a feeling that if we don’t lynch him today, I will be Nked tonight for one of two reasons. A.) he is scum, wants me off his back b.) he is town, and the mafia wants to frame him. Either way, I have pushed so hard today for the Mit’s lynch, I am pretty sure I am dead if he doesn’t hang.

I'd say you're pretty safe.

My problem with Jitsu’s post (other than the obvious) was that it is a little misleading(or maybe I read it wrong)….when I read the post, it sounded like Anata asked for a replacement for this game, THEN JOINED another game, if you meta the dates of Anata’s posts, you find that is not exactly how it has happened, she was in both games (actively posting) at the same time.

Uh, he clarified that already. Did you forget about that post too?

[Mexal]

you know what the mafia will do? Interesting.

No, but I can make a logical guess. You wouldn't be it.

[Mexal]

who would?

Lets not get into this discussion. It gives scum way too much information and allows the ability to mislead us. This is just a case of WIFOM and it's not helpful.

[Mexal]

Mexal seems to think that I am clear for a NK..I want to know why.

No, you wanted to know who was the most logical choice of a night kill. That is a different question all together.

As for why, it gets into logical speculation and WIFOM and it's an unnecessary conversation right now. It won't help the town so we're not going to dicuss it. Drop it.

[Mexal]

Or that is my take on it... let's say Anata is town who did for some reason get caught up... If any of the above happen we could more or less lose a very good replacement player. I mean you all said something about her being "lazy" or something right? Perhaps her replacement will be a bit more like Mexal or Jitsu or something... Wouldn't it be nice to give him or her a chance instead of automatically assuming they are scum right off the start?

My problem is if her replacement is anything like me and she is scum, he'll easily spin himself out of a lynch. It's not hard to say, look, I'm not Anata, I don't know what she was thinking when she posted these things, maybe she was lazy then move on and make a case against someone to make it look like they're participating. That's why I don't want a replacement and would rather lynch.

And for the record, I think there is like 1 vote on Anata so I have no idea where you got L-2 from.

[Mexal]

Really? I just saw Jitsu vote her and I thought she already had 2... So in my mind I saw her with 3 votes.. yeah the last mod vote count was on page 13 but jitsu was one of those voting.. hmmm...

MOD:

Hows about an up to date vote count?

I was more worried about people continuing to vote for her and not what she was voted right now... But yeah I see your point.

The problem is, people aren't continuing to vote for her. You're not reading the thread and that can be annoying, especially when you make posts like your previous ones. There has only been 3 votes on Anata. 1 from me, 1 from Jitsu and 1 from jerubbaal. On that same page, jerubbaal took off his vote. I took off my vote a few pages back and moved it to Miztef. Jitsu removed his vote then just recently put his vote back on. That's 1 vote. I don't need a vote count to know this because there hasn't been a lot of people voting for her. You should know this as well. The highest she was at all game was 3 votes, which is another 2 votes away from being at L-2 and that was BEFORE page 13.

Why are you worried about people continuing to vote for her? I think I've laid out exactly why we should vote for her. I don't know if people will, but I believe what I've said and you've yet to disagree. So again, why are you worried?

[Mexal]

Sorry for the lack of response from me; I was waiting for the replacement to come in, but it didn't happen as quickly as I would like. I have to say, this is the most content heavy game I've ever been in, and it's difficult to keep up sometimes between classes.

In any event, I'm really happy to see Jitsu's large posts- however, I'm not sure that we needed a wall on why we should wait to see opinions about anata, since such a thing could have been said more succinctly and more persuasively in a shorter form. I've seen scum post large posts on tiny points to look impressive (and townie). I don't think that's what's happening here, but I have seen it.

Don't wait for a replacement. That could be a week or two. There are a ton of other games that need replacements as well.

[Mexal]

I'm pretty sure this day is basically over. We need lynch info. This game is just stalling now.

Yup and it's going to continue to stall because we're missing almost half the players in the game.

Nothing from AA, oEJo, Gunslinger, Anata.

[Mexal]

EBWOP: And nothing from Jayalay

[Mexal]

Honestly, I don't care anymore. It's day 1. Just lynch someone so we can move on with the game.

[Mexal]

If you guys think lynching someone who is unable to defend themselves is fine then you are anti-town. Plain and simple.

This is the only thing I'll comment on now since it's incredibly hard to get through your post and well...you said this several times.

She had her opportunity to defend herself. She came back and chose NOT to address the points made in the case. Instead, she decided to cast suspicion on the three votes against her. The fact that you continually miss this point (as it has been brought up at least 15 times) really tells me you don't read the thread.

[Mexal]

Oh no I got it... That was part of your case 8 pages ago I agreed with.. But all this new stuff you keep bringing up in the last 6 pages or so that you all feel strengthens your case, the meta thing as an example, is all BS because she cannot defend against THAT!

Who cares if it's 8 pages ago? It's still relevant. It's still apart of day 1. She had her opportunity to defend herself, she

chose

not to. Do you agree or disagree?

[Mexal]

I'm here and have been here. Nothing to say though.

[Mexal]

Korlash, any reason you keep saying I'd just vote you to end the day?

[Mexal]

I can see Korlash as scum. His posts are completely nonsensical.

Basically, at this point I'm willing to vote Miztef, Anata and Korlash.

I'm getting really bored.

[Mexal]

Oh and for the record, this game started almost a month ago. That's absolutely ridiculous considering there is no concrete evidence.

[Mexal]

Setael is a saint for replacing Anata112, but her role is still scum. Vote: Setael - abandoning one game in favor of another while being pressured is a major scumtell.

I agree, but I'd like to hear what she has to say about the entire thread.

[Mexal]

This link will list all posts by Setael, starting with the most recent.

She's made 16 posts in other games since her most recent one in this game, and many many posts in other games since she replaced in.

Mr. Flay says that this is a scumtell, because Anata was under pressure and Setael is currently active in other games while not being active in this game.

I do not consider it a scumtell, and I question whether Setael was really under pressure at all. Probably another of my Crystal Meth theories

Actually, that's not what I think he was considering a scumtell.

I think his point was that Anata left after being pressured and played actively in a new game. That was his scumtell.

As for Setael posting in other games, it doesn't bother me much. This game is extremely meaty and might take her a little bit to get through.

[Mexal]

EBWOP: Setael replaced into the game for Anata.

[Mexal]

It bothers me that your post is implying that I am somehow doing something wrong. I have a 1500 gamepost record of being a highly ethical player. I turned in a scumbuddy who was attempting to cheat with me by PM in Friends and Enemies, I've used encryption twice in previous games without cheating, or being accused of cheating. Frankly, I don't care if you can't be certain that I are not communicating in a forbidden manner.

I really don't like your request that I immediately decode it

or

be replaced. There are several other possible solutions than the ones you named. The two you listed are the two most anti-town possibilities.

I'm starting to think you are scum attempting to eliminate me from the game, or at least seriously undermine my influence on other players.

Honestly, I hate encryption also. It's completely unnecessary and I don't like it. Please encrypt it or not post it at all.

Thanks.

@Mexal and Jerubbaal: can you both link to your best game as scum.

I've only been scum twice and a SK once, none of which has been on this site. The first scum game I can link you if you want. The second, the game is still ongoing but I was NKed N3 and cardflipped so I'm not quite sure if that's such a big deal or not to link. I don't know if you want the SK one. Let me know.

[Mexal]

Please encrypt it or not post it at all.

This was meant to say decrypt it.

[Mexal]

So you can refuse to decrypt the single instance here if you wish, but if you do it again, I'm gone from this game. That's a simple promise, not a threat.

You aren't the only one. I agree 100% with your opinion on cryptology. I absolutely despise it.

[Mexal]

Agreed. Day 1 has lasted a month now.

Just lynch someone and move on. Miztef has a lot of votes and he's a good candidate. I know a bunch of people have voiced suspicion on him so vote where your suspicions lie and compromise. We'll continue tomorrow.

[Mexal]

you didn't bold your vote on me adel.

I'm gonna claim Town. (I don't know if I've been hammered or not yet) . As it always happens, A townie is lynched Day 1, so I don't mind my own death. Hopefully a good chunk of information has been gained today, and the town can win on a subsequent day ^^. Good luck to all, and I hope adel and Mr. flay get along. I think I may go see what Adel's post said, why not post it decrypted as well Adel?

@Jitsu: I was honestly just too lazy to post a case against Korlash. Most of the stuff against him was just things I dislike in game, and count as "scummy", so I felt a case against him would look dumb anyway.

Uh, are you a vanilla townie or do you have a role? Claiming town is worthless.

[Mexal]

Uh, are you a vanilla townie or do you have a role? Claiming town is worthless.

This is actually his second claim. He claimed "Civillian" some time ago, and then clarified it as Vanilla Townie.

I forgot. It's been too long.

[Mexal]

Ok. It's L-1.

[Mexal]

Wow it's over. I'll be honest. I'm really glad I was killed N1. I don't think I could have handled the month and half day 3. Way too long for me when I'm near a comp 10+ hours a day.

As for play, Jitsu was great. I absolutely detest Adel's play style and I'm glad I was able to help put suspicion on CKD which kept him alive (this was not a plan).

I will say that if Setael was lynched day 1 like she should have been, the game would have been over in 3 game days. Korlash would have been next followed by Jerub just based on their reactions to lynching Setael.

All in all, good game guys.

[Mexal]

I just cant see why anyone would walk away from a mafia role..lesson learned

Mex, I think this game would have been totally different if you would have survived through N1.

Good or bad different?

[Mexal]

I just cant see why anyone would walk away from a mafia role..lesson learned

Mex, I think this game would have been totally different if you would have survived through N1.

Oh, she walked away cause of the pressure. When you got someone like Jitsu or I breathing down her neck, it's really really hard to get out of it if you're inexperienced. She prob figured it was easier to leave then try to wiggle out.

[Mexal]

I'd like to hope I would be as good an analyzer as jitsu or mexal if I was only in one game at a time and near a computer 10+ hours a day.

It helps that you have 35 or more games of experience too

And I'm currently in 3 games and modding 1, just on different sites

[Mexal]

I absolutely detest Adel's play style

Do you mind if I sig you on that?

Not at all.