Mini 520 - Triumvirate Mafia - ABANDONED

[Mastermind of Sin]

Original Roll String: 1d12

1 12-Sided Dice: (11) = 11

[Mastermind of Sin]

Vote: someone2

Thought you could copy a guy's name, didn't you? Well, you can't!

[Mastermind of Sin]

Unvote

Vote SSF

Voting by dice is bad. It doesn't give any actual information.

Considering the fact that I have started every game with an

identical

post, AFAICR, how is this scummy?

Well, it isn't scummy, actually. I voted you to drill it into you that random voting

using a dice

is bad (although since you do it every game, it is not scummy, especially for you)

The logic behind dice voting being bad is, that if you random vote without a dice, all we know that it is an apparent random vote, which may, or may not indeed be random. That is information. However, when you vote using a dice, we

know

why you voted so and so player. You did it because the dice told you to. It doesn't give the town any information.

For more details, read the first couple of pages of newbie 476 where mith explains this in a much better way.

Unvote, Vote: Sir Tornado

Interesting that you get on SSF's case for dice voting but don't even mention me. Trying to distance from your scumbuddy early?

Basically, the claims become almost worthless in finding out what someone is. It's WIFOM if there is a claim, or if there isn't a claim.

Triumvirate - Almost certainly must claim, unless they are a very good player.
Mafia - can choose to claim or not, completely WIFOM
Townie - really, really shouldn't claim. However, since there is no way (that I know of) to prove triumvirates, they could claim.

Why shouldn't townies claim? I agree it doesn't do much, but how does it help us for them to refuse to claim? It's the same as claiming anyways. And claims are always wifom, get over it. This game isn't any difference from other games. We have 3 "power roles" that can't prove themselves, it's not really any different from normal mafia. There is always WIFOM possible surrounding claims.

Just saying that this completely sucks...completely. If I was mafia, I wouldn't claim using this table so....dum dum dum! NO RESULTS

I can tell you've really thought about what you'd do as mafia...

[Mastermind of Sin]

Interesting that you get on SSF's case for dice voting but don't even mention me. Trying to distance from your scumbuddy early?

That vote was to make a point, not to necessarily call SSF scummy due to his rolling dice (I did say so when I unvoted).

I wanted to get it across to SSF that using dice to start the game is not a very good idea. The vote on him was to draw his attention to it, because I have found that people pay more attention to what you are saying if you vote them.

Calling that "distancing" from SSF was a bit strange MoS. Why the heck would I specifically say that what he did was not scummy in my next post if I was trying to distance from him?

Distancing does not require you to call one scummy. The fact that you are addressing him and questioning his actions is enough. My point is, my vote after your vote on SSF clearly showed that I had not read your post (because I never read the thread before I do my dice vote, I've even done it upon replacing into a large game before). However, you did not even mention me or address my actions, instead focusing your questioning/comments on SSF.

[Mastermind of Sin]

Distancing does not require you to call one scummy. The fact that you are addressing him and questioning his actions is enough. My point is, my vote after your vote on SSF clearly showed that I had not read your post (because I never read the thread before I do my dice vote, I've even done it upon replacing into a large game before). However, you did not even mention me or address my actions, instead focusing your questioning/comments on SSF.

So, by your logic, if I say Person A is town, but still ask him why he's done something, it is distancing? Because, technically, in doing so, I am:

1) Not calling him scummy
2) Addressing him
3) Questioning his actions

It's not distancing in and of itself, though. But it is

possible

distancing when you take the above action and completely ignore someone

who did the exact same thing you were questioning person A about

.

[Mastermind of Sin]

It's not distancing in and of itself, though. But it is possible distancing when you take the above action and completely ignore someone who did the exact same thing you were questioning person A about.

So, you want me to give the same ICish gameplay advice to everyone in the same game like a broken record player?

You're strawmanning, SirT. This behavior was not exhibited by everyone in the game. I'm saying that it looks weird for you to question one person and completely ignore the other person. At the very least, I would expect you to say something like "this goes for you, too, MoS".

Perhaps I'll give you a more useful dare.

State whether or not you think MoS is talking crap.

It's too early to say for sure, but I'd say he's talking crap. I'm waiting to see how he responds to Sir T before placing my vote.

You guys are making this out to be a lot bigger than it really is. It's not like I've said that what SirT did is some end-all scumtell that's going to reveal the scum. However, it was a good place for my vote on page 2 of a game, and it was worth pointing out. The only reason I'm still talking about this is because people are questioning it, and I don't ever let comments about me go unanswered if I can help it.

[Mastermind of Sin]

Yuan, if you want some discussion, look at the people who massively unvoted, saying "the random stage is over". What a load of bullshit. I'd pursue it, but I'm lazy and have been arguing with SirT. Someone else can do it.

[Mastermind of Sin]

Close, but not quite. It's not that I'm pouting, it's that I've already been putting in a lot of contribution to the game, so someone else should take a crack at it.

[Mastermind of Sin]

I admit to nothing.

[Mastermind of Sin]

MoS is using the "I don't have to because I've wasted time already excuse."

That never fails to annoy me.

Sucks to be you, then.

@MoS: I'm not sure how anything scummy can be determined by a lot of people unvoting from the random stage. A whole bunch of one vote here one vote there situations dosen't really get anything done. I think the best idea is to try and get peoples minds out of that stage and into a stage where a vote is placed for some actual reason even if there isn't much to go on. I'd like to hear though how you or anyone else who thinks we can would deduce any scum tells from it, perhaps I'm missing something.

Getting out of the random stage is good. However, I really don't like it when people just decide to say "the random stage is over", like it's some sort of boundary that can be defined, and you can just cut off all random voting at a specific point. I much prefer that people *do* something to get out of random voting, rather than just say it's over and do nothing.

For example, look at me. Instead of just saying "oh, random voting is done!", I actually did something, I made an attack on SirT, and I started a lot of serious discussion.

That

is how you end the random voting stage. It's bullshit to think you can just say it's over. Actions speak louder than words, my friend. Although in this case, words are your actions, I suppose.

And sometimes you *can* pick up scumtells during random voting.

Not much to go on but I'm going to

FoS: Mastermind of Sin

because so far I find that he pushed something on some very fishy logic then after people disagreed dropped the I've put too much into this to do anymore line. However, we don't want to start bandwagoning over something so small, so I'd love to hear some of the more quiet give their points of view.

Erm, I never said I was going to drop my argument against SirT. I said that I've done enough that I don't really feel like spearheading

other

arguments at this point in the game. Just because people disagreed with my point against SirT does not mean I think they're right. It's certainly not a strong tell, but it's something, imo.

[Mastermind of Sin]

Getting out of the random stage is good. However, I really don't like it when people just decide to say "the random stage is over", like it's some sort of boundary that can be defined, and you can just cut off all random voting at a specific point. I much prefer that people *do* something to get out of random voting, rather than just say it's over and do nothing.

For example, look at me. Instead of just saying "oh, random voting is done!", I actually did something, I made an attack on SirT, and I started a lot of serious discussion. That is how you end the random voting stage. It's bullshit to think you can just say it's over. Actions speak louder than words, my friend. Although in this case, words are your actions, I suppose.

I don't disagree with most of this. However, if you'll note your discussion with SirT started shortly before the large amount of unvotes. In my mind and perhaps in others, that discussion was worthy of the end of random voting whether we agreed with your stance or not. This in addition to the other discussion about claims gave us something in game to discuss and analyze.

Fair enough, point taken.

Erm, I never said I was going to drop my argument against SirT. I said that I've done enough that I don't really feel like spearheading other arguments at this point in the game. Just because people disagreed with my point against SirT does not mean I think they're right. It's certainly not a strong tell, but it's something, imo.

I definitely didn't mean to say you thought people disagreeing with you were right, or that you were dropping your argument against SirT completely. Though I do think you may have been trying to change the topic. I could see how I was a little unclear though.
I meant that after people disagreed with your point about SirT that you dropped another topic and then backed out of the potential discussion.

The thing is, the topic didn't really exist until I brought it up. ooooh, nvm, I see what you're saying. You mean "dropped" as in "presented", not "dropped" as in "dropped the case". Got it.

*shrug* I was just responding to other people saying there wasn't much to pursue atm.

I thought your lack of an explanation as to why unvoting would be a scum tell as well as what appeared to be a lack of desire to participate in the discussion of that topic seemed a little scummy. It seemed it could be a way to redirect people from looking at your earlier argument against SirT much more and for you to be able to stay out of the new discussion from there on in.
I'll admit that all this is not a particularly strong tell either, but I'd still really like to have you explain how we could decipher a scum tell from a handfull of people unvoting once some minor discussion had started.

You can't, really. I just get annoyed when people do that.

Again, I'll use any witty devices I damn well want to, and if someone doesn't understand, they can ask me to clarify. Also,

FoMS: Spider Jerusalem

for being way too agreeable. That always makes me suspicious. Also for his name, which I can't figure out.

Bullshit.

@Phate: I don't agree that unvoting = scum. Basically, I felt like moving some stuff forward in this game and didn't like the way/tone you were posted, so I just send a vote out there to see what happens.

I absolutely agree that Spider Jerusalem is looking scummy as well.

Everyone, check out the start of a two-pronged attack from Phate/Miztef.

Not much to go on but I'm going to

FoS: Mastermind of Sin

because so far I find that he pushed something on some very fishy logic then after people disagreed dropped the I've put too much into this to do anymore line. However, we don't want to start bandwagoning over something so small, so I'd love to hear some of the more quiet give their points of view.

Agreeing with the majority view here.

He's not really agreeing with the majority. SJ actually put a lot more thought and reasoning into his posts about me than anyone else in this game. He's actually

useful

, as opposed to most of the "majority" that he was "agreeing" with.

I agree that in your specific post there was nothing seriously misleading, and if my statement came off that way I'll clarify. I was trying to speak in a more general tone, largely because I felt you intended a clear response but I have seen posts done that way get muddied up very quickly. Perhaps it's just a difference in opinion but I think it's much clearer to the town as a whole if you avoid the use of witty devices.

I don't disagree with most of this. However, if you'll note your discussion with SirT started shortly before the large amount of unvotes. In my mind and perhaps in others, that discussion was worthy of the end of random voting whether we agreed with your stance or not. This in addition to the other discussion about claims gave us something in game to discuss and analyze.

Again, more agreeing.

This isn't even agreeing at all. SJ is the first person to explain in detail what was wrong with my argument, and he caught something that I hadn't. Just because everyone else unvoted and he speculated on a reason for it does not mean that he is agreeing with the majority. He's the only person to post this logic, he didn't copy what anyone else said.

I'll

unvote vote: Spider Jerusalem

on just these minor tells only because no one else strikes me as scummy.

Also, besides a random vote on me, Spider has not voted on any of his suspicions. To me, being non-committal, especially in an early phase in the game, is scummy because it leaves no real tracks to follow for inspection on later days.

Agreed.

FlyingHawk, SJ, not to call the kettle black, but you guys are new here. And thus it might stand to reason that you'll make mistakes, especially in the area of keeping things hidden if you have them to hide. And it strikes me as interesting that while you've been quiet all game, you both fairly well jump to defend MoS. This might (indeed, probably) be nothing, but I think it's worth mentioning.

*stores away the possibility that there might be a link between flyinghawk, MoS, and SJ*

Can I just say that I nearly feel out of my chair laughing at this?

Phate, regardless of saying that you aren't doing it, you are

totally

calling the kettle black here. Even worse than that, FlyingHawk has been a member of this site since the end of

May

, and he even played mafia elsewhere before joining. So he is definitely *not* new here. And SJ joined this site before you did, Phate, so you have no business acting like you know what you're talking about when it comes to newbies here. That's just ridiculous.

[Mastermind of Sin]

And thus it might stand to reason that you'll make mistakes, especially in the area of keeping things hidden if you have them to hide.

This sentence is just fluff. It doesn't actually mean anything, unless you can explain what the point of saying it was.

And it strikes me as interesting that while you've been quiet all game, you both fairly well jump to defend MoS. This might (indeed, probably) be nothing, but I think it's worth mentioning.

People *do* tend to defend others when they are being attacked with crappy cases.

[Mastermind of Sin]

People who look scummy to me

MoS-Overexplains a lot. Maybe just overeager, like I said before
SJ-someone said that he was too agreeable. I agree (heh heh, too ironic)
Phate-seems as though he is looking for the opportunity to lynch someone and get to night.

Those are my opinions, not really big on anyone at this point. But dere ya go.

As for myself, I find that if I don't explain something thoroughly, people tend to bullheadedly continue a horrible train of thought and completely fuck the game up.

As for SJ, see my post on why he is not being too agreeable.

Agreed on Phate.

However, I stand by my original statement - I find you too agreeable. Your points of dissent are always surrounded by things like "I agree with most of this", "I definitely didn't mean to say", and "I could see how I was a little unclear." Perhaps this is just your playstyle, but I don't trust diplomats.

This is at least the second time you have said SJ was too agreeable

since

I have presented an argument that said he was not being "too agreeable", yet you have completely ignored my argument despite the fact that you quoted most of the rest of the post that this point was addressed in.

[Mastermind of Sin]

bleh, forgot to add that I'm V/LA for a week.

[Mastermind of Sin]

Where did Sir T go?

[Mastermind of Sin]

I think this no lynch wagon is going a little too quickly for me. Any vote that gets 3 agreements in so short a time makes me wary. Many times it's an indication that those people should be looked at. Not that I'm saying everyone on it is scum. Only that it looks a little suspicious. To be honest, I considered No Lynch myself. And rejected it. Time will show if no lynch is the play, but it's not the time

yet

. Right now, we need to discuss more before going to night. I like the pressure that's going on right now, and we should keep it up. Unless someone has a compelling argument to support phate's innocence, it's probably time for me to vote him. Maybe I'll consider no lynch eventually, but not right now.

Unvote, Vote: Phate

[Mastermind of Sin]

SJ was stretching to come up with that conclusion, methinks.

[Mastermind of Sin]

If we no lynch, we won't gain any information from today's votes, except from the person that dies and the one that gets investigated (assuming both are successful). I think we maximize our information by lynching today.

[Mastermind of Sin]

@Elmo: I object to Phate acting as if he knows better. Among other things. The implications of the statement were very much not logical, as well.

[Mastermind of Sin]

Hey all, I'm going to be asking the mod to replace me, hate to have to do it but I'm completely overwhelmed with work for my classes right now and I don't see that getting better till mid December when the semester breaks. It was fun while it lasted.

For Mod: Please go ahead and replace me

SJ, trust me, if you just skim the thread and post sparingly until then, you won't miss much. We probably will still be on the same day or just starting Day 2 when you get back. Don't get replaced, please.

[Mastermind of Sin]

...gah...

[Mastermind of Sin]

Ditto.

[Mastermind of Sin]

I don't. Does it matter that I don't have 100% definitive proof?

[Mastermind of Sin]

Even worse than that, FlyingHawk has been a member of this site since the end of

May

, and he even played mafia elsewhere before joining. So he is definitely *not* new here.

Does it matter that I don't have 100% definitive proof?

If you'll pardon the pun, you do seem quite definite there.

It's just that if I were scumbuddies with someone, the one question I'd be guaranteed to ask them is how experienced they were.

I don't care how experienced my scumbuddies are. I just assume they're all n00bs unless I know them, and then half of them are n00bs anyways. Anybody who's played with me as scum would know that. Which is probably, like, no one in this game right now. But whatever.

Regardless, I've seen FlyingHawk say this in a couple queue threads:

May i play? i've played forum mafia online before.

Just, not on this site.

@Elmo - not terribly surprised. He [MoS] hasn't shown himself to be much for logic so far.

That's an empty accusation to make when you haven't even shown how any of my logic was bad so far. And then you blindly agree with Elmo without checking your facts first. Nice job,

sport

. Wanna cookie?

[Mastermind of Sin]

Oddly enough, that's exactly what he says here - the signup for a game which you're not in, and in which you have no reason to have read. I also highly doubt you just happen to remember what someone wrote in a signup thread back in May.

Unvote

:

Miztef

;

vote

:

Mastermind of Sin

. DIE, PLEASE.

I almost signed up for that game, actually. I just didn't have time to add another normal, unless I saw one I *really* liked. That one just didn't do it for me. But I did see him post that. Odd things stick with you sometimes.

Does it matter that I don't have 100% definitive proof?

This, by the way, is the absolute 24 carat gold standard of overdefensiveness that everyone who hasn't had their gut surgically removed wants to see.

Okay, Linus, you're way too excited; I want you to get your blankie, go in a corner, and take a time-out.

Uh huh. Because you have *how* much experience playing with me that you can evaluate to know what overdefensive is for me? Right. Smooth move, Sherlock.

What logic, MoS? You've given me none to evaluate.

Chocolate chip?

Let's see here. Dismissive comments, Fallacy of Negative Premises? Yeah, you're really convincing here. Nice try, Shirley. Why don't you go back to school and take an apple with you next time. Here, I'll give it a spit shine for you. I'm sure your teacher will do her job this time.

It's too early to say for sure, but I'd say he's talking crap. I'm waiting to see how he responds to Sir T before placing my vote.

You guys are making this out to be a lot bigger than it really is. It's not like I've said that what SirT did is some end-all scumtell that's going to reveal the scum. However, it was a good place for my vote on page 2 of a game, and it was worth pointing out. The only reason I'm still talking about this is because people are questioning it, and I don't ever let comments about me go unanswered if I can help it.

Again, I'll use any witty devices I damn well want to, and if someone doesn't understand, they can ask me to clarify. Also,

FoMS: Spider Jerusalem

for being way too agreeable. That always makes me suspicious. Also for his name, which I can't figure out.

Bullshit.

See reasoning below instead of ignoring it like you did last time

@Phate: I don't agree that unvoting = scum. Basically, I felt like moving some stuff forward in this game and didn't like the way/tone you were posted, so I just send a vote out there to see what happens.

I absolutely agree that Spider Jerusalem is looking scummy as well.

Everyone, check out the start of a two-pronged attack from Phate/Miztef.

Not much to go on but I'm going to

FoS: Mastermind of Sin

because so far I find that he pushed something on some very fishy logic then after people disagreed dropped the I've put too much into this to do anymore line. However, we don't want to start bandwagoning over something so small, so I'd love to hear some of the more quiet give their points of view.

Agreeing with the majority view here.

He's not really agreeing with the majority. SJ actually put a lot more thought and reasoning into his posts about me than anyone else in this game. He's actually

useful

, as opposed to most of the "majority" that he was "agreeing" with.

I agree that in your specific post there was nothing seriously misleading, and if my statement came off that way I'll clarify. I was trying to speak in a more general tone, largely because I felt you intended a clear response but I have seen posts done that way get muddied up very quickly. Perhaps it's just a difference in opinion but I think it's much clearer to the town as a whole if you avoid the use of witty devices.

I don't disagree with most of this. However, if you'll note your discussion with SirT started shortly before the large amount of unvotes. In my mind and perhaps in others, that discussion was worthy of the end of random voting whether we agreed with your stance or not. This in addition to the other discussion about claims gave us something in game to discuss and analyze.

Again, more agreeing.

This isn't even agreeing at all. SJ is the first person to explain in detail what was wrong with my argument, and he caught something that I hadn't. Just because everyone else unvoted and he speculated on a reason for it does not mean that he is agreeing with the majority. He's the only person to post this logic, he didn't copy what anyone else said.

I'll

unvote vote: Spider Jerusalem

on just these minor tells only because no one else strikes me as scummy.

Also, besides a random vote on me, Spider has not voted on any of his suspicions. To me, being non-committal, especially in an early phase in the game, is scummy because it leaves no real tracks to follow for inspection on later days.

Agreed.

FlyingHawk, SJ, not to call the kettle black, but you guys are new here. And thus it might stand to reason that you'll make mistakes, especially in the area of keeping things hidden if you have them to hide. And it strikes me as interesting that while you've been quiet all game, you both fairly well jump to defend MoS. This might (indeed, probably) be nothing, but I think it's worth mentioning.

*stores away the possibility that there might be a link between flyinghawk, MoS, and SJ*

Can I just say that I nearly feel out of my chair laughing at this?

Phate, regardless of saying that you aren't doing it, you are

totally

calling the kettle black here. Even worse than that, FlyingHawk has been a member of this site since the end of

May

, and he even played mafia elsewhere before joining. So he is definitely *not* new here. And SJ joined this site before you did, Phate, so you have no business acting like you know what you're talking about when it comes to newbies here. That's just ridiculous.

And thus it might stand to reason that you'll make mistakes, especially in the area of keeping things hidden if you have them to hide.

This sentence is just fluff. It doesn't actually mean anything, unless you can explain what the point of saying it was.

And it strikes me as interesting that while you've been quiet all game, you both fairly well jump to defend MoS. This might (indeed, probably) be nothing, but I think it's worth mentioning.

People *do* tend to defend others when they are being attacked with crappy cases.

However, I stand by my original statement - I find you too agreeable. Your points of dissent are always surrounded by things like "I agree with most of this", "I definitely didn't mean to say", and "I could see how I was a little unclear." Perhaps this is just your playstyle, but I don't trust diplomats.

This is at least the second time you have said SJ was too agreeable

since

I have presented an argument that said he was not being "too agreeable", yet you have completely ignored my argument despite the fact that you quoted most of the rest of the post that this point was addressed in.

No, you're right. I haven't given you any logic in this game. Not at all.

Listen, cookie, you've been here over a month. This is Mafia 101: I don't want every little thing run by me unless you actually know what you're talking about. I don't wanna give you my two cents' worth in a defense. But if you ever do wanna know my opinion, rest assured it will always be that you're an incredible pain and that every time I see your cutie-pie-doll face, it just makes me wanna pick you up and shake you until all the hours of my life that you've wasted...fall out.

And we only have Snickerdoodle. Deal with it.

[Mastermind of Sin]

Let's see here. Dismissive comments, Fallacy of Negative Premises? Yeah, you're really convincing here. Nice try, Shirley. Why don't you go back to school and take an apple with you next time. Here, I'll give it a spit shine for you. I'm sure your teacher will do her job this time.

I'd just like to say that the above quote sets the tone for the rest of your post - you may as well be talking to yourself.

I was having fun.

Incidentally, you need to brush up on your formal fallacies. The Fallacy of Negative Premises, more accurately known as an affirmative conclusion from negative premises, is only committed when a categorical syllogism has a positive conclusion based on only negative premises.

An example of an affirmative conclusion from negative premises is the following:

Code: Select all

No scummers use logic, and no logical people are wrong, therefore all scummers are wrong.

Are you actually suggesting I've made the above error, and if so, would you like to point it out? Or are you simply throwing around philosophical terms to try to sound intelligent?

No, it was just the closest thing I could come up with. There isn't really a syllogism involved. It's just that you first assumed a negative premise and came up with two conclusion, both of which were reliant on a premise that you had not established yet.

Premise: MoS has given no logic this game.
Conclusion #1: I have no logic to analyze.
Conclusion #2: MoS is scum.

Conclusion #1, of course, follows if the Premise is true. However, Conclusion #2 has not been shown to follow in the first place.

Therefore, one could argue that your assertion is instead that:

If MoS is scum, he would give no logic in this game.

However, that is a non sequitur fallacy, as anyone who has read my games should know.

In your quoted posts, you make assertions, but with precious little to back them up.

Your first quoted post: "It's not a big deal, guys. I didn't say that was some huge scumtell, I just thought it was worth a vote."

Not a huge scumtell does not means that it's not a scumtell at all. It's still a scumtell, and it was worth a vote at the time. Your subsequent posts have not convinced me to lift said vote.

Your second quoted post: "Insert profanity with no fucking explanation here. Insert implication of Phate/Miztef scumpair here, just because Miztef agrees that SJ agrees too much. SJ has good logic. I agree. You're stupid, and you have no business posting anything that implicates me."

Given that you both made an illogical attack on SJ after you (Phate) made an attack on me and SJ countered it, it was a fairly logical thing to point out. Not pointing out the connections would have been dumb.

In addition, you have yet to show how SJ's posts were just agreeing with people. I would assert that he specifically went into more detail in his opinions than most people, which would require original material and not just agreeing. Neither of you showed how everything he said was an unoriginal thought that was merely agreeing with what the majority had already said.

Your third quoted post: "This logic is meaningless. The fact that they defended me is not inherently scummy [editor's note: <-- This is an example (I think the first I've seen from you) of logic. Way to go, MoS! Everybody give MoS a hand!]

Hmm, we might make you into a decent logic detector yet. If you hadn't already missed several other examples...

Your fourth quoted post: "SJ's not too agreeable, and he has good logic. I said this before, so I'll call it 'presenting an argument,' regardless of my lack of any kind of supporting points for this statement, and say you've ignored it."

I have said this before, and I just said it again up above. You HAVE ignored it, and you have NOT shown how he has just given examples of stuff. You are accusing him of doing something that is NOT obvious. Therefore, it is up to you to SHOW that he has done this. Merely claiming it is so does not make it so. My assertion is the base assumption that does not require me to show anything unless you have shown to the contrary already.

No, you're right. I haven't given you any logic in this game. Not at all.

That's about the size of it.

Your last paragraph is empty once you take out the elitism and bravado. So a merry Fuck You to you too, good sir.[/quote]

Clearly you didn't get the reference and were too pissed off to realize that I actually put it there for a purpose. Plus it was funny.

[Mastermind of Sin]

Odd things stick with you sometimes.

It was six months ago. It's not odd, and it's not memorable.

Erm, not odd in that sense of the word. Odd as in random or unexpected.

Because you have *how* much experience playing with me that you can evaluate to know what overdefensive is for me?

Do you have some kind of psychological issue that causes you immense fear and stress when people ask you perfectly simple questions?

The fact that you think I could have immense fear and stress over anything on the internet answers my question for me.

[Mastermind of Sin]

FaerieLord, Phate's just attacking SJ on the assumption that I'm scum, so you can pretty much disregard what he's saying.

[Mastermind of Sin]

@MoS

Code: Select all

Premise: MoS has given no logic.
Conclusion: MoS is scum.

I have not made anything like that statement. I think the fact that you're reluctant to use logic makes you scummier, but absolute (justified) certainty is hard to come by in mafia.

So what

other

reasons do you have for me to be scum? That's the only reasoning I've seen from you so far, and you seem pretty hellbent on declaring that I'm scum and getting me lynched. Please, enlighten me.

I'm not going to bother to quote it, but go back and look at the post where I note that all of his points of dissent are covered in things like "I don't disagree with this," "I can see where I was being unclear," etc. I never said he

just

agreed with people.

So when is it scummy to agree with people and do other stuff as well? Everyone does it. Hell, you're as guilty of that as anyone else. Wtf is the point of your attack on SJ, then?

@FaerieLord

Fine, you're on my suspicion list.

No, seriously. MoS is right - I think he's scum, and therefore, I'm likely to be suspicious of anyone defending him, especially if it looks like he's being ultratactful in order to stay on the public's good side.

I'm being tactful? That's a new one. And here I thought I was going out of my way to be an unmitigated asshole with an enormous ego...where did

tactful

come out of that?

[Mastermind of Sin]

I'm for a mass claim. I think it would tip things in the town's favor a lot, because it makes the scum commit to claims. If we don't mass claim now, it gives the scum a night to discuss claiming strategies. If we mass claim today, we catch them flat-footed.

[Mastermind of Sin]

So how many people have yet to agree with mass claim?

[Mastermind of Sin]

Me. Still thinking. I'm worried about the apparent lack of actually working it out, although it might be a good idea.

Should I post a full working out so far? It lets the scum know what the best moves are, but it also helps us understand what may be about to happen.

It's also possible the scum have already discussed trying to claim pre-game. If you're paranoid, you might say they're fully worked out it's bad for the town and are trying to get us to do it. So basically I want it to be watertight before we out the power roles.

SSF / MoS: You're smart, how far have you thought this through?

Didn't we start with day...how would scum have had a chance to talk to each other already? I assumed the scum had not been able to strategize yet...

[Mastermind of Sin]

Me. Still thinking. I'm worried about the apparent lack of actually working it out, although it might be a good idea.

Should I post a full working out so far? It lets the scum know what the best moves are, but it also helps us understand what may be about to happen.

It's also possible the scum have already discussed trying to claim pre-game. If you're paranoid, you might say they're fully worked out it's bad for the town and are trying to get us to do it. So basically I want it to be watertight before we out the power roles.

SSF / MoS: You're smart, how far have you thought this through?

Didn't we start with day...how would scum have had a chance to talk to each other already? I assumed the scum had not been able to strategize yet...

They had four days from PMs being sent out until day 1 start, during which time they could talk.

Oh.

[Mastermind of Sin]

I'm ethically against an organized cipher claim. I think it goes against the spirit of the game, mostly. I don't really have a problem with the occasional single person that does it, but an organized cipher mass claim is just an attempt to break not the

setup

, but the entire

game

of mafia.

[Mastermind of Sin]

I have actually just come across the idea recently in another game, and it was seen as unethical there as well.

However, I don't understand how this is so in this situation. Should we not be allowed to all claim at the same time? Must claims be said in a particular order? If that is the rule of the game, then so be it.

Even with the mafia getting to choose how they are each going to claim, I still believe one of the greatest advantages of doing such a plan is having no careless risk of hitting triumvirate. If we so choose, we can go after townies as long as 1 mafia claimed townie and keep the triums alive. That way, the power roles, at worst, would be eliminated in 3 days, and, if that's the case, the mafia who claimed trium would be found.

AS SSF pointed out, there is nothing wrong with a mass claim. However, the encrypted mass claim is breaking the game, and it's an unethical move if we do it. I would be sad if we were so bad at this game that we had to break it to have a chance at winning.

[Mastermind of Sin]

Elmo is right. I'm glad he brought up these statistics, because I hadn't thought of it. This "we deserve to lose" crap is bullshit. There is never a reason to let pride cloud your judgement from taking the safer path. You should never gamble with the statistics in a situation like this. The best strategy is the one that has the best worst-case scenario. We're not looking for the high-risk, high-return plan. We're looking for the plan that gives us the best chance of not screwing it up, not the plan that gives us a very small chance of completely owning the scum and a very large chance of getting our asses kicked. There is no reason to decrease our chances of winning just because we're too proud to take the safer route. That's retarded.

No Mass Claim from me.

[Mastermind of Sin]

The triums can still claim before we lynch them...the mass claim changes nothing in that respect.

[Mastermind of Sin]

If every scum claims Trium, that's no different than every scum claiming Trium during mass claim. If we get too many Trium claims, we can deal with it then.

[Mastermind of Sin]

Unvote, Vote: FaerieLord

You were given the chance and the reason to drop this. I can only conclude that you are still pushing for mass claim because you are scum, and it benefits you to go through with it.

[Mastermind of Sin]

Because only scum could possibly think this was a good plan at this point. The logic has been proven that the town has a better chance of winning if we do NOT mass claim. You are trying to brush past these proven statistics and play towards some retarded sense of pride about the game. You're presumptuous and likey scum as well.

[Mastermind of Sin]

I would like more people to speak up about the mass claim situation while I'm away on V/LA.

[Mastermind of Sin]

FaerieLord is continuing to argue for the mass claim without responding to the arguments that have been brought forth against his plan. He's just continually repeating the same words over and over, trying to browbeat us, through repetition, into agreeing. Can we please lynch him now?

[Mastermind of Sin]

His last post was one of the things that bumped that percentage from 40 to 65. Making a 180-degree turn not based on any evidence but on the threat of a lynch.

Well there was plenty of evidence. Just no

new

evidence. Only clarifying here, I agree that the 180 under pressure doesn't look that great. I'm going to think on that one, because I need to figure out what I think a town player in that situation would have done (I still feel it's unlikely for a townie to get IN that situation, but we have to consider the possibility).

[Mastermind of Sin]

He's just continually repeating the same words over and over, trying to browbeat us, through repetition, into agreeing. Can we please lynch him now?

I'm going to think on that one, because I need to figure out what I think a town player in that situation would have done

Speaking of doing a 180...

How is that a 180? I still want to lynch FaerieLord because he's scum. However, I'm not doing this with my blinders on. I'm still

considering

the possibilities. I just don't find it very likely that he's not scum.

[Mastermind of Sin]

Faerie is a spectral sprite, but there is really no gender applied to the being itself. Perhaps there is a stereotype that only girls like faeries and therefore an account with faerie in the name would be a girl. I could see that as possible.

[Mastermind of Sin]

Does the fact that I'm voting Faerie not tip you off at all, Phate?

[Mastermind of Sin]

How is that a 180? I still want to lynch FaerieLord because he's scum. However, I'm not doing this with my blinders on. I'm still

considering

the possibilities.

I just don't find it very likely that he's

not

scum.

[Mastermind of Sin]

So the fact that I said "I'm still considering the possibilities" didn't tip you off

at all

?

[Mastermind of Sin]

Are you voting FL?

[Mastermind of Sin]

Weird in what way? Please try to quantify your feelings into something that can be documented. "Weird" doesn't cut it.

[Mastermind of Sin]

It was a question to find out if he was voting her, since he had expressed suspicion of her in the post right before mine. Apparently he read my mind.

[Mastermind of Sin]

Because he's scummy. If you have to ask why I think he's scummy, you clearly haven't been reading very well.

[Mastermind of Sin]

Because you haven't been reading very well.

[Mastermind of Sin]

LoL

[Mastermind of Sin]

In optics and physics, Snell's law (also known as Descartes' law or the law of refraction), is a formula used to describe the relationship between the angles of incidence and refraction, when referring to light or other waves, passing through a boundary between two different isotropic media, such as air and glass. The law says that the ratio of the sines of the angles of incidence and of refraction is a constant that depends on the media.

In optics, the law is used in ray tracing to compute the angles of incidence or refraction, and in experimental optics to find the refractive index of a material.

Named after Dutch mathematician Willebrord Snellius, one of its discoverers, Snell's law states that the ratio of the sines of the angles of incidence and refraction is equal to the ratio of velocities in the two media, or equivalently to the inverse ratio of the indices of refraction:



or




Snell's law follows from Fermat's principle of least time, which in turn follows from the propagation of light as waves.

[Mastermind of Sin]

"QFT", internet slang usually meaning "quoted for truth". This term applies on forums and posting boards where users can edit their posts, and describes a re-posting of another user's statement in order to counteract subsequent changes. Since the repost is not made by the original author, it can not be edited by him and will always preserve an unaltered copy of his initial contribution. Thus the QFT holds the poster to his original statement. It is also used to express agreement with a previous poster's statement and validate its veracity. Other variations include "quoted for truthiness," "quoted for truthery," and "quite fucking true". QFT can also mean "quit fucking talking".

[Mastermind of Sin]

Good choice.

[Mastermind of Sin]

Elmo, why are you voting me and saying we should lynch Thin_Man?

[Mastermind of Sin]

FL is our best bet as scum. *shrug* I welcome any other cases, but I don't see anything out there.

[Mastermind of Sin]

Unvote, Vote: Elmo

I love it when scum drop this tell.

[Mastermind of Sin]

Why the new wagon, MoS?

He's noticed the scumtell of "I'll not attack a townie that is being attacked, so then I'll look innocent when he gets lynched." by Elmo.

I don't really agree in this case, but I don't like the farielord lynch, so

unvote vote: elmo

It's not just that, it's the way he said so matter-of-factly that FaerieLord was town just as we were about to lynch him. That speaks volumes of inside information to me, and I know it's a popular strategy for scum to use that they don't seem to realize is a scumtell until it's too late.

[Mastermind of Sin]

Hmm, damn. I thought I'd caught you out of step. Your explanation for thinking FaerieLord is town seems good to me. Oh well.

Unvote

So much for that strategy.

[Mastermind of Sin]

I'm back from holidays.

[Mastermind of Sin]

Make him explain it

[Mastermind of Sin]

B-b-but...what about me? *cries*

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Phate, the topic of your rant is also known as "extreme paranoia".

[Mastermind of Sin]

B-b-but...what about me? *cries*

Oh I suppose I can give you some head-pettin's. *Pets kitten*

*purrs* ^.^

[Mastermind of Sin]

Still here.

[Mastermind of Sin]

If you honestly want to make a wagon against me, can you give me more evidence to defend against, I don't particularly like just being attacked.

Well, honestly, I didn't attack you, nor did I vote/fos you. I simply answered a question someone had asked me.

This raises my eyebrows somewhat. Not because Mizzy is wrong, but because of how correct she is. Elmo asked her to analyze Miztef's post, and then people used her reasoning as a springboard for their votes. It puts the responsibility on Mizzy and not themselves, because they can always say they were "convinced" by Mizzy. The implications of this possibility don't make me happy, because Mizzy's logic isn't bad either, so I don't know how to differentiate between scum and people who genuinely believe Miztef is scum.

[Mastermind of Sin]

Notice: I will be leaving Mafiascum in the near future. As a result, I will be cutting back on games where possible. I'm going to try not to be replaced if I can, but this is an advance notice that my activity WILL decrease.

[Mastermind of Sin]

Why am I so high on everyone's lists? There isn't even a case against me...

[Mastermind of Sin]

So, according to the calculator, using the slips received so far, MoS is getting deaded.

Vote: MoS

I'll move along with the results of the voting if anyone else bothers to vote...

I think you're divesting responsibility by "going along with the majority". I came upon this problem in another game, where people tried to give their votes to other people because they were protown. This falls under the same issue. All this serves is to give people a way to cast votes they are not responsible for. If you vote me and I get lynched, after I come up town you can say you were just going along with the majority and point out that you had me somewhere in the middle of your list. It's a divestment of responsibility, and it looks pretty scummy from here.

FoS: SSF

That's only one of the problems with doing lists like this, though. Doing lists in general isn't really helpful. I think most people can agree that after the first five or so, most of the people are kinda random, and we could go either way on them. The only helpful part of these lists is finding the people you find most scummy and most innocent, which could be accomplished by asking for a top 3 or bottom 3 list. But doing an entire list only serves to help the scum find out which of them is successfully hiding under the radar, and it helps them strategize better by knowing what people think about them. This is a case of too much information.

I'll be honest about mine MoS, I only voted you first because I'm close to being picked and your also close, so even though I'm fairly neutral about you, I decided that it would be better you then me.

If people were really adamant about going after phate or some others, I would have voted that candidate first in an instant.

That's a horrible reason to put me on top. Obviously you think you are protown, so you're at the end of your list. It's assumed that you would vote anyone else in the game over yourself, because you can guarantee your own alignment. You don't have to list me first to emphasize that. You're skewing the results of this already bad exercise by putting me first just to point out that you'd vote me over yourself, which is a given already. It makes it seem like you are only concerned about self-preservation, not about voting based on your actual suspicions.

There is no reason why voting has to be reduced to a "you or me" situation. You're presenting a false dilemma to the town and to yourself by saying that if you're not going to vote yourself, you have to vote me. It doesn't work that way. No one is forcing your opinion. You can vote for whoever you find the scummiest, and that's what you should do. You shouldn't vote for someone else just because you think it'll come down to you or them. The only time you should maybe do that is if you're both at like L-1 and you think they might be scum. If you're worried about being lynched, it's better that you express your own opinions and vote accordingly because maybe, just maybe, people will listen to you and hear what you have to say. Even if they don't, they know they can trust your words more after you've been lynched, so it's best to give your true opinions before you die, not present a false dilemma between yourself and another person, when it's obvious you aren't going to vote yourself anyways.

[Mastermind of Sin]

I'm not voting Miztef because I'm not going to create a false dilemma between him and myself. It's bad that he did what he did, but I think he may have inadvertently trapped himself in his own false dilemma. I posted those comments to try and free him from his own trap, not to say that I suspected him for it. I think he may be as much of a victim as anyone else, maybe more. So I don't suspect him just for putting me at the top of his list, especially since he came clean of his own accord and admitted

why

he had me at the top of his list. If he was scum with some sort of agenda to get me killed, he wouldn't have admitted to the false dilemma.

[Mastermind of Sin]

yea I've been quiet because I took a break from MS for like 2 weeks, so I didn't post much in any of my games. It's taken me a while to catch up, but I'm going to be V/LA again until Monday.

[Mastermind of Sin]

Actually it's a cake avatar, at least for the next month. But if you keep me alive for a month, the kitty can return!

[Mastermind of Sin]

It's not like we're interrupting anything...

[Mastermind of Sin]

I came upon this problem in another game, where people tried to give their votes to other people because they were protown.

There's a very big difference between proxying and what's going on here.

No, there isn't, and you know it. The fundamental problem with both situations is divestment of responsibility. They're a lot more similar than you're making them out to be.

I come up town you can say you were just going along with the majority and point out that you had me somewhere in the middle of your list.

You were top of the list. You just happened to be there along with 8 other people.

So why does your suspicion list have 8 people tied for first? Unafraid to single anyone out on your own?

Vote: Somestrangeflea

[Mastermind of Sin]

Why the Rishi MoS connection? You never mention Rishi in that entire post...

[Mastermind of Sin]

Flea: so you think I'm scum because the FL wagon died when I went after Elmo? You do realize that I also started the FL wagon, right?

[Mastermind of Sin]

Miztef overreacted, I think. Ironically enough, I think if he posts as much as the average player in this game, technically that'd count as lurking. Our activity sucks.

[Mastermind of Sin]

Miztef? Why do you have emotions?

This is Mafia.

We don't have those here.

I have emotions. That's why I'm quitting the site. Cuz some people are jackasses.

[Mastermind of Sin]

I'm suspicious of the way Elmo keeps asking Mizzy to analyze posts for him. He implies that there is something to be found in a post and then sends someone off to find out what it is, without having to do any of the work himself. It's a good way to send people on a wild goose chase without having to be responsible for the results.

[Mastermind of Sin]

At the moment, I feel a bit like if I don't ask people to scumhunt, they won't. I also think getting people to analyse each other is potentially more revealing than just stating my opinion. I do see how you could view it that way, but I took care to give my own opinion afterwards, last time, which was somewhat different from Mizzy's.

That's fair, and I agree. I don't necessarily think it's a bad thing you're doing, but the possibility of it being malicious is there, and I wanted to make sure people recognized that and proceeded with caution.

Why do you suspect analysing Miztif would be a wild goose chase, MoS?

I don't necessarily think that. My comment about the wild goose chase was a general analysis of the methodology you were using, because it causes people to find tells where there is nothing.

Bullshit.

Asking someone what's up with someone else's post is at least as good as pointing it out yourself. If there's nothing to be found in a post, they'll tell you so - it won't send them on a "wild goose chase". Besides, looking at past posts is scumhunting.

You know this. Why am I having to tell you this?

But that's not true at all. What Elmo is doing causes people to overanalyze those posts. He could point to a post that means nothing, but because he asked them to look at it, they will find *something* to be said about it. It's all psychology, Phate. You know this. Why am I having to tell you this?

[Mastermind of Sin]

What Elmo is doing causes people to overanalyze those posts.

I see.

How do you feel we should best scumhunt without being in danger of overanalyzing other people's posts?

It's simple, really. Try analyzing the posts yourself instead of making other people do it. If you see a specific post you think is worth mentioning, analyze it yourself. If you think there are people who are not contributing enough and you want to see some analysis from them, ask them to analyze a specific *person*, or just ask for analysis in general, but don't point them to a specific post and ask them to analyze it, because there is too much possibility of the results being skewed by focusing them on it. To put it to analogy, it's like putting a magnifying glass over an ant on the sidewalk. Sure, people can see the ant through it, but you're also likely to light the ant on fire, too. You could've just told people to look at the bugs in section of the sidewalk, and they would've seen the ant without need for a magnifying glass.

[Mastermind of Sin]

Phate, can you break up your replies into separate quotes next time? I hate it when people put their responses inside someone else's quote. It's really painful to have to do extra formatting of my posts just because you were too lazy to make your posts easier to read.

Vote: MoS because after a reread, I think I was correct in my initial suspicion of him, and if he turns out to be a townie after all, he will be decreasingly active in his games. I don't really want to be part of an endgame with a lurker.

Scum love lynching lurkers, yes they do! Easy kills.

Yeah, they do like lynching lurkers. That's not actually what I was proposing, though. Read what you're quoting and see what I wrote: 1) I think he's scum and my initial suspicions were correct, and 2) as an afterthought, his potential for being an endgame lurker is icing on his lynch's cake.

I don't have *any* potential for being an endgame lurker. I hate lurkers. The reason I notified everyone of my decreased activity is because I may not post for a couple days at a time without being able to notify you in advance, and I just won't be on the site as often. If we get to a point where I'm so inactive that it will actually affect the game in a negative way, I will ask for replacement so that the game doesn't suffer.

Asking someone what's up with someone else's post is at least as good as pointing it out yourself. If there's nothing to be found in a post, they'll tell you so - it won't send them on a "wild goose chase".

No, having someone else do your scumhunting for you is not really part of the game. It is a good way, as it was already said, of getting the info out there without catching blame yourself.

Pointing out someone's post and asking someone else what's up with it != having someone else do your scumhunting for you. I honestly can't see that as a viable scumtactic

at all

.

If you really think that's true, then I can't wait for the day I play a game with you where I'm scum. Heck, anyone who's played with Pooky as scum can tell you that it's a great scumtactic. You have no idea how often entire towns have been snowed by a scum seeming to contribute by asking everyone else to give their opinions on various topics instead of actually contributing his own opinion. It's a great active-lurker tactic, too.

Do a recent meta of me. Watch my post count drop sharply in the last few months, then gradually begin to recuperate, with my 'meaty' post located almost exclusively on or near weekends. Things are going on in my life that takes precedence over mafia, but they're coming to an end, and I will have more time soon.

Already did, and what I dislike is that you were busy and yet stayed in the game when you could have been replaced with an active player. You posted just enough to get by, no more, and no less. Real life does come first, but it's not good or okay for busy players to active-lurk and bitch about the length of the game at the same time.

No, that's a bad idea. It's better for a player to have decreased activity if they know it'll get better later on than to have to replace them with an entirely new player. Replacements can kill games almost as much as inactivity can. It's better to have the same players all the way through the game if at all possible. That's why, as a mod, I prod players who haven't posted within the last 3-5 days, and then I replace them *IF* they don't post or notify me of a period of V/LA that they know they will return from.

If you ARE a PR, then get off your ass and act like a townie.

Another thing I disagree with. It's not really a protown player's job to worry about "acting protown". They should be more worried about hunting scum and being correct in their opinions. That's not to say they should be all "fuck the world, I don't care what you think of me", but you can't just tell someone to "act protown", because if they're protown, they're probably already trying to do that. It's an empty statement that is fairly misleading.

I don't believe him because every single aspect of his play so far has been indicative of scum hunting the triums rather than triums trying to blend in with the townies.

Why the

HELL

would a Trium member advocate a massclaim? Come on, people. I would have believed a vanilla claim out of Miztef much faster than a trium claim. Not too long ago he was talking about how claims are irrelevant - that was because he found it more likely that he was going to get a trium lynched than to be close to lynch himself. Now, naturally, he's changed his mind.

Nothing in Miztef's prior play has suggested trium at all. No breadcrumbs, nothing.

Someone has already mentioned that we can't just go "oh, ok" and meekly unvote every time anyone claims triumvirate. Because, you know, scum lie sometimes.

I don't see why being a Trium member automatically means you'd be unwilling to mass claim. If a strategy was devised where mass claim could help the town, you should support it regardless of your role. If Miztef was convinced that mass claim would help the town, he would support it. I don't think that supporting it is a good enough reason to think that he's not a Trium, but I have to admit, I didn't think Miztef would claim Trium either. I totally had him pegged as a townie in the back of my mind, but then again, what's not to say that he was trying to play like a townie so he wasn't found by scum?

Either way, I don't think we should lynch him today. His defense seems earnest, so I believe his claim.

[Mastermind of Sin]

Not offhand, no.

[Mastermind of Sin]

Rishi, why would you be comfortable with lynching yourself over like, half the game?

[Mastermind of Sin]

NVM. Stupid question.

[Mastermind of Sin]

MoS: Why are you voting SSF?

I don't like his (lack of) contributions so far. He also tried a divestment of responsibility plow with the concordet voting, and his "summary" of the game so far didn't accomplish much. I expect more out of him as town. It sounds more like he wasn't trying to get caught taking any big positions on people, so he could easily backpedal away from bad positions.

Yuan, if you want some discussion, look at the people who massively unvoted, saying "the random stage is over". What a load of bullshit. I'd pursue it, but I'm lazy and have been arguing with SirT. Someone else can do it.

Also, is it just me, or are you contradicting yourself a little?

No matter how many times you bring that post up (between you and Phate, it's probably been quoted like 7 times), it's not going to change anything. I was very open about the fact that I was delegating responsibility and was not going to make any contribution of my own. You can't accuse me of any sort of diabolical scum plan when I was open about my intentions and my reasons to begin with.

[Mastermind of Sin]

Unvote, Vote: Mizzy

[Mastermind of Sin]

---

No matter how many times you bring that post up (between you and Phate, it's probably been quoted like 7 times), it's not going to change anything. I was very open about the fact that I was delegating responsibility and was not going to make any contribution of my own. You can't accuse me of any sort of diabolical scum plan when I was open about my intentions and my reasons to begin with.

I can't help but notice that you haven't answered the question.

Yuan, if you want some discussion, look at the people who massively unvoted, saying "the random stage is over". What a load of bullshit. I'd pursue it, but I'm lazy and have been arguing with SirT. Someone else can do it.

I'm suspicious of the way Elmo keeps asking Mizzy to analyze posts for him. He implies that there is something to be found in a post and then sends someone off to find out what it is, without having to do any of the work himself. It's a good way to send people on a wild goose chase without having to be responsible for the results.

You have

quite clearly

said that you were suspicious of me for asking Mizzy to analyse Miztif. You've also

quite clearly

done the same thing earlier in the game. You're contradicting yourself. Do you think I should I be suspicious of you for getting Yuanti to look over the people who unvoted?

I totally answered the question. I explained how I did NOT do the same thing as you. The basic action was similar, but the surrounding factors were not.

[Mastermind of Sin]

This is ridiculous. Is the current page just a series of scum crawling out of the woodwork to post votes on people before deadline or is it just a bunch of townies fooling around because they have no better idea!

Skitzer, I fail to believe you had an ulterior motive to gambit with your recent activity, especially since you posted SUPER SECRET PLAN on the post. I don't think being an idiot makes you scum necessarily though.

Unvote

I really wish this deadline wasn't coinciding with my exams, it's stressing me out and I have a much higher chance to misvote at this period in time.

Mod: What time is the deadline on the sixteenth?

It doesn't look like they're going to bother to go after anyone else, though..

I will vote Cephrir if we have not lynched Flea by the end of tomorrow.

[Mastermind of Sin]

Unvote

Pseudovote: Phate, Cephrir

I will vote whichever one of them I need to vote to keep Miztef from being lynched. Lynching Miztef is a bad idea today, given the consequences of failure.

[Mastermind of Sin]

You appeared to be angled more towards a Cephrir lynch a post ago, MoS. Anything change your mind?

I still prefer a Cephrir lynch. I'm merely making it clear that I'm prepared to cast a vote for Phate OR Cephrir to prevent a Miztef lynch. Before, I was merely saying that I would vote Cephrir before deadline if the flea vote failed to produce a wagon. Those statements were unrelated in their purposes.

[Mastermind of Sin]

To make it clear, here's my preferences for lynching Flea/Miztef/Phate/Cephrir:

FleaScum
*gap*
Cephrir
*gap*
Phate
*big gap*
Miztef

[Mastermind of Sin]

TrustGossip, I really don't like repeating myself, but I'll do a quick and dirty overview, provided you never ask me such a lazy question again, cuz I'm pretty sure I've outlined my suspicions for flea in several different posts.

He went for divestment of responsibility with the concordet voting, and he really wasn't contributing anything of his own to the game. When pressured, he made a weak attempt to summarize what had happened so far, made an even weaker attempt (if any) to analyze it, and nothing really came of it. I don't think he's trying hard enough to be town, and I think he's consciously trying to keep from nailing a solid opinion down on anything that matters, so it can't be traced back to him.

[Mastermind of Sin]

I got the doc power, wheee. Protected Miztef, cuz I figured scum might go after the claimed Trium, since we didn't lynch him.

[Mastermind of Sin]

damn. For a second there, I thought scum were giving themselves up already...

[Mastermind of Sin]

LoL, orly?

[Mastermind of Sin]

You know, MoS and CES... you both could be right. Since scum can get the Triumvirate powers as well. So MoS might have gotten the doc power AND he might be scum.

(I don't actually think MoS is scum... but just saying.)

I'm going to have to be as confused as CES is on this one. What do you mean we're both right? I said I'm not scum, he said I'm scum...how, exactly, is it possible for us both to be right?

[Mastermind of Sin]

You would be right in the sense that you actually got the doc power.

And you would be wrong in the sense that I'm not actually scum.

[Mastermind of Sin]

Vote: ssf

[Mastermind of Sin]

I actually think you were fairly justified in blocking Cephrir. He was a top suspect yesterday, after all. Unfortunately, the only thing it proves is that he didn't make the kill last night, and if he's town, we lost a cop result.

[Mastermind of Sin]

It also tells us Cephrir actually bothered to use it. I can see scum failing to do that.

I already knew Cephrir was town though.

Can we lynch MoS now?

Are you trying to discredit everything you say, or do you just not get it?

Scum lie.

There is no proof that Cephrir actually bothered to use his cop ability. Him being roleblocked doesn't prove anything.

[Mastermind of Sin]

NVM, I should not post while drunk. Stupid Unofficial St Patrick's Day. Keg and eggs are good mmmmmm.

[Mastermind of Sin]

Well that sucks.

[Mastermind of Sin]

*sigh*

[Mastermind of Sin]

CES, do you even have a logical reason to think I'm scum? I'd really like to hear it.

[Mastermind of Sin]

Except that I didn't push mass claim. Did any of you actually read my posts regarding it? I agreed with it because I thought the numbers worked out. I didn't spend any time arguing for it, and I went against it when I saw a reason for it to be a bad idea.

I'm for a mass claim. I think it would tip things in the town's favor a lot, because it makes the scum commit to claims. If we don't mass claim now, it gives the scum a night to discuss claiming strategies. If we mass claim today, we catch them flat-footed.

So how many people have yet to agree with mass claim?

I'm ethically against an organized cipher claim. I think it goes against the spirit of the game, mostly. I don't really have a problem with the occasional single person that does it, but an organized cipher mass claim is just an attempt to break not the

setup

, but the entire

game

of mafia.

I have actually just come across the idea recently in another game, and it was seen as unethical there as well.

However, I don't understand how this is so in this situation. Should we not be allowed to all claim at the same time? Must claims be said in a particular order? If that is the rule of the game, then so be it.

Even with the mafia getting to choose how they are each going to claim, I still believe one of the greatest advantages of doing such a plan is having no careless risk of hitting triumvirate. If we so choose, we can go after townies as long as 1 mafia claimed townie and keep the triums alive. That way, the power roles, at worst, would be eliminated in 3 days, and, if that's the case, the mafia who claimed trium would be found.

AS SSF pointed out, there is nothing wrong with a mass claim. However, the encrypted mass claim is breaking the game, and it's an unethical move if we do it. I would be sad if we were so bad at this game that we had to break it to have a chance at winning.

Elmo is right. I'm glad he brought up these statistics, because I hadn't thought of it. This "we deserve to lose" crap is bullshit. There is never a reason to let pride cloud your judgement from taking the safer path. You should never gamble with the statistics in a situation like this. The best strategy is the one that has the best worst-case scenario. We're not looking for the high-risk, high-return plan. We're looking for the plan that gives us the best chance of not screwing it up, not the plan that gives us a very small chance of completely owning the scum and a very large chance of getting our asses kicked. There is no reason to decrease our chances of winning just because we're too proud to take the safer route. That's retarded.

No Mass Claim from me.

So I didn't spend any time trying to "push" for mass claim. In fact, once I understood why it was a bad idea, I "pushed" for there not to be a mass claim.

Miztef, don't you dare try a proficiency argument with me. I am notoriously bad at planning, even when I *am* paying attention to detail, and I should think that a quick look at the length and quality of most of my posts around that time would show that I wasn't able to spend a lot of time on this game. On top of that, I just recently got lynched as town in a Quack mafia open setup for suggesting 2 outrageously flawed plans. The argument the scum used to get me lynched was that town-MoS would have thought through the plan and realized its flaws. Sound familiar?

[Mastermind of Sin]

I'd like to point out that the selected quotes are not *all* of my posts regarding mass claim, but every omitted post came after the ones quoted here, so they're all posts about me arguing against mass claim and trying to lynch people who support mass claim in the face of solid, logical reasoning. You wouldn't be interested in that.

[Mastermind of Sin]

Posts 1 and 2 are the scummy ones. (Post 2 I would describe as pushing.)

I believe I asked it because several people had stated their opinion on mass claim earlier in the day, so I just wanted to find out who was still sitting on the fence. Note Elmo's post right after mine:

Me. Still thinking. I'm worried about the apparent lack of actually working it out, although it might be a good idea.

Should I post a full working out so far? It lets the scum know what the best moves are, but it also helps us understand what may be about to happen.

It's also possible the scum have already discussed trying to claim pre-game. If you're paranoid, you might say they're fully worked out it's bad for the town and are trying to get us to do it. So basically I want it to be watertight before we out the power roles.

SSF / MoS: You're smart, how far have you thought this through?

Posts 3 and 4 are just you arguing you against a cypher-based claim, which is pretty irrelevant to the actual massclaim situation.

I agree. I just pointed them out because they were in sequence, and because it shows how little time I actually spent supporting any sort of massclaim.

Post 5 is after Elmo demolished the plan.

And yet people still argued for mass claim at that point and I did not, so obviously it wasn't as clearly demolished as you and I think it was.

Link to Quack mafia thing please.

http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=7066

Well, would you not agree that town players "should" make good plans? If your just throwing around "outrageously flawed" plans in many games, is that town-like behavior. I agree with the argument that it is scum who would benefit from bad plans, and therefore, people who push for/start/agree with bad plans should be scrutinized. I was, heavily actually in this game, and I agree that I deserved it, my defense was/is that I scum would not continuously advocate bad plans, and that I'm triumvirate

Then you know where I'm coming from, Miztef. It's not that I'm advocating bad plans on purpose. I just thought they were good plans at the time. I don't always have time to run all the numbers and looks for flaws, so if the plan looks ok on the surface, I'm at least willing to suggest it.

[Mastermind of Sin]

lol. I'll be interested in hearing your attempt at a case, Elmo

[Mastermind of Sin]

I should have known him to be significantly suckier than I thought he was? But if I knew, then I wouldn't have thought he was that sucky, I would've thought him to be as sucky as he is(ie. suckier). So that's an impossibility, my good sir.

And what's with the "should"? Either I did know and was making it up on account of me being scum or I didn't know(as town or otherwise). What I

should

know, is not relevant.

More importantly, why do you think I should've known? To my knowledge, MoS has never acted so suckily in any of the games I've been in and isn't it completely to natural to assume a certain level of intellectual maturity when it comes to a player as experienced as MoS?

Also, I will note that I went after Zindaras and Yosarian2 in Jungle Republic over the same type of situation and was right about both of them.

*shrug* The last couple months have been rather sub-par for me, for obvious reasons (the fact that RL and MS issues have caused me to begin a gradual exit from Mafiascum altogether: I haven't signed up for a new game in almost 2 months, with the exception of Newbie 567).

[Mastermind of Sin]

Well now you know. I had 23 games at the beginning of January (20 playing and 3 modded). Now I have 7 games (6 playing and 1 modding). That's how much I've cut back, and it's only going to go down from there.

[Mastermind of Sin]

Out of town until Tuesday night/Wednesday

[Mastermind of Sin]

*bump* Where is everyone?

[Mastermind of Sin]

Ironically, Rishi, the think that struck me the most was

your

response to Beep! Beep!

First off, your second conclusion really only makes sense if Beep is scum, so why would she admit to it in the first place? I don't see the point in you asking that question except as what I like to call the "implication tactic". It seems more like you're implying that the second conclusion is the truth, so that it makes Beep look worse, but you're phrasing it as a question instead of an accusation so that it looks better on you. It's a great tactic, I like to use it a lot.

Secondly, how did you draw such a conclusion from her response in the first place?

Beep! Beep!, why are you voting CES? What about his case makes you think that he's scum rather than just wrong?

[Mastermind of Sin]

We're also missing Primate and skitzer.

[Mastermind of Sin]

LIES!

(Mod doesn't have you listed in the front post. You aren't even in this game! Leave us in peace, CES!)

[Mastermind of Sin]

*bump*

[Mastermind of Sin]

I think we need some prods.

[Mastermind of Sin]

*sigh* Shanba, are you even there, much less any of the other players?

[Mastermind of Sin]

umm, we're all lazy today. That about sums it up. I'm to the point where I really don't feel like playing anymore.

[Mastermind of Sin]

...

[Mastermind of Sin]

I am a sad panda

[Mastermind of Sin]

/afk all weekend.

[Mastermind of Sin]

Rishi, do you have a better case on someone else?

[Mastermind of Sin]

CES, why do you think Miztef should be lynched?

[Mastermind of Sin]

Flea isn't in the game anymore...

MBF, what are your reasons for suspecting CES?

[Mastermind of Sin]

I can't tell you if you're wrong in pursuing a CES lynch if I don't know *why* you are pursuing it.

Personally, I don't really understand wtf CES is doing in this game, but Beep's play hasn't really struck me as scum so far, and I'd like to think of myself as a fairly good judge of her play.

[Mastermind of Sin]

out of town this weekend

[Mastermind of Sin]

I think metas are actually fairly reliable, as long as you have decent sources and examples. Sure, people *can* change, but usually they don't. It's a good place to start, but not necessarily the place you should stop at.

[Mastermind of Sin]

indeed.

[Mastermind of Sin]

Vote: Abandon

Also,

Vote: CES

[Mastermind of Sin]

Knew I was right about Beep. Kind of surprised about MoS though.

<3

[Mastermind of Sin]

I to admit this wasn't my best game, but I'm glad I was able to fend off Elmo for the duration of the game. Here's what I sent to my scumpartners at night:

If we take out the people who claimed townie, here's what I think of the rest:

somestrangeflea - also unwilling to go with mass claim, also didn't like Miztef's claim
Mizzy - Flyinghawk was apprehensive about the mass claim, tentative with his vote, seemed like a careful townie, Mizzy didn't like Miztef's claim
Cephrir - has been fairly lackluster in his play, doesn't seem too interested in the game, townie
Thin_man - townie, just too little interest in the game to be a trium, imo
Elmo - against mass claim, but I think he's too aggressive to be a Trium, townie
TrustGossip - can't really place him.

My Trium suspects (in order):

Mizzy/Flea
TrustGossip
Cephrir
Elmo
Thin_man

I think we should kill Mizzy tonight, because TrustGossip and I will be pushing Flea tomorrow, so we might get a claim out of him.

I'm thinking about setting up for claiming that I got the cop power last night, just in case someone else got it and investigates me. Hopefully they will go after Miztef tonight.

Also, don't worry about the doc power, I've got it tonight.

So I pegged flea correctly, but Elmo was off my radar, although I probably would've had him if I'd meta'd his play.