Mini 1009 ÔÇô Popularity mafia (Game over - Mafia wins)

[Johoohno]

Vote count

(12 players alive = 7 to lynch before deadline)

(4) Iron Man - Cuethlachtli, ChannelDelibird, Ectomancer, Thief
(2) mothrax - Simenon, scotmany12
(2) Scotmany12 – eljcko, mothrax
(1) Blackberry – Korts
(1) eljcko - Iron Man

Not voting: Blackberry, tumescence

:arrow: Day 1 – (Deadline is August 10)

[eljcko]

Actually I don't like that vote at all, especially since he wrote that he'll be posting a follow up. Your bandwagoning attempt here leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

Unvote. Vote:Thief

[Iron Man]

Okay.

@scotmany12

After reading the page, I'm going to retract my FoS. While I certainly do not enjoy your initial post, I will believe that you used it simply to draw a reaction.

On the issue of the Blackberry agruement, I'm going to side with Blackberry. I find it much easier to believe that his initial stance against RVS was used to create discussion than his anti-RVS stance being a scumtell.

@Thief

I am fairly disconcerted at your responses so far. We are over two pages into the game with a fair amount of significant discussion, yet you somehow have no response to any of it? Your first vote seems to me that it's targeting someone that is at least a little unpopular, possiible distancing but I may be looking too hard at that one, and your second vote reeks of bandwagon.

FoS

Also,

Unvote: Eljcko

because he is clearly not the scummiest on the board right now and we seem to have drifted out of the RVS stage.

[ChannelDelibird]

V/LA for next 24 hours - I'm away.

[Ectomancer]

Also, @Ecto: Why do you attack Iron Man for random voting, but not eljcko? You say Iron Man missed an opportunity to take a stronger stance, yet the same could be said for eljcko.

I'm saying that Iron Man's random vote wasn't random, but calculated.

@ Ecto

You seem to be targeting me on charges of stagnating possible discussion by buddying up with elcko. My vote post four of the game was entrenched in RVS and very little was meant by it. I don't understand what you mean by creating a "tiff" with him when the vote was obviously RVS and would be written off by him post haste. I especially don't understand why you would think I would argue with him considering the fact that I mostly agree with his stance on the RVS issue.

I think he meant you could have gotten this game rolling quickly with little random voting had you started a little argument with me over this. Instead you remained neutral and you can deduce what ever you want off of that.

Sums it up right. Why not eljcko? He took a stance against Blueberry's stance and supported random voting by randomly voting. He opened himself to attack for it. Iron Man's left him open to...nothing.

Thief could make fleas jump off a dog.

[Iron Man]

I'm saying that Iron Man's random vote wasn't random, but calculated.

Well, no, it wasn't. It was RVS.

Sums it up right. Why not eljcko? He took a stance against Blueberry's stance and supported random voting by randomly voting. He opened himself to attack for it. Iron Man's left him open to...nothing.

I'm not sure if I agree with your point. What you're saying is that I should have opened myself to attack? What do you think I am, a mafia masochist?

[Iron Man]

Thief could make fleas jump off a dog.

Agreed

[Blackberry]

I think Iron Man wants the fairy title of

Mafia Masochist

.

[Ectomancer]

I'm saying that Iron Man's random vote wasn't random, but calculated.

Well, no, it wasn't. It was RVS.

Sums it up right. Why not eljcko? He took a stance against Blueberry's stance and supported random voting by randomly voting. He opened himself to attack for it. Iron Man's left him open to...nothing.

I'm not sure if I agree with your point. What you're saying is that I should have opened myself to attack? What do you think I am, a mafia masochist?

No, but you can't have mafia without disagreement and declining to take advantage of an early, game starting opportunity to disagree could be construed as avoiding.

Ectomancer - Flea
Iron Man - Dog

unvote, vote Thief

Hi there.

[Thief]

Hello.

Blackberry seems content to withhold his vote and post fluff as of post #57.

Unvote:
Vote: Blackberry

Ecto's jump is noted. He is in the ongoing game in which scum was lynched D1 for "pretending" not to have seen a second page. Him not mirroring my read and keeping his vote on Iron Man is suspicious.

[Blackberry]

Hello.

Blackberry seems content to withhold his vote and post fluff as of post #57.

Unvote:
Vote: Blackberry

Ecto's jump is noted. He is in the ongoing game in which scum was lynched D1 for "pretending" not to have seen a second page. Him not mirroring my read and keeping his vote on Iron Man is suspicious.

A) I've already said I was waiting for Simoneon and Korts to respond. I posted one bit of "fluff" as you call it.

B) Reading what people have posted, I am getting some town reads on a few people. I however, wish to focus on Korts/Simoneon for a bit considering nobody else has peaked my radar (except you, and right now). You are doing a lot of things that do not make sense.

C) Why would someone pretend not to see a second page? What would a mafia or town, or anyone, gain from pretending not to read a page? Iron Man clearly noticed his mistake right away and made another post about what he missed.

D) Your jumpy attitude is raising a lot of red flags.

E) Your lack of addressing anyone that is voting you, also raises flags O_o.

[Cuetlachtli]

Cuetlachtli made me chuckle.

I did?

"You wouldn't lynch someone this excited!"

eh?

. Listen, if scum sometimes make suspicious remarks, and you know the general ratio of scum to town is about 1 to 3, and 4 players posted above you,

did you not do that math and look for anything

?

No.

Iron Man had a possible slip that I pointed out above.

Are you just talking to be talking

, or

did you actually intend to follow up your insight

?

At the time I didn't put much thought in my RVS vote. Why? Because it was an RVS vote. So if you want to know if I was just talking to be talking, I will reply "yes, kinda sorta."

Did you actually intend to follow up your insight?

What insight? My post consisted of two parts.

• Part 1: RVS vote. Nothing too deep.
  Part 2: My personal default response to your typical pre-game RVS hatee (usually 1 or 2 per game). Again nothing too deep.

You would make a good vote as well, you just came along second.

Bring it.

---

unvote

for now. Will park my vote somewhere else tomorrow.

[Ectomancer]

Ecto's jump is noted. He is in the ongoing game in which scum was lynched D1 for "pretending" not to have seen a second page. Him not mirroring my read and keeping his vote on Iron Man is suspicious.

Do not discuss ongoing games. You will also have to prove that either or both were "pretending".

Did you actually intend to follow up your insight?

What insight? My post consisted of two parts.

• Part 1: RVS vote. Nothing too deep.
  Part 2: My personal default response to your typical pre-game RVS hatee (usually 1 or 2 per game). Again nothing too deep.

Did you forget the "scum sometimes makes slips in the rvs" insight? But you already said you were just talking to be talking, so its not surprising that the one actionable thing you said is the one you forgot you even brought up. Funny how you forgot and couldn't even type it up into your little list there. You had 2 frickin sentences.

vote: Iron Man

for voting second!

I actually think RVS is useful. Scum sometimes slip or make suspicious remarks at this stage in the game.

So you tell us "here's how scum can be caught in the RVS", but do

nothing

and then seemingly forget all about being able to catch scum in this manner, in fact, your response to me has you acting as though we should have ignored what you said because it was a "default" response.

Scum like to talk to be talking.

unvote, vote Cuetlachtli

[scotmany12]

V/LA today to Saturday the 31st. I am positive that I will have internet access, but I will not be extremely active.

[Korts]

Reading his posts, I don't think he intended to buddy up to me or even defend me, just agree with me in his initial post. In his second post, I think some of his words were odd. Overall, however, I think he is being genuine in his actions and reactions, I do not get the feeling he is mafia trying to buddy up to me so I can get killed, turn town, and make him look clearer.

Yet:

I feel like my being defensive of BB is going to cause trouble later in the game,

especially if by some weird chance he flips scum

, however, I have come under scrutiny because of the same stance and in an effort to explain my point, I will try to explain his.

This is the type of thing, had I heard it about someone else, I would think the two were mafia partners. I don't get the "by some weird chance he flips scum." What reason do you have to believe I'm NOT going to flip scum?

Do you see my point here? Whatever the reason for mothrax basically calling you town, you should be suspicious, not taking his side.

As for downplaying the connection, that part's natural, but:

Mothrax's reaction to scotmany12, although waranted,

almost

seems

a bit

overexaggerated

Why downplay his scumminess as well? (not to mention that as an experienced player you should be aware of a multitude of reasons not to give reasoning with a vote, and hence your statement that mothrax's reaction was warranted, without an analysis of context and mothrax's experience, is also suspect)

Thief's first two votes don't seem to be serving any scumhunting purpose. His lash out against Ecto is stupid as well. I could see myself supporting this wagon.

I find it much easier to believe that his initial stance against RVS was used to create discussion than his anti-RVS stance being a scumtell.

Of course it's not a scumtell. But by itself, it's not productive, either. My intention was to prod BB into activity, and I'm not particularly comfortable with his reactions and his association with mothrax at this point.

[Simenon]

First off, when did I ever say that my policy is to stay out of the fray?

Second off, what are you referring to when you referenchnig a "self-made perch"?

Both reference:

I'll let you kids figure out the random voting, and when things come up that I find odd, then a vote shall be cast by me .

I agree with Korts that this suggests a detached approach.

My post does not say "if I weren't town, those posts would be scummy" it says, if I weren't ME and I didn't know my own alignment, that post would be summy.

The difference accounts for nothing. Both statements are terrible in the same way.

This is my philosophy.

I'm saying this philosophy is vacuous. Obviously the scum need to be intimidated; obviously their behavior will be different from that of the town's. You might as well say that catching scum is your philosophy.
I think that paragraph was an excuse to reassert your supposedly town role. You've implied your alignment in many of your posts, but to no avail. If this is offensive, then I'm sorry.

Unvote

I haven't read the rest of the thread; I'll vote again when I get the chance.

[Iron Man]

Hello.

Blackberry seems content to withhold his vote and post fluff as of post #57.

Unvote:
Vote: Blackberry

Ecto's jump is noted. He is in the ongoing game in which scum was lynched D1 for "pretending" not to have seen a second page. Him not mirroring my read and keeping his vote on Iron Man is suspicious.

There are so many things wrong with this. While I agree that Post #57 can be called "fluff", that in and of itself does not warrant a vote. Would you like to provide some more ample reasoning as to why you are voting Blackberry?

And I have no idea what you mean by your second paragraph. Please elaborate. And you're starting to look more and more worthy of my vote unless you can properly and promptly explain yourself.

I find it much easier to believe that his initial stance against RVS was used to create discussion than his anti-RVS stance being a scumtell.

Of course it's not a scumtell. But by itself, it's not productive, either. My intention was to prod BB into activity, and I'm not particularly comfortable with his reactions and his association with mothrax at this point.

Okay, I'll take your word on your intention to prod BB, but I'm starting to get a picture here that maybe BB and mothrax keep defending eachother because they are getting attacked together. It's kind of a self fulfilling prophecy. If you keep saying that there is a connection, then a connection will begin to form. Granted, I could be completely backwards on this, and you could be correct that they are, in fact, scum partners, but this is just some food for thought.

[Blackberry]

Do you see my point here? Whatever the reason for mothrax basically calling you town, you should be suspicious, not taking his side.

I get an overall town vibe from him. I did mention I was somewhat suspscious. But overall, I get a town vibe

Why downplay his scumminess as well?

I didn't downplay his scumminess? I've been honest and when he's done stuff that has drawn suspcion I've mentioned it.

Not to mention that as an experienced player you should be aware of a multitude of reasons not to give reasoning with a vote, and hence your statement that mothrax's reaction was warranted, without an analysis of context and mothrax's experience, is also suspect.

As an "experienced player" I do not recall having seen it done before like that. When someone is getting attacked, and then someone just votes him without making any comments (to the best of my memory). As I said though, I stated this was something that

didn't make sense to me

, not that indicated to me that he was mafia.

Just for reference/future, although I have experience, when people say "experienced player" I typically think of someone who has played online mafia for years, follows the general patterns and accepted playstyle that most people use and plays the way people expect a smart person to play. I wouldn't define myself as what I just said for three reasons:

A) I do not like conformity and play differently than everyone else, for example, I never use the terms "FOS" or "WIFOM"
B) I haven't played mafia on the forums in probably over a year or more
C) I'm used to playing mafia in person rather than on a forum, where things are drastically different

Both statements are terrible in the same way.

I was being honest with the town about how I felt about a statement that is said. I don't understand how that is terrible. You think I should keep my thoughts and feelings to myself?

I'm saying this philosophy is vacuous. Obviously the scum need to be intimidated; obviously their behavior will be different from that of the town's. You might as well say that catching scum is your philosophy.

Obviously, you do not understand what I mean then. Because my purpose of saying that was to state that I don't look for mafia the same way most people do. I look at how sincere I think people are acting. Most people look for contradictions and attempt to psych out their competition (whether mafia or town) by using aggressive logic and pointing out flaws that people make (which even townspeople make flaws). My way is different because I can't point to facts and specific accounts and say "this is this." It's just a general feel of the way someone says something and whether or not they are actually being sincere when they say it (I realize this is not how most people play, I have gotten in a heated debate about it before on another online mafia game, but it's what works best for me, as my personal belief is that mafia try to look for small "mistakes" or fishy actions that townies make, and capitalize on those mistakes by attempting to use logic).

----------

Vote: Thief

- At the moment his vote on me and his reasons don't make a lot of sense. Also, and here is what I was talking about sincerity, reading his references to other games and someone "pretending" not to see a post, etc. etc., makes me think he may have a genuine reason to suspect Iron Man. HOWEVER, he isn't voting Iron Man, he is voting me, and his reasons for suspecting me, I can not see a genuine angle to suspect me from his reasonings. Mafia can't genuinely vote people the same way town do, they only pretend to vote people. I don't see genuineness in him that I am more suspscious than Iron Man, thus why I am voting him. How he responds to my previous questions will determine whether I am more confident in my suspcions of him, or whether I can see him being genuine.

[Simenon]

Cuetlachtli's first post seemed reasonable to me, Ecto. Just because he believed the RVS to be effective doesn't mean its content required his immediate comment.

Iron Man is so unwilling to vote. Look at his "retracted FoS," and his "worthy of my vote" warning. This caution bothers me.
Also notice how he sticks a condition in this post to avoid commitment:

Your first vote seems to me that it's targeting someone that is at least a little unpopular, possiible distancing

but I may be looking too hard at that one.

He uses a similar tone later:

Okay, I'll take your word on your intention to prod BB, but I'm starting to get a picture here that maybe BB and mothrax keep defending eachother because they are getting attacked together. It's kind of a self fulfilling prophecy. If you keep saying that there is a connection, then a connection will begin to form. Granted, I could be completely backwards on this, and you could be correct that they are, in fact, scum partners, but this is just some food for thought.

Equivocal, cautious tone. Iron Man is clearly not new; why isn't he sticking to his convictions?

Vote Iron Man

You think I should keep my thoughts and feelings to myself?

Yes, if they aren't useful. There is no way in any context a comment like that could be helpful or convincing.

(I realize this is not how most people play, I have gotten in a heated debate about it before on another online mafia game, but it's what works best for me, as my personal belief is that mafia try to look for small "mistakes" or fishy actions that townies make, and capitalize on those mistakes by attempting to use logic).

This is what I disagree with. I think most players analyze sincerity.

[scotmany12]

Both statements are terrible in the same way.

I was being honest with the town about how I felt about a statement that is said. I don't understand how that is terrible. You think I should keep my thoughts and feelings to myself?

It's terrible because regardless of who Mothrax says it about, it is scummy. Why you don't find it scummy because he said it about you is eye raising. Why does it matter that he said it about you? You pretty much said that if he said that about anyone else, you would find it scummy. Why does it matter that he said it about you?

@Thief: Please elaborate why you think Blackberry is scummy.

[Ectomancer]

Cuetlachtli's first post seemed reasonable to me, Ecto. Just because he believed the RVS to be effective doesn't mean its content required his immediate comment.

I don't like Cuet's or Iron Man's method of kicking off the game. Blackberry's post was an excellent game starter, these two commented

about

RVS and its usefulness,

but neither actually tried to apply that to this game

. ie, No Scum Hunting. Cuet's is the worse of the two because he actually says that Scum slips occur in the RVS, but apparently doesn't consider applying it to the game?

Had he just simply stated that he was being lazy and didn't bother, I could accept that. But no, he decides instead to be contentious and pretend he never made an insightful comment on how to catch scum, and thusly there must be nothing he didn't follow up on. Why is that? Why not have a straight up conversation about what he said and didn't do? To undermine my point? It isn't an upfront attitude, and I don't see why a town player would play "chase me around the bush" instead of just giving a straight answer and off we go again.

Do you?

[Blackberry]

Both statements are terrible in the same way.

I was being honest with the town about how I felt about a statement that is said. I don't understand how that is terrible. You think I should keep my thoughts and feelings to myself?

It's terrible because regardless of who Mothrax says it about, it is scummy. Why you don't find it scummy because he said it about you is eye raising. Why does it matter that he said it about you? You pretty much said that if he said that about anyone else, you would find it scummy. Why does it matter that he said it about you?

@Thief: Please elaborate why you think Blackberry is scummy.

Because it is something that, if said, would make me think, "THOSE TWO ARE SCUM TOGETHER" (in any other situation, I would read it as "mothrax knows BB will come up as scum and is trying to protect himself if BB gets lynched," but knowing that isn't the guess, I don't see it as scummy.)

[Cuetlachtli]

Ecto's jump is noted. He is in the ongoing game in which scum was lynched D1 for "pretending" not to have seen a second page. Him not mirroring my read and keeping his vote on Iron Man is suspicious.

Do not discuss ongoing games. You will also have to prove that either or both were "pretending".

Did you actually intend to follow up your insight?

What insight? My post consisted of two parts.

• Part 1: RVS vote. Nothing too deep.
  Part 2: My personal default response to your typical pre-game RVS hatee (usually 1 or 2 per game). Again nothing too deep.

Did you forget the "scum sometimes makes slips in the rvs" insight? But you already said you were just talking to be talking, so its not surprising that the one actionable thing you said is the one you forgot you even brought up. Funny how you forgot and couldn't even type it up into your little list there. You had 2 frickin sentences.

vote: Iron Man

for voting second!

I actually think RVS is useful. Scum sometimes slip or make suspicious remarks at this stage in the game.

So you tell us "here's how scum can be caught in the RVS", but do

nothing

and then seemingly forget all about being able to catch scum in this manner, in fact, your response to me has you acting as though we should have ignored what you said because it was a "default" response.

Scum like to talk to be talking.

unvote, vote Cuetlachtli

OMG, your Crap-Logic™ is nauseating. Where to begin...

I think the main point at issue is whether or not I made an "insight." This is mainly a disagreement concerning the English Language. In my opinion, I didn't make an insight. Rather, given the context of the situation and BB's opening comments, I made a stance on RVS and subsequently gave my reasons for advocating RVS in a concise manner.

Another issue you brought up is whether or not I

forgot

about the alleged "insight." This is reaching for straws in my opinion. I never mentioned anything about forgetting what I said.

Thirdly, you bring up the point about me just "talking to be talking." Given the context of the situation, you know, it being RVS and all. I believe I was justified in my actions. Allow me to retort. It was the RANDOM Voting Stage. If I had put much thought into my vote and talked with a "purpose," it would have been contradictory to what RVS is all about.

And again, more reaching for straws. You argue that "

...'how scum can be caught in the RVS', but do nothing" to try and apply my previous statement to the game. Again this is more Crap-Logic™. You are wrongly assuming that scum ALWAYS slip in the RVS, and that I should always be able to properly identify said slips. No that is not how it works, sorry.

And then you go on to further miss represent my previous comments. Earlier, I used the words "personal default response" when describing my comments on RVS. You seem to believe this is some sort of disclaimer on my part. No it wasn't a disclaimer. There are various incidences in my Meta where scum have slipped in RVS and subsequently got burned for it. Thus, previous experiences have solidified my stance on RVS and I always make a point to share this stance with RVS haters to some extent. Hence, the choice of words: personal default response.

What else...or yea this:

Are you just talking to be talking, or did you actually intend to follow up your insight?

This series of questions are inherently primed for failure. As I already mentioned, players typically don't talk with purpose during RVS. If they did talk with purpose, then it wouldn't be random! Thus, I have to respond to that question by saying I was just talking to be talking, which I was--if you disregard my comments on RVS. But lets say I lie and say I was talking with a purpose. Then you say LYNCH ALL LIARS because only scum would talk with a purpose during RVS!

And what about your second question. The one about following up with my insight. What was there to follow up on? For one I didn't give any insights. Two, there was nothing to follow up on because no one questioned or commented on my RVS statement. And I didn't identify any slips or suspicious statements either. Given the circumstances, I think your expectation for me to follow up was unfair.

You know what. Lets talk more about unfair expectations.

if scum sometimes make suspicious remarks, and you know the general ratio of scum to town is about 1 to 3, and 4 players posted above you, did you not do that math and look for anything

This is an unfair expectation. Ecto is implying that the 1:3 scum to town ratio is universal in every situation. In other words, it would be inconceivable for 8 townies to arrive on seen first and the 3 scum to linger in the rear. I believe this is a false assumption and it is unfair to expect me to applying this ratio in respect to post sequence.

I don't like Cuet's or Iron Man's method of kicking off the game. Blackberry's post was an excellent game starter, these two commented about RVS and its usefulness, but neither actually tried to apply that to this game. ie,

No Scum Hunting

. Cuet's is the worse of the two because he actually says that Scum slips occur in the RVS, but apparently doesn't consider applying it to the game?

Here Ecto expects scum to slip in the RVS and me to identify those slips. Unfair. Since I didn't identify any slips, Ecto accuses me of not applying my arguments to the game. Unfair.


Ok with all that said. I want to highlight where Ecto reached for straws.

vote: Iron Man

for voting second!

I actually think RVS is useful. Scum

sometimes

slip or make suspicious remarks at this stage in the game.

and Ecto reaching for straws:

Cuet's is the worse of the two because he actually says that Scum slips occur in the RVS, but apparently doesn't consider applying it to the game?

Why did Ecto fail to mention that I said that scum SOMETIMES slip during RVS?

Are you just talking to be talking?

At the time I didn't put much thought in my RVS vote. Why? Because it was an RVS vote. So if you want to know if I was just talking to be talking, I will reply "yes, kinda sorta."

And the icing on the cake...

Scum like to talk to be talking.

unvote, vote Cuetlachtli

[Iron Man]

Iron Man is so unwilling to vote. Look at his "retracted FoS," and his "worthy of my vote" warning. This caution bothers me.
Also notice how he sticks a condition in this post to avoid commitment:

Your first vote seems to me that it's targeting someone that is at least a little unpopular, possiible distancing

but I may be looking too hard at that one.

He uses a similar tone later:

Okay, I'll take your word on your intention to prod BB, but I'm starting to get a picture here that maybe BB and mothrax keep defending eachother because they are getting attacked together. It's kind of a self fulfilling prophecy. If you keep saying that there is a connection, then a connection will begin to form. Granted, I could be completely backwards on this, and you could be correct that they are, in fact, scum partners, but this is just some food for thought.

Equivocal, cautious tone. Iron Man is clearly not new; why isn't he sticking to his convictions?

Vote Iron Man

Since when was a conservative play-style a scumtell? By this logic, a confident, self-righteous fool has a less chance of being scum than a mildly cautious player. IMO, at this point in the game, there aren't many convictions to stick to.

Also, your citation of my experience is scewed. This is the first game I've played on MS in just under two years, during which I had ceased all activity on the site. And even during my initial time on the site, I was only active for about six months before I left.

[tumescence]

Hey folks... bump just to show I'm here; will give quick first impressions in my next post.