Mini 739 ~ Mafia Jailbreak, Game Over

[RedCoyote]

Yeah pops, it's EpicMafia. It's gotten a pretty bad rap from the people at MS but all it needs is people to keep the point-centric players from running the show.

---

I don't particularly see anything wrong with Huntress' decision, but I'm kind of waiting to see if we can't get Rishi and Rhinox on the horn.

[Rhinox]

/confirm

vote spyrex

since he is one of the 2 people I recommended for this game.

FOS rhinox

for being the other.

hmmm... conspiracy...

vote: bio

because I'm the one who recommended HIM for this game! Also, OMGUS! an FOS on ME!?!

P.S.

3) Voting: Votes should be in bold in order for them to count, for instance:

Vote: Prof. Guppy

.

This made me laugh

Yeah I almost rolled off my chair too. Easily my favorite rule.

P.S.S. This game has an all-star line-up as far as I'm concerned... I've been so looking forward to this game.

P.S.S.S.

Vote: Rhinox

Still smarting from that newbie game where you spanked me.

Yeah, I've been doing that lately, on both sides *cough* Mafia 87 *cough*

P.S.S.S.S. Huntress, I usually have strong things to say against those who don't random vote in the RVS, which usually ends up being a big argument, and a waste of time. That being said, I'd still prefer to see you random voting...

P.S.S.S.S.S. Sorry bout taking so long to post... I'm most active Monday through Friday, and last night was the superbowl, and I was busy this weekend kicking ass in mafia 87 (yes, I'm damn proud of myself for that).

P.S.S.S.S.S.S I hope my fellow town members read the rules, specifically the part about what is and isn't allowed in a bah post, and the consequences for not following said rule. If not, go read the rules now.

[Korts]

P.S.S.S.S. Huntress, I usually have strong things to say against those who don't random vote in the RVS, which usually ends up being a big argument, and a waste of time. That being said, I'd still prefer to see you random voting...

So why not say them? Don't you agree that serious discussion has to root either in jokes or in theory discussion?

[Rhinox]

P.S.S.S.S. Huntress, I usually have strong things to say against those who don't random vote in the RVS, which usually ends up being a big argument, and a waste of time. That being said, I'd still prefer to see you random voting...

So why not say them? Don't you agree that serious discussion has to root either in jokes or in theory discussion?

hmmm... those are 2 options for sparking serious discussion. Another option is random votes, which huntress has not done. However, based on my completed games, I can't find a correlation between players who don't RV and the probability they are scum. I still believe not RV is anti-town, but null in terms of finding scum. And I just don't feel like hopping up on my soapbox about it this time.

[Huntress]

hmmm... those are 2 options for sparking serious discussion. Another option is random votes, which huntress has not done.

Yet my non-vote has caused more discussion so far than any vote.

And a question: Why are you not mentioning My Milked Eek, who also posted without voting?

[popsofctown]

he confirmed, he didn't post. don't think he knows the game started

[bionicchop2]

I seem to be popular in the early stages of the game.

[Rhinox]

Yet my non-vote has caused more discussion so far than any vote.

I agree... but, there can be good discussion and bad discussion. Would it be good discussion if I thought you were scum for refusing to RV, if you were actually town? Would that make me scum if I thought refusing to RV was a scum tell?

Also, what are you learning from this conversation?

And a question: Why are you not mentioning My Milked Eek, who also posted without voting?

Well, I never said everyone has to RV in their very first post, I just think its better if everyone does it. MME only confirmed, so who knows what he's planning on doing once he starts talking about the game. You actually said you weren't random voting, so thats the difference.

Look! votes can spark conversation too!

I seem to be popular in the early stages of the game.

Do you have a problem being popular?

[bionicchop2]

I seem to be popular in the early stages of the game.

Do you have a problem being popular?

I like attention from small groups of people. It makes me feel special. If the attention eventually results in my death, I tend to frown upon it.

Now a question for you since the setup presents an opportunity for a SK to exist. I know your first game on the site you were SK. I also noticed in your post game comments from mafia 87 that you suspected Tar of being SK when you replaced in. Since he did turn out to be SK, maybe you learned something from your SK experience on how to hunt for them.

What lead you to correctly believe Tar was SK in mafia 87?

[Rhinox]

Now a question for you since the setup presents an opportunity for a SK to exist. I know your first game on the site you were SK. I also noticed in your post game comments from mafia 87 that you suspected Tar of being SK when you replaced in. Since he did turn out to be SK, maybe you learned something from your SK experience on how to hunt for them.

What lead you to correctly believe Tar was SK in mafia 87?

Wow. Now thats a question. First things first... my first game on the site was a newbie, my second game on the site was a mini theme in which I was town. My 3rd game on the site I was an SK...

Regarding Mafia 87, and thinking Tar was an SK initially when I replaced in, it was basically a conspiracy theory that just happened to be correct this time. It required too many assumptions to be true, plus a little bit of luck on Tar's part that he was able to fake claim how he did. It seemed more likely he was actually what he said he was. I try to keep my conspiracies repressed because 99% of the time they'll be wrong.

As far as anything else regarding how I specifically try to recognize sk's, I'd rather not say so I don't tell any sk in this game exactly how not to act. Until I have any reason to believe otherwise, I will be hunting dirty cops.

[bionicchop2]

Wow. Now thats a question. First things first... my first game on the site was a newbie, my second game on the site was a mini theme in which I was town. My 3rd game on the site I was an SK...

Ahhh, ok. I don't know why I thought our first game together was your first game on the site.

Regarding Mafia 87, and thinking Tar was an SK initially when I replaced in, it was basically a conspiracy theory that just happened to be correct this time. It required too many assumptions to be true, plus a little bit of luck on Tar's part that he was able to fake claim how he did. It seemed more likely he was actually what he said he was.

Reading your post after Mafia 87 closer, this seems consistent with what you said there. I guess since you were replacing in late (D4) it had already been established there was a SK and the number of possible suspects was limited.

I try to keep my conspiracies repressed because 99% of the time they'll be wrong.

Random votes are often wrong too (and generally don't end in the lynch of the person who is initially wagoned), but you are a fan of those. I assume this is for the discussion they generate (correct me if wrong). Theories - even if wrong - will also generate discussion and the discussion IMO will have more merit than early game RV discussion. Why do you choose to keep your theories repressed?

As far as anything else regarding how I specifically try to recognize sk's, I'd rather not say so I don't tell any sk in this game exactly how not to act. Until I have any reason to believe otherwise, I will be hunting dirty cops.

I can support this - during the early game.

[Rhinox]

Ahhh, ok. I don't know why I thought our first game together was your first game on the site.

probably because I played like crap for an sk

Reading your post after Mafia 87 closer, this seems consistent with what you said there. I guess since you were replacing in late (D4) it had already been established there was a SK and the number of possible suspects was limited.

Actually, it was established that there was an sk

or a vig

. I was a vig, and knowning who my predecessor targetted, there were no other unexplained kills aside from the one Tar claimed was his 1-shot.

Random votes are often wrong too (and generally don't end in the lynch of the person who is initially wagoned), but you are a fan of those. I assume this is for the discussion they generate (correct me if wrong). Theories - even if wrong - will also generate discussion and the discussion IMO will have more merit than early game RV discussion. Why do you choose to keep your theories repressed?

Well, you're kinda mixing a couple of my philosophies together. RVS/discussion and conspiracy theories about who is scum near endgame are 2 completely different situations that I handle differently. I like random votes at the beginning of a game because random votes don't lynch anyone, but they still generate discussion. Theories/Mafia theory at the beginning of the game is a fine strategy as well. I believe everyone should random vote because if nobody ever voted (usually the people not voting in the random voting stage use the excuse "why should I vote until I have an idea of who's scum), there would never be any opportunities for scum to do something scummy, so there would never be a reason to vote. You're actually proving a point that you can generate conversation without a vote, that may or may not lead to somebody casting a vote one someone for a non-random reason. I have a point because 3 random votes on you got you to respond and comment on it. Votes and theory discussion both work at the start of a game. I prefer everyone random votes, and I accept theory discussion as well.

Conspiracy theories about who is scum is a completely different can of worms. I consider conspiracy theories to be something that is theoretically possible, but requires a number of assumptions to be true, and can't be proven. For example, in Mafia 87, there were no unexplained kills, other than Tar's claimed 1-shot. I couldn't prove Tar was sk without using 3 or 4 assumptions, but to believe his claim required no assumptions because there weren't any question marks unanswered. I hold my conspiracies like those back because they're probably wrong, and if they're true, there will probably be some evidence pop up before it becomes too late... especially if the scum doesn't know I'm onto them. If they're wrong, it could distract the town, and incriminate myself for seeming to manufacture a stretchy case (bad if I'm town). Downside is, there might be a time when I know I'm right, but don't speak up before its too late...

And now I think I've talked enough about mafia 87... I'm excited I played well and helped the town win after replacing in, but its time to focus on this game don't you think?

Time for some questions for you:

Just because an SK is possible, doesn't mean there is one... What do we stand to gain from talking about an SK now when we don't know one exists? What are you trying to acomplish by analyzing my sk catching ability? What are you trying to learn by talking about how I felt in mafia 87?

Huntress: Why don't you want to random vote?

[bionicchop2]

If I understand your 'conspiracy theories' as long-shot possibilities with a lack of supporting evidence then I agree keeping them to yourself is reasonable.

And now I think I've talked enough about mafia 87... I'm excited I played well and helped the town win after replacing in, but its time to focus on this game don't you think?

Surely you don't think my discussion of that game was to analyze it in a vacuum. I found some aspects game relevant and player relevant. The small discussion may or may not help me determine your alignment later.

Just because an SK is possible, doesn't mean there is one... What do we stand to gain from talking about an SK now when we don't know one exists? What are you trying to acomplish by analyzing my sk catching ability? What are you trying to learn by talking about how I felt in mafia 87?

I don't enter every topic of conversation with a clear expectation on what might be gained from the information revealed. Much in the same manner as a RV, I saw it as a discussion starter. The direction and information unveiled in the process of the discussion is wholly dependent on the participants. I saw/see some potential benefits to understanding how players think about SKs. I also think SKs are understated as far as their threat to towns (a general feel of hunting for mafia since there are more of them). If I was told early in a game that player X was SK and player Y was mafia, I would lynch player X first. The simple reason being that lynching X immediately cuts the number of deaths at night in half.

Aside from that, I feel that town players and mafia players would view a SK in a different manner. As for asking you in particular, it is about trying to piece together anything I know about you from our 1.5 games together, your previous known roles and your approach to those roles.

Now that I am playing with a greatly reduced game load in an attempt to focus and fine-tune my scum hunting, I plan on working as many new angles as I can think of, even if it means I might discuss a potentially useless point. I have no plans of cluttering 10 pages of discussion with this (I don't really have any further questions / comments on it) and would hop on any alternate discussion which became more appealing.

[Korts]

Oh noes, walls of text, my only weakness!

Rhinox, I disagree with you on the issue of random votes. They should be taken just as seriously as normal votes, otherwise any pressure they represent is non-existent, which is counter-intuitive. The power in random votes is exactly the fact that they are in essence the same as any well-reasoned vote, the sans reason part aside. Random votes can lynch, as they should.

I agree with BC on the fact that this discussion is mostly counter-productive, but consider this: in lieu of anything else, do you agree that this line of discussion at least means the game doesn't stall?

BTW I'm thinking that BC is guilty of a very early stage of selective scumhunting.

[bionicchop2]

I agree with BC on the fact that this discussion is mostly counter-productive

It is hard to agree with me on something I never said or implied. Could you explain this for me?

BTW I'm thinking that BC is guilty of a very early stage of selective scumhunting.

1. Could you explain how my hunting is selective and how the first 2 pages have lead you to this conclusion? Yes I did ask a player for their approach on a specific type of scum, but I am not sure how that indicates no other types of scum are being looked for.

2. Do you think mafia and town players would have different views and concerns about a serial killer? (I don't think discussing the specifics of perceived differences is helpful at this time, just looking for an opinion on whether differences exist in your opinion).

[popsofctown]

Selective scumhunting, that's a buzzword..

BC has brought up SKs specifically, and emphasized the threat they hold to the town. If he were scum, this could help ensure the SK get lynched, which makes lots of sense, since the mafia have to double shoot SKs to kill them according to the role pms.

Of course, maybe he just thinks SKs are bad for the town and hard to find (which is true). So maybe he's town helping us.

If he's SK, he's done something that is very bad for himself.

Those are all the "my wine" choices of WIFOM motivations for all the BC's alignments. Everyone here seems seasoned, so i think they can all infer the opposite (but not always equal) gains or losses for doing the same action with the same alignment.

The spread on the "my wine" gains looks something like:
Mafia: +++
Town: +
SK: ----

Really, i think those kinds of spreads can be dangerously bad for the brain. Your mind sort of bounces back and forth between the obvious reasoning and the possible concealed reasoning for the discussion, and then eventually decides to discount SK and settle into: meh, simply town. So i guess what i'm saying is... after overanalyzing BC (i decided too since there's not going on right now), i'm going to count the SK discussion against him more than i would initially, because i think i'd do it if i was scum.

[Korts]

It is hard to agree with me on something I never said or implied. Could you explain this for me?

Oh, sorry about that. I read the following as what I said:

I don't enter every topic of conversation with a clear expectation on what might be gained from the information revealed.

I was simply skimming that part.

1. Could you explain how my hunting is selective and how the first 2 pages have lead you to this conclusion? Yes I did ask a player for their approach on a specific type of scum, but I am not sure how that indicates no other types of scum are being looked for.

Well, you explained it yourself. You don't look for any scumtells in particular, but what you do is ask a player how to catch SKs.

2. Do you think mafia and town players would have different views and concerns about a serial killer? (I don't think discussing the specifics of perceived differences is helpful at this time, just looking for an opinion on whether differences exist in your opinion).

There's an inherent difference most definitely, I just don't know how distinguishable the two views would be, since both manifest themselves in the same way i.e. practically nothing except possible selective scumhunting from mafia (which is viewed as a scumtell and would therefore be avoided most likely).

[Korts]

And pops posts a long-long analytical post to the effect of an accusation of selective scumhunting. I wonder if that had anything to do with my prior accusation.

[popsofctown]

kinda

I'm trying to join the talk-about-nothing-like-you're-getting-paid club.

[Korts]

Oh. Didn't see the first line of your post there...

Good job, then. Take a look at the Tarhalindur Standard Tells in the wiki, that's where I find most of my inspiration.

Also, posting for the sake of posting? Admitting to it? Shame.

unvote, vote: pops

[Rhinox]

Selective scumhunting, that's a buzzword..

agreed. If you meta some of my games, you'll find a nice list of other similar buzzwords I dislike. Actually, I'm not sure I've come across selective scum hunting before, so I'll add it to my list.

That being said, korts explained why he felt bio might be selective scumhunting, so I don't see it as anything more than to make a mental note of right now. What I dislike most is players who attack with one of these buzzwords without being able to explain why.

Bio: I agree with #37. I don't view any conversation as useless, so long as its mafia related.

Pops: I don't know what to think of your use of WIFOM to give bio scum points for it because "It sounds like something you would do as scum"... but at the same time downplaying it calling it "bad for the brain"

Korts: I use to like the Tarhalindur Standard Tells, but after playing with Tar a couple times (both times Tar was scum), I'm starting to get the feeling that the true purpose of that page is for Tar's meta so he can have ammunition to forge mislynches as scum... Sometimes they're valid, but they're too vague to be reliable.

[Jahudo]

As far as anything else regarding how I specifically try to recognize sk's, I'd rather not say so I don't tell any sk in this game exactly how not to act.

I think this is a good response to bionic's question and probably a safer move in case there is an SK looking for advice.

Much in the same manner as a RV, I saw it as a discussion starter.

It looks like an innocent discussion starter to me.

For me, scum is scum but it would be nice to get rid of a killing faction earlier than later. We may know what we've dealing with after the first night but until then it might be counter-productive to speculate into the semi-open setup.

Selective scumhunting, that's a buzzword..

I don't think I've heard the phrase "selective scumhunting" in a game, though I can infer what it's about. Do you think it is a bad thing to use buzzwords?

The spread on the "my wine" gains looks something like:
Mafia: +++
Town: +
SK: ----

What do the +'s and -'s mean? Is the wine more likely to lean to the +'s, or are the +'s indications of how the WIFOM helps each faction?

[bionicchop2]

@ pops post #40

You are making a jump though if you simply state my discussion as hunting for a SK. We have no conclusive evidence there is a serial killer, so scum would have no additional incentive at this point to direct the town to hunt for a phantom. In addition, I don't think anybody in the game would be able to clearly indicate differences in how they would hunt for a sk as town versus how they would hunt for scum as town.

I also think there is more incentive for scum to eliminate a SK during the mid-game than during the first day. Extra deaths at night tend to help all scum until the potential risk of their own death overwhelms the immediate benefit of extra town deaths.

The discussion began for 2 reasons:

1. It gave me a chance for direct discussion with a player I have recent experience with. The more I know an individual, the better equipped I am to determine their alignment.

2. The conversation that could split off from the initial topic. This obviously includes questioning the topic itself and the motivation for its start.

[Huntress]

he confirmed, he didn't post. don't think he knows the game started

He did post. Are you suggesting he posted without reading the dozen posts already in the thread? What makes you think he doesn't know the game had started?

Yet my non-vote has caused more discussion so far than any vote.

I agree... but, there can be good discussion and bad discussion.

Any discussion at this stage is grist to the mill. Whether it's good or bad can be information in itself.

Would it be good discussion if I thought you were scum for refusing to RV, if you were actually town? Would that make me scum if I thought refusing to RV was a scum tell?

That's drawing conclusions, not discussing.

Also, what are you learning from this conversation?

It's too soon to say.

Well, I never said everyone has to RV in their very first post, I just think its better if everyone does it. MME only confirmed, so who knows what he's planning on doing once he starts talking about the game. You actually said you weren't random voting, so thats the difference.

No, I said I wasn't voting

yet

. MME didn't say that, but the result was the same, no vote.

Huntress: Why don't you want to random vote?

What makes you think I don't want to random vote?

[Vi]

Vote Count:

bionicchop2 (L-4) ~ iamausername, popsofctown, Rhinox

Rhinox (L-5) ~ Jahudo, OhGodMyLife
SpyreX (L-6) ~ bionicchop2,

Korts

RedCoyote (L-6) ~ SpyreX
Rishi (L-6) ~ RedCoyote
popsofctown (L-6) ~ Korts

Minimum (L-7)

Not Voting:

Huntress, My Milked Eek, Rishi,

Rhinox

First Deadline Review: Feb 14 2009
Current Deadline: Feb 18 2009

-----

*pulls out a shiny new ProdLauncher 2500^TM*
This is about to see some use tomorrow. I'm not pleased with the prospect of using it so early, but...