Mini 768- Root of All Evil (Game Over)

[Azhrei]

The above post convinces me more and more.

"You're over analyzing on this one"

No such thing, good sir.

"I never said to speed up the lynch"

we might as well make Verbosity the day one lynch.

Now, is it just me or does this clearly state that you wish to lynch Verbosity today, and the fact your following vote puts him at what, L-2, which implies you want him lynched pretty much now.

And you continue to contradict yourself. "I am voting on the townie I think may be scum". He can't be both. Which one do you think he is? Actually, I noticed something, you implicitly state he is a townie, and yet say you think he may be a scum. Doesn't this imply you

know

he is a townie? And who knows who is a townie, and who is not? The scum.

Now, I do hope I'm understanding your post right, because it's crazy and convoluted.

@Verbosity: That makes a helluva lot more sense. I thought you had a scum list and a town list. Next time tell us its a spectrum it'll avoid confusion.

[Azhrei]

EBWOP: I didn't realise that post would be a new page, so it really should read 'the last post' not 'the above post' so that it makes sense.

[kpaca]

@Azhrei: I have significant experience on MTGS. I got bored so decided to check things out here.

That said I will be rereading and posting more tomorrow. I had to attend a Hornets game tonight.

[Gateway]

Again, you first say I am defending Verbosity like crazy, which I never do.

I am asked why my opinion at that time was to unvoted while looking over who has me more suspicious. After a couple days no one, so since I think -everyone- is town on day one, the townie I think is most likely scum is Verbosity.

You seem to have an issue with me changing me opinion, why is that?

I happily explain my opinions at the time so I think it makes perfect sense for my vote. Also I would like to add this isn't the first time I voted on Verbosity, I had voted for Verbosity well before you claim I started defending them.

Also while I played mafia plenty for enjoyment, until recently I never learned as many terms and strategies. So "L-(n)" means little to me. It might to you, but at this point I think it matters little as long as you are willing to change your vote. If anything that might bring out the scum that try to push it over the edge right?

[Azhrei]

"L-2" equates to lynch minus 2, or what ever other number is in there, meaning that the player in question is n number of votes from a lynch.

Note that my above post does not contain any thing about you defending him. At all. (That doesn't mean I don't still think you are, but it's not in that post). Next, I have no issue with you changing you opinion, that is not an issue. My opinion of you will most likely change constantly throughout this game. What I have an issue with is your logic.

Have you ever heard of mutually exclusive events? You know, you can't roll a 6 on a die at the same time as you roll a 2. That kind of thing. SOmeone cannot possibly be a mafiate AND a townie at the same time. (Well, maybe there's a really screwy role out there, but I doubt it). They are one or the other (or a 3rd party), but not both. Yet you continue to stay adamant that you think Verbosity is a townie, while voting for him because he 'is most likely scum'. Thinking that everyone is town on D1 is a silly stance to take, as it obviously wrong. Personally, I take in no prejudice, and judge everyone as I see fit. Everyone starts off as nothings to me, so to speak.

Also, that first time you voted for Verbosity was not exactly very townish in my eyes. The post consisted of naught but an unvote and vote, and that is always something that strikes me as scummy. Always provide some reasoning when you vote. Seriously.

Now please, next time, actually read my posts properly. You have ignored things that I have actually said, and imagined things I have not.

[ThAdmiral]

vote: verbosity

You have already shown your aptitude at pointing out every small thing in a given players post and dubbing it "horrendously scummy" so i can only imagine what you would have done with who you call "the weakest player".
Most probably witch hunt.

That was in fact one (1) thing that I did that to. If you've noticed, I actually said that Azhrei is town. Explain how my actions could be motivated by the scum, and why those motivations are greater than those for a townie.

Regarding azhrei he could be your scum partner. (this is theoritcal and does not necessarily reflect how I feel)

Regarding how your actions could be motivated by the scum: if a scum were to focus on a player they believed to be the weakest, by putting pressure on them and scrutinizing their words, they could most likely get a wagon going and possibly a lynch.

Trust me I think Verbosity is blowing wind, and stirring up more trouble then they are worth, but still I am going on the vote that they are townie.

With that said though, and the fact Verbosity has us focused on someone we shouldn't, we might as well make Verbosity the day one lynch.

Vote: Verbosity

What?

Yes I am voting while not sure because to claim you are 100% sure on day one is ignorance, so I am voting on the townie I think may be scum. I change my vote a lot because I don't have the "I am right!!!!" attitude. If a few posts say something that goes against (or maybe with) something I was thinking, I change my vote.

No seriously, what?

vote: gateway

[Spolium]

Anti-town behaviour and scummy behaviour are separate animals. Scummy is something that is suspicious, anti-town is flagrantly indicative that the player is scum. It's more like degrees of bad, really.

Strange. I would define scummy/anti-town the other way around, but I think I see what you mean.

Another question (open to others as well) - I have seen it noted on occasion that scum will commonly declare the RVS over, usually in an aggressive manner and implying/declaring that it is for the good of the town. I have not come across this myself, but what's your take on that? What do you think of it in light of this game?

Spolium - Why do I think he's gun-ho, because I feel he's living up to the term verbosity, we'll know more on day two. See post 36

Given that "verbosity" means an excess of word use (typically more than necessary to clarify a point), I find it odd that you attribute this to towniness, when it is a null tell at best.

Would Mafia push that hard though, Verb has pretty much guaranteed a day two lynching if they lead a bandwagon in such a strong way and it is wrong.

That said, I don't think Verbosity is saying more than is necessary. He's said a lot to a lot of people, which is different.

I

am

curious about why you think he has guarunteed a D2 lynch in the event that he is wrong. Please expand upon this.

I change my vote a lot because I don't have the "I am right!!!!" attitude.

Scum could change their vote a lot to see which bandwagon starts rolling. What do you think of that?

I find it interesting that you've thrown your vote on/off/on a controversial player. Your opinion of him seems to shift when the wind changes. Can you clarify, in bullet point form, what you find townie/scummy about Verbosity, and why the latter outweighs the former?

Until then,

unvote; vote: Gateway

[molestargazer]

Mod: Vote count?

This is a common misconception. Getting people to crack merely leads them to post in what I like to call a "natural" way, without any guards or screens. In the case of scum, this reveals what they are, in the case of town, it does the same. You just need to know what to see.

I still stand by the viewpoint that new players will not post naturally, their playstyle will become worse under pressure. That's certainly how it was for me - perhaps I'm generalising a bit, but it isn't going to change my opinion.

I'm going to continue as is necessary to fully disclose my thoughts.

I'm going to drop this argument now.
I know I will take time to fully read your posts. Let's move on.

In the interest of good education, common practice is to lynch those who claim jesters or those who you believe to be jesters, they are more often scum than jester. Back to relevance, I am not a jester. If I were a jester, I would have asked for replacement. Jesters are not a role for a decent game, which I believe Battousai knows well. Think I'm scum if you want, but don't insult me like that.

Where did he say you might be a jester?

I feel he's living up to the term verbosity,

we'll know more on day two

Trust me I think Verbosity is blowing wind, and stirring up more trouble then they are worth, but still I am going on the vote that they are townie.

With that said though, and the fact Verbosity has us focused on someone we shouldn't,

we might as well make Verbosity the day one lynch.

Vote: Verbosity

What.

do you now consider the molester the weakest player? or have you moved your vote because of your suspicion of molester?

1) MOLE. My avatar. Read.
2) I would hope that his vote was because he believed I was scum when I disagreed with his initial post and voting, and not because I'm a useless player.

"You're over analyzing on this one"

No such thing, good sir.

I'm 50/50 agree/disagree with this bit.
Yes, it's possible to overanalyse a person's post to draw connotations from it that they simply did not / would not have meant.
However, it isn't possible to look at someone too much if you think they're scum.

Again, you first say I am defending Verbosity like crazy, which I never do.

Saying why you think he is town is pretty much a defence.

the

townie

I think

is most likely scum

is Verbosity.

Eh?

I have seen it noted on occasion that scum will commonly declare the RVS over, usually in an aggressive manner and implying/declaring that it is for the good of the town. I have not come across this myself, but what's your take on that? What do you think of it in light of this game?

I don't think saying that RVS is over is a scumtell. It's merely an indication that said player wants to get on with the game, be it for pro-town or pro-scum purposes. It will heavily depend on the context in which it is said.

Given that "verbosity" means an excess of word use (typically more than necessary to clarify a point)

Hence his posts, which are long. I believe that's what he was trying to get at.

If I'm right, Gateway's on L-3, so I think it's perfectly acceptable to

Unvote
Vote: Gateway

I'd like you to explain
- Why you're voting for someone who you believe is purely a townie
- Why you denied you were defending Verbosity when you were posting why you thought he was Pro-town

Verbosity - Do you still believe I am the best bet for a lynch D1? If so, why?

[Verbosity]

Alright to address a few points
Spolium - Why do I think he's gun-ho, because I feel he's living up to the term verbosity, we'll know more on day two. See post 36... Again, reading the above posts Verb is either scum, or a gung-ho person that likes to move in a direction and for the second is perhaps flustered by us talking and discussion the idea instead of doing it. (should see me play call of duty and explain the concept of rushing B in the beginning of every map and ignoring the one they start by, it looks just about the same)

Trust me I think Verbosity is blowing wind, and stirring up more trouble then they are worth, but still I am going on the vote that they are townie.

With that said though, and the fact Verbosity has us focused on someone we shouldn't, we might as well make Verbosity the day one lynch.

Vote: Verbosity

Why is it a good idea to lynch someone you believe to be town?

wow. a busy day...

verb - now that ssk has replaced in, have you moved your vote because it was no longer on what you considered the weakest player? do you now consider the molester the weakest player? or have you moved your vote because of your suspicion of molester? I'm just trying to figure out if the 'weakest player' bit had any validity to it, or if you ONLY picked that player becuase he/she had not yet confirmed. therefore was useful in your presentation of your 'plan', which in reality was just a mechanic to spark discussion.

SSK is not a weak player, but the reason I moved my vote was more to lynch molestargazer, because I believe that he is scum. You're probably the smartest player in this game. Do you have anything more helpful to add?

Bad logic

Incompetence is not a good excuse for scapegoating.

vote: verbosity

You have already shown your aptitude at pointing out every small thing in a given players post and dubbing it "horrendously scummy" so i can only imagine what you would have done with who you call "the weakest player".
Most probably witch hunt.

That was in fact one (1) thing that I did that to. If you've noticed, I actually said that Azhrei is town. Explain how my actions could be motivated by the scum, and why those motivations are greater than those for a townie.

Regarding azhrei he could be your scum partner. (this is theoritcal and does not necessarily reflect how I feel)

Regarding how your actions could be motivated by the scum: if a scum were to focus on a player they believed to be the weakest, by putting pressure on them and scrutinizing their words, they could most likely get a wagon going and possibly a lynch.

I'm just going to ignore what you just said. Out of respect for your skill.

The last part of my request was the most important part. In order for your accusation to be valid in any way, shape or form, you must prove why I would have more motivation to act as I have as scum than is town.

Anti-town behaviour and scummy behaviour are separate animals. Scummy is something that is suspicious, anti-town is flagrantly indicative that the player is scum. It's more like degrees of bad, really.

Strange. I would define scummy/anti-town the other way around, but I think I see what you mean.

Good.

Another question (open to others as well) - I have seen it noted on occasion that scum will commonly declare the RVS over, usually in an aggressive manner and implying/declaring that it is for the good of the town. I have not come across this myself, but what's your take on that? What do you think of it in light of this game?

Any competent player wants to end the random voting stage as soon as humanly possible. It's not indicative of alignment. I don't think that the circumstances in this case are any different. Though some players desire to continue the RVS is strange. Frankly, it's also stupid.

Spolium - Why do I think he's gun-ho, because I feel he's living up to the term verbosity, we'll know more on day two. See post 36

Given that "verbosity" means an excess of word use (typically more than necessary to clarify a point), I find it odd that you attribute this to towniness, when it is a null tell at best.

That's actually not true in general terms. Scum players are more inclined to post less, to attempt to avoid revealing information about themselves. In my case, I imagine I would act like this regardless of my alignment.

Would Mafia push that hard though, Verb has pretty much guaranteed a day two lynching if they lead a bandwagon in such a strong way and it is wrong.

That said, I don't think Verbosity is saying more than is necessary. He's said a lot to a lot of people, which is different.

:)

This is a common misconception. Getting people to crack merely leads them to post in what I like to call a "natural" way, without any guards or screens. In the case of scum, this reveals what they are, in the case of town, it does the same. You just need to know what to see.

I still stand by the viewpoint that new players will not post naturally, their playstyle will become worse under pressure. That's certainly how it was for me - perhaps I'm generalising a bit, but it isn't going to change my opinion.

You are generalising, but whether or not you're right is a matter of opinion, more than anything, and I would not want to get into a discussion on theory when we have better things to be doing.

I'm going to continue as is necessary to fully disclose my thoughts.

I'm going to drop this argument now.
I know I will take time to fully read your posts. Let's move on.

:)

In the interest of good education, common practice is to lynch those who claim jesters or those who you believe to be jesters, they are more often scum than jester. Back to relevance, I am not a jester. If I were a jester, I would have asked for replacement. Jesters are not a role for a decent game, which I believe Battousai knows well. Think I'm scum if you want, but don't insult me like that.

Where did he say you might be a jester?

He said that I might want to be lynched. There's only one role that does that.

do you now consider the molester the weakest player? or have you moved your vote because of your suspicion of molester?

1) MOLE. My avatar. Read.
2) I would hope that his vote was because he believed I was scum when I disagreed with his initial post and voting, and not because I'm a useless player. :P

Sho' Nuff.

"You're over analyzing on this one"

No such thing, good sir.

I'm 50/50 agree/disagree with this bit.
Yes, it's possible to overanalyse a person's post to draw connotations from it that they simply did not / would not have meant.
However, it isn't possible to look at someone too much if you think they're scum.

It is always possible to be tunnel-visioned.

I have seen it noted on occasion that scum will commonly declare the RVS over, usually in an aggressive manner and implying/declaring that it is for the good of the town. I have not come across this myself, but what's your take on that? What do you think of it in light of this game?

I don't think saying that RVS is over is a scumtell. It's merely an indication that said player wants to get on with the game, be it for pro-town or pro-scum purposes. It will heavily depend on the context in which it is said.

Given that "verbosity" means an excess of word use (typically more than necessary to clarify a point)

Hence his posts, which are long. I believe that's what he was trying to get at.

Gasp!

Verbosity - Do you still believe I am the best bet for a lynch D1? If so, why?

I think you're scum. (Yes.)

Thank you for your time.

[sekinj]

Trust me I think Verbosity is blowing wind, and stirring up more trouble then they are worth, but still I am going on the vote that they are townie.

With that said though, and the fact Verbosity has us focused on someone we shouldn't, we might as well make Verbosity the day one lynch.

how can you say these two lines one right after each other? Please choose A OR B below

A) Verb is a zealous townie
B) Verb is the scummiest person today

It can't be both as you seem to think in the above quote.

[Battousai]

Vote Count

Gateway

- 3 (Azhrei, Spolium, Molestargazer)

Sekinj

- 2 (Chiefsky4, MafiaSSK)

Molestargazer

- 1 (Verbosity)

Verbosity

- 1 (Gateway)

MafiaSSK

- 1 (ThAdmiral)

Spolium

- 1 (kpaca)

Chiefsky4

- 1 (Jazzmyn)

Not Voting

: Archon, sekinj

It takes 7 to lynch!

You must

Unvote

before voting if you already have a vote on someone

[Battousai]

Prodding Archon now. Archon has 48 hours to reply in thread or return PM or be replaced.

[sekinj]

You're probably the smartest player in this game.

You could tell after just 2 posts? *blush* It takes most people the whole game to figure that out

[Gateway]

Note that my above post does not contain any thing about you defending him. At all. (That doesn't mean I don't still think you are, but it's not in that post). Next, I have no issue with you changing you opinion, that is not an issue. My opinion of you will most likely change constantly throughout this game. What I have an issue with is your logic.

Don't distort and hope people don't read back, you accused me of being a scumpartner to Verbosity in post 42 then accused me of defending Verbosity in post 47.

Why do I get this feeling that Gateway and Verbosity are scumpartners?

From nearly every one of your recent posts, I have felt that you have been attempting to defend the actions of Verbosity. You keep saying how you think he's a townie, but there really isn't much reasoning behind it.

You just lied. Next you say how can I vote on a person I think is townie. Let me say it again on its own line since I've repeated it already

**************Without deaths, cops, or some other information we can only assume everyone is townie on day one********************

So yes my day one strategy is to vote on the -TOWNIE- I think is most likely scum. Since there is no possible way any of us know who is scum on day one.

Have you ever heard of mutually exclusive events? You know, you can't roll a 6 on a die at the same time as you roll a 2.


That kind of thing. SOmeone cannot possibly be a mafiate AND a townie at the same time. (Well, maybe there's a really screwy role out there, but I doubt it). They are one or the other (or a 3rd party), but not both. Yet you continue to stay adamant that you think Verbosity is a townie

No wrong, but you admit a die you know has a 6 could roll a 2. I see a lot of sixes here and I was voting on the die I thought was most likely to roll a two

Also, that first time you voted for Verbosity was not exactly very townish in my eyes. The post consisted of naught but an unvote and vote, and that is always something that strikes me as scummy. Always provide some reasoning when you vote. Seriously.

Bringing up something else brought up in a previous post again? I answered that question in post 31, but I'll save you the back button, someone already asked the same thing and I explained well I think. Verbosity was making some large posts, so right after one I quietly changed my vote to Verbosity, and although I was getting heat, kept my vote until I saw the effects of my pressure and then changed the vote with an explanation.

Now please, next time, actually read my posts properly. You have ignored things that I have actually said, and imagined things I have not.

Ditto to you.


To Verbosity - Your last post helped me make up my mind about you, I read it as more winded then defensive, and I don't think your a Joker as that would just ruin the game.

Unvote

Now....

Given that "verbosity" means an excess of word use (typically more than necessary to clarify a point), I find it odd that you attribute this to towniness, when it is a null tell at best.

I said I thought that is why he uses large posts, not why he is town. Basically you just repeated what I did

I

am

curious about why you think he has guarunteed a D2 lynch in the event that he is wrong. Please expand upon this.

Verb had a gung=ho attitude about -one- player on page -one-. If they would have turned out to be a townie, who would have been first on the chopping block day two? I think my statement was common sense

Scum could change their vote a lot to see which bandwagon starts rolling. What do you think of that?

You just used a term I looked up, null-tell. Well a townie would quickly change their vote just as quickly if they thought they had an innocent person in their sights as well wouldn't they? So that's sort of a null-tell

I find it interesting that you've thrown your vote on/off/on a controversial player. Your opinion of him seems to shift when the wind changes. Can you clarify, in bullet point form, what you find townie/scummy about Verbosity, and why the latter outweighs the former?

[Gateway]

Can't edit, but I meant 'You're' in the above post instead of 'your' (awesome meds, but making my mind loopy with writing words oddly)

While I am writing though Azhrei, I will address once concern I missed.

You mentioned my vote changing making you have concerns for my logic. I promise that is just my day one playstyle (you meta people can see that in my other games) On day two there are solid facts to work from and on so my voting will be a lot less jumpy starting then.

[Gateway]

Bleh, sorry for the triple post. The "I find it interesting that you've thrown your vote on/off/on a controversial player. Your opinion of him seems to shift when the wind changes. Can you clarify, in bullet point form, what you find townie/scummy about Verbosity, and why the latter outweighs the former? " in post 63 is a quote from Spolium that I was going to address.

It is simple Spolium.

My vote changes because one statement or another made me question my logic, and I am quick to take off a vote that could be wrong.
I can't unlynch a person, but I can always throw my vote back on as needed

As it stands right now I think Verbosity is a townie because that is the gut hunch I get (I'm a gut hunch person on day one, "logic" doesn't really work since we have only theory and not a single fact on day one)

[sekinj]

gateway - don't forget to answer post 59 as well, please.

[Verbosity]

Gateway, so you know, it's very unlikely that we will ever "know" anything in the way you seem to think we will. The chances of a cop claiming with reliable information is practically null. This is not Something Awful, on mafiascum, we play a better game of mafia. You had better get used to using reasoning, not relying on reveals or claims to do your work for you. I find your logic (if it can even be called that) to be severely lacklustre. Despite that, I think you are more stupid than you are scum, so I will not vote for you, as I think we would be better served with a molestargazer lynch. Regardless of your alignment, you need to clean up your play. Think out what you say, don't just run off at the mouth. Just because you don't have a convenient answer to chase doesn't mean your opinions should change with the wind. If you change your opinions too much, they become worthless, as they are rapidly becoming to me.

Sekinj: Why are you not voting? Surely there's enough information to scrounge a vote from, and the random voting stage is well over with.

Those voting Gateway: Why do you think that his play is indicative of scum, rather than stupid?

[ChiefSkye4]

Hey, guys, I'm up on my reading, but I just wanna say due to projects at school, I might not be fully active until Thursday. I'll keep reading and post, but it can't be much. Thanks.

[Battousai]

Previous vote count edited to fix mistakes.

[sekinj]

Sekinj: Why are you not voting? Surely there's enough information to scrounge a vote from, and the random voting stage is well over with.

Those voting Gateway: Why do you think that his play is indicative of scum, rather than stupid?

I'd like an answer from gateway before I vote him.

gateway may be inexperienced on mafiascum, but I can't give him a free pass for that.

[ThAdmiral]

vote: verbosity

You have already shown your aptitude at pointing out every small thing in a given players post and dubbing it "horrendously scummy" so i can only imagine what you would have done with who you call "the weakest player".
Most probably witch hunt.

That was in fact one (1) thing that I did that to. If you've noticed, I actually said that Azhrei is town. Explain how my actions could be motivated by the scum, and why those motivations are greater than those for a townie.

Regarding azhrei he could be your scum partner. (this is theoritcal and does not necessarily reflect how I feel)

Regarding how your actions could be motivated by the scum: if a scum were to focus on a player they believed to be the weakest, by putting pressure on them and scrutinizing their words, they could most likely get a wagon going and possibly a lynch.

I'm just going to ignore what you just said. Out of respect for your skill.

The last part of my request was the most important part. In order for your accusation to be valid in any way, shape or form, you must prove why I would have more motivation to act as I have as scum than is town.

Well referencing the point that I already mentioned, I believe a scum would be more likely to go after the weakest player than a town, as choosing to lynch someone based on how good a player they are is a random selection and not based on tell-indicated alignment, and furthermore is a selection that is based off how easily a lynch can be achieved rather than anything else.

The point is moot though. You clearly have not done this, and I don't believe you are witch hunting anybody (although I did think at one point that you were going to).

Another question (open to others as well) - I have seen it noted on occasion that scum will commonly declare the RVS over, usually in an aggressive manner and implying/declaring that it is for the good of the town. I have not come across this myself, but what's your take on that? What do you think of it in light of this game?

Any competent player wants to end the random voting stage as soon as humanly possible. It's not indicative of alignment. I don't think that the circumstances in this case are any different. Though some players desire to continue the RVS is strange. Frankly, it's also stupid.

Also I agree with this.
(and is that a thinly veiled attack

spolium

?)

[ThAdmiral]

You must

Unvote

before voting if you already have a vote on someone

Oh, you BASTARDS!!!! I hate having to do this.

unvote

vote:gateway

**************Without deaths, cops, or some other information we can only assume everyone is townie on day one********************

Ok, I can appreciate that, but you seemed to suggest that verbosity was one of the people you

most

suspected to be town, but still voted him anyway.

Those voting Gateway: Why do you think that his play is indicative of scum, rather than stupid?

Definitely could be stupidity. But we must apply pressure so that we can get one to post in their "natural" way, mustn't we?

[Verbosity]

It wasn't an attack, I was just stating my opinion. I can't even comprehend the desire to lengthen the random voting stage.

That only works if you think that the player would crack, and frankly I think Gateway is not collected enough to be a valid choice for that strategy.

I also get the feeling that those of you that suspect Gateway will not switch to molestargazer at any soon point, is that accurate?

[Spolium]

I think ThAdmiral meant me.

No, it wasn't an attack. I've seen the point raised on more than one occasion, and since this is the first game where I've seen someone jackhammer their way out of the RVS like that I wanted to know what the consensus was. My thinking was that multiple responses would allow me to make a better judgement of the validity of the claim.

More to come tomorrow.