Mini 1137: Long Overdue Mafia [Game Over!]

[Rhinox]

Votecount 1.2

andrew94 (0) -
Xalxe (3) - Idiotking, neil1113, andrew94
neil1113 (0) -
P.T. Barnum (0) -
Jahudo (1) - mikemike778
Jerbs (0) -
mikemike778 (1) - Cecily
Idiotking (2) - Jahudo, P.T. Barnum,
Jinxx (0) -
Voidedmafia (2) - Jinxx, pappums rat,
Cecily (0) -
havingfitz (0) -
pappums rat (1) - havingfitz

not voting: Jerbs, Voidedmafia, Xalxe

With 13 alive, it takes 7 to lynch.
Deadline for Day 1 is Wednesday, March 30 at 9:00AM EST.

Jinxx is V/LA until [redacted]

[Cecily]

The only reason I ask the time frame question is because last game I was in, I was lynched in 3.5 hours because scum and traitor hammered before everyone had even seen what was going on, so if that could not happen again I'd be very happy about it.

Voided, why so tense already? This game should be fun, and while I'm not saying that not participating in RVS is scummy, it's not particularly team oriented. Maybe could turn into something anti-town later on, but as of yet I've seen nothing conclusive about his play style.

FoS:

Pappums rat.
Already pushing someone as scum without any evidence and very few posts seems more scummy than not participating in RVS.

[Idiotking]

It was a quasi-joke. It is, however, odd how he jumped off of my wagon when Jahudo joined it, as if he thought I was near a lynch already.

Odd as in suspicious? Is your Xalxe vote serious or not? Calling it a quasi-joke downplays your seriousness, but you haven't retracted the theory that he was distancing himself from me. Why do you think the unvote had more to do with me and not you?

The "distancing himself from you" part was the joke. The main point of my vote was his supposed misunderstanding of how many votes were on the wagon/how many votes would make a lynch. The only connection it has to you is the fact that he backed away immediately after your vote on me.

[Idiotking]

And no, to answer the first part of your question that I forgot to respond to, it's not a serious vote. I just wanted to make the observation that Xalxe's reaction to your vote was unusual.

[Jerbs]

V/la till monday

noted, thanks

[Jahudo]

Okay, idiotking.

I don't see the problem with pappums push.

[Cecily]

I've never liked pushes this early in the game. They sometimes (oftentimes) start wagons that lead to a townie getting killed with very little reason. At least that's how it's gone in my experience, so I'm wary when someone tries to get one going so soon, especially after RVS and without any explanation.

[Voidedmafia]

Voided, why so tense already? This game should be fun, and while I'm not saying that not participating in RVS is scummy, it's not particularly team oriented. Maybe could turn into something anti-town later on, but as of yet I've seen nothing conclusive about his play style.

I'm not tense, I'm blunt.

FoS:

Pappums rat.
Already pushing someone as scum without any evidence and very few posts seems more scummy than not participating in RVS.

Good point.

[P.T. Barnum]

Xalxe: you seriously thought the scum were going to line up three votes to hammer someone on day one?
I'm only pushing this point because this seems like irrational fear to scare off potential wagons. I don't think the idiotking wagon built that quickly in the first place.

[andrew94]

v/la for a couple of days

also noted, thanks

[havingfitz]

Nice...three v/LAs two days into the game.

FOS Cecily

for inquiring about posting timeframes. I can envision the answer to this question being beneficial to scum but do not see how it matters to town.

That's an interesting point. I can't think of a town benefit either, though its one of those icebreaker questions I see often. And now that I think about it scum would be more likely to lie, so it could benefit them if they want to plan out lurking times or setup quickhammers in the future. However I don't scum would come into a game thinking about that, so I don't suspect Cecily for asking the question. Its just that scum could exploit it after its asked.

@Jahudo...Cecily's response above shows it (quickhammers) is something she had in mind when she asked the question. Even with her response above I do not see how the answers would benefit her as town?

@Cecilytown...how do you plan on mitigating the possibility of a quicklynch (on you or anyone else) with the answers to your posting time question? I think it would be easier to coordinate a quicklynch among ~3 scum with the answers than I think it would have any benefit in preventing a quicklynch by ~10 town. I don't think the question is voteworthy but it could be a consideration later in the game combined with the rest of your gameplay.

As an aside...if any of you have ever played with andrew94 before...he is a pleasant enough player but is nothing but a detriment to town. I'd be up for cutting town losses and just removing the detriment before he gets too far in the game to where he (if town) would actually be relied on for his gameplay...not lamented for it. I.e. I'm up for an andrew94 policy lynch.

[mikemike778]

Xalxe: you seriously thought the scum were going to line up three votes to hammer someone on day one?
I'm only pushing this point because this seems like irrational fear to scare off potential wagons. I don't think the idiotking wagon built that quickly in the first place.

Agree 100%

Can't see any chance of scum pushing through a quick lynch at this point, would be a crazy move and if they did then they'd almost certainly give away at least one of them maybe more. Maybe in a newbie game if all the scum were playing the first game. Surely getting a few wagons to look for reactions is the best way to get the game out of RVS. Black mark against Xalxe in my (green) book

I've never liked pushes this early in the game. They sometimes (oftentimes) start wagons that lead to a townie getting killed with very little reason. At least that's how it's gone in my experience, so I'm wary when someone tries to get one going so soon, especially after RVS and without any explanation.

Well after getting a similar push against me (as town) in 1040 for using Random.org and then finding out it was led by scum, I can emphasise with this.

The above was accompanied by pretty notable tunnelling though - don't see anything wrong with rat's push so far. Questioning his reponse is good, given his reponses looks like he wants everyone else to get the game going which is not pro-town.

As an aside...if any of you have ever played with andrew94 before...he is a pleasant enough player but is nothing but a detriment to town. I'd be up for cutting town losses and just removing the detriment before he gets too far in the game to where he (if town) would actually be relied on for his gameplay...not lamented for it. I.e. I'm up for an andrew94 policy lynch.

No I haven't. Think its pretty off to be talking policy lynches at this point though and pretty scummy for that matter.

[havingfitz]

As an aside...if any of you have ever played with andrew94 before...he is a pleasant enough player but is nothing but a detriment to town. I'd be up for cutting town losses and just removing the detriment before he gets too far in the game to where he (if town) would actually be relied on for his gameplay...not lamented for it. I.e. I'm up for an andrew94 policy lynch.

No I haven't. Think its pretty off to be talking policy lynches at this point though and pretty scummy for that matter.

That's fine. I expect/ed some flack for bringing up the dreaded "policy lynch" but the truth is the truth. andrew is a detriment to town and town would not want him to be around when it matters (ie LYLO or the day before LYLO). If I'm scum I want him in the game...he will drive town crazy.

With the day 1 odds favoring a mislynch (short of scum making a stupid mistake) I would prefer the potential mislynch to be deadweight.

No offense andrew

[Cecily]

I don't think you could call what I did with pappums tunneling. So far all I've done is given my opinion on him, same as everyone else does and I don't see how, since I didn't actually vote him, that could be considered a bad thing...?

And just to clarify, yes, my question was just an icebreaker, but it's nice to know that I don't have to frantically check this site first thing when I wake up before classes just to make sure I don't have to rush a post.

If it makes you feel any better about the question I was thinking of accompanying it with "what three things would you bring if you were stranded on a desert island?" just to keep the feel of ice breakers, but I didn't think that went along with the game very well and someone would probably have given me crap for asking it.

[mikemike778]

Why is Andrew a detriment to town ? Example ? Presumably this is a reference to previous games and not just here. I'm not violently against policy lynches in general on Day 1 but it seems way too early to be suggesting it.

@Cecily - if directed at me, I wasn't suggesting you were tunneling, it was in relation to my example in 1040

[havingfitz]

A self proclaimed lazy poster who comes off scummy if you aren't familiar with his playstyle...and if you are familiar with his playstyle you still don't know wth to do with him. He posts a minimal amount of minimal content. Uhhh...let's see...at least one occasion I know of where he has claimed a town PR when he was VT, thereby causing the real town PR to counter claim and thus be nk'd. Otherwise he's a nice fellow.

I'm not advocating a quicklynch on him and thereby averting a full day's worth of discussion and tells...but if he was a candidate to be lynched it would not take a lot of persuasion for me to put my vote on him.

[andrew94]

i also find mikemike's reaction not right when havingfitz suggested a pl of me.
seems to be nitpicking on fitz, but no vote or anything

[Voidedmafia]

Why do you not think it's right? From the looks of things, he's trying to defend you, in a way.

[neil1113]

@Andrew: WHY are you posting to little and have such a lazy meta? Are you willing to pick your game up for this game and be pro-town, or do you really not care? If the latter, I won't have any problem with a policy lynch later on in the day.

[pappums rat]

well folks i am a one-shot day cop, and i just investigated voidedmafia and got a 'guilty' result back. this is a normal so my sanity is guaranteed (as my pm told me as well). no quicklynch please, as there is still plenty of time to talk and figure out who his scumbuddies are.

[neil1113]

[img]well folks i am a one-shot day cop, and i just investigated voidedmafia and got a 'guilty' result back. this is a normal so my sanity is guaranteed (as my pm told me as well). no quicklynch please, as there is still plenty of time to talk and figure out who his scumbuddies are.

Woah, are you serious? Just for the record, joking at this point of the day is VERY detrimental to the town, so please, are you being serious?

[Voidedmafia]

Rather quick with that reveal, aren't you? Maybe YOU'RE worried about your scumbuddy instead?

But then, that raises the question: Why go after me, then, since I haven't really tried to go after you?

...wait...YOU DON'T SAY WHAT YOUR PM TELLS YOU, YOU IDIOT.

[Voidedmafia]

I'm referring to the part about sanity, not the role reveal, just so you know.

[neil1113]

Rather quick with that reveal, aren't you? Maybe YOU'RE worried about your scumbuddy instead?

But then, that raises the question: Why go after me, then, since I haven't really tried to go after you?

...wait...YOU DON'T SAY WHAT YOUR PM TELLS YOU, YOU IDIOT.

First, I don't get your defense. At all.

Second, I'm not sure about the current mods way of writing, but usually the rule is you're not allowed to

QUOTE

the role PM, but it has nothing against paraphrasing it.

[Voidedmafia]

My point is that there's absolutely no reason to claim such a role now, which makes me wonder why he didi it. The first question that came to mind was if HE was trying to get protection for scumbuddies. I don't know if it's true, though, but it's the first question that came to me.

All in all, this is a VERY suspicious post that pappums has made.