Mini 617 - Scottish Mafia, Game Over

[kuribo]

screwed up my quote tags. but you get the idea

[kuribo]

and even such, "almost always" doesn't give you cause to assume three scum unless you know it to be a fact

[Erratus Apathos]

Give me a reason why I shouldn't assume three scum in a format where there's almost always three scum.

[dcorbe]

Give me a reason why I shouldn't assume three scum in a format where there's almost always three scum.

and even such, "almost always" doesn't give you cause to assume three scum unless you know it to be a fact

[massive]

Well at least you didn't call me out for saying we were on Page 3 when we were still on Page 2. But it was a nice attempt. I'm much more interested in your own three-related slip-up though.

vote Erratus

[Erratus Apathos]

Give me a reason why I shouldn't assume three scum in a format where there's almost always three scum.

and even such, "almost always" doesn't give you cause to assume three scum unless you know it to be a fact

What part of "Give me a reason" do you not understand?

Well at least you didn't call me out for saying we were on Page 3 when we were still on Page 2. But it was a nice attempt. I'm much more interested in your own three-related slip-up though.

vote Erratus

Are you even reading what I've said about that post or are you just being opportunistic? It wasn't a "slip-up", it was a completely intentional assumption based on the bloody format standard. Jesus, it's like I'm the only one here with any experience at all playing mini-normals.

[starkmoon]

[col color=white]Player[col color=white]Votes[col color=white]Voting [col color=white]Erratus Apathos[col color=white]4[col color=white]dRool89, dcorbe, Lowell, massive [col color=white]roflcopter[col color=white]2[col color=white]CC09,Cephrir [col color=white]CC09[col color=white]1[col color=white]q21 [col color=white]massive[col color=white]1[col color=white]Erratus [col color=white]Lowell[col color=white]2[col color=white]rolfcopter, Empking [col color=white]q21[col color=white]1[col color=white]kuribo [col color=white]dcorbe[col color=white]1[col color=white]cybele [col color=white]dRool89[col color=white][col color=white]

[col color=white]Not Voting : [col color=white] Seems you all are voting

Any mistakes, let me know asap.

[Cephrir]

I've made the same slip-up as scum. This is a good wagon.

Unvote, Vote EA

dcorbe's behavior still strikes me as odd.

[dcorbe]

Give me a reason why I shouldn't assume three scum in a format where there's almost always three scum.

and even such, "almost always" doesn't give you cause to assume three scum unless you know it to be a fact

What part of "Give me a reason" do you not understand?

You were given a reason. So now you're going to sit there and OMGUS me because you don't like the reasoning?

Let me try this again...

and even such, "almost always" doesn't give you cause to assume three scum unless you know it to be a fact

Well at least you didn't call me out for saying we were on Page 3 when we were still on Page 2. But it was a nice attempt. I'm much more interested in your own three-related slip-up though.

vote Erratus

Are you even reading what I've said about that post or are you just being opportunistic? It wasn't a "slip-up", it was a completely intentional assumption based on the bloody format standard. Jesus, it's like I'm the only one here with any experience at all playing mini-normals.

You CAN'T ASSUME that every mini is going to be set up the same way, because they're not. How many minis have you completed since february that you have SO much more experience than the rest of us? 3? maybe 4?

[Erratus Apathos]

Give me a reason why I shouldn't assume three scum in a format where there's almost always three scum.

and even such, "almost always" doesn't give you cause to assume three scum unless you know it to be a fact

What part of "Give me a reason" do you not understand?

You were given a reason. So now you're going to sit there and OMGUS me because you don't like the reasoning?

Let me try this again...

and even such, "almost always" doesn't give you cause to assume three scum unless you know it to be a fact

THAT ISN'T A FUCKING REASON THAT'S JUST KURIBO TELLING ME WHAT TO DO. A reason to not assume three scum would be something along the lines of "if a townie assumes three scum and is wrong then the whole town automatically loses". What dire consequences will I incur if I'm wrong, besides absolutely nothing?

Also, the fact that you called my post OMGUS when it wasn't even remotely OMGUS makes me think you're trying to make me look scummy when you know I'm not.

Unvote, Vote: Dcorbe

Well at least you didn't call me out for saying we were on Page 3 when we were still on Page 2. But it was a nice attempt. I'm much more interested in your own three-related slip-up though.

vote Erratus

Are you even reading what I've said about that post or are you just being opportunistic? It wasn't a "slip-up", it was a completely intentional assumption based on the bloody format standard. Jesus, it's like I'm the only one here with any experience at all playing mini-normals.

You CAN'T ASSUME that every mini is going to be set up the same way, because they're not. How many minis have you completed since february that you have SO much more experience than the rest of us? 3? maybe 4?

Completed two. Read through too many to count. And yes, I

have

seen games with two families of two, or three mafia and an SK (ask rofl about the latter ) and you know what has this weird tendency to happen in games with two scumgroups? Strangely enough, two people die in the same night! Until there's ACTUAL GOD DAMN EVIDENCE pointing to one of those fairly uncommon setups, there is NO REASON to assume they are likely. Three mafia is so common that it is in fact the default assumption, until proven otherwise.

Seriously would you geniuses lynch someone for saying something like "I think the scumpair is X and Y" after the first mafia lynch? Because that post makes the same bloody assumption I'm getting shitwagoned for.

[q21]

I did warn you, dcorbe.

I don't know why you felt the need to warn me at all. We're still pretty much well entrenched into the random voting phase.

And kuribo, in defence of my name... bite me.

Wow, OMGUS much?

FoS: q21

for expecting anyone to take anything seriously at this point in the game.

Here is dcorbe taking my one liners seriously... and then FoSing me for taking anything seriously. They weren't serious - but they were intentional, to see who jumped on them.

FoWhatIsWrongWithYou: dcorbe because I think it's pretty obvious that EA is not breadcrumbing, and exiting the random voting stage is not anti-scumhunting. Your posts are really weird and you take everything seriously, what's with that?

What's wrong with taking anything seriously? You can take something seriously and still have fun with it. I'd be concerned about anyone who is able to coast through a game without making a serious attempt at scum hunting. It's in the town's best interests to take a few things seriously and it's in the scum's best interests not to.

Here, shortly after FoSing me for taking anything seriously he tells hw important it is for the town to take things seriously...

unvote, vote dcorbe

Erratus Apathos

If that was your reason surely you'd at least FOS everyone else without an avatar.

Holy bejesus, there's two people without an avatar? If I was the third guy on your team I'd be really pissed at the both of you for giving away yourselves this early.

Here is the comment which dcorbe seems to be hounding EA for. Looks like it was originally meant in jest to me. But just after FoSing me for being serious he decides that being serious is the way to go because then he can pile the pressure on.

And anyway, assuming three scum at the beginning of a 12 player game is a perfectly reasonable thing to do. It doesn't really help anyone much, but it isn't some outrageous assumption that indicates that he

must

know something. Yes, its perfectly possible that it was a scum slip, but it really isn't enough to justify the L-2 wagon on him.

[dcorbe]

@q21: Way to twist my words. It's not time to be serious over random votes, but my wagoning Erratus is not without reason. There's nothing wrong with turning up the pressure on someone to see where their breaking point is.

[dcorbe]

They weren't serious - but they were intentional, to see who jumped on them.

Design by hindsight, obviously

[q21]

No just design, but believe what you will.

Also, I got the impression that it was not, or at least not just, the random votes you thought I was getting serious about.

[dcorbe]

No just design, but believe what you will.

Also, I got the impression that it was not, or at least not just, the random votes you thought I was getting serious about.

Like I said bro, I don't understand why you felt the need to warn me. If it was a random comment then fine, I can accept that, but why aren't you going after anyone else wagoning him for the same reason that I am?

[q21]

Mostly because you were the first to get on that wagon for a reason I don't particularly think is worth of the size the wagon has reached. And you were the one hounding him the most for it. Also, you seemed to lose your lets not take things seriously viewpoint just in time to pile the pressure on him.

But you make a decent point, there is more than 1 person on that wagon. The last vote on it come from Cephrir.

I've made the same slip-up as scum. This is a good wagon.

Unvote, Vote EA

dcorbe's behavior still strikes me as odd.

One of the main reasons the EA wagon (which you Cephrir approves of) being where it is, is due to the pushing of dcorbe... but he doesn't like dcorbe's behaviour?

[dcorbe]

[quote="q21"] Mostly because you were the first to get on that wagon for a reason I don't particularly think is worth of the size the wagon has reached.[/q21]

I personally don't have a problem pushing wagons up to L-3 or L-2. It's called pressure voting, but the thing about it is if you call it "pressure voting" you're telegraphing your intentions and it really isn't pressure any more after that. This early in the game weak justification for votes is not a scum tell because it really only serves to push us past the random stage

When people hit L-2 they tend to spill a lot of scum tells, and most early D1 wagons fall apart anyways.

Picking apart early wagons under the guise of "that's not a good reason to vote for someone" is anti-town because you've basically just ensured that this wagon will fall apart. Your anti-scum-hunting stance is ultimately going to hurt the town.

Unvote

Vote: q21

[q21]

Um... OMGUS much?

First you say that most early day one wagons fall apart, which is perfectly true... then you vote for me for actions which could lead to an early day one wagon falling apart. Why do you think that early D1 lbandwagons fall apart?

If people didn't pick apart the early wagons based on "that's not a good reason to vote for someone" then those early wagons would end up being the day one lynches.

[dcorbe]

Um... OMGUS much?

First you say that most early day one wagons fall apart, which is perfectly true... then you vote for me for actions which could lead to an early day one wagon falling apart. Why do you think that early D1 lbandwagons fall apart?

If people didn't pick apart the early wagons based on "that's not a good reason to vote for someone" then those early wagons would end up being the day one lynches.

I don't see too many bandwagons falling apart because people pick them apart. I see them fall apart after the town has sufficiently pulled enough information out of them to consider concentrating on other targets for wagons. Even if they are pulled apart by someone else it's usually after a good amount of WIOFMy logic has been tossed into it.

You've ensured that this wagon is going to fall apart well before we've gotten anything useful out of it at all. Thank you.

And as far as OMGUS is concerned, I voted for you with some reasonable justification. Look up the definition of OMGUS:

OMGUS: Oh My God! You Suck!. Usually used in the context of an 'OMGUS vote' - i.e. a vote for someone purely on the basis that they are voting for you.

I'll quote that again and highlight the interesting part of that

OMGUS: Oh My God! You Suck!. Usually used in the context of an 'OMGUS vote' - i.e. a vote for someone

purely on the basis that they are voting for you.

That implies a BASELESS vote, and I provided some justification for my vote.

You're playing silly little word association games with me and I

DON'T

like it

Confirm Vote: q21

[q21]

No, by unvoting him EA you are in fact the one who

ensured

that the EA wagon would fall apart, I just said I didn't like it. I don't see how my posting could stop you getting info out of EA.

Its still OMGUS if the reason you give isn't worth much, and I don't feel the reason you gave was worth very much.

[dcorbe]

No, by unvoting him EA you are in fact the one who ensured that the EA wagon would fall apart, I just said I didn't like it. I don't see how my posting could stop you getting info out of EA.

No sir! YOU ensured that the wagon would fall apart when I had to telegraph my intentions to answer your idiotic and WIOFMy vote justification on me!

[q21]

Because EA would never have guessed that that was what was happening... right...

[dcorbe]

Because EA would never have guessed that that was what was happening... right...

He wasn't doing a very good job of it up until that point.

[Cybele]

No, by unvoting him EA you are in fact the one who

ensured

that the EA wagon would fall apart, I just said I didn't like it. I don't see how my posting could stop you getting info out of EA.

Brought aup a good point here. Dcorbe isn't too willing to hold onto the bandwagon that he engineered, despite him being so sure it was under valid pretenses, and with information to gain. Now, even if his suspicions about q21 are correct, the only reason q21 would have to jump on dcorbe is if Erratus is his scumbuddy. Why else disrupt the lynch, and bring suspicion on himself? We could have at least pressured some information from Erratus, and moved on to q21. Instead, dcorbe noticed his bandwagon being picked at, and attacked. I don't htink dcorbe has enough invested in his bandwagons to be town.

And anyway, assuming three scum at the beginning of a 12 player game is a perfectly reasonable thing to do. It doesn't really help anyone much, but it isn't some outrageous assumption that indicates that he must know something. Yes, its perfectly possible that it was a scum slip, but it really isn't enough to justify the L-2 wagon on him.

Not a bad reason for day one, but we have two better suspects right now. I believe q21 is less suspicious, but that's me.

Confirm Vote: dcorbe

[kuribo]

Completed two. Read through too many to count. And yes, I

have

seen games with two families of two, or three mafia and an SK (ask rofl about the latter ) and you know what has this weird tendency to happen in games with two scumgroups? Strangely enough, two people die in the same night! Until there's ACTUAL GOD DAMN EVIDENCE pointing to one of those fairly uncommon setups, there is NO REASON to assume they are likely. Three mafia is so common that it is in fact the default assumption, until proven otherwise.

Seriously would you geniuses lynch someone for saying something like "I think the scumpair is X and Y" after the first mafia lynch? Because that post makes the same bloody assumption I'm getting shitwagoned for.

good work Captain Overreaction