Doctor Who Mafia 2- GAME OVER!

[vollkan]

A double vote...

BM, question

- Does that mean I have one individual vote that is worth twice as much, or that I have two separate votes that I can hypothetically put wherever I want?

I'm going to assume it just means my vote is worth double, so:

Vote: Albert. B Rampage

for being the first to post.

[vollkan]

*gasp* Overeaction!

[vollkan]

Wow...I go to bed and 6 pages.

So it looks like we've got rid of the Cult straight away. Its good to know thats one scum group out of the way immediately.

Also a scum dead on night 1 too? Great work.

This is a good start.

Scumdar sense is tingling. I approve of the wagon.

WHEN THIS GUY TURNS UP TO BE TOWN DONT BE MAD AT ME FOR VOTING HIM

Doing the "I'm town" thing...

To be quite honest, using the wiki is a terrible excuse for not having actual discussion. Perhaps they work in terms of probability, but just bandwagoning one person on day 1 immediately from the start is incredibly scummy.

Hm? The wiki was not being used as a substitute, just as evidence that what Taff had done is a scumtell. Interesting that you would react to the wagon by calling it scummy.

Man that post must have made your mafia dick really stiff. I'm sure you're one of the coolest kids on the block around here.

Whether or not you're impressed is of no consequence to me. If there is one thing I hate about this particular forum's play, is your insistence that there is a set of rules that would govern this, if any, social game.

If one were able to actually take Taff's first post in any context and thence vote him, then maybe you would be acting usefully. Seeing as it is his first post in the damn game, and furthermore and observation that is hardly astounding, I see no reason to find suspicion from it. I DO, however, find a day 1 bandwagon of 6 people immediatly after talh's vote suspicious.

Cut the site politics please. We don't have a set of "rules". It's just that certain behaviours are viewed in certain ways; that's the hallmark of a social game like this.

A bandwagon of 6 people and it's....14 to lynch? That's numerically equivalent to about a bandwagon of 3 in a mini normal. Also, why is such a wagon suspicious?

Its not impressive to see me think its dumb to bandwagon someone because the wiki says so, especially when its people entering the thread and saying yes thats scummy and voting? Well sorry, that is dumb.

Ive played plenty on Something Awful, where we dont rely on peoples wikipedia entries to vote people off. Where we use good old fashioned detective skills. I would have thought a forum dedicated to mafia would have had more impetus placed in calculating and working out peoples alligence.

Enough with the site politics already.

It is not a substitute and most people would never consider using it as such. But it does provide some sort of general pointers and springboards to think from.

I say we kill all the people from SA and send them back to the hell they came from.

*so tempted to QFT*

Page 3 seems largely nonsense bantering
*next page*
Yay, BM chastises Aisar. <3 BM

This kind of claim was utterly unacceptable in Mini 431, it was unacceptable in Mini 458, and it's unacceptable here.

I don't care who you are or what you believe - if you claim that another player is your scumbuddy, you either need to be replaced or you need to die. Period.

Unvote, Vote: Aisar on principle.

Nice to see someone posting seriously and sensibly.

Then OMGUS from Aisar...

Alright, let's go over this again:

OMGUS as defined by your retarded little wiki:

OMGUS stands for "Oh My God, You Suck (for voting for me)!". it is sometimes used as a shorthand to indicate that you are voting for someone primarily because they voted for you.

Nothing I did was "voting for someone primarily because they voted for you."

My vote has probably been the most sane vote you idiots have ever seen in your life, for reasons 1) Because he started a bandwagon, and 2) Because he votes me for e-principle and doesn't need stupid things like "an actual valid reason" to vote me.

Everything I have said during and after my vote has substantiated those two reasons for me voting him.

Also, you have yet to tell me when I defended taff. I just called you idiots for falling into a bandwagon.

I refuse to go around in this circle again.

1) is not scummy in my books. The wagon never reached an appreciable size. Explain how it is.
2) is legitimate. How is it scummy of him to do so?

Unvote, Vote: Aisar

[vollkan]

No, what you're allowing is "Hey, X broke rule A. Regardless of X's scumminess/not scumminess, let's lynch X."

This is terrible. Or at least I think it is.

This is really more of a meta-theory thing, but the rationale usually is that the breaking of certain rules ends up hurting town in the long run if that behaviour is tolerated.

ABR's gripe was with you joke-claiming scum. I appreciate that you did it for a reaction, but you should think of the wider ramifications of what happens if people are allowed to claim scum and get away with it. It's a 'slippery slope' argument, I admit, but in the end it simply gives scum another avenue by which they might improve their chances of survival. As a matter of pro-town policy, that's bad.

Don't think of it as "rules". It is just that certain acts, if tolerated, will help scum in the long run and, for that reason, there are policy motivations in punishing those acts.

Now, the serious really relevant stuff:

I'll address the two points above:

1) If you want to define Bandwagon as "An arbitrary number of votes till lynch", then fine. In my opinion, the bandwagon has nothing to do with the number of votes, it's how fast they are voted. Taff was voted with exceptional speed. I don't see how this is NOT scummy.

2) I am absolutely baffled that you would find Tarh's voting reason acceptable. He is literally voting with no other reason than for some imagined principle.

Does anybody else see what I'm saying? Please don't just discount what I'm saying, if you don't see it, tell me why not, I don't know from what angle I should go about convincing you if you don't explain it.

1) Speed now? What has that got to do with anything? I mean, you are saying that speed is the important thing in making the wagon scummy, but I frankly fail to see what makes a wagon of just 6 votes scummy just because it happens quickly.

2) Because there are strong policy reasons against allowing people to jokingly pretend that they are mafia. Think about it.

[vollkan]

1)
The misconception was always mine, it was always an issue with the speed to me coupled with a plurality of votes. Anyways:

6 Votes went on 1 person within the first page of a 30 man game under an hour and a half. I will not say anything to the reason except that I feel that it was and is simply not enough to lynch somebody, and yet 6 people within such a short period of time felt it as such. I called it out, and people called me out on calling it out. I simply did not see it as a "trap", because if it was a trap, it was a shitty one. What are you trying to capture, people who think quick lynches are stupid? Congrats, you caught me on that one.

The point of the wagon is to get reactions, not to lynch. It is not a trap, it is an information-gathering technique and a springboard for proper discussion.

2) This is a two parter, so I'll assign a and b to this:
a)
Voting a Townie on purpose is never a good idea. Never. The only people who do it are stupid people who have vendettas over out of game shit for some bizarre reason, or scum. I don't know who got it in your head that voting for somebody for reasons other than to kill scum was a good idea, but get it out of there, or admit that you think there is a good time to kill townies in any situation.

That way I can easily sort out who is scum and who isn't.

Okay, think about it this way-
Certain behaviours are unhelpful to town: yes.
It would help town overall if those behaviours are prevented: yes
Therefore, policy should be used against those behaviours: yes

Now, a lynch is not always necessary and, I agree with you to an extent here, I see policy arguments being used a lot more than they should. However, I have learnt not to see policy votes as scumtells, because usually it is just people who have very strong views.

b)
The mafia claim was a joke. Some of you got it. Some of you got butthurt over it. I'm sorry if I don't play mafia your way, but as long as I don't disobey strict orders from the Mod or whoever runs this place, which I haven't (or have and then reformed), then I'm not liable for any last damn principle you have.

This is not a question of "can and can't", but of "should and shouldn't".

You should not make posts which claim to be mafia and identifying your buddies. End of story. You're perfectly allowed to within the rules, but it's horribly bad play to do so.

Furthermore, besides showing yourselves to be humorless, what exactly have I harmed by fakeclaiming scum? Nothing. If I were really scum and that was the list of my scumbuddies, then BM would be in here within the hour to restart the game or soemthing. Your principle is hollow, meaningless, and anybody who follows it is scummy.

Hollow, meaningless and "scummy"?

All I said was "Don't think of it as "rules". It is just that certain acts, if tolerated, will help scum in the long run and, for that reason, there are policy motivations in punishing those acts."

The precise meaning of "punishing" varies from person to person. I don't usually support policy lynches (though I have done so and it turned out the guy was scum anyway), but a lot of people do and, from my own experience and that of others, I have learnt better to treat that as a scumtell.

[vollkan]

People using their first or second post to say "I agree with him vote taff" is not weird to you?

I mean, just contribute people, think for yourselves.

Their rationale for voting you was you making a "good night for us" comment. Do you really expect each one of them to deliver their own individual explanation of what is wrong with such a comment, for a random starting wagon?

[vollkan]

What the ass, Tral?

You're saying a policy lynch is better than actually using logic and reasoning?

I'm sorry, but that's the stupidest fucking thing I've ever heard.

##vote: Trahalindur

The policy is based on "logic and reasoning".

There is never any reason for a townie to claim scum, but there are plenty of reasons for scum to claim town. If we tolerate it, the practice becomes more prevalent and we allow scum to mess things up with WIFOM which, again, only works to their advantage.

Thus, it is to town's advantage if the scum-aiding behaviour is prevented. As a matter of logic and reasoning, the town ought to act to discourage such practices.

[vollkan]

He explicitly said that he would vote someone,

even if he knew they were town,

for joke claiming scum. I agree with voting for someone because they make a scummy move, which is what Tra did. He voted without explaining his vote, which is

especially scummy considering it is part of a bandwagon.

He did explain his vote though:

I don't care who you are or what you believe - if you claim that another player is your scumbuddy, you either need to be replaced or you need to die. Period.

Unvote, Vote: Aisar on principle.

It is a misrepresentation on your part to say that Tar said he would vote for a person knowing them to be town. His exact words were "I don't care". That might imply he would vote a known townie, I can't speak for Tar, but he did NOT say that he would do so.

Also, why is it more scummy because it is part of a bandwagon? That's an assertion which you need to back up with evidence/argument.

[vollkan]

I don't care who you are or what you believe

That is the exact same thing as saying he would vote a known townie.

No, it isn't. I'll leave it to Tar to explain exactly what he meant, but it is not equivalent to saying you would vote a confirmed townie.

It's more scummy as part of a bandwagon because he's not giving ANY reason as to why he voted based on any of Aisar's other actions. He's using the "Oh, he said he had scumbuddies! I'm going to vote him based on only this bullshit rule that I follow, even if it was just a joke!"

You're still saying the wagon is scummy, and I'm still asking "Why?".

As you say, he is giving a reason for his vote. Not one based on suspicion, but it's a valid reason.

And, again, it is not a "rule". It is a conclusion drawn after you properly think through the consequences of allowing anti-town behaviour.

It's bullshit, plain and simple. He's scum.

[vollkan]

Woah...15 pages.

Okay.
page 10 not much
Page 11:
Taff's accusation that ChronX's changing votes is a scumtell is odd. And he softclaims.

FoS: Taffmaster

I don't like the fact that he fishes to find out if someone is the Face of Boe.
Page 12:
I agree with Garnasha that causing chaos to catch scum is a bad tactic. More rot frmo Aisar about "truthers"
Page 13:
Cicero makes a good post and Aisar chucks a tantrum and claims vanilla.

I am keeping my vote on Aisar for now, but Taff is definitely a close second. I'll wait and see if Aisar's replacement is more sane.

[vollkan]

a) boredom
b) annoyance
c) to fish for reactions

a) is not excuse
b) is even more no excuse
c) there are much better ways to get reaction. Ie. a random bandwagon. Claiming scum is pointless inducing of chaos which can only serve to wifom the town and work in scum's favour.

[vollkan]

I'm not trying to defend him as a human being, I simply answered the question.

Excuse or no, if he's town then lynching him would not be beneficial.

You guys play a lot more seriously here but I am used to lots of joke claims and such. I just realise when they're jokes and ignore them. There was a point where it was actually an accurate scumtell on SA to take a joke claim too seriously and harass someone over it, if you were wondering.

I am really getting tired of the "On SA hamburgers eat people" stuff. If you want to end the site bickering (I do as well) then start acting like "players" and stop acting like "players from SA". Cutting the constant identification with SA would do you all a world of good.

[vollkan]

Oh, and as a

rule

, if Xythar doesnt die night 1, he's scum. Just an FYI.

Which forum did you guys say was the one with stupid rules?

[vollkan]

I was more criticising Jamuraan's suggestion that Xythar not being killed was a scumtell.

However, the irony, given the bickering over rules, struck me as worth referring to, as a

joke

if nothing else.

[vollkan]

No way is there another scum "group". Maybe one Serial Killer, but no group. I would say that 99% sure.

I really disagree:

Recently there have been rumours. Rumours of the reformation of the Cult of Skaro, under new leadership.

Rumours of a return of the Slitheen masses.

Rumours of the rebuilding of John Lumic's creations. The 30 of you know one thing- you are not alone. You feel sure that there are innumerable scumbags in your midst, and that

many of them are probably protown.

You know that nothing is certain, until death. The outcomes of this fight for the innocents are as follows. Either win, and save your planet to fight another day, or lose, and allow Earth to become enslaved by whatever foul creatures escape your glance.
God speed, brave warriors.

From personal experience, large theme games commonly have 2 scum groups and SK and the fact that BM even referred to the Slitheens just further bolsters this.

On that note, time for some Whovian conjecture:
The slitheens are able to hide themselves in the skin of their human victims; a technique they used on the show to inflitrate British society. Obviously, that corresponds to the mafia concept of a scum group with safe claims, which possibly fits with the second bit I bolded by BM.

I'm actually rather surprised that there is no mention of the Master, who is a perfect match for a SK. I don't think the Master is ruled out though, just because there is no mention of him.

[vollkan]

But I read BM's opening post not to say that the scum have "safe claims" per se, but that there will be members of the town with scummy sounding role-names, who we might think were scummy if we were strictly looking at their alignment on the TV show.

That's another way of looking at it. Either way would serve to prevent the game being broken by a mass claim (as so often plagues poorly constructed theme games).

[vollkan]

Appeal to authority ? lol ? I have more experience than volkan.

*insert snide remark about join dates*

Because its a dumb tell, that gives an advantage to experienced scum players over new town players as they can use it to manipulate town into an easy lynch which they can later justify by saying "Oh well, he made a scum tell"

You're looking at this the wrong way, Taff.

The reason these things are recognised as tells is because they are mistakes that newb scum make. Hell, I look back now in embarrassment at my first games as mafia.

The town will be sorry because I am a town player, not because of my specific role. I'm not saying I'm a cop or a roleblocker or a doctor or THE Doctor because that would be a dumb thing to do this early in the game if I was, I'm saying I'm town aligned and therefore the town would be sorry in the same way they would be sorry did they eliminate a vanilla townie or a power role because ultimately a townie dead is a loss for the town.

By the way, ##unvote

*headdesk* Again with the soft-claiming. It does nothing for you. Every single player in this game can say "I am town, you'll be sorry". It is useless.

Role claiming when youre 7 votes away from a lynch would be dumb. Why do you keep pressing me to do so?

Cicero did not press you to roleclaim. He told you to stop soft-claiming.

For the record, I would PREFER that YOU stop telling us how town you are, as opposed to you claiming. But if you ARE going to keep on with claiming town, then I want to pin you down to what your purpose in the town is.

Rolefishing. Strange that it's coming from a player like ChronX.

HoS: ChronX

For now, explain this rolefishing ChronX. As far as I can see, you never actually responded to Cicero's questioning you on it.

[vollkan]

@ Vollkan: Maybe I haven't adequately explained why I expressly said Taff should claim. I think he is trying to dance around the truth, by claiming town but throwing off all kinds of other scummy scents.

I think he may have a role which is convertible from town to some other role.

Along a different and possibly contradictory line of thinking, I also think that he might just be scum, who would opportunistically claim something else when/if the town gets him to within lynching range. I would love for him to go on the record as something now, so that he doesn't have wiggle room later. This feeling stems from all the role speculating he has done. Frankly, I think HE is rolefishing with a wider net, not looking for any particular person to claim a role, but looking for a safe harbor he can claim into when/if the pressure builds. He doesn't seem like an awful player, and he has to at least be smart enough to know that he is going to be on the block at some point with all the heat on him.

The bolded is a very strange suggestion.

Can you list the instances of Taff rolefishing please?

[vollkan]

*blink* I completely missed it

This again directed at Mcpaltp. Again, trying to out a role (is the Master a goodie or baddie on Dr Who? Couldn't find mention in the wiki straight off)

Master is baddie.

The Doctor is a timelord and The Master is also one, but The Master is evil. He's sort of like the Doctor's recurring nemesis.

Since this game appears to have the flavour of the revived series:
In his most recent appearance, the Master initially takes the form of a harmless old man but then transforms into The Master. He then travels to earth and assumes the identity of Mr. Saxon, a politician.

As such, I am thinking that an investigation-immune SK would be a likely role for him.

[vollkan]

Did we not win your first game as mafia?

Mini 436 was actually my second, though it ran simultaneously with my first: Mini 358. There, we won without casualties (same as in 436), but my early D1 play was atrocious. I opened up with about 2 pages long of stupid contrived attacks pushing for someone's lynch.

I survived though, after the suspicion got deflected towards townie BM and he got lynched instead

[vollkan]

EBWOP:- The game I referred to in my previous should be "Newbie 358", not "Mini 358"

[vollkan]

The only setup which has really been discussed is the likely number and nature of scumgroups. I don't think there is anything wrong with speculating on that front.

[vollkan]

It allows the scum to spread discussion that could sway the town into voting away from them, especially if they know they're the only scum group. There is no good that can come out of speculating on game setup.

I frankly don't see your logic here. How does us discussing the likely scum groups in any way enable them to "sway the town"?

[vollkan]

Just assume that there's only one scum group. When someone starts planting ideas that there's two scum groups, that gives the real scum reasons to say "Well, even though he voted for confirmed scum to lynch, he could still be a member of ScumGroupB!"

I have serious issues with this.

Yes, in the event there are two scum groups then the fact that people are actively scum-hunting is not a town-tell. That is, unless they can be proven to have been in pursuit of persons from both groups (though even then is still cause for reasonable doubt)

Your suggestion equates to saying that we should assume there is only one scumgroup so that scum-hunting will appear inherently pro-town. There are serious problems with that sort of thinking, given the near-confirmation of multiple scumgroups.

It simpl creates a fictional means by which members of scumgroup B can be held to give off town-tells.

Even if there is a guilty lynch today, the persons on the wagon are not demonstrably pro-town. That is a fact that we need to accept. Assuming otherwise is just shoving our heads in the sand.

Don't even start to discuss if there's an SK or second or third scum group. Just let the game play out, and vote who you think is scum in general. Once we can confirm separate scum groups, fine, let's think it out. But for now? Doing that only hurts the town.

No. Doing so is necessary because if we take your approach and assume there is only one scumgroup, then we are naively making people out to be pro-town scumhunters when the reality could be very different.

I don't think there is a third scum group, but a SK is a perfectly viable probability. The fact it was not mentioned leans against it somewhat, but it is open for contemplation and you have failed to convince me that such contemplation is unhelpful.

[vollkan]

With discussion, comes speculation. When three die, all will talk.

I assume that you were trying to say something, but I didn't quite follow you.

Since you are clearly allowed to quote people, quote which of these is the more accurate reflection of what you meant:

A. Such speculation is good

or

B. Such speculation is bad

Quote neither if neither reflects what you meant. Clarify if possible.

If you are required to post your usual cryptic stuff in addition to a quote, then just insert some gibberish at the end to satisfy the PR requirements.

[vollkan]

Things are stalling already?

As for mcpaltp, I am beginning to seriously question his PR, mainly because it is seriously out of step with the character who he appears to be.

Let's face it, he's been hinting for some time now that he is the Face of Boe.

However, let me draw up some quotes from Boe on the show:
"It's good to breathe the air once more. "
"Everything has its time. You know that, old friend, better than most. "
"I have seen so much, perhaps too much. I am the last of my kind. As you are the last of yours, Doctor."
"He has arrived... find him, before it's too late!"
"Got better things to do today."

Notice anything?

[vollkan]

They're not italicised?

No...more that they don't sound like some pseudocryptic Yoda clone (which seems to be the effect mcpaltp is going for)

It is not conclusive that he is faking it, but I just find it interesting that his posting is so different to what Boe actually sounds like.

On that note, mcpaltp, when you kept saying "You Are Not Alone" around the time I was suggesting the possibility of the Master, were you (quote):

A. Just hinting at your own character.

or

B. Hinting at you having flavour knowledge of there being the Master.

[vollkan]

But no, I did not "notice anything" since I haven't seen doctor who. So please enlighten us why he's out of character, Vollkan.

I've kind of already explained it.

Boe talks in an odd fashion, but not to the extent that mcpaltp is. As I said, I don't think this is proof he is faking (because a PR need not match precisely with the character) but it is just striking me as a little too extreme. Boe doesn't speak in riddles the entire time.

[vollkan]

You can only speculate if he even has a post restriction or not, and/or what its specifics might be. Maybe he was given the post restriction to post as if he were Yoda doing an impression of the character from the show (exaggeration for the sake of humor and irony, but to emphasize the point).

You're completely correct. I was getting carried away in my flavour-theorising.

It's because the axiom has become impatience = scum. so anyone trying to end the day is clearly scummy. We've become trapped in an endless limbo of suck

Which is why I love deadlines.

VOTE Flameaxe

Valueless, No Content, Belligerent posts amount to nothing more than active lurking. You only comment on topics that have no bearing on the game and do so in a way that appears deliberate in its attempt to derail conversation.

Meta, this is largely consistent with what I have seen of flameaxe.

[vollkan]

I didn't say it was. I hate his playstyle and think it completely unhelpful. The worst part is that, if you metacheck, you will see he acts that way as town.

He's another candidate for a policy lynch.

[vollkan]

A loss of a townperson is a loss to the town. Taking such a loss deserves deliberation, and simply policy is not enough.

I know...I'm just in a phase of "being pissed at active lurkers".

I did not notice this. Any confusion I caused was unintentional. I am who I am, and that is all I am.

Thanks for clearing that up.

[vollkan]

And I've got two. Aww, poor MoS...

I've got my votes on Aisar right now, but I think he's actually gone for good.

YAY!

Taff's got a FoS from me already, so I'll vote for both of us MoS

Unvote, Vote: Taffmaster

. I'll wait to see if Aisar's replacement is any better before I change back.

[vollkan]

Random vote?

[vollkan]

Mcpaltp has been softclaiming the Face of Boe for some time. However, I have role-based information (I can elaborate if needed, but I think that it is not a good idea to spill the beans just yet) that gives me reason to doubt that the Face of Boe is even in game, and I suspect that if mcpaltp is telling the truth he is neutral.

Also, I have one more word for you: Torchwood.

I know exactly what you are hinting at ^^ and do not reveal anything more. I don't think it necessarily invalidates mcpaltp's softclaiming of Boe, because what you are talking about was never confirmed on the show anyway and, moreover, it still wouldn't rule them out as distinct game characters.

[vollkan]

If he's false-claiming then he's by far the better target. So how reliable is this information you have? Not very reliable is what I'm sensing. In which case, why did you even bring it up?

It's not a reliable indicator he is lying AT ALL. Tar's line of thinking is residing on speculation about a possibility that is hinted at in the show. It is not even confirmed in the series itself. Even if it were, it would not rule out mcpaltp's softclaiming outright.

For everyone else - I know Daleks, Slytheens(sp?), Cybermen, and Face of Boe now. Are there any other really MAJOR recurring enemies or friends of the Doctor that I should check out?

Face of Boe is not a bad guy.

Major Recurring Enemies:
Daleks
Cybermen
Sontarans (only old series)
The Master
The Rani (like a female of the Master)

The Slitheen have only been in the new series. But their existence is all but confirmed by BM.

Given the pictures we have seen so far also, I am beginning to think that this may be a "new series"-oriented game. I won't rule anything out though.

I maintain that it is most likely the Daleks, the Slitheen and possibly the Master (though the Master is not hinted at by BM)

[vollkan]

Are there any other really MAJOR recurring enemies or friends of the Doctor that I should check out?

I missed your request for friends:

Recurring

Rose Tyler & family
Martha Jones & family
Captain Jack Harkness
Face of Boe
Mickey Smith
Donna

Now, Oman was revealed as Mrs. Moore, a fairly minor character (we are talking a 2 episode arc). That really expands the possibilities well beyond what I can list here.

[vollkan]

Got it also.

Unvote

I intend to look at Cicero shortly

[vollkan]

First up, @Tar why the hell did you just claim!? I have been hinting so many times that the presence of Jack is not incompatible with the presence of Boe. Please make NO further hints as to your actual in-game role.

Secondly, as promised, my analysis of Cicero:
Not a lot of helpful stuff overall, but I could say the same thing for almost everybody. I read over him and most of Cicero's posts don't ring bells for me. Indeed, his arguments against ChronX for the role-fishing are entirely sensible. I get a faint whiff of damage control regarding Jamuraan, but I think it's a tad speculative.

[vollkan]

wtf is tar doing?

Tar is counter-claiming...just without the "counter" part.

[vollkan]

I agree, and I wasnt going to claim. But to be honest, with the thread being locked Ive kind of grown a little disillusioned with the game and with people just coming back and voting for me I'd prefer to take away the easy option so town have to look at other options, rather than waiting 5-10 days for another 8 votes.

I guess I dont need to full claim now?

No, don't full claim.

The thing is, Taff, that claiming at all is bad. The important thing about waiting for votes is that it gather information. That would have been 8 more people who we would have some information on. Instead, by claiming, you prevent the opportunity for the town to benefit from the information gained by the wagon on you reaching a serious size.

[vollkan]

You don't get it.

If you had waited until the wagon got to a serious size and then claimed, we would have more information. Maybe the information would not be particularly helpful, maybe it would. The point is that by claiming, you cut off any hope for people to vote you, thereby cutting off our access to any arguments to scrutinise etc.

Do you understand what I mean?

[vollkan]

Yes. But the way discussion had stagnated over the last few days, and with the thread reopening and me getting a no content vote and another FOS, I wanted to do it. Because to be honest, I'm sick of saying the same things, especially as we are up to page 27

Yes, a No Content vote and FoS. They are potential sources of information and, if you had not gone and claimed, we would be able to have more of them.

Given that a substantial amount of the 27 pages were spam, I think some leeway is granted. My own view is that 20 pages of content or 3 RL weeks is the point at which D1 becomes excessively long. Wait until it's about 33 pages; then you can legitimately order people to get a move on.

[vollkan]

@MoS: You don't have a vote anyway...

[vollkan]

We're at 28 pages and almost 2 weeks. Moreover, we have very little to go on as a result of the efforts by our good friends at SA. It's to be expected that things will be a little dead, particularly given that we have no substantial scumtells because so much has just been squabbling.

As such, it's time for a wake-up wagon.

And, I think the best candidate is Roach.

Vote: Roach

Aisar was a weird player himself who raised a lot of questions, and I know from experience that Roach has a "unique" style of play which is bound to at least generate discussion once he gets going.

We don't have anything else to go on, and I think this might well provide a kick-start.

[vollkan]

All of this wasted time is counter-productive. I may have all the time in the world, but we do not. What suspicions are held? Now is the time to speak. Now more than ever.

The only players who have raised my suspicion thus far were Taff and Aisar. The former has claimed.

The latter has now been replaced by Roach who is, conveniently, very likely to be a good conversation starter.

That makes two damn good reasons for voting Roach.

[vollkan]

Why am I an easy wagon?

Because I know for a fact that putting pressure on you will cause all sorts of reactions which will then spill out and involve people in discussion.

Roach, a question, why should we just give you a clean slate after Aisar's bizarre behaviour?

[vollkan]

Now, vollkan, my previous experience with you has not been a good one. You hammered me. Remember?

Yes, and you were the godfather. What's your point?

Now, I'm not going to be so low to say that you are scum...but then again...

No please do. That's exactly why I wanted to wagon you.

[vollkan]

New game, new slate, new role. That's my point.

Yes, and you are still Roach. That means you are still going to generate interesting responses from people.

I'll prove it: Roach, what do you think of Cicero, Garnasha and mcpaltp?

Do I sense a scum-tell?

No. I just said that I welcome accusations from you because that is precisely how to kick-start discussion.

[vollkan]

The TARDIS isn't actually a phone booth; it's chameleon circuit is just broken which causes it to look like a phone booth from the outside

[vollkan]

A vote without explanation fails to help the town.

Not when it's a random wagon.

The blue box is no mere telephone booth-- it is a police box.

Yes. I said "look like a phone booth". Saying it is actually a "police box" would just confuse him even more.

It's day 1 and there's 1... maybe 2... scum left in the game? oh. this should be fun.

Um..no Cicero. The Slitheens appear to exist from BM's post and they will likely be a full mafia group.

[vollkan]

vote Roach

Ive had enough of Day 1, Aisar behaved like an ass and from what some of you say Roach can be disruptive too. So lets nip this in the bud.

Hmm...Taff is the first person to move it from a random reaction wagon to a serious lynching wagon. As Yos has picked up on, Taff doesn't actually explain why Roach is scum either.

Which is odd, given he has claimed a character who is without a doubt pro-town, albeit very minor.

[vollkan]

"Without a doubt pro-town" is a very strong statement. I agree that Taff's character would normally be considered pro-town, but we shouldn't assume anything from the flavour at this early stage,

I said the character is "without a doubt pro-town". I am not for a second doubting the likelihood of a safe-claim. All I meant was that the particular character he has claimed is one I do not doubt would be a pro-town role (since some characters could be ambiguous).

[vollkan]

Unvote

I was hoping Roach would have played to form and begun OMGUSsing and getting tempers flying. Obviously not.

[vollkan]

How is that an answer to the obvious question posed. It is ok to cast one ininformed vote then? I'll make it more direct:

Why are you jumping on a bandwagon with imperfect information.

Is it because you don't care if a townie gets lynched?

Why are you using weasel words to ignore the original question?

How exactly do you expect him to answer those questions...I mean, you might as well ask "Are you scum?"

Additionally, it's one vote. Your reaction to it is very interesting since you soft-claim town: "you don't care if a townie gets lynched".

[vollkan]

Why are you defending him? Let him answer his own questions don't you think? It's how we generate discussion. That's the joy of a good wagoning. It's also a useful rhetorical way of drawing attention of the town to his scummy behavior.

I wasn't "defending". It was just you asked a form of question that always bugs me.

Additionally - I'm not soft-claiming anything. Everybody is town until proven otherthise. A soft claim is a hint at a power role. not a hint at towniness. Everyone is always soft-claiming towniness by virtue of their entry into the game. What I am pointing out was that that particular vote was opportunistic or uninformed and therefore a potential slip by scum or bad play by a member of the town.

Not in my books. I play on a system of 0% scummy to 100% scummy. Everybody starts at 50%. Some people move down, the vast majority move up. Everyone starts as moderately scummy with me.

This is a matter of playstyle, so I won't argue the point.

As for this "interesting reaction" stuff. What makes it interesting to you? What conclusions do you draw from it?

The fact you did the "you don't care if a townie gets lynched" is interesting. It was a mere bandwagon that presented no real threat of a lynch, and yet you raised the spectre of it. Not scummy, per se, just "interesting".

Are you of the mistaken impression that Axelrod was the only player voting for me or considering voting for me? At what point would my reaction - asking him to cast an informed vote and pressing him when he said he couldn't be bothered - been appropriate by your way of playing?

Again, we are getting down to playstyle.

If people want to fling votes around, I say let them. But when the wagon gets into serious territory, then I will chase them down and demand to know precisely why they think that person, whom they voted for random reasons, is really that scummy.

[vollkan]

1) Who? The player that got replaced or the replacer?

Roach, the likelihood that someone is scum doesn't actually change because they get replaced.

2) To me, each player starts off with a clean slate. That INCLUDES players that have replacements (or, more specifically, the replacements themselves). Is that wrong, so wrong that it warrants me a vote?

No. That's not wrong at all. In a game of suspicion, deception and incomplete information it is a very very good idea to assume that everybody is innocent unless they positively demonstrate otherwise.

[vollkan]

Christ Vollkan, I almost missed your sarcasm and had a go atcha. haha

Huh? Sarcasm? Where?

[vollkan]

I'm not disagreeing with what you wrote. I just don't think it's germaine. Can you explain it to me like I'm a three year old? Or is it just not the quote you meant to quote.

Right. You were trying to explain the "lynch a townie" thing that I have a problem with, because it is effectively "I'm a townie don't vote for me". Then you said "Everyone is presumed townie unless proven otherwise" which is something I object to on a playstyle level.

It was irrelevant to the initial point, which was my problem with the "you don't care if a townie gets lynched", but it was relevant to your response.

In this particular wagon on me though - and in the next little while it's going to be even worse. I'm going to be hyper anal and ask a lot of pointed questions. It's a deliberate attempt to do my part to get the game back on track by squeezing out a ton of information while also getting people engaged. I opened another avenue of discussion with Axelrod and another with you. Anywhere I can find something to poke I'm going to poke it. This game almost died. People wanted it resurrected and I'm up for resurrecting it. That's how I'll be helping to do it.

That's good. By all means, prod away. My only problem was the "you don't care if a townie gets lynched" thing.

Finally - I dont accept your "interesting" just "interesting" thing re the townie lynch point I presume you meant I was being defensive. You should have had the cajones to say it so I could reply to it. I was trying - for once - not to anticipate what would happen. Something that is already plaguing me in this game Very Happy. But I cant reply to an accusation if you don't get behind the thing. Know what I'm sayin'?

Well, that's the thing. I don't consider it necessarily defensive in the scummy sense. I have a problem with people explicitly referring to themselves as townies, but I know not to be presumptive about it. I didn't mean to raise it as an accusation for you to respond to. When I note things as interesting, it just means I may want to come back to them later when I read through things.

So, yes, I said it was "interesting" because I believe it could reflect a defensive effort to derail any growing wagon.

[vollkan]

And yet another person flavourclaims

Can I suggest that we stop this? We've had relatively little actual suspicion and already we have had mclpaltp - Boe, Roach - town (Not to give away name) and now Iammers - town (not to give away name).

It really doesn't help because, in my experience from having been in a sci-fi theme game, flavour is a pretty strong determinant of role in many cases.

People should stop flavourclaiming unless and until they are actually in real peril of being lynched. All this does is, as I am sure I have said already, is castrate potential wagons before they even begin, thereby denying information.

[vollkan]

Vote: Taffmaster

How about explainign the rest of your beautiful logic on how you're not scum with the rest of us?

What? Weirdo.

Refusal to explain merits my votes.

Vote Vote: Taffmaster

If you aren't going to explain, you aren't helping.

[vollkan]

That I have two votes...I thought it would be easier if I wrote it twice to remind BM.

[vollkan]

*HEAD-FUCKING-DESK*

A D1 doc claim...I really cannot express how angry I am and how ridiculous this is.

Unvote, Vote: caps

[vollkan]

caps, what is the basis for the flameaxe/vollkan thing that you keep saying, anyway? You keep ranting on about that Jamuran that got modkilled.

[vollkan]

It's listed in the wiki as wishy-washy voting, 15 points of scummyness. Dunno how reliable that one is. The one game I completed while actively playing attention it worked though. I was mafia in that C9 game, someone posted a votehistory for everybody and I went like "shiitt, hope they don't notice me and Oman(scumbuddy, new IC) being the most wishy-washy voters in the game :S ". Luckily nobody else noticed.

It is rarely a reliable scumtell, imo, especially in a large game like this on D1.

I'd be willing to bet that Albert and Iammars are two pro-towns too caught up in their own beliefs to stand down.

Just a thought.

I'm not entirely comfortable with Iammar's claimed power, or lack thereof, though. With a cult recruiter killed night one,

is it (reasonably) safe to assume

he did not recruit someone? Is the cult possibly still around? With his role being called CyberController, did the cult represent Dr. Who's Cybermen faction?

Just want to make sure

that Iammars isn't looking to be recruited by the cult; but I don't think this is likely with the leader being axed. He may also be unaware of who's looking for him (ie, doesn't know it would turn him into a cult member) and

it's entirely possible it is a pro-town role also.

Answers appreciated, but

all in all, I'm not that worried about Iammars.

This pings me a bit.

You are drawing up concern over Iammars over something highly unlikely (The CL is dead and, moreover, I can't imagine anybody wanting to be recruited by the cult).

Moreover, this whole post is very "softly, softly" (occurrences bolded), in that you are trying to raise this concern without having to take responsibility for it.

FoS: Shteven

[vollkan]

What kind of vig kills N1?

A newb that thinks having a power role is fun (...and I have seen players that should know better make N1 vig kills as well)

A Cult that survives and can still recruit after the Cult Leader is dead is a Cult that is unbeatable. We would have to kill the recruiter and the recruited in the same Night. Most Cults die completely when the Leader dies. If they don't die, they revert back to what they were before. Less common, the recruits stay recruited, but just can't do anything else.

Actually, I thought it was most common that the CRs just linger on. But yes, if the CL dies, it seems unlikely the cult can continue to recruit.

And do you realize how insane the town would have to be in order to justify working against two scum groups, an SK and a cult?

Well...BM's flavour was absent any mention of a SK, though that is not conclusive. The difference could be made up in power roles, though it would have to be pretty "insane".

[vollkan]

Honestly from what I've seen of the setup of this game in particular, it seems BM went out of his way to give scum safe claims, and possibly pro-town players dubious claims. I'm not certain a mass claim would be that helpful, although locking people into one claim would be nice; I've never liked bread crumbing much for that reason.

You're making 2 assertions here:
1) That BM went "out of his way" to give scum safe claims
2) That BM possibly has given pro-towns dubious claims

2) there is no evidence for, and 1) may well be an enormous slip on your part.

Meh. In the interests of a lynch today, I suggest everyone look over IAM and Flameaxe and decide which is the better lynch.

IAM wouldn't be my pick for a lynch today. Similarly, I've seen this same sort of obstinate lurking from flame before, though I would prefer flame to IAM if it came to deadline. Shteven is also a high candidate for me; I want to read over him a bit to determine whether I should upgrade my FoS.

[vollkan]

Honestly from what I've seen of the setup of this game in particular, it seems BM went out of his way to give scum safe claims, and possibly pro-town players dubious claims. I'm not certain a mass claim would be that helpful, although locking people into one claim would be nice; I've never liked bread crumbing much for that reason.

You're making 2 assertions here:
1) That BM went "out of his way" to give scum safe claims
2) That BM possibly has given pro-towns dubious claims

2) there is no evidence for, and 1) may well be an enormous slip on your part.

1

I assure you what I said was very deliberate. Whether it was wise or not remains to be seen; but it was deliberate.

In any case, I thought that at least 1 was well known. From my understanding there was a scumgroup that invaded people's bodies/personas or took over innocents? I believe this is the cybermen, so they may already be handled. I haven't seen Doctor Who, so I don't know if this was the only case.

2

In closing, I prefer Flameaxe to Iammars, so:

Unvote. Vote: Flameaxe

3

I wish I could say I knew he was scum, but sadly he does do this every game*, and yes, it does bother me.

*based on the one other game I played with him.

1) The fact it was deliberate doesn't change the two assertions you are making. Moreover, 1 is not "well known". It was just an idea that got raised after reading what BM had said. If you

know

that 1 is the case, I would love to know how.

2) Explanation?

3) He is a useless lurker; I'm not disputing you there. However, your lack of actual scumhunting is more interesting.

I kind of just assumed that everyone was on the same page here. I expected to get more flak for Vollkan's point 2 than point 1.

Nobody is ignoring BM's flavour. The point is that you have called it "well known". At best, we just formed a theory. It isn't knowledge.

Your empathetic plea seems rather...illogical.

Adel was illogical? Explain the fallacy.

Vote Vote: Shteven

[vollkan]

3) He is a useless lurker; I'm not disputing you there. However, your lack of actual scumhunting is more interesting.

Interesting. Please show me all of the amazing scumhunting Flameaxe has done.

You miss my point entirely. It's an easy bandwagon vote for Shteven: Go after the guy that's doing nothing. Doesn't require any argument or justification. That, I don't like.

[vollkan]

That stupid Jamuraan ruined the game for me. I was so looking forward to Doctor Who mafia and completely destroyed it.