NY 120: Flash mafia 2. GAME OVER

[Untrod Tripod]

hey guys, sorry I haven't been posting. school really kicked my ass this week so I kind of neglected my games, but this coming week will be better.

because walls of text are bad for good reading, I will divide my larger catchup post into smaller posts. coming next is my ISO analysis of Esp

[Oman]

I think you're wrong, but I'm not going to correct you yet.

Why do you think Prozac-scum copied me?

Once Prozac-scum flips accordingly, his buddying puts you, a townie, square in the frame from the town's perspective - exactly what he (Prozac) set out to do in the first place. My suspicion of Oman takes the same premise.

This is stupid, seriously. Being friendly with Vollkan is independent of alignment, being silly with prozac is the same. I'm quite honestly a social player. I called shanba out on being british and posted pictures of Bert Oldfield in Utopia mafia. It's what I do, who I am.

And buddying to Vollkan is a pointless idea anyway, he is a cold blooded killer. Emotion is not his bag.

[RichardGHP]

Oman, it's not buddying to

vollkan

specifically that strikes me - it's like you're trying to set up as many buddies as you can. Playful RVS votes on someone for being British and posting pictures of whoever are quite different to this. Your ISO also shows elements of coaching.

There's social playing, and then there's you. ISO Post Numbers 1, 2, 3, 5, 10, 11, 13 and 15 are incirimating from my perspective. 8 out of a possible 16 is enough for me.

[Oman]

Uhhh are you serious, I hope this is a joke.

I'll go through them one by one if you want...but like... number 5, really?

[RichardGHP]

Yes, really. I'll take you up on that offer of going through those posts.

Love the new avatar, by the way.

[Untrod Tripod]

ye olde Espeonage ISO

1) What in your view is the purpose of the RVS?
2) How does using a random generator advance that purpose?

1) It generates discussion and instigates reactions. In saying that, it hardly if ever seems to do either of those very adequately.

That's because you have already shown that you do it wrong. Even playing by normal rvs protocols would have been better.

2) If it has a reason, it is not random, thereby missing the point of the stage's namesake.

lol you're missing the point of rvs. If it was completely random then we would never get anything from the rvs.

Personally, I prefer games with a night start so that RVS is much shorter or overlooked altogether. Bloody thing can die in a fire as far as I'm concerned.

Am I correct in assuming that his responses are the bolded portions? Anyway. There's nothing wrong with using a random number generator to get your RVS vote. Calling it scummy is bad. The original RVS votes are completely random. The way people respond to them isn't. That's kind of the point. You use random votes to see how people respond to wagons and try to figure out how people's stances are from pseudo-theory discussion. Then someone gets lynched and you analyze from there. You cannot honestly expect RVS votes to tell you anything. It's not like someone is going to say "vote suchandsuch because I am mafia scum! lol whoops".

Pressure. That is the true aim of rvs. To build pressure and from that things happen. It could be a slip up by a confident scum. Someone falling apart under the pressure or just simply a few small bits like people that don't choose to join the wagon(s).

I agree. Where do you think the pressure comes from?

The proper way is to provide a reasoning. People who post VOTE: suchandsuch for no reason are being anti town. Not anything worth going into but anti town nonetheless. It is those early little tidbits that lead to the first weak cases which leads to pressure which leads us out of rvs. Now I'm glad that we have gotten two great things from this rvs. A wagon on you and this discussion which people can use later on in the day to actually get the game going somewhere.

No they aren't. Are you saying that everyone's RVS votes that are like "vote for this guy because his name is a reference to something" are being anti-town? I guess pretty much everyone I've played mafia with was anti-town. Good to know.

You are taking the name Random Voting Stage too literally. If you want a proper name something like Non-committal Case Stage would be better as that is more accurate.

The point is that you have to start the game out some way so you just vote for people and then people make wagons and hopefully scum slips somewhere. You can't make a "noncommittal case" with no information. That would be dumb.

All I am saying you did incorrectly (albeit saved by other people and not severe by any measure, not that it is really that important but eh.) was that you robbed the town of a potential post that can be analysed. This is magnified by it being your first post and first impressions are very important in mafia because no matter what people will get opinions from the first bit they read.

That is all for my little rantish thing. Let us continue with the game.

This post gets more and more silly as it goes on. First impressions? Robbing the town of analysis? LOL WUT.

VOTE: Vollkan

Because?

You tell me.

What is this I don't even.

ebwop. Contrary to what you believe I think I am playing well. I have two scum. I just need the third and I will have them all. Then it is just a case of convicing the rest of you that I am actually smarter than I appear.

I...just really dislike this post. We'll believe you that you have good reads when you provide them and show us some reasoning. I'm not saying that it's impossible that you've figured out who the scum are, I just find it very unlikely, so yeah, it is kind of a case of convincing people, just not that you're smarter than you appear. I don't think you're dumb or anything, I just don't know what your reads are and I have absolutely no reason to not think that what you're doing right now isn't a scum tactic to appear more valuable than you are.

That is definantly a reason not to post them. Especially when the power of the case is that the scum don't yet know what they are dealing with. There is more than one way to catch scum.

...one of the main mechanics of mafia is that unless you have a confirmed role, everyone suspects you. A scum member knows that people can analyze their posts. This is not news.

Cases that have one very strong point that has a convoluded path is weak by this site's meta. Consider it a partial case with a confusing base that will explaination and backing up.

hmm...I can't think of why people wouldn't like a case that's based on garbled reasoning...

information fishing is like role fishing but for information. Scum really likes to know exactly what the town is thinking.

so does town.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

pretty much the rest of his posts could be summarized as "guys, I am awesome at this, but I won't explain why". Is it really so unbelievable that I don't like that?

[Untrod Tripod]

Um, Oman I love your avatar.

also, in response to Fishy's "point", which I think is

This really doesn't read to me like he thinks Espeonage is scum. Confusing play is simply not a scumtell in the RVS, and to treat it as such isn't something I'd expect from town.

I don't think it's particularly pro town to try to build a case using secret reads by saying "GUYS. I HAVE SECRET READS. WATCH WHILE I DO THINGS THAT ARE FOR THE PURPOSE OF GETTING SECRET READS. DID I MENTION I HAVE SECRET READS".

or was it

Esp's secret reads have been

very

thoroughly discussed. Is all you have to add on the whole game really an almost unexplained call for Esp to do what he's already made it clear he's not doing?

Has he told us what they are? No? Then I guess we're not done. I think it's occupied a significant portion of the game and we should keep talking about it and find out what he has to add. If he's "caught" two scum, I think it would be best if he revealed them. Especially if he is somehow miraculously right.

Either way, I think he should just stop attentionwhoring with his "scum trap" so we can talk about his reads. People will either agree with him or won't agree with him. I think he's wanting to wait until he has an airtight case, which simply won't happen this early in the game. Also, I find it...weird... that you're defending him and calling me scum for not liking what he's had to say, but whatever.

[RichardGHP]

Untrod, what is your read on vollkan?

[mykonian]

votecount

Espeonage (4): Untrod Tripod, RichardGHP, Oman, Vollkan
Untrod Tripod (3): Luchris, Fishythefish, Budja
Porochaz (1): Ojanen
Parama (1): JDodge
Oman(1): mikeburnfire
RichardGHP(1): Porochaz
Fishythefish(1): Parama

Not voting (1): Espeonage

You have 6 days till deadline

[mykonian]

mikeburnfire, Espeonage, Porochaz, JDodge and Budja were prodded

[Parama]

^THIS is a problem.

[Parama]

Mod: You prodded JDodge earlier and he never posted in-thread after the prod. Shouldn't he be due for replacement, especially considering his last post in thread was a week ago?

[Fishythefish]

Poor weekend access; will make a decent post in perhaps 30 hours.

[Porochaz]

Apart from being within the 48 hours for a prod, the prodding rules seem way to strict. Will answer questions dedicated to me later.

[vollkan]

And buddying to Vollkan is a pointless idea anyway, he is a cold blooded killer. Emotion is not his bag.

Damn right.

Oman, it's not buddying to

vollkan

specifically that strikes me - it's like you're trying to set up as many buddies as you can. Playful RVS votes on someone for being British and posting pictures of whoever are quite different to this. Your ISO also shows elements of coaching.

There's social playing, and then there's you. ISO Post Numbers 1, 2, 3, 5, 10, 11, 13 and 15 are incirimating from my perspective. 8 out of a possible 16 is enough for me.

"it's not

vollkan

specifically". Do you think Oman buddied to me or not? If so, you've failed entirely to deal with what has been said against you on this point. This is just evasive.

Richard+1

Likewise for Prozac being "British" and the more general fact that Oman is a social player.

You say "there's social playing, and then there's you" - but that makes no sense. Why is Oman's not merely social playing? What is in the posts you identify that is buddying? I suspect, from the fact that you say "from my perspective" (which, from experience, my brain translates as "I don't have any sensible argument to support this, but I'm going to say it anyway and then whine if anyone attacks me over it that it's 'just a difference of opinion'.") that you can't/won't answer these questions, but I'm beginning to notice a pattern here.

@UT: On the RVS point, as I've already said, I think that RVS is largely useless. That said, from people who don't take that attitude, Espy's treatment of Richard early on is exactly what I would expect. Your criticism of Espy proceeds from the assumption that a truly random RVS vote is valid - but the meta has moved on significantly from that position.

I...just really dislike this post. We'll believe you that you have good reads when you provide them and show us some reasoning. I'm not saying that it's impossible that you've figured out who the scum are, I just find it very unlikely, so yeah, it is kind of a case of convincing people, just not that you're smarter than you appear. I don't think you're dumb or anything, I just don't know what your reads are and I have absolutely no reason to not think that what you're doing right now isn't a scum tactic to appear more valuable than you are.

You find it scummy, or not?

[RichardGHP]

vollkan: No, I do not think that Oman has been buddying to you.

Oman, if you can show me a game where you played like this as town, I'll ease up.

[Parama]

Oh crap I missed this post.

@Parama: Unless I'm mistaken, it's been a long time since anyone said anything much about you. Yes, I voted for you (although tbh, I have no idea whether or not I remembered that when I asked about your wagon). It was on page 2, and it wasn't based off much. I wanted to hear what other people voting for you had to say about why they think you are scum.

Fishy: Do you still think I'm a valid wagon? If not, what has changed to make you think I'm not scum?

[Oman]

There's social playing, and then there's you. ISO Post Numbers 1, 2, 3, 5, 10, 11, 13 and 15 are incirimating from my perspective. 8 out of a possible 16 is enough for me.

1: Noting that I agree with some comments is not buddying, the focus is on Espy, not on those players.

2: I- I just don't get how this is anything other than telling the dude he's scummy.

3: Prozac was right, I was supporting him.

5: Was a joke that Vollkan hates gut and intuition.

10: What don't you like about this? The fishy bit in the middle? let me quote it:

I totally agree with this. Espy has a bad habit of saying "I'm acting in the town's interest, anyone against me is anti-town." And that is how he justifies the vollkan vote that this refers to.

That is "buddying"? Really?

11: What the fuck? How does this have anything to do with my interactions with any other players? Espionage was on the wrong rails with the whole "Avoiding wagons = town" thing and I was correcting him. It's important to remember that people *might* not be lying to you, they might just be wrong, and think incorrectly.

13: I don't know what you want out of this. The bit asking vollkan about his play? I don't like people who play by the numbers, but Vollkan is much more intellectual in his play, more scientific. We just work differently and I wanted to know.

15: This is me calling you out for exactly what you're doing now.

You are silly, your list is silly, and if you stop being silly, we can have beers together and be mates.

[RichardGHP]

The game, please.

[vollkan]

The game, please.

He's already rebutted you, so meta is redundant.

[RichardGHP]

I don't care. As far as I'm concerned, it's not a full rebuttal if he doesn't give me the meta to exonerate him.

[RichardGHP]

EBWOP:

I don't care. As far as I'm concerned, it's not a full rebuttal if he doesn't give me the meta to exonerate himself.

[Porochaz]

I wish this thread had more to it.
I'm keeping my vote on Prozac due to riding on the coattails of vollkan in pressuring Esp+Rich.

Also I haven't changed my vote yet.

vote Richard

For not supplying the reasoning and being generally stubborn about it. I want to know why vollkan unvoted, I see no reason to on the basis of his defence.

I don't like the reasoning for this vote. Especially the "being generally stubborn about it" part.
I don't like how long it took Prozac to change his rvs vote. His reasoning is very pressure-vote-ish but the timing is anything but.

You are right, it took me way too long to change my vote. I am finding currently better to make sure of what Im thinking before I jump in. MBF wasnt under pressure, although probably should be, there was no point in me changing, if he has a problem with it, then he can bring it up with me. The reason I'm voting him is because what he is doing is a crap shoot. He's picking holes in Kevlar and trying to run with it. When it doesnt work with one person he moves onto someone else. Its not fooling anyone.

2, If someone does something page 30, and you had a "base suspicion" on page 4. Im not going to give a rats ass. I do now though.

The fact that you refuse to say anything even under pressure looks scummy.

I don't understand at all what's scummy about that. The stubborness makes more sense if he actually cares about revealing or not. Fabricating a weak case is hellishly easy.

Fabricating a weak case is hellishly easy (oh crap Im repeating things word for word again), fabricating one that people believe and go along with is however a lot harder. Why am I going to be interested on page 30, something he has been holding onto 26 pages. My first question would be, "Why did you not bring this up at the time?" or "Why did you allow town to head on a completely different track when you had what you thought was a golden nugget about that player?"

3, is bullshit. Sometimes the small things count, and the small things can lead to bigger things. Granted Im arguing the opposite side of this argument with Parama but at least it creates discussion.

Ugh in that case you are arguing for the sake of arguing. Which doesn't create useful discussion, it creates useless noise.

I said this wrongish. My point is (and Im aware Im doing this metaphor thing too much) if you are building a bridge in London over the Thames then you have to lay foundations down. Its the same here. If you are going to attack someone and actually attack them, then you actually have to lay the groundwork first or you will have a hell of a lot of groundwork later on. Keeping going with my metaphor, as far as I can see Parama started creating his bridge in Cairo and is still trying to get to the other side of the Thames.

[Porochaz]

Fucked up the quote tags there although its easy to know which words are mine.

[Ojanen]

You are right, it took me way too long to change my vote. I am finding currently better to make sure of what Im thinking before I jump in.

Make me believe this by elaborating on what was the trigger for this mindset of "making sure what you're thinking" before casting a pressure-ish vote. Otherwise this strikes me as typical of the careful scum archetype mindset.

MBF wasnt under pressure, although probably should be, there was no point in me changing,

if he has a problem with it, then he can bring it up with me

. The reason I'm voting him is because what he is doing is a crap shoot. He's picking holes in Kevlar and trying to run with it. When it doesnt work with one person he moves onto someone else. Its not fooling anyone.

75% rhetorics. And I don't get this, at all. Richard's one and only serious vote has been Esp. What do you mean by moving between stuff? I thought you were voting him for not providing reasoning for his read-list.
The underlined sentence is ambiguous, which player is the "he" referencing?

Fabricating a weak case is hellishly easy (oh crap Im repeating things word for word again), fabricating one that people believe and go along with is however a lot harder. Why am I going to be interested on page 30, something he has been holding onto 26 pages. My first question would be, "Why did you not bring this up at the time?" or "Why did you allow town to head on a completely different track when you had what you thought was a golden nugget about that player?"

What? A lot of the reason Esp didn't publish his reads was that he said he

didn't

have a conventional case that people would believe and go along with, in addition to wanting to observe more uninterfered.
Try again:

The fact that you refuse to say anything even under pressure looks scummy.

Why?