Micro 75: Bureaucracy Mafia (Game Over)

[njoseph]

Maestro:town
Y:Call it intuition.
Processing what this might suggest ...

[Aj The Epic]

Maestro, you aren't satisfied with me making posts that don't fit your own criteria? Or you just can't read it? It makes perfect sense from my end... Which then means I didn't fit your own criteria and that means I need to make something that makes no sense whatsoever to me or anyone else.

Drats. Foiled again.

I actually was leaning towards Maestro being scum on the basis he gave me an impossible task. I can't physically not make any sense, and any vote I make wouldn't be random, would it? Perhaps I vote for Jake from state farm, because I don't like the color red? It appears random, but isn't. It'd be apart of my scheme to take over the planet and banish the color red.

[Maestro]

^ That is silly. Everything I stated on Page 1 was RVS and was not meant to be taken seriously at all (except my desire for a paper, which has been fulfilled).
You continuing to take some off-hand comment about not making sense and blow it out of proportion to make me look Scummy is absurd.

[njoseph]

Whatever zone of the brain that tells Maestro/Shamrock that Jake from State Farm must be scummy for his actions, so far, is an erroneous zone.

[Shamrock]

Maestro, you aren't satisfied with me making posts that don't fit your own criteria? Or you just can't read it? It makes perfect sense from my end... Which then means I didn't fit your own criteria and that means I need to make something that makes no sense whatsoever to me or anyone else.

Drats. Foiled again.

I actually was leaning towards Maestro being scum on the basis he gave me an impossible task. I can't physically not make any sense, and any vote I make wouldn't be random, would it? Perhaps I vote for Jake from state farm, because I don't like the color red? It appears random, but isn't. It'd be apart of my scheme to take over the planet and banish the color red.

No

VOTE: Aj The Epic

[Maestro]

Come back to Jake. I want pressure so he doesn't worm his way out of answering the question I hope to ask.

[Shamrock]

Shh, I'm trying to do a thing here.

[Aj The Epic]

Look, why would I attempt to make you look scummy? The only reason you ever make someone look scummy is to get them lynched. Suggesting such is saying that you feel I'm setting you up, which I'm not. Unless you feel that my post was actually a practical attack on you, meant to make you look bad in front of everyone, which I doubt most people took it that way. Are you trying early to get townie points and feel that I blocked you? All these questions make me wonder if you didn't over react to a harmless post. Well, let me ask you, do you feel that you over-reacted to my post, or do you feel that my post justified said reaction.

I have you down as slightly over-reacting, but if you're ready to get serious and push forward, let's go.

@Shamrock, No what?

[Maestro]

I'm responding what looks like an accusation of Scumminess. Nothing more. If you're not suspicious, say so. If you are, bloody say so. Don't beat around the bush with pointless posts discussing the "motive" I might've had for making Post X or Post Z on Day 1, Page 1. It's not helpful to the gamestate. That was/is my only point...


I do not feel I overreacted. I feel it may have been perceived as such.
I'm pushing forward for pressure on the other paper-holder, Jake from State Farm.

Hop on, the wagon's fine.

[Shamrock]

Hmm, I was hoping for an overreaction that would give me a townread on you. Instead I got a headache. Oh well.

UNVOTE: Aj
VOTE: Jake

[njoseph]

Hmm, I was hoping for an overreaction that would give me a townread on you. Instead I got a headache. Oh well.

UNVOTE: Aj
VOTE: Jake

Is a thought process in your brain telling you that there is a condemning quality to Jake from State Farm's actions so far?

[Maestro]

Instead I got a headache.

My reaction to most of his posts. No offense, A.J.
Reads Newb-something, but not helpful, amIright Shamrock?

P-Edit @Joe: So far, we're barely out of RVS, but we've got an adequate reason for putting down some votes and getting some pressure Day 1, Page 2. What's your oh-so-good reason for witholding your vote and not doing much of anything so far? Formulate your own opinions on the game before asking other people theirs. It makes you look like you're trying to follow, which is Scummy.

[Shamrock]

No. What gave you that impression?

pedit @Maestro: exactly.

[Aj The Epic]

I'm responding what looks like an accusation of Scumminess. Nothing more. If you're not suspicious, say so. If you are, bloody say so. Don't beat around the bush with pointless posts discussing the "motive" I might've had for making Post X or Post Z on Day 1, Page 1. It's not helpful to the gamestate. That was/is my only point...

Do I look like a person to be direct? I use a rubix cube as my avatar, something that is almost impossible for most to solve and still difficult for me. I like to try to bat 1.000 with my accusations. While I could've said it was odd, I don't think that saying that you are suspicious yet would benefit anyone.

But, no. I felt it could've been suspicious HAD you over-reacted. But you didn't, so I'm fine.

Just a sidenote, if you read in the mafia discussion section, you'd have seen that before this game, I posted how I generally look for scum. It is all motive-based. Which is why I use so many circular arguments. I literally type what i think. Not that it gets people anywhere, other than myself.

And sorry for the headache. Unintentional.

Have to go run an errand. Be back in... 20, let's say.

[njoseph]

Hmm, I was hoping for an overreaction that would give me a townread on you. Instead I got a headache. Oh well.

UNVOTE: Aj
VOTE: Jake

Q:

Is a thought process in your brain telling you that there is a condemning quality to Jake from State Farm's actions so far?

Apparent answer from Shamrock:

No

I write "Apparent" to:

Jog my mind about what scum theoretically want to do, which is appear not scummy. Someone mention motive(s), and if we go

with this theoretical, then "scum motives" might have to be replaced with the notion of "hollow town motives."

In other words, the issue is who is trying to look like they are acting with town motivation while not quite doing it bona fide-ly?

Whiteknighting is an example of trying to do something that would prove, seemingly, to be a pro-town decision in the event of a

town flip. Yet the act of whiteknighting is not truly a uniquely town-motivated act.

I think Shamrock's unvote from the person with the cube in his/her avatar is implicit whiteknighting of that person. Wagoning for

the sake of wagoning on Jake and giving a pass because of "headache" would be a subtle way of having a stint of a vote on one

person and then switching to a more opportune vote.

Town does not hope for OVERreaction. They hope for reaction. The fact that Shamrock said "overreaction" implies he thought the

cube guy would go ballistic or something, which implies he really has CERTITUDE of his towniness: the only way ballistics happens

usually is when someone votes someone for a reason that's not holding water. Scum, like Jerry Sandusky (for a pizzazz-y

example), would be more understanding of a accusatory vote because they know they might ooze suspect aurae that merits it. On

the other hand, townies have a hatred of being read wrong and can overreact in tandem with this. Shamrock implies a certitude

of this overreaction's being a potential outflow from the cube guy, an outflow which should only come from a townie, and then

backs off when he doesn't get it, and has a convenient place to park his vote on Jake, and admittedly gave a look inside his mind

that he doesn't actually see Jake as having been scummy.

I think Shamrock too easily got off of the cube guy, which might seem like a townie thing because the claimed reason

was "headache," which an authentic townie might not feel worried to claim, but this claim that might look townie is not actually

townie as it is too convenient for anyone to use in order to just get off from someone that they no longer deem opportune or

practical to be on.

Note: You might be able to tell that I am getting ready to move to somewhere for eating purposes and write this all to get more

meaty stuff out of the way before eating there.

VOTE: Shamrock

[Shamrock]

What...

You've never seen a noobtown overreaction before?

[Empking]

Vote Count 3

Jake from State Farm (2) - Maestro, Shamrock
Breakfast (1) - maverick_alpha
Maestro (1) - pirate mollie
Aj the epic (1) - Robert2424
Shamrock (1) - njoseph

Not voting: Breakfast, Jake from State Farm, Aj The Epic

Just to be clear: It is illegal to quote communications from the mod and it violate guidelines 27886745b & 16, 5 to lynch.

[Maestro]

Holy crap...that wall of text...

[Aj The Epic]

My name is Aj, thanks.

While I do think Shamrock is very strange, this is primarily because he was almost openly encouraging a bandwagon. Is this common practice here? Generally speaking, bandwagons aren't a smart thing, you let someone else basically make arguments for you. It's a scum mechanic so that the leaders get people to follow them blindly or the scum can simply say "ditto" and cast a vote. Stupidly suspicious to me, but I'm not sure if this is common for the site.

Town does not hope for OVERreaction. They hope for reaction. The fact that Shamrock said "overreaction" implies he thought the

cube guy would go ballistic or something, which implies he really has CERTITUDE of his towniness: the only way ballistics happens

usually is when someone votes someone for a reason that's not holding water.

I agree. But I also think that people may overreact simply because they overreact, and it's just something they do. I mean, the whole objective of playing scum is to make yourself look town, so you aren't simply going to have two completely different reactions based on alliance if you can help it. Therefore, if someone overreacts, for the sake of sameness as scum, they'd probably overreact, and vice versa.

[Maestro]

That last part is a very bad argument, IMO.
And bandwagoning is not bad. It's quite common.

[Maestro]

Not only is it not-bad and common, it's a natural (some might say "necessary") part of Mafia games, at least on this site.
Depending on what you mean by the term bandwagoning, that is...if you mean just blindly following a lynch?

That's called "sheeping", and yes Shamrock did that too, but he acknowledged his own "sheeping" and it is my opinion that his acknowledgment of the fact that we are on Page 3 and my reasoning seemed sound enough for a vote was good enough reasoning for him to follow me in putting pressure on Jake.

[Aj The Epic]

Eventually, I see if a well thought out argument is brought up on someone who has been acting strange, and the town moves as a group to lynch said person, I understand that, but only if more than a couple can repeat the points or expand on the initial argument. I feel that if one solid argument is made, even if others re-iterate the point, it's bandwagoning.

I've never used the term 'sheeping'. I just figured anything less than what I described as a bandwagon was also a bandwagon, so by your definition, your conclusion that he is 'sheeping' is correct. Still not a very good positive mark for him.

As for my argument, it's just what I notice. Sure, people react. But they will try more or less to react the same way. Find motives for reaction, or figure why they react. That's why I had originally asked you the questions. I wanted to find your motive without assuming anything on page three.

[Shamrock]

Starting/joining a decent wagon is a good way to push the town out of RVS which is a horrible pointless place and not somewhere the town wants to be for more than a few posts.

It's actually fairly unusual to see a game that

doesn't

start with a wagon on this site.

[Aj The Epic]

Yeah, I generally place my vote towards the middle of the day. If someone is scummy enough, I don't feel the need to have multiple initial votes so I can hammer them off or motivate a lynch. BW is just asking for mafia to present case and lynch. You wouldn't hang a vote in LyLo so easily, so why hang them now? They represent the same amount of authority that they do in the stages before endgame.

I was reading through one of the games currently going on and they are throwing votes like crazy. It'd make me wonder what was happening and also make me lose track of who is testing who. By voting less, you almost keep the water cleaner, and patterns are easier to see. That way, you don't have to say "Well, X trended voting for Y on day __, who turned ___, so be situation, X is ___" when in fact X has voted for every person on the list.

[Shamrock]

I would suggest trying to divest yourself of that attitude; a vote definitely doesn't mean the same thing at all stages of the game. In the early game, it is almost never meant as "I want to lynch this person right this second". And switching votes liberally actually makes things much easier to track, because you can look at the vote counts to see who was expressing suspicion of who when.

Anyway, this is drifting into a pointless theory discussion. What do you think of njoseph?