Mafia 62: Suspicion in Sicily - Game over!

[AlexPaoletti]

/confirm

[AlexPaoletti]

So we're voting Rand just out of bandwagon.. and we're voting Panzer why? Because he jumped on the bandwagon? (Just trying to get the story straight)

[AlexPaoletti]

Yeah I'm with Raffles on this.

vote:N9V

[AlexPaoletti]

Unvote. Vote: Cubsfan4ever

[AlexPaoletti]

Hmm all of this talk about lynching lurkers makes me feel like I should be a bit more active

Lynching mole doesn't seem like a great idea to me. True, we will be able to learn by peoples' reactions, but that will be the case in any lynching. Why not then choose someone who we have any bit of suspicion. Unless you're arguing that mole is lurking because he is scum (which does not seem to be the case.. he's apparently a lazy player or something), a lynch of anyone else would tell us the same amount of information, with at least a slightly higher chance of eliminating scum. As far as lynching mole for the sake of convenience, he has been prodded, and if he doesn't respond, he'll just be replaced, right?

As this is my first mafiascum game, I'm very curious to meet mole.. many of you seem to have strong opinions about him I suppose all this argument about lynching lurkers will be moot when he finally says something.

Also, I'll take this time to ask a quick question about the way this works:
Do we know how many scum there are? I may have missed on the wiki or tutourial whether or not there is a universal rule for deciding that.

Anyway, I'm leaving my vote on Cubsfan, and I suppose a

FoS on ToasterStrudel

.

[AlexPaoletti]

Unvote: Cubsfan4Ever | Vote: ToasterStrudel

[AlexPaoletti]

There's no "logical defense" - it's Day 1. Gotta start a wagon somewhere. Who knew adding a third or fourth vote was so scummy?

Toaster, you're missing it completely. On Day 1, people should be able to provide a logical defense. Day 1 isn't about starting a wagon to get someone out; it's about starting a wagon in order to force people to react, and make decisions based on their reactions. And you definitely reacted in a way we didn't like. No one has a problem with you adding a vote to the wagon. The problem is the things you said in doing so. They just sound scummy. So, a logical defense would be convincing us that the things you said were not things scum in your position would say.

[AlexPaoletti]

Jayln, I have to agree with you in saying that Raffles' logic was faulty. However, I think it is because he misinterpreted what N9V was saying, thinking that N9V was trying to say that it's scummy joining a bandwagon late... that's the way I first interpreted it. I still think N9V sounds scummy, because that is such an odd criteria he uses to make his vote. It sounds to me like he wanted to vote Panzer and made up a random reason to justify it.

Regardless, my vote is sticking with Toaster Strudel, but I would definitely vote ~N9V~ before Raffles.

[AlexPaoletti]

I don't think he's saying there's any kind of "code" you must follow. However, a townie should always be trying to help the town. The attitude you portrayed does not show that; it seems foolish and scum-like. Something scum-like coming from a townie is definitely ludicrous.. unless, of course, you're scum.

[AlexPaoletti]

Hollywoody's convinced me.

Unvote: Toaster Strudel

Vote: Dragon Phoenix

[AlexPaoletti]

What you will learn is that the scum you're trying to chase down will act, if anything, more helpful than the town. They will make sure that each of their points is perfectly explained, they will have back-up and contingency plans, they will rarely slip, because they are making an effort not to slip. So you have two groups. The scum are trying to appear as pro-town as possible. The Town are trying to weedle out the people trying to act as pro-town as possible.

http://www.mafiascum.net/wiki/index.php ... Too_Townie

[AlexPaoletti]

Just got prodded! Sorry I haven't been posting. I've been paying attention but haven't had anything to say. From what I've seen, I think a vote for cubsfan or toasterstrudel will turn out scum. I may have been a little quick to jump to DP, though there's definitely a good argument against him. I'm going to

Unvote: Dragon Phoenix | Vote: Toaster Strudel

[AlexPaoletti]

Hey all. I've had a lot less time to be on as of late. A few things.

Eh. The case against kinkster isn't all that strong, but at the moment I'd rather lynch him then see a deadlilne no-lynch.

I have to agree here. I'll put my vote in last-minute if need be, but I'm leaving my vote on TS, just in case attention switches back to him. I'm pretty convinced she's scum from the early game.

Is anyone paying attention to scotmany? In particular, his voting pattern and his reasoning? He is extremely opportunistic.

Interesting. As I've said before, I'm pretty convinced that you are scum, but this could make sense. I was just wondering if you wouldn't mind sharing a summary of this case against scotymany. Not that I'm going to switch my vote to him this day(if anyone, it will go to kinkster) but I would love something to chew on for Day 2.

[AlexPaoletti]

Going to go ahead and

Vote: Toaster Strudel

again. Same reasons as before.

[AlexPaoletti]

Wow.

Where shall we start?

[AlexPaoletti]

Jalyn = mole, if I remember rightly. It's probably just my gut, but I do sense cooperation whilst keeping enough distance from each other.

In the first quote, regarding whether or not people should mole, I was simply pointing out that it is not justified to vote him based on the fact that he has not showed up. I think we can all understand that we don't want to vote off a player for being

inactive

(keep in mind, that is separate from lurking). With, of course, the exception of putting votes on someone just to see how people react. I now have a bit more of an understanding about that concept, though I still say it'd be better to put the pressure on someone more suspicious instead of an inactive player.
As far as the second quote goes, I don't really understand how that is evidence against me. I was just pointing out fallacy in Jalyn's reasoning. As far as I can tell you, you picked out one vote where I defended mole and one where I disagreed with Jalyn and decided that it was "cooperation whilst keeping enough distance."

One of the most hardcore lurkers.

As far as me lurking, I did not have much to contribute. I was pretty sure that TS was scum, and when conversation switched from the TS/N9V group, I didn't really have much to say. I apologize for not doing as much as I should, and I'll try to be more active from this point on.

basically everyone he did attack turned out to be town.

This is a horrible argument. Everyone we voted turned out to be scum. It takes a majority vote to get lynch people. So really, the majority of people attacked someone who turned out to be town. Are you saying we're all mafia? Thinking someone is scum that wasn't does not make me scum; it means I misjudged.

Alex, tell me who you find scummy the most.

I don't know at this point. I was really sure TS was scum, lol. I'll go through the thread and come up with a name in a little bit.

[AlexPaoletti]

I've looked through the thread and nothing is jumping out of me. If I had to decide on someone I find most scummy, I'd say either hollywoody, based on the point you (Raffles) just made, or Rand Althor, based on lurkiness. Not going to put any votes on though.

[AlexPaoletti]

Which day was that quote? If it was Day 2, the unexplained vote may be DP having seen that he has a gun. We do need someone to investigate this gut thing. I've never played any other games with DP (this is my first game) so someone with experience with him might be able to help.

[AlexPaoletti]

Yeah Spectrum, that is a loaded question ^^

If it was on Day 1, then I don't think DP's accusation means all that much, though since I've not played here long I don't know how customary it is to give a cop a head start. Granted, even if that is the case, he may or may not have picked scum. Spectrum's vote isn't very justified, though, as Raffles pointed out, it seems to be just to gauge reaction.

[AlexPaoletti]

@Alex: Why would having lurkers cloud your thoughts? If there are less activity, much less scummy ones, you've got all the freedom to analyze the past at your leisure. Also, why did this cause you to unvote?

I don't quite understand what you're talking about. I don't recall saying that lurkers cloud my thoughts. And I'm pretty sure I never made a vote today. I think you may be referring to this:

I've looked through the thread and nothing is jumping out of me. If I had to decide on someone I find most scummy, I'd say either hollywoody, based on the point you (Raffles) just made, or Rand Althor, based on lurkiness. Not going to put any votes on though.

If that is the case, I think you may have misread my punctuation. You may have thought that I said "based on lurkiness, I'm not going to put any votes on though." But I was really saying "...or Rand Althor, based on lurkiness.

[Period-New sentence]

Not going to put any votes on though.

If that's not it; I don't know what to say. Is there a post I don't remember making?

[AlexPaoletti]

Mabey its because I don't have much computer time now-a-days? Could that be why I haven't posted much. And hmm, mabey it's because I've forgotten what my post was, mabey thats why I haven't posted it yet. I am human you know,I don't put every waking minute of my life into this game. Actually, it's quite low on my priorties. If thats not good enough for you, then ask for me to get replaced.

That post just reeks of scum. Plus, the fact that you guys pointed out that he has been posting. I don't think it really makes a difference at this point, but

Vote: ~N9V~

[AlexPaoletti]

Hey, finals start tomorrow so I haven't been on much the past couple days. Expect an analysis tomorrow.

[AlexPaoletti]

Ahh I might have to get to the analysis tomorrow or the next day!

Are we just randomly paired to people, or is this supposed to be based on voting patterns and what we've said?

And by the way, wish me luck on Calculus!

[AlexPaoletti]

Analysis of Cubsfan4ever

[Note: any unnamed quote in this analysis comes from cubsfan]


Cubsfan starts the game off on a very suspicious foot:

Vote: Panzerjager cuz of the random third vote.

Now at this point in the game, we are very much in the random vote stage. Trying to defend his vote like this is extremely suspicious.

That is wonderful BS, but look at Cubs fan, he put a third on me for putting a third on rand and justfied it with nonother then "he put a third vote on rand." To me that is far more scummy then N9V for voting me. N9V just lied. Unvote, Vote: CubsFan

you were just too happy to jump on a completely random wagon, which doesn't really make sense. It's nothing major but it makes you look a bit shady.

Here cubsfan uses the same illogical (and scum-suggesting) argument.


Soon after, focus switches to ToasterStrudel, and later switches to the big Hollywoody, DP, Primate, etc. argument. When focus switches off of him, cubsfan waits a week before posting anything, and simply puts a vote on TS. [NOTE: The fact that he voted for TS when the focus was on everyone else could possibly mean one of two things. A: Cubsfan realized he hadn't been active, possibly prodded, and put a vote on the person with the most votes. B: One might argue that a better bandwagon for scum would deal with the current issues. Perhaps he really was convinced, and had just been inactive (not lurking), so he put his vote on TS. I feel it's most likely the former.]


Panzer notices the odd timing of cubs' vote, and puts a vote on him. What brilliant argument does cubsfan bring us?

you're so damn cocky

Ahhh. Okay. Didn't look at it that way. *Sarcasm*


When asked if that was all he had to say, cubsfan responds as follows:

um, it is until you can explain what the hell you meant by "that post screams scum" onto of my "already scummyness".

First of all, Cubs is a little confused here. It was Anglacon that asked "is that all you have to say?" but it was Panzer that laid down these accusations and the vote. These things that Cubs was referencing were in Panzer's FoS post. When Panzer puts the vote on him, he did indeed give a short explanation. It is understandable that Cubsfan wants elaboration, but he should definitely give

some

defense. And his attitude seems to be an attempt to make it personal and gather sympathy, which is a common theme with Cubs. Lucky for him, this is never addressed, and we soon see the end of Day 1. [NOTE: Possible suspicion on Panzer. He simply ignores Cubsfan's request for elaboration and changes his vote to kinkster.]


Unless I missed something, Cubsfan makes

no posts

on Day 2.


Let's look at Day 3:

I wonder how three deaths occured. If there are two mafia groups and a SK we are pretty screwed.

well that server thing fucks things up

That's all he gave us. Day 3 was pretty weak for most people.


Today we have:

well that's a weird strategy Raffles

that is awful vague

Again, not very helpful. Are we going to get an analysis from you cubs?


All-in-all, my analysis of cubs goes like this: During Day 1, he was very scummy. For the remainder of the game, he was largely inactive. Whether this latter activity was lurking or laziness does not really matter, because he is left in the scum side of the spectrum regardless.



Okay, that's all I have for today, sorry. Expect my analysis on Yosarian tomorrow.

[AlexPaoletti]

Do we know how active he is in other games?

[AlexPaoletti]

Analysis of Yosarian2

[Note: any unnamed quote in this analysis comes from Yos]
[Note: This analysis contains less quoting because Yosarian tends to make bigger posts, so I do more summarization. It's much easier to directly quote Cubsfan.]


Yosarian's first vote is on Rand Althor:

Random voting huh, time to zone out till pg.4 or so.

vote:Rand Althor

Seems legit to me. That does have a bit of a scummy ring.


Then the kinkster fun begins, lol.

You started without waiting for me? How rude.

Anyway, let's put a threesome at three votes.

Vote Cubsfan4ever

dont see the point in ure vote at all whats point in evening things up seems like a scum thing to do adding some protection to 1 of your scumy friends

unvote

vote dragon pheonix

Responding to this, Yosarian puts a vote on Kinkster, and when asked why, he responds:

Anyway, DP pretty clearly just added the third vote on for the sake of doing so, as part of a semi-random reaction getting bandwagoning pattern of the type most people have been doing this game, and he wasn't really putting anyone at risk or anything by doing so. Kinkster's reaction to his vote seems a little off to me.

This seems fine to me. I think Kinkster really messed us all up. His poor writing always made him sound mad and stuff... I think it's a legit vote.


For a little while we see Yosarian making some posts asking for clarification, playing devil's advocate, etc. Nothing big, but not lurking at all either. Stays townie in my book.


Without bothering to quote, the game starts to focus on this discussion of what defines "acting town" and whether or not we should lynch people for "unhelpfullness" versus observed scumminess, what makes a good scumtell, etc. Yosarian makes some significant contributions to the discussion, saying that it does make sense that we follow similar scumtells from game to game and that townies should do their best to make the most contributions. This isn't a tell either way I don't think, just thought I'd share this part of Yos's game.


Here we have a nice long post:
http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... 625#544625
Just previous, a few people had been commenting on and quoting heavily Hollywoody's logic. Yosarian follows suit, but puts a vote on him where other people had just FoS'd. Don't really know what to conclude from that; probably nothing.


Hollywoody then abandons many of his earlier arguments, and focuses on the fact that certain players appear to be in collusion. Yosarian notes this, seems to be in partial agreement with certain points, and puts a FoS on DP. Seems pretty town to me... not blatantly picking on one person. Or perhaps the weakness to stand ground and being willing to always move with the swings of the game is a scumtell here? Possibly, though I think it's the former. He does indeed stay "against" Hollywoody, just recognizes certain points.


After a little while, as the Kinkster case starts moving and we're facing a deadline, we get this:

Eh. The case against kinkster isn't all that strong, but at the moment I'd rather lynch him then see a deadlilne no-lynch.

unvote

vote:kinkster

This is perfectly reasonable to me, as I commented in-game.


We soon see the conclusion of Day 1 with the death of Kinkster.


In Day 2 Yos comments that lynching TS might not be bad

Hm. TS might not be a bad wagon; I notice Jalyn didn't mention him at all, which is unusual as TS did get a good deal of attention yesterday, and one scum will sometimes totally ignore a bandwagon on his partner rather then join it or defend

and follows it with a vote after a little while

Really not liking TS's recent behavior.

vote:TS

and then follows with a more detailed explaination
http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... 591#568591
I was convinced TS was scum, so naturally I don't find Yos's actions here scummy. Good reasoning, and no tone of scumminess that I'm sensing.


We soon see the end of Day 2. Another incorrect lynch.


Early in Day 3 he votes me based on his Raffles' proposed evidence against me.

Yeah, reading Alex's posts, I can agree with that; he hasn't really contributed much, and basically everyone he did attack turned out to be town. vote:Alex, at least as a starting point for the day.

In my defense, I quoted him on the "basically everyone he did attack turned out to be down" saying that that was poor evidence. What I only realized now is that he did vote for both townies that were lynched. That's a

little

scummy to me. Not that the people he voted were town, but the hypocrisy in the statement. But from what I've seen of Yos, I might be looking to far into it.


After a little while he puts his vote on Rand, who is being seen as lurky in possibly scummy. He then gets into a discussion with Raffles about the fact that we should try to lynch someone, and though there are other lurkers, Rand seems the best candidate and already has votes.


Then we see N9V get very defensive, and Yos points out the fact that he is voting in other games. A number of people switch their vote to N9V, including Yos.

Well, to make sure we have someone to lynch at deadline, unvote, vote:n9v. Gotta say I don't like Rand's excuse any better then I liked N9V's excuse, though.

Pretty soon, we see the end of N9V.


In the beginning of Day 4 he starts off with a vote back on Rand.

Might as well start out with a

vote:rand althor

, we should have lynched him yesterday.

Makes sense, very consistent with his earlier play.


He then makes his analysis on scotmany, and that's what we have so far.


All-in-all, I'm feeling pretty well about Yosarian2. He did vote everyone off that was town, but that's not really all that surprising; we all made mistakes in judgment there. His reasoning seems to be consistent and logical, and he made a number of unmentioned posts asking for simple questions and clarification... very helpful to the town. Definitely close to the bottom of my scum suspect list (which I don't really have, but if I made one, he'd be near the bottom).

[AlexPaoletti]

Yeahhh,

Vote: Cubsfan4ever

[AlexPaoletti]

I'm sorry, but this

Alex and Anc are both cool I think. Unless they ever voted for me. Then they are not cool. Not cool at all.

is just horribly scummy. Pehaps he might be trying to make a joke? If so, it just shows that he's purposefully avoiding making any contribution to the game.

[AlexPaoletti]

I don't know what to say... I put my vote on. If anyone wants to argue my logic, please, we could use some more activity. We could also use the rest of the analyses (sp?).

[AlexPaoletti]

Sorry just got online and saw the prod. I am going to Vote:Cubs for the reasons I brought up and his analyses on Anc and Alex. I'm thinking if he comes up scum one of those two (or both) is a scummate.

Wait, why would we be cubs' scummates???

[AlexPaoletti]

Both RA and Cubs have been lurking throughout this game quite a lot. That does not totally make them scum. I view them as just some lurkers who aren't paticularly helpful. I'm not really ok with going out and lynching some one just because they are lurking. For a deadline lynch, lurkers are fine, but I don't want to see them get lynched just for lurking.

I would like do find Cubs to be an extreme lurker, my vote on him comes more from the things he did say, as explained in my analysis of him. My vote is not because he is a lurker, though that does contribute to my opinion of him.

[AlexPaoletti]

I agree with Yos; we should be very careful with our votes. We're looking at this game having 3 or 4 mafia, right? If it started with 4, then there are two left. If there are two left, only one other person will have to put a vote on a non-mafioso for them to win.

That being said,

FoS: Rand Althor

. He definitely seems scum, and the defense scotmany gave him suggests it even more so.

[AlexPaoletti]

So, no posts since Saturday. What now. We have to make a decision about who's scum.

[AlexPaoletti]

For scot??

[AlexPaoletti]

Hey just checking in... (prodded ) still very suspicious of Rand.. but he does make an interesting point about how Yos had a different reason each day.. idk. Jury's still out in my mind.

[AlexPaoletti]

Meh, you're right. I guess that is a pretty weak argument against you..

I'm still going to hold off my vote for now.. I'd like to hear a little bit more from Panzer. We need a little bit more input from him today.

Also, is there anything you guys want me to discuss? Can't say I've put forth much today either.

[AlexPaoletti]

I killed he who I thought would be the best candidate for SK. I was seriously considering Raffles, but the fact that he was hesitant to vote Rand surprised me. I figured if he were SK, he would just want to get someone lynched. So very well-played there.

[AlexPaoletti]

So wait, did Raffles get to kill two people?