Newbie 656 Game Over!

[thinktank]

What's L_1?

It means there is just one more vote needed to lynch you. So basically, as close as you can come without it being too late.

Indeed. L-1 means minus 1 till lynching person. Ie, Think is at L-1. He has the required umber of votes to lynch minus 1. This works for any such number not only L-1. Talks of L-2 or even L-3 are common but usually nothing further because its kind of useless after that.

[ShadowLurker]

okay wel iv played mafia before but not online. I role claimed because I thought there was a time limit on the day phase and I was in line to be lynched. Now I'm not going to say anymore because I want to keep my role ambiguous to the Mafia.

Your role is hardly "ambiguous" now that you've already claimed vanilla townie. And if you're not going to explain your actions because you're not under pressure, then I'll gladly add a vote.

Unvote Vote Drifter

Yes, you generally claim when you are a L-1 because in most cases that's probably the only thing that's will to save you.

And even then, it might not
Depends on the circumstances really.
Although while we're on the subject, I'd like to mention that it is never beneficial for a townie to fake-claim a power role.

This is incorrect as a absolute rule, but correct in 99% of cases in Newbie Games.

[NabakovNabakov]

Vote Count as of Post 101

lifeofpie (1):

Artem-

owsianko

Drifter (2):

lifeofpie, ShadowLurker

thinktank (1):

Drifter

Sion (1):

Fenchurch

Not voting (4)

Chapter 5, RandomGem, thinktank, Sion

Artem Replaces owsianko!

[Fenchurch]

okay wel iv played mafia before but not online. I role claimed because I thought there was a time limit on the day phase and I was in line to be lynched. Now I'm not going to say anymore because I want to keep my role ambiguous to the Mafia.

Your role is hardly "ambiguous" now that you've already claimed vanilla townie. And if you're not going to explain your actions because you're not under pressure, then I'll gladly add a vote.

I think that Drifter

was

explaining his actions, in the post that you just quoted. If you want more of an explanation, you may have to ask more specific questions.

In other news, Happy Scumday thinktank!

And welcome Artem! You may notice that some of us found your predecessor a little suspicious, although perhaps mainly due to a lack of activity and/or reasoned voting. It will be good to hear your take on the game so far!

[RandomGem]

Hi also Artem! Anything you want to say, or will you be a lurker like

some

people? *whistles and looks around*
Is a scumday the anniversary of the day you join the forum?
Anyway,

I say this, because my feeling is that most of you attacking Drifter are barking up the wrong tree. To me, his actions come off as newbie town more than they do scum.

I believe this too, and think his actions don't really indicate that he is scum, but on the other hand, it can't exactly be ignored because then if he was scum he would have a free ride for the whole game. Such is the game...

[Artem]

Confirming the replacement of owsianko.

Unvote

until I do a read-through.

Will post later tonight or tomorrow.

[Fenchurch]

I think that Drifter

was

explaining his actions, in the post that you just quoted. If you want more of an explanation, you may have to ask more specific questions.

Having thought about it some more, I have another specific question.
Drifter, did you read any of the threads on these forums, before coming into this game?

[Artem]

I'm not liking RandomGem's self-vote and then pointing finger on himself and going "Lurker". How is that pro-town, unless you're telling us that you're scum, in which case:

Vote: RandomGem

.

I say this, because my feeling is that most of you attacking Drifter are barking up the wrong tree. To me, his actions come off as newbie town more than they do scum.

If this wasn't day 1, I'd say that it's a cop telling us to back off an investigated townie. But it

is

day 1, so the statement begs the question: why are you so convinced that Drifter is town?

Personally, I've seen plenty of newbies inadvertently claim vanilla, but what bothers me is Drifter's

yeh, I see what you mean apologies to the townies for that. Unless I turn out not to be a vanilla townie.

...followed by erratic attempts to cover-up the claim. Why? Also, is he saying that he's not apologizing if he's scum?

FoS: Drifter

I also don't like Sion bandwagoning Drifter with nothing better than a "Too bad" argument in 53.

FoS: Sion

Finally, owsianko's vote on lifeofpie appears to be, as he said, aimed to get a reaction. When lifeofpie gave a joking reaction to a joke vote, owsianko unvoted. How is that scummy again and why are you trying to paint it scummy?

FoS: RandomGem, Fenchurch

[Fenchurch]

But it

is

day 1, so the statement begs the question: why are you so convinced that Drifter is town?

Because, to me, his actions so far seem like newbie town more than newbie scum. But no, I'm not saying I'm certain; I just don't think I'd be willing to lynch him based on the game so far. And I guess I'm not convinced by ShadowLurker's attacks, because he doesn't seem to have the read the thread thoroughly before making his posts.
Drifter is not off the hook as far as I am concerned; I have been asking questions based on his behaviour - and I am still waiting on the answer to my latest one.

yeh, I see what you mean apologies to the townies for that. Unless I turn out not to be a vanilla townie.

...followed by erratic attempts to cover-up the claim. Why? Also, is he saying that he's not apologizing if he's scum?

FoS: Drifter

Well, Drifter's post here is in response to thinktank's criticism of the claim:

Usually a bad idea to claim this early and with so little pressure because it ends up helping scum. Especially in newbie games with setups as such, there is the possibility of 1 cop, 1 doctor, both or neither. So if there are both in a game, and there are usually two scum, so in a game of 9 people the scum have a choice of 7 people who to kill at night. If you've claimed vanilla, they could take pick the other 6, significantly increasing their odds of hitting a power role.

So, having been told that his early vanilla claim could help the scum, Drifter tries to revert it "oh, well actually I might be the cop or doc, who knows". Sure, the backtracking is much too late, but again, I think that it fits in the context, and with what we have seen of Drifter's character.

Finally, owsianko's vote on lifeofpie appears to be, as he said, aimed to get a reaction. When lifeofpie gave a joking reaction to a joke vote, owsianko unvoted. How is that scummy again and why are you trying to paint it scummy?

FoS: RandomGem, Fenchurch

It was more to do with the fact that owsianko's

only

involvement so far was to throw about a couple of random votes, and no more posting besides that. You're right, it's a weak case; and owsianko's replacing out proves now that he had either chosen not to or was unable to continue with the game.
To be honest, I'm still not not sure either way whether being inactive in the game can be counted as a sign of scumminess or not. On the one hand, there are plenty of legitimate, real-life reasons which might cause someone to be inactive. On the other, not posting means you prevent the other players from being able to analyse you, for scum-tells or for town-tells.
And so on the plus side, it looks like you are a lot more verbose than owsianko was, and I'm glad for that.

[Drifter]

I think that Drifter

was

explaining his actions, in the post that you just quoted. If you want more of an explanation, you may have to ask more specific questions.

Having thought about it some more, I have another specific question.
Drifter, did you read any of the threads on these forums, before coming into this game?

tbh no, i mean i looked at the rules and the wiki.

Fair enough I understand why I'm sus, at least I have got a few reactions out of people.

[lifeofpie]

I'm not liking RandomGem's self-vote and then pointing finger on himself and going "Lurker". How is that pro-town, unless you're telling us that you're scum, in which case:

Vote: RandomGem

.

I say this, because my feeling is that most of you attacking Drifter are barking up the wrong tree. To me, his actions come off as newbie town more than they do scum.

If this wasn't day 1, I'd say that it's a cop telling us to back off an investigated townie. But it

is

day 1, so the statement begs the question: why are you so convinced that Drifter is town?

Personally, I've seen plenty of newbies inadvertently claim vanilla, but what bothers me is Drifter's

yeh, I see what you mean apologies to the townies for that. Unless I turn out not to be a vanilla townie.

...followed by erratic attempts to cover-up the claim. Why? Also, is he saying that he's not apologizing if he's scum?

FoS: Drifter

I also don't like Sion bandwagoning Drifter with nothing better than a "Too bad" argument in 53.

FoS: Sion

Finally, owsianko's vote on lifeofpie appears to be, as he said, aimed to get a reaction. When lifeofpie gave a joking reaction to a joke vote, owsianko unvoted. How is that scummy again and why are you trying to paint it scummy?

FoS: RandomGem, Fenchurch

Aw, I feel left out. Eh, you can't really FOS both Sion and Drifter, because one bandwagoned the other (unless it's an elaborate ploy, which I suppose is possible). Who do you think is scummyer?
Also, where did Drifter say he's not apologizing if he's scum?
It could be that Fenchurch and RandomGem (well, Gem has been lurking) are trying to spark conversation.

[Artem]

To be honest, I'm still not not sure either way whether being inactive in the game can be counted as a sign of scumminess or not. On the one hand, there are plenty of legitimate, real-life reasons which might cause someone to be inactive. On the other, not posting means you prevent the other players from being able to analyse you, for scum-tells or for town-tells.

One way to tell if somebody is lurking is to see whether they are posting in other games. Another way is to request a prod and if the player picks up the prod but doesn't post, then they are likely avoiding posting on purpose.

Aw, I feel left out. Eh, you can't really FOS both Sion and Drifter, because one bandwagoned the other (unless it's an elaborate ploy, which I suppose is possible). Who do you think is scummyer?

Well, just because I FOS two players doesn't mean that I think both to be scum at the same time. One scenario might involve Sion being scum and bandwagoning Drifter for hypocritical reasons, another scenario might involve Drifter being scum who attempted to claim vanilla and then backtracked, realizing that it's anti-town.

If I had to rate the players I FOSd from most to least scummy, it would probably be:

RandomGem
Sion
Drifter
Fenchurch

Also, where did Drifter say he's not apologizing if he's scum?

Well, if I'm reading this right, then here:

yeh, I see what you mean apologies to the townies for that.

Unless I turn out not to be a vanilla townie.

Drifter should probably tell us what he meant there.

[chapter 5]

Hmm. I think I'm going to

vote: Fenchurch.

[RandomGem]

I'm not liking RandomGem's self-vote and then pointing finger on himself and going "Lurker". How is that pro-town, unless you're telling us that you're scum, in which case:

Vote: RandomGem

.

The vote on myself was just a joke vote. Note that I took it off when people started going after Drifter.
I can't exactly defend myself on the lurking, but note that I am posting now.

Finally, owsianko's vote on lifeofpie appears to be, as he said, aimed to get a reaction. When lifeofpie gave a joking reaction to a joke vote, owsianko unvoted. How is that scummy again and why are you trying to paint it scummy?

FoS: RandomGem, Fenchurch

Interesting how you took my vote to not be a joke and theirs to be a joke when I did the opposite. I was thinking that if it was a joke vote, then he wouldn't mind the joke OMGUS. But instead, he took off his vote, which to me made it not look like a joke vote and that he was trying to take pressure off himself.

Hmm. I think I'm going to

vote: Fenchurch

Uh.... why?

[Fenchurch]

One way to tell if somebody is lurking is to see whether they are posting in other games. Another way is to request a prod and if the player picks up the prod but doesn't post, then they are likely avoiding posting on purpose.

That is true, although a little difficult to apply it to our game, since many of us are newbies and therefore not posting in any other games. Also, I understand that some mods have a policy to prod, but not post the results... not sure how common this is though, and anyway it hasn't come to that yet with anyone in this game :)

Hmm. I think I'm going to

vote: Fenchurch

Uh.... why?

Ditto that! chapter 5, would you mind giving any of the reasoning behind your vote?

[Fenchurch]

tbh no, i mean i looked at the rules and the wiki.

Fair enough I understand why I'm sus, at least I have got a few reactions out of people.

Can you remember where you first came across the term, "vanilla townie"?

[Artem]

Finally, owsianko's vote on lifeofpie appears to be, as he said, aimed to get a reaction. When lifeofpie gave a joking reaction to a joke vote, owsianko unvoted. How is that scummy again and why are you trying to paint it scummy?

FoS: RandomGem, Fenchurch

Interesting how you took my vote to not be a joke and theirs to be a joke when I did the opposite. I was thinking that if it was a joke vote, then he wouldn't mind the joke OMGUS. But instead, he took off his vote, which to me made it not look like a joke vote and that he was trying to take pressure off himself.

Here's the sequence of posts related to owsianko's vote:

vote: lifeofpie

Because it seems he dislikes Family Guy, or maybe he may think I'm scum for liking Family Guy.

Yeah, I think you're scum for liking family guy...

I never said I thought your name was weird..? It's definitely not as weird as some others I've seen.

Anyone have any pie?

Unvote

I was just looking for a reaction.

First off, I'm not seeing the OMGUS. OMGUS implies voting for no reason other than because the subject of the vote is voting you back. To my knowledge, lifeofpie was voting Shadowlurker at the time. Second, owsianko's vote was fishing for reaction and it appears that not getting anything worthwhile, owsianko decided to unvote. I think that keeping his vote on lifeofpie for a joke reason would have been more scummy as it would have been a convenient way to "park" a vote.

I don't really understand how your self-vote falls under the same category. Sure, it was during a joke phase, but what were you attempting to achieve with it?

Okay, have access again... (not that it's made a difference so far)
Who are the IC's?
---
You can vote for yourself? Cool!

unvote, vote: RandomGem

He is

so

obviously scum.

Voting yourself is a great way to start a WIFOM argument and I see no benefit from it to the town.

Same thing with calling yourself out for lurking? If you're looking for somebody to put pressure on you, then here you go.

[lifeofpie]

I think he was joking. It was that phase of time. You yourself quoted me, who wasn't being altogether serious.
Voting yourself is also a thing a newbie does. 'Hey, this is unusual, so I'll do it.'

[Artem]

I know that newbies sometimes do that sometimes, but why continue to point scummy things out in own behavior?

Also, is there a reason you're answering for RandomGem?

[RandomGem]

The point with owsianko's vote is that even though he

said

he was fishing for a reaction, I'm not completely sure if he was. To me, it seemed too early to be doing that.
For my self-vote, I wasn't trying to accomplish anything. That's why it's a joke. And isn't the way to deal with WIFOM to ignore it for a clearer argument?

[Fenchurch]

Also, is there a reason you're answering for RandomGem?

I also see RandomGem's self-vote as a joke. And that's not answering for him, it's giving my opinion on the matter. He has already chosen to defend it as a joke, surely the rest is just whether you believe him or not. Is there a disadvantage to posting when you believe another player's defence? (This isn't a rhetorical question.. I'm actually curious, is there?)

Your argument about RandomGem's "lurking" posts I can agree with a little more; since at the time he wasn't really lurking, and posting about it, comes across as showing a little too much concern about his own behaviour.

But I still feel that the most scummy action so far is Sion's bandwagonning, especially given that his only post since then is just to remove the offending vote, with no effort to add any reasoning or discussion to the game; I am happiest with my vote on him.

[NabakovNabakov]

Vote Count as of Post 120

Drifter (2):

lifeofpie, ShadowLurker

thinktank (1):

Drifter

Sion (1):

Fenchurch

RandomGem (1):

Artem

Fenchurch (1):

Chapter 5

Not voting (3)

RandomGem, thinktank, Sion

[lifeofpie]

Also, is there a reason you're answering for RandomGem?

Yes, I can't think of anything particulary fulfilling to add to the conversation. I suppose this is kind of scummy, so shoot me. You should let me voice my opinions. It should also assist you in making a desicion on whether I'm scummy or not.

[Artem]

Not saying this is what's happening in this situation, but the problem with answering for other players is giving them ideas, which they may sometimes happily adopt. As such, the behavior should be discouraged.

For example, if RandomGem didn't already state that his vote was a joke in 113, I could point out that lifeofpie gave him the idea in 117.

@RandomGem: so, suppose your self-vote was a newbie doing the unusual move. What was the point of calling yourself out for lurking?

[Artem]

Also, chapter 5 still owes us an explanation for his/her vote.