Newbie 1761: Welcome to Mafia (Game Over)

[MortFeld]

it's to let him know I disapprove of that use of logic

Why does this require a vote, instead of an "I disapprove of your reasoning"?

Cuz i wanted to place my vote there?

Either we are in RVS or we're not.

If we are in RVS, why did you say Zaraki's reasoning was part of the justification for your vote?
If we are not in RVS, "i wanted to place my vote there" is not a sufficient reason to vote someone.

[XnadrojX]

I don't think i can show you my exact meanings and definitions for the terms I use. However the points we can both look at im pretty sure you can answer.

You are ignoring what I define as random to say "that makes it nonrandom", with random clearly being of your own understanding. You later quoted my definition of random, which means you deliberately ignored it for the purpose of answering that it was nonrandom.

In the third paragraph of 45, you also said that I "either my vote was meaning gless and poi gless, or you have to account for my question in 37". 37's question was not related to the topic at hand. In fact, 37 further shows that the vote on him was unnecessary, which backs up my point on random being meaningless, in that the vote was not required and i chose to use it to signal him, which means I used my vote more as a signal than as a vote, thus meaning that the vote portion of the vote was meaningless, backing up the part of randomness.

PEdit: I said it was mostly random. I did not say we were out of RVS. I did not say i was suspicious of him. I said I was going to keep my eye on him. Theey mean 2 dofferent things. The first means that I have reason to believe he has scum motivation while the latter means that i will be looking at him later on, to see if I should suspect him. I did not consider it a talking point, I co siderwd it relevant as we need players to have an understanding of the game for better chances of winning. The vote was mainly pointless but the point of it was the signal, not the vote. He justification for not voting me should not matter. If you have reservations about me being Town then its not an FoS. My possible reaction should not hamper your ability to vote. And a vote in RVS most certainly should be given up willingly to a person you suspect

PEdit 2: We

were

in RVS, the Zaraki reasoning was not justification for the vote, the vote accompanied the intent to watch him.

You are deliberately ignoring points that i brought up. VOTE: MortFeld

[MortFeld]

So what I'm getting are these points:

You are not suspicious of Zaraki.
Your vote was mostly random - random meaning 'meaningless, pointless, just to use the vote on someone.'
Your vote's secondary purpose was to signal - you had no intent to lynch, and you wanted to use your vote to let Zaraki know that you didn't like his reasoning, but not in a scummy way, just in an accuracy way.

A couple issues.

Why did you say this if suspicion of Zaraki didn't drive your vote?

As I said, mostly a place to stick my vote and only scum wants to use bad logic, although I doubt the colour of his role PM is 100% red, it's to let him know I disapprove of that use of logic

This reads like you believe Zaraki's faulty reasoning was a scumtell.

The contents of 37 are basically this: if you believe Zaraki's faulty reasoning was a scumtell, you must believe that Zaraki deliberately tried to mislead. Only now have you really made it clear that you do not consider Zaraki's faulty reasoning a scumtell. But your 35 makes me think otherwise, and I think my 37 made you backtrack into calling the vote pointless and meaningless.

Also, saying "my vote is mostly random" and then defining random as "for the hell of it" doesn't look good for your Zaraki vote. It was pointless by your own admission - thereby undermining the very purpose of making RVS votes, which is to pressure people and attempt to sort their slots.

Do you still think I'm ignoring your points?

[MortFeld]

The contents of 37 are basically this: if you believe Zaraki's faulty reasoning was a scumtell, you must believe that Zaraki deliberately tried to mislead. Only now have you really made it clear that you do not consider Zaraki's faulty reasoning a scumtell. But your 35 makes me think otherwise, and I think my 37 made you backtrack into calling the vote pointless and meaningless.

Actually the more I think about it, this isn't 100% true. I think you might have been just imprecise rather than contradictory. But I want to see what you have to say to my 52.

[ArcAngel9]

What's up all

Mod, I am on vacation from 2nd Dec 2016 to 8th Dec 2016. Please let me know if thats an issue

[XnadrojX]

Why did you say this if suspicion of Zaraki didn't drive your vote?
In post 35, XnadrojX wrote:
As I said, mostly a place to stick my vote and only scum wants to use bad logic, although I doubt the colour of his role PM is 100% red, it's to let him know I disapprove of that use of logic

This reads like you believe Zaraki's faulty reasoning was a scumtell.

Then you read it in a different way than I read it when I previewed it.

The way you were attacking me did certainly make me feel like you ignored my clarifications.

I need to go now I'll be back in ~15 hours

[Cheetory6]

I do indeed think it is wrong. Look, voting on D1 is wonderful for pressuring scum but it's just so RANDOM. I mean, on D1 we all know that the town outnumbers the mafia by quite a large margin. There is just such a small change that a scum is voted that it's ALMOST, I say almost a gaurunteed town loss. Why should we vote away fellow townies? There's just such a small chance of scum lynching that it isn't even worth it. I'd go as far as to saying random on D1 is pro-scum.

Something to consider in general with mafia is that a vote is not a lynch. You can change your vote anytime you want. So, as town you can vote another town player over the course of the game and have it be worth it, if you gain something positive in return. Votes are your biggest tool in terms of pressure. Even just a little bit of pressure on someone during the early game for simple reasoning can create something to talk about.

If we were rolling a die with numbers 1-9 on it to decide who we were all going to lynch today, you would be right that our odds aren't very good, but who you vote now isn't who you have to vote for the rest of the day.

Does that make sense?

Therefore my vote stays as only scum would want to random knowing that it is súper unlikely to be hit, since town always starts with a huge majority.

Well, ~four-ish people voted randomly to open the game.
Can you talk about why Deicon was more likely to be scum there than myself, Mort or algebra?
Can you also talk about what your experience previous to this game is with mafia?

1)What kind of behaviour do you deem the scummiest (lurk/filler/whatever)?
2)What kind of behaviour would you judge as Townie ?
3)(more off-topic) What kind of roles do you think impact the game the most?

i) People acting against your expectations of their play.
ii) Genuine scumhunting.
iii) Scum roles apparently according to the stats.

3) Mafia roleblockers

IS THIS WISHFUL THINKING?

if you believe Zaraki's faulty reasoning was a scumtell

Where did he say that this was a scumtell?

[Cheetory6]

I have exactly one townlean!
Yay!

[Zaraki_Jaegerjaquez]

1) Yes you are correct.
2) I was planning to, just not with my first post.
3) I vote Deimos because while I hate random, he seems to promote it. While I don't deny it's good for pressuring, random voting leads to a random bandwagon like with Clemency. Like I stated before random lynching and by extensión voting seem very scummy to me.

All in all, I didn't plan to vote on Dei, he just seemed kinda suspicion on the logic.
(P.S. Good morning.)

[Zaraki_Jaegerjaquez]

I do indeed think it is wrong. Look, voting on D1 is wonderful for pressuring scum but it's just so RANDOM. I mean, on D1 we all know that the town outnumbers the mafia by quite a large margin. There is just such a small change that a scum is voted that it's ALMOST, I say almost a gaurunteed town loss. Why should we vote away fellow townies? There's just such a small chance of scum lynching that it isn't even worth it. I'd go as far as to saying random on D1 is pro-scum.

Something to consider in general with mafia is that a vote is not a lynch. You can change your vote anytime you want. So, as town you can vote another town player over the course of the game and have it be worth it, if you gain something positive in return. Votes are your biggest tool in terms of pressure. Even just a little bit of pressure on someone during the early game for simple reasoning can create something to talk about.

If we were rolling a die with numbers 1-9 on it to decide who we were all going to lynch today, you would be right that our odds aren't very good, but who you vote now isn't who you have to vote for the rest of the day.

Does that make sense?

It makes sense. I didn't say you couldn't do it, I'm saying I don't like it. Doesn't have to affect you ya know?

Therefore my vote stays as only scum would want to random knowing that it is súper unlikely to be hit, since town always starts with a huge majority.

Well, ~four-ish people voted randomly to open the game.
Can you talk about why Deicon was more likely to be scum there than myself, Mort or algebra?
Can you also talk about what your experience previous to this game is with mafia?

1) Deicon is more scummy because while I don't like RVS, I accept you guys do it. He went in like, aren't you gonna vote? You need to vote now. I wasn't going to vote with the first post I made. I was planning on no lynching and then voting only if we have a good strong lead. He tried to forcé a random.
2) I have played many a game irl and even some on epicmafia. I usually employ the exact same strategy and it works pretty well.

1)What kind of behaviour do you deem the scummiest (lurk/filler/whatever)?
2)What kind of behaviour would you judge as Townie ?
3)(more off-topic) What kind of roles do you think impact the game the most?

1) Trying to prod into lynching wrong.
2) Asking good questions.
3) Umm... I dunno.

Quote tags fixed. (Equinox)

[karldilkington]

Hi all, cheers for the random votes. I feel loved.

On MortFeld vs XnadrojX, it's been established that Xnad's vote was not 100% random in RVS which is problematic. However, to vote as such and immediately plant suspicion on yourself if you get called out for it would be a very ballsy and very pointless scum move. Although not randomly voting during RVS is rather suspicious, clearly not much thought was put into that vote, which doesn't suggest scum at all. On that basis I get the feeling this debate is town/town.

1)What kind of behaviour do you deem the scummiest (lurk/filler/whatever)?
2)What kind of behaviour would you judge as Townie ?
3)(more off-topic) What kind of roles do you think impact the game the most?

1. Semi-lurking and not being willing to throw yourself right into the centre of attention.
2. Poor logic seems most often to be Townies. Good scum will be extremely calculating and that often shows in their reasoning. It's possible for scum to manufacture bad logic, but it's also bloody difficult to make it convincing.
3. I always thought a (successful) doctor can have a massive impact as they effectively buy the Town another lynch when they prevent a Mafia kill.

I have exactly one townlean!
Yay!

Care to elaborate? Good for town to know what everyone's thoughts are.

[Deimos27]

1) Yes you are correct.
2) I was planning to, just not with my first post.

What are these replying to?

As I stated before random lynching and by extensión voting seem very scummy to me.

All in all, I didn't plan to vote on Dei, he just seemed kinda suspicion on the logic.
(P.S. Good morning.)

You simply cannot make this extension to random voting. As I already said, voting ≠ lynching. In fact, at the beginning of the game it is a helpful tool to generate discussions such as this one.

Anyway, the way Zaraki clings to his vote without reason, despite all the arguments that have been given against it, it's pinging me hard.
VOTE: Zaraki
So what are your reasons that refute #27 and #56?

[Deimos27]

RQS
1) Staying under the radar, dodging questions and participating unmeaningfully to discussion. Lurking I believe is anti-town but not necessarily a scumtell per se. It can, and possibly will affect my reads though.

2) Scumhunting and actively asking questions, in general attempting to participate in a meaningful manner.

3) I don't really think about things like this. RBs and Cops probably.

[Zaraki_Jaegerjaquez]

I had just woken up before I saw the other two pages. Was replying to Mort. Look Dei, I don't like RVS but honestly? Looking at it now you don't seem bad.

Unvote

[Zaraki_Jaegerjaquez]

I just don't approve of your approach to toning. That ok?

[Equinox]

Vote Count 1.02

Clemency (1) - algebra
Deimos27 (1) - Clemency
karldilkington (1) - Cheetory6
MortFeld (1) - XnadrojX
XnadrojX (1) - MortFeld
Zaraki_Jaegerjaquez (1) - Deimos27

Not Voting (3) - ArcAngel9, karldilkington, Zaraki_Jaegerjaquez

With 9 votes in play, it will take 5 to lynch.

The deadline is Tuesday, December 13, 2016, at 9:00 PM EST (UTC-5), which is in (expired on 2016-12-13 21:00:00).

Moderator Comments

ArcAngel9 is on V/LA from December 2 to December 8.

[Zaraki_Jaegerjaquez]

Towning* No Deimos. It's fine Equinox.

[Cheetory6]

1) Deicon is more scummy because while I don't like RVS, I accept you guys do it. He went in like, aren't you gonna vote? You need to vote now.

Spoiler: The Exchange

9 is me trying to sort, 11 is because his reply was exactly what I expected. That there just wasn't a good joke to make about Clemency.

Zaraki where is your RVS vote?

What;s RVS?

This first portion of the game is called RVS or Random-Voting-Stage. People tend to do silly votes/votes with generally simple reasoning to try and get things started off.

Vote: karldilkington
More like karlDEADkington.

Oh well I dunno.

Vote Deimos27

. He's trying to egg people into rando'ing

Seems like a little bit of an exaggeration here, no?

I wasn't going to vote with the first post I made. I was planning on no lynching and then voting only if we have a good strong lead. He tried to forcé a random.

Did you think Deicon was a good strong lead?

Care to elaborate? Good for town to know what everyone's thoughts are.

Maybe in a few more pages.

[karldilkington]

Look Dei, I don't like RVS but honestly? Looking at it now you don't seem bad.

Unvote

This is a very quick backpedal. The second the heat was turned up on you with an actual vote, you relented immediately.

1) Deicon is more scummy because while I don't like RVS, I accept you guys do it. He went in like, aren't you gonna vote? You need to vote now.

Seems like a little bit of an exaggeration here, no?

An excellent point. It looks like Zaraki tied himself into a knot and then looked for a very quick get-out when he sensed the danger.

Care to elaborate? Good for town to know what everyone's thoughts are.

Maybe in a few more pages.

Hmm, ok. It'd better be good though, or there's gonna be questions.

[MortFeld]

@Zaraki, can you please answer my 24?

1) Yes you are correct.
2) I was planning to, just not with my first post.
3) I vote Deimos because while I hate random, he seems to promote it. While I don't deny it's good for pressuring, random voting leads to a random bandwagon like with Clemency. Like I stated before random lynching and by extensión voting seem very scummy to me.

All in all, I didn't plan to vote on Dei, he just seemed kinda suspicion on the logic.
(P.S. Good morning.)

Are you misunderstanding my questions? For reference:

I asked you if you thought voting randomly at this stage was wrong. This answer seems to be saying that lynching at all Day 1 (almost always) favors scum.

1) Am I correct that you believe this?
2) If so, why not vote No Lynch to start the game?
3) Why did you vote Deimos if you believe Day 1 lynches favor scum?

If the answer to 1) is yes, this either means that your scumread of Deimos is somehow very strong, or that the suspicion threshold for a vote is very low. I'm still not seeing how believing that Day 1 lynches favor scum is consistent with you voting anyone - perhaps the answer to 1) is not in fact yes?

if you believe Zaraki's faulty reasoning was a scumtell

Where did he say that this was a scumtell?

It's possible I could have misread, but this is where I got the idea that he scumread Zaraki to some extent.

As I said, mostly a place to stick my vote and only scum wants to use bad logic, although I doubt the colour of his role PM is 100% red, it's to let him know I disapprove of that use of logic

[MortFeld]

Hi all, cheers for the random votes. I feel loved.

On MortFeld vs XnadrojX, it's been established that Xnad's vote was not 100% random in RVS which is problematic. However, to vote as such and immediately plant suspicion on yourself if you get called out for it would be a very ballsy and very pointless scum move. Although not randomly voting during RVS is rather suspicious, clearly not much thought was put into that vote, which doesn't suggest scum at all. On that basis I get the feeling this debate is town/town.

Not understanding this analysis. Xnad made a vote with poor justification and then tried to explain it away as random - explain why this is a ballsy and pointless scum move? And why does "little thought" behind a vote, i.e. a poor explanation for said vote, suggest town?

Look Dei, I don't like RVS but honestly? Looking at it now you don't seem bad.

Unvote

This is a very quick backpedal. The second the heat was turned up on you with an actual vote, you relented immediately.

It was a quick backpedal. Do you think it was a scummy backpedal or a towny backpedal?

[MortFeld]

Don't like Karl's 68 at all.

[MortFeld]

Just noticed Cheetory and I a similar question to Zaraki. As the questions are still somewhat different I think he can answer both.

[MortFeld]

@Zaraki, can you please answer my 24?

Sorry, forgot to delete this when I noticed he had. Feel free to ignore.

[karldilkington]

Hi all, cheers for the random votes. I feel loved.

On MortFeld vs XnadrojX, it's been established that Xnad's vote was not 100% random in RVS which is problematic. However, to vote as such and immediately plant suspicion on yourself if you get called out for it would be a very ballsy and very pointless scum move. Although not randomly voting during RVS is rather suspicious, clearly not much thought was put into that vote, which doesn't suggest scum at all. On that basis I get the feeling this debate is town/town.

Not understanding this analysis. Xnad made a vote with poor justification and then tried to explain it away as random - explain why this is a ballsy and pointless scum move? And why does "little thought" behind a vote, i.e. a poor explanation for said vote, suggest town?

Let me clarify. Reading Xnad's 27, he doesn't try to explain his vote as random after the fact, he starts by claiming it's RVS but then states that it's not completely. This could be a ham-fisted scum gambit trying to draw suspicion on someone else at a very early stage but if that's true then it's way too obvious and poorly implemented. As for poor vote justification, scum will obviously be thinking very carefully about what they say. Surely they would be cleverer than putting themselves in the firing line for bad reasoning (it could of course be a double-bluff but for my stated reasons I don't think that's what Xnad is doing here.)

Look Dei, I don't like RVS but honestly? Looking at it now you don't seem bad.

Unvote

This is a very quick backpedal. The second the heat was turned up on you with an actual vote, you relented immediately.

It was a quick backpedal. Do you think it was a scummy backpedal or a towny backpedal?

On balance, given it's hastiness I would say it was a scummy backpedal. I'll let Zaraki explain himself before I start voting though.

Don't like Karl's 68 at all.

Specify.