Mini 1266 - My iTunes Mafia - GAME OVER

[Guttersnipe]

Painted, what's your experience with online mafia that you don't see fishing as a good scum-finding tactic?

What's an alternative to fishing that you see as more useful?

Slandaar, you said in #46 that your scum-read on Sken was "ridiculously strong" (for the time of day), but I haven't seen you give any strong reasons for your suspicion of Sken, only that you would "go out on a limb" and call out Sken as being prob scum for (implicitly) Sken's OMGUSsy reaction to Deas, which you quoted in the post in which you voted for her, and Painted's defense of her. Given the relative weakness of those tells, what was it that prompted you do make such a strong statement about your feeling about Sken?

[DeasVail]

This game got serious fast.

I like

I know!

So, Skenvoy, what do you think of Painted?

Also Slandaar, should I believe that you're town because you've supported me?

The above was my post.

Not because I have supported you, no.

If you agree with the reasoning behind supporting you then you should I think.

I find you pretty town anyways, that reasoning behind the vote on sken was really well thought out, your vote on painted was pretty good too imo.

I'm quite wary of Slandaar. It seems as if he's really jumping onto the whole skenvoy thing and I really don't get why he keeps saying my vote on Skenvoy was well-thought-out/logical, because it wasn't that good at all in my opinion.

Also I get a weird feeling from the posts I quoted. I may have seemed like I could be easily manipulated and Slandaar's post makes it seems liek he could be attempting to manipulate me.

Nothing too serious at the moment, and I find Painted a lot more scummy, but I do suspect Slandaar.

[J]: What doesn't "sit well" with my response? As far as my wagon, I got no idea about you or Noramp. I don't really understand the reasoning behind my wagon. I'm also still waiting for my objections to DJ's analysis to be addressed.

DV: If I understand correctly, an OMGUS vote is a vote for someone who just voted for you? See post 45 for what was wrong with it.
I think it's likely that you're scum, but I'm hoping people will agree that it's at least possible. I said that in response to Noramp's post.
Why do you think an explanation for Sken staying in is required? She had signed up and the game had started. Unless she has a good reason for leaving, she'd stay in by default.

Saying that someone's vote is OMGUS implies that the main reason for them voting is because they were voted for (I'm noob so I might be wrong). Anyway, it seems to me that by saying my vote is OMGUS, you detract from the credibility of my vote.

Of course it's possible I'm scum. Why would anyone think otherwise?

[J]

Personally, I am having a hard time seeing DV as scum really with the way his posts are going.

So DV, to make it clear, you feel Slandaar is manipulating you in a way that looks scummy to you?

[DeasVail]

Personally, I am having a hard time seeing DV as scum really with the way his posts are going.

So DV, to make it clear, you feel Slandaar is manipulating you in a way that looks scummy to you?

Pretty much, but it's mostly just a feeling rather than anything concrete. I just thought I'd share it.

Oh, and to whoever asked about my call-out to skenvoy, it's because I haven't made up my mind up about her yet and I don't want her to think that I don't suspect her at all anymore.

[J]

That was me who asked about Sken I recall. Anyways thank you for your reasoning on Slandaar. So it's gut what you feel about Slandaar. At the moment, my read on Slandaar is null-leaning town. Nothing concrete but I don't mind what he is posting/doing as of late.

[Painted Face of Death]

Seriously? It's under Sken's avatar, just like all the other gender tags. I don't think you missed it, I think you're trying to stir up trouble. This is pretty shady right there.

This is the part that was unsettling to me because it is a really bad point to try and make someone scummy for not recognizing gender of a player. You accuse him of doing it on purpose to make you look worse.

No. It's not that he didn't recognize the gender of a player. It's that he accused me because I recognized the gender of a player

which was clearly visible on every one of her posts.

Within the rest of the post, you don't really fend off DJ but more or less qualify what he has brought up against you which is why I don't like it. It's not really a solid defense.

Are you kidding? I explained clearly in great detail why almost everything he said was completely wrong or a non sequitur. The one thing I qualified was that DV's "fishing" post ended up being useful. If you're still confused please ask more specifically.

As far as the reasoning against me, there hasn't been much given, and what has been given is based on false premises or misunderstandings (not understanding what happened with Sken; not understanding how the chainsaw defense works; thinking there's something fishy about me actively trying to fish out scum by asking for reasons; and so forth)

Guttersnipe, fishing in general can sometimes be a useful tactic. But the way DV did it was very odd and seemed scummy. Specifically, during the random phase he voted for someone and said he had reasons, but didn't say anything else. It seemed very odd, as if he wanted to be able to hide behind the "random" excuse. More useful tactics would either be to fish by giving some reasons, and explaining more fully when asked, or to fish later in the game, or to sniff out scum by looking for faulty reasoning and senseless accusations, which is what I'm trying to do. Right now I have leads on DV and DJ (for post 61; I guess I should put FOS: DJ), and I'm not really sure about anyone else. Possibly also Slandaar, for repeatedly trying to falsely portray me as defending Sken, which was very odd.

[Slandaar]

Slandaar, you said in #46 that your scum-read on Sken was "ridiculously strong" (for the time of day), but I haven't seen you give any strong reasons for your suspicion of Sken, only that you would "go out on a limb" and call out Sken as being prob scum for (implicitly) Sken's OMGUSsy reaction to Deas, which you quoted in the post in which you voted for her, and Painted's defense of her. Given the relative weakness of those tells, what was it that prompted you do make such a strong statement about your feeling about Sken?

I did not understand why painted couldn't consider the theory, its weak and completely depends on what role she prefers playing and even then it might not even be relevant it might just be she could play for whatever reason, but the reasoning behind its pretty good I mean she could have replaced out if she wanted, so shes seen her role and decided to stay in, ok, thats cool, but there is a slight chance the role helped to make her decision. it completely looked like scum jumping to buddys aid, there was no reason to come out guns blazing against that reasoning.

Still, painteds defence posts are not good, for example he says Deas made an issue out of it which is completely exaggerating to say the least.

And he also says the theory is possible, completely nullifying the view that the theory is complete bs but still says Deas is scummy for presenting it. Even if there is a 0.5% chance the theory has any merit its better to make the vote with the reason as it does increase the odds someone is scum over a random vote. This is how I view it, so to say Deas's reasoning is scummy seems a bit ridiculous.

OK I didnt really answer the question; the answer is simple, they seem to have a link, which combined with minor scummy actions made my reads escalate.

[Slandaar]

I hope that answers your question. Would you answer a question or two for me? Why do you think Don's post was a "great summary" given the numerous inaccuracies and mischaracterizations I pointed out? And why did you attempt to misleadingly portray me as defending Skenvoy, when I instead attacked DV for faulty reasoning when he attacked Skenvoy? This really has nothing to do with Skenvoy's guilt or innocence. Even if Skenvoy is guilty -- and I have no clue one way or the other -- the way DV acted is scummy for all the reasons I've explained.

He basically summed up how I have viewed things with a couple minor differences.

Misleading? I am just giving my honest opinion of the events.

You must be able to see how your actions can be viewed as defending sken?

Sken votes you, then votes someone else both of which are 'random' bit pointless right? ok very very minor, but it shows a small connection 'LOLZ IM VOTING YOU PAINTED' 5 secs later 'BETTER NOT VOTE MY BUDDY ANYMORE'... then we get;

Could you elaborate on that, please? It isn't that helpful to just say you think someone is scum without saying why.

WHY IS MY BUDDY SCUM? PLEASE ELABORATE!

and this;

... and apparently Slandaar's not a fan of people providing reasons. Or asking for reasons. Or posting reasons for his own votes, for that matter.

FoS: Slandaar. That was a strange-looking post.

DONT VOTE MY BUDDY!!!

Then you vote Deas again looking like you are defending your buddy.

Can you see how your actions can be viewed as defending sken? especially the fos on me, that was odd imo, anyway, your defence didn't make any sense to me at all, it does a little now, im just not convinced.

[Painted Face of Death]

I did not understand why painted couldn't consider the theory, its weak and completely depends on what role she prefers playing and even then it might not even be relevant it might just be she could play for whatever reason, but the reasoning behind its pretty good I mean she could have replaced out if she wanted, so shes seen her role and decided to stay in, ok, thats cool, but there is a slight chance the role helped to make her decision. it completely looked like scum jumping to buddys aid, there was no reason to come out guns blazing against that reasoning.

Still, painteds defence posts are not good, for example he says Deas made an issue out of it which is completely exaggerating to say the least.

He did, in fact, make an issue out of it. He voted for her based on it. He didn't make a major issue, but it was an issue. I think saying I came out "guns blazing" against the faulty reasoning is an exaggeration. I pointed out the problems with it and watched the follow-up (which pointed to DV being scum).

And he also says the theory is possible, completely nullifying the view that the theory is complete bs but still says Deas is scummy for presenting it. Even if there is a 0.5% chance the theory has any merit its better to make the vote with the reason as it does increase the odds someone is scum over a random vote. This is how I view it, so to say Deas's reasoning is scummy seems a bit ridiculous.

Logic fail.
If there's a 0.5% chance she stayed in because she was scum, and also a 0.5% chance she stayed in because she was the cop or the doc, it does not increase the odds she's scum at all. Sure, both are possible. But we don't know which is more likely.

And keep in mind that by this logic, each of us "chose to stay in" the game. We all could have looked for a replacement. So we have the same information about every player based on the fact that we all chose to stay in. Granted she did express minor interest in leaving the game, but only under certain circumstances that didn't apply anymore (the game had started and the newbie limit no longer mattered).

[Painted Face of Death]

Slandaar: yes, I guess I can see that interpretation. But you have to realize that there were several poorly reasoned attacks and a lot of suspicious behavior relating to Sken. There was your odd post where you quoted a reasonable question of hers and voted her without explanation, which I FOSed. And there were DV's posts making the "staying in" argument.

So anything that anyone does at that point to challenge the poor reasoning could be interpreted as "buddying" Sken. I was online at the time, and as Town it's my job to fish out scum and look at poor reasoning. So I pointed it out.

This seems like a strategy scum might use: make poorly reasoned attacks on someone randomly, and then start a wagon on whoever calls you on the attacks, arguing they were "defending" the first person. If I hadn't criticized the logic fail then, someone else would have and then that person would be getting accused of "defending" Sken.

On a side note, I've made 14 posts, you've made 19, and most players haven't even made 4 yet. Seems like a good strategy for scum right now would just be to sit back and let the town fight it out.

[DeasVail]

Skenvoy doesn't like being power roles by the way. At least that's what she's told me. I also know that she has wanted to be in a game as scum, since she has been town a lot recently. I don't why you can't accept that I had a fair reason to slightly suspect someone during RVS.

Painted, please clarify why you think I'm scum. Possible scum motivations behind my posts would also be nice.

[monk]

VOTE: Skenvoy

You guys are arguing over whether Sken and Painted are buddies and focusing on Painted, meanwhile Sken is not getting the attention she deserves.

[DeasVail]

monk, What is it about Skenvoy that deserves attention?

Also, Painted, regarding your mention of people's post numbers, are you suggesting that we shouldn't discuss? But yes, that would be a good strategy. I don't know how it should make a difference though.

[monk]

More that she's scooting under the radar, if she is likely to be scum with painted shouldn't we try and push more interaction out of the both of them and not just painted?

[Slandaar]

@Painted: heres the thing, if Deas thinks that Sken's favourite role is playing as mafia, then it isnt a logic fail right? this is an assumption I made based on his reasoning for voting.

[Slandaar]

A fair assumption to make I think?

So I don't see the logic fail, like at all.

Sure its based on meta, but noone else is voting sken based on it, I don't find sken scummy because of it but I think its a fair vote for Deas's POV.

[Slandaar]

Granted she did express minor interest in leaving the game, but only under certain circumstances that didn't apply anymore (the game had started and the newbie limit no longer mattered).

See, Deas didn't know this (I think) I didn't until she explained which is after the vote, so I assume he didn't.

I think this is your logic fail.

[Metabot]

/Confirm

Sorry for the late confirm.. saw the thread yesterday but my post seemed to not have gone through.

This is legit my first game of forum mafia! Hi guys.

.... and I see people are already voting for me. Interesting.

[Skenvoy]

PFoD suggested in post 65 that I changed my mind because the list mod said it was too late to out - this is not true. I didn't even see that comment until PFoD linked to it. The first point I need to make (and I don't really give a fuck if it looks like buddying or communicating in the thread) is

PFOD, STOP FREAKING DEFENDING ME. I CAN DO IT MYSELF.

At the moment, I have a town read on Deasveil, cause he's playing completely differently to the way he's played a scum. Slandaar's sticking out a lot, and I think scum would play more cautiously at this stage of the game.

Slandaar: yes, I guess I can see that interpretation. But you have to realize that there were several poorly reasoned attacks and a lot of suspicious behavior relating to Sken. There was your odd post where you quoted a reasonable question of hers and voted her without explanation, which I FOSed. And there were DV's posts making the "staying in" argument.

So anything that anyone does at that point to challenge the poor reasoning could be interpreted as "buddying" Sken. I was online at the time, and as Town it's my job to fish out scum and look at poor reasoning. So I pointed it out.

This seems like a strategy scum might use: make poorly reasoned attacks on someone randomly, and then start a wagon on whoever calls you on the attacks, arguing they were "defending" the first person. If I hadn't criticized the logic fail then, someone else would have and then that person would be getting accused of "defending" Sken.

On a side note, I've made 14 posts, you've made 19, and most players haven't even made 4 yet. Seems like a good strategy for scum right now would just be to sit back and let the town fight it out.

In this post, PFoD basically repeats my earlier argument that scum are probably lying low, but the way he says it reeks of getting attention off himself (and me) - I don't like the way it's posted.

Skenvoy doesn't like being power roles by the way. At least that's what she's told me. I also know that she has wanted to be in a game as scum, since she has been town a lot recently. I don't why you can't accept that I had a fair reason to slightly suspect someone during RVS.

Painted, please clarify why you think I'm scum. Possible scum motivations behind my posts would also be nice.

You forgot to mention that I like playing vanilla just as much as I like playing mafia - you're right about the power roles. That said, I'd

never

/out or /in based on the PM I got. Even if it was the worst role in history, it WOULD NOT affect my choices to stay in the game or not. NEVER.

Oh, and Slandaar, I'd never vote for my scum buddy in RVS. I generally ignore them completely at that stage.

[Metabot]

Just gone through a quick perusal of the posts...

It looks like the main conflict right now is between Skenvoy/Slandaar/PFoD. I think I need a little more time to do an analyses on them, but just by gut feeling, I don't really believe the argument that Skenvoy is maf because would not /in otherwise. I dunno. Is that how things work around here?

DV-> Sken, PFoD sticks up for Sken,

On the other, there are plenty of people, like me, who could be slightly lurking either because of real life issues or something else entirely. Thus, to attempt to be somewhat productive in this discussion, I will try to give an objective view on their behavior:

(listed based on order of appearance in thread)

Internet Stranger
Guttersnipe: made some good questions pg4
Fennin: agrees with PFoD, on "possible, but doubt it" reasoning about DV's vote
Noramp: Voted me before game started, then again later after J did so as well. Votes Painted later
monk: draws attentino to skenvoy (as apposed to PFoD) pg4,
don_Johnson: on page two, puts a vote on skenvoy, and a waste post. First substance post after prompted by J, is a summary questioned by others
[J]: Voted me, likely cause my name was lolzy. Participated in some discussions, asked questions.

Other stuff:
Sland posts a lot, but not that much per post.
Does PFoD have a preferred shortening?

[evilpacman18]

Question?: Is the format of my vote counts ok?

Vote Count 1.2

[J] (1): Skenvoy
Metabot (0): (Noramp)
FightingShadow (0): (Painted Face of Death)
don_johnson (0): (Fennin)
Skenvoy (3): (DeasVail), Slandaar, don_johnson, monk
DeasVail (1): Painted Face of Death
Painted Face of Death (3): DeasVail, Noramp, [J]

Not voting: FightingShadow, Internet Stranger, Guttersnipe, Metabot, Fennin

With 13 alive it takes 7 to lynch
Day 1 deadline is 8:00PM on Nov. 17

Prods: none
V/LA: none

[DeasVail]

Unvote: Painted Face of Death
Vote: Monk

This does not mean that I no longer suspect painted.

[J]

I actually agree with a Monk push after his posts w.r.t. Sken.

Still feeling Paint>Monk though.

[DeasVail]

Just wanting to get this out there: Why does skenvoy have 3 votes?

Don, why is your vote on skenvoy when you said that my initial reason for voting her wasn't that strong and your summary post seemed to indicate you were more suspicious of Painted.

VOTE: Skenvoy

You guys are arguing over whether Sken and Painted are buddies and focusing on Painted, meanwhile Sken is not getting the attention she deserves.

More that she's scooting under the radar, if she is likely to be scum with painted shouldn't we try and push more interaction out of the both of them and not just painted?

monk, what do you actually think? You've somehow managed to avoid providing this. Your posts seem to depend on what everyone else thinks rather than what you think yourself, as if you have no opinion? Firstly, you never actually properly explained why Skenvoy deserved the attention. Secondly, how can we push interaction out of them, if you're saying that this is the plan?

I will try to give an objective view on their behavior

Firstly, what you provided wasn't objective and we have no use for objective views anyway. I want subjective views! You saying that you're trying to give an objective view sounds scummy to me, as if you feel that your view is different from ours because you're scum and know (almost) everything.

PFOD, STOP FREAKING DEFENDING ME. I CAN DO IT MYSELF.

At the moment, I have a town read on Deasveil, cause he's playing completely differently to the way he's played a scum. Slandaar's sticking out a lot, and I think scum would play more cautiously at this stage of the game.

Skenvoy, why do you have such a problem with PFoD defending you?

Your town read on me doesn't seem quite right. Why do you feel the need to express your town read on me (twice) and justify it using meta (twice)?

[Skenvoy]

I have a problem with anyone defending me, particularly before I've had a chance to myself. Firstly, it weakens my own defense, secondly, if the person defending me is scum and they go down, I get a bunch of extra suspicion on me. I've told you before that I don't see how defending someone is beneficial for town, because you'll never know whether the person is scum or not.

You're pretty much the only town read I have at the moment, which is why I repeated it.

A question for you: Why do you ask why I have a problem with PFoD defending me when you

know

I have a problem with defense of others in general?