Mini 1405: The Simpsons Mafia (Game Over)

[Lord Mhork]

Ztife, what kind of flavor would help with this? In fact what kind of restriction would this be? "You may only vote for yourself."? "Your first post must be a self vote."? The former is just about impossible to envision barring a really, really sadistic bastard of a mod, and the later seems like an awful lot of effort and a cop out for the mod. "You must do this highly controversial thing with your first post. And you can't tell anyone about it. "

It makes absolutely no sense to me. More likely this is just Klick being klick.

[D3f3nd3r]

It was asking for opinion. If a lot of us wanted to name claim, why not?

I gave my bit on the self-vote stuff...I don't see why Klick hasn't posted since his self-vote.

[The Rufflig]

Looks like everyone has confirmed.

VOTE: Guille2015
for not stopping by and saying 'hello'.

[guille2015]

Hello

Vote MHork

Klick's self vote is null for him, he does it in pretty much every game he is as both Mafia and Town. It's usuallu used to catch tells like yours.

VOTE: Klick

For the self vote. Scum shall go down in a flaming mess.

Psst... Tell your buddies to bus you now and we'll go easy on them.

Sounded a bit like RVS so I was going to let it slide for a while.

But then you confirmed as a sure thing. Saying you vaguely remember him do it seems like a cop out for when or if he flips town. But I do remember. He did that as Town in Open 455 and you said nothing about it. Actually you went after the player who voted for Klick because of that. I remember you were town in that game.

[Plessiez]

DoubleJD and havingfitz's decision to ignore the discussion in favour of placing random votes is noted.

D3f3nd3r -- have you played in (or read) many theme games? (The games I've seen have been designed so that mass name-claims aren't very helpful; scum usually either have fake names to claim or actually do have town-sounding role names).

In general, discussion about whether or not anybody is forced to self-vote should wait until Klick returns to the thread. However, D3f3nd3r is right that it's a bit strange Klick hasn't been around to explain his vote -- he has been posting elsewhere on the site.

VOTE: Guille2015
for not stopping by and saying 'hello'.

This is a better wagon than the Mhork one, I feel, given the next post:

But then you confirmed as a sure thing. Saying you vaguely remember him do it seems like a cop out for when or if he flips town. But I do remember. He did that as Town in Open 455 and you said nothing about it. Actually you went after the player who voted for Klick because of that. I remember you were town in that game.

This is a misrepresentation. Both of this game and, funnily enough, of the game you link to.

(1) At no point has Mhork "confirmed as a sure thing" his vote on Klick. Quite the opposite, really: in 21 he says he is "36% sure" (so not very sure); he begins 22 by saying "oh, and more serious.." (with the obvious implication that he

wasn't

serious in the earlier post).

(2) In Open 455 Klick did self-vote, and another player (Disturbed_One) did vote for him. But Mhork didn't vote for Disturbed_One

because

of this -- in fact, he only voted Distrubed

after

D_O, under some pressure, moved his way

away

from Klick. Mhork actually says "Dude ... I was with you up until that horrid last vote". That is, rather than voting D_O for his Klick vote, he implies he supported it.

[D3f3nd3r]

All games under my belt are normal or games with special mechanics (where all VTs get the same PM).

FYI, I recall Klick replacing into my Open 444 as Scum in early Day 1 (person being replaced-site flaked before the game). I don't think he did that.

[Ser Arthur Dayne]

Vote Count 1.01

• Klick (3) -
  Klick, qwints, Lord Mhork
  
• guille2015 (2) -
  Plessiez, The Rufflig
  
• Lord Mhork (2) -
  DoubleJD, guille2015
  
• Baby Spice (1) -
  havingfitz
  
• DoubleJD (1) -
  D3f3nd3r
  
• qwints (1) -
  saulres
  
• havingfitz (1) -
  Ztife
  
• saulres (0) -
  
  
• Plessiez (0) -
  
  
• sword_of_omens (0) -
  
  
• D3f3nd3r (0) -
  
  
• The Rufflig (0) -
  
  
• Ztife (0) -
  
  
  
  
• Not Voting (2) – Baby Spice, sword_of_omens

With 13 alive, it takes 7 to lynch.

Deadline is ~11am EST Jan 13

sword_of_omens is V/LA till the 26th.
havingfitz is V/LA till the 27th.

[/i][/area]

[Klick]

I can recall two games where I self-voted at the start: The one guille linked, and Open 434, in which I was Mafia but looking for a second Mafia.

D3f3nd3r, you should know that I was spending all of my attention looking at the Survivor challenge. I stayed up doing that for four hours and then hit the hay.

I like guille's #28. I don't necessarily agree with it, but I like it. He's an early town read.

VOTE: DoubleJD

I also question why you didn't comment on anything that was already going on. That's counterproductive.

[DoubleJD]

Anything = 1 thing = a null self vote. That theory was a dead end, and i like my mhort vote better than it.

Your exaggeration here was weird, but you're encouraging attacks on yourself which is town. You get town cred.

[Klick]

I'm sorry, I didn't follow that. Can you explain more?

[DoubleJD]

DoubleJD and havingfitz's decision to ignore the discussion in favour of placing random votes is noted.

D3f3nd3r -- have you played in (or read) many theme games? (The games I've seen have been designed so that mass name-claims aren't very helpful; scum usually either have fake names to claim or actually do have town-sounding role names).

In general, discussion about whether or not anybody is forced to self-vote should wait until Klick returns to the thread. However, D3f3nd3r is right that it's a bit strange Klick hasn't been around to explain his vote -- he has been posting elsewhere on the site.

VOTE: Guille2015
for not stopping by and saying 'hello'.

This is a better wagon than the Mhork one, I feel, given the next post:

But then you confirmed as a sure thing. Saying you vaguely remember him do it seems like a cop out for when or if he flips town. But I do remember. He did that as Town in Open 455 and you said nothing about it. Actually you went after the player who voted for Klick because of that. I remember you were town in that game.

This is a misrepresentation. Both of this game and, funnily enough, of the game you link to.

(1) At no point has Mhork "confirmed as a sure thing" his vote on Klick. Quite the opposite, really: in 21 he says he is "36% sure" (so not very sure); he begins 22 by saying "oh, and more serious.." (with the obvious implication that he

wasn't

serious in the earlier post).

(2) In Open 455 Klick did self-vote, and another player (Disturbed_One) did vote for him. But Mhork didn't vote for Disturbed_One

because

of this -- in fact, he only voted Distrubed

after

D_O, under some pressure, moved his way

away

from Klick. Mhork actually says "Dude ... I was with you up until that horrid last vote". That is, rather than voting D_O for his Klick vote, he implies he supported it.

I can see 5 things i said in that post, which point is confusing?

[DoubleJD]

DIdnt mean to quote :/

[Lord Mhork]

Ack. V/LA 'til after Christmas. December 27th

[saulres]

@Plessiez

: Your 29 bothers me. Why is this:

VOTE: lord mhork

Smilely faces equal scum.

"noted" as a "decision to ignore the discussion in favour of placing random votes" but this:

Looks like everyone has confirmed.

VOTE: Guille2015
for not stopping by and saying 'hello'.

"a better wagon than the Mhork one" and not a "decision to ignore the discussion in favour of placing random votes"?

Why the buddying of Mhork so much?

VOTE: Plessiez

[Plessiez]

Your exaggeration here was weird,

but you're encouraging attacks on yourself which is town

. You get town cred.

Why is "encouraging attacks on yourself" town? I don't understand why you would think this.

@Plessiez

: Your 29 bothers me.

I don't understand the basis of your confusion.

DoubleJD made a single random joke vote instead of commenting on the discussion. This is (clearly?) a different thing to commenting on the discussion a bit and then later placing a random vote, which is what Rufflig did (his very first post was a reaction to D3f3nd3r's 10). I treat them differently because they are obviously different.

My "buddying" of Mhork consists of pointing out that guille2015's reasons for voting him seem contrived. Do you not agree with this?

[Baby Spice]

Hi. Xmas, birthday, etc.

Vote Defender

First posts of Que?

[The Rufflig]

I guess I've become rather blase about self-votes to open a rvs. I really didn't assign any value to it. I also don't assign a lot of value to meta cases made by players I don't know to other players that I don't know. A feeling on ennui comes over me when presented with a meta case that requires me to read other games - sometimes I overcome it, but don't expect a favorable vote from me because of a meta case.

[saulres]

Will get back to this tomorrow. I want to be more awake when I reply lest I say something stupid because I'm tired. (I have a history of doing that...)

[saulres]

This is (clearly?) a different thing to commenting on the discussion a bit and then later placing a random vote, which is what Rufflig did (his very first post was a reaction to D3f3nd3r's 10).

Huh. I don't see this as commenting on the discussion, I see it as being completely meaningless, hence, an RVS vote. Same thing with his second vote which is the one you specifically didn't call "ignoring the discussion".

My "buddying" of Mhork consists of pointing out that guille2015's reasons for voting him seem contrived. Do you not agree with this?

Hm. In retrospect I do agree that was your argument. I think I was thrown by your use of the word "better" in "This is a better wagon" and misinterpreted it. I'm still bothered by it though. Something doesn't sit well with that.

[qwints]

Christmas is all around me. V/LA til tomorrow.

[Ztife]

Ztife, what kind of flavor would help with this? In fact what kind of restriction would this be? "You may only vote for yourself."? "Your first post must be a self vote."? The former is just about impossible to envision barring a really, really sadistic bastard of a mod, and the later seems like an awful lot of effort and a cop out for the mod. "You must do this highly controversial thing with your first post. And you can't tell anyone about it. "

It makes absolutely no sense to me. More likely this is just Klick being klick.

I was thinking along the lines of a character restriction rather than post restriction, on hindsight I would agree that a first post restriction wouldn't add much to the game (flavour-wise or etc.) We now know that Klick has done this twice, once as mafia and another time in a game that is still on-going..

So what does Klick being klick imply? Pro-town move or pro-scum?

[D3f3nd3r]

Lots of V/LAs.

FYI, Klick said in 32 that he self-voted during a challenge in a Mish Mash game that required almost constant attention.

[guille2015]

But then you confirmed as a sure thing. Saying you vaguely remember him do it seems like a cop out for when or if he flips town. But I do remember. He did that as Town in Open 455 and you said nothing about it. Actually you went after the player who voted for Klick because of that. I remember you were town in that game.

This is a misrepresentation. Both of this game and, funnily enough, of the game you link to.

(1) At no point has Mhork "confirmed as a sure thing" his vote on Klick. Quite the opposite, really: in 21 he says he is "36% sure" (so not very sure); he begins 22 by saying "oh, and more serious.." (with the obvious implication that he

wasn't

serious in the earlier post).

(2) In Open 455 Klick did self-vote, and another player (Disturbed_One) did vote for him. But Mhork didn't vote for Disturbed_One

because

of this -- in fact, he only voted Distrubed

after

D_O, under some pressure, moved his way

away

from Klick. Mhork actually says "Dude ... I was with you up until that horrid last vote". That is, rather than voting D_O for his Klick vote, he implies he supported it.

1) Perhaps not a sure thing, but the intent that it was serious, even if just 36% was clear. The words "More Serious" means that the previous was serious.
2) This is correct, I was remembering just the vote. After reviewing the post his intent seemed that Klick's vote is scummy. Regardless, I am satisfied with were I am.

So, are you saying that his vote is nonsense and should be treated as such?

[Plessiez]

Vote Defender

First posts of Que?

Er. I'm afraid I don't know what this means. Can you explain?

My "buddying" of Mhork consists of pointing out that guille2015's reasons for voting him seem contrived. Do you not agree with this?

Hm. In retrospect I do agree that was your argument.

"In retrospect" you agree that was my argument? Okay. But my question was meant to be: do you agree that my argument is correct? What do you think about guille's reasons for voting Mhork? (Is he right, and if not, is he merely mistaken or is he knowingly misrepresenting the facts?)

We now know that Klick has done this twice, once as mafia and another time in a game that is still on-going.

Klick was town when he self-voted in 455 (and that game is over, obviously). His self-voting therefore seems entirely null. However, having read 455 a bit more, I have a queston for Klick:

In Open 455, Klick was town and self-voted. A town player and a scum player both joined the wagon: Klick reacted to both of them (and voted for the scum). Compare that to this game, where both qwints and Lord Mhork voted for Klick after his self-vote. So far he's been quiet about both.

So

Klick

-- what do

you

think about the people who joined your wagon? Any read on either yet?

(Also, Klick, you're an alt of kondi, right? Otherwise Open 434 doesn't really give any meta for your scum play... assuming the answer to that question is 'yes', I'll read that game later.)

1) Perhaps not a sure thing, but the intent that it was serious, even if just 36% was clear. The words "More Serious" means that the previous was serious.
2) This is correct, I was remembering just the vote. After reviewing the post his intent seemed that Klick's vote is scummy. Regardless, I am satisfied with were I am.

Not persuaded by either of these responses, really. Don't want to waste much time on (1) -- I think it's general usage that introducing a topic as "more serious" in no way means the previous topic was serious. Quite the opposite, in fact - "more seriously" often implies "more serious [than a thing that is not being taken seriously]".

But arguing about English usage seems like pedantic time wasting. I maintain that it's obvious Mhork was no more serious than qwints; both votes were firmly tongue-in-cheek.

More interesting is (2). You see, I can understand half-remembering an event from a previous game and not bothering to read it to be sure. And I can understand linking to a previous game to support a point. What I don't understand is doing both at once. You provided the link to Open 455 -- did you really not read over it to make sure you'd remembered correctly? Why not?

So, are you saying that his vote is nonsense and should be treated as such?

I'm not sure whose vote you meant by "his vote". If Klick, see above. If Mhork ... well, certainly I'd have felt happier about his vote if qwints hadn't already voted for Klick before Mhork did. My suspicion (even before reading Open 455, which seems to support the idea) is that town are more likely to be the first to vote for a self-voter. Scum dont want to make waves. A hypothetical Scum!Mhork, though, might have seen qwints's vote as a sign it was safe to vote for Klick without drawing attention. So I think Mhork's vote is largely meaningless as an alignment-tell, yes (while qwints's vote is a very slight point in his favour).

[Klick]

Just noting that I read your questions and will answer them after my Marathon game is over.