Newbie 995 .:|Game Over|:.

[Nina]

/confirm

[Nina]

Hello everyone, this is my first game as well.

*do you prefer random votes or random questions?
*do you think it is good to share your town reads? how about your scum reads?
*at what point do you think it is beneficial to roll-claim?

*I prefer random questions because they are more interesting and, if they are thought out, will force people to give stances and opinions that can later be looked back on.

*I think it is good to share scum reads, for obvious reasons. I think town reads should be given with discretion because it puts a target on people's backs.

*Along with the aforementioned: If you can prove someone is false claiming through your own claim.

I prefer random votes, because random questions don't tend to move us forward.

And random voting does?

[Nina]

No lynches are never good, ESPECIALLY D1. You should never have a no lynch D1

The only reason Im voting no lynch right now is that, as of now no one has anything to go off of.If every one random votes right now you have a 2/9 chance of hitting a mafia member OR a

7/9

chance of killing a useful townie.

Random votes are neither fatal or pivotal. The point, if there is any point, of random voting is to incite reactions so that you

do

have something to work off of. Voting no lynch concedes to, but does not solve, the problem of no leads.

You could also always withold your vote and wait. By voting no lynch I think you've bought yourself a ticket to some NO LYNCH IS BAD sermons.

[Nina]

Lol, I think I just rebutted my own comment to CallMeLiam. To clarify, I contest that an RVS moves the game forward anymore than a RQS.

[Nina]

What bickering?

I'm suspicious of anyone who votes no lynch, and Salazel seems transparent enough to try and push it as scum. However, he has mentioned in two posts that he sees it as a momentary measure. Though he is defensive, I feel like scum would be more conscious of the way they come across -- the OMGUS, the lack of tact, the transparency in "I was afraid it will make me a target" and the frivolousness of "McGriddles taste funny" indicate someone more guileless than scheming.

He is suspect to me, but in the way most newbies often are.

[Nina]

Nina, you seem very knowledgeable/experienced for a claimed first timer, why is this?

Thank you? I joined two months ago, and though I didn't sign up for anything because I was away for the whole of July, I did read my fair share of games.

[Nina]

I don't agree with the reasons Katsuki and CallMeLiam cited for voting Salazel.

For me, it's not the fact that Salazel doesn't agree with the RVS -- it's the fact that his reason for voting no lynch is that there are no leads, and that reason is very weak, because he could have a) withheld his vote and/or b) been proactive and created leads through tactics such as RVS and RQS.

However, this might not even have occured to him. The fact that he wasn't receptive to the explanations but rather submitted to them angrily is to his favour because, once again, I think the scummy route would have been to lay down and plead inexperience. It all depends on his degree of transparency, but I've seen a lot of newbie mislynches and I don't feel like voting for him is optimal.

He has definitely deserved a

FOS: Salazel

, though.

That said, I find the best way to get out of RVS is to start wagon like this and watch what happens.

Vote: CallMeLiam

because of the redundancy of observing a bandwagon while telling everyone that you are doing so, which will only put people on alert. I feel like you really said it as a disclaimer: "I'm pushing for Salazel (but just in case, I'm voting because bandwagons are good)."

[Nina]

I would also like a response to the RVS vs RQS in terms of pushing the game forward, CallMeLiam. It's not really related to the game anymore, but I'm curious.

[Nina]

You shouldn't be afraid on voting in the RVS because the chances of it growing into a full on lynch are pretty slim. That said, I find the best way to get out of RVS is to start wagon like this and watch what happens.

Nina, I'm an IC. It helps if I explain my actions so the new players see what I'm doing.

The "explanation" seemed a little superfluous. You gave reasons for your vote and then added this comment which sets up a situation where, if Salazel is lynched and flips town, you can explain your vote away with the additional reasoning of "it was the best way to get out of RVS". At the time of reading, I thought it was an underhanded way of freeing yourself from future responsibility.

That said, my vote on you was hasty. I spent a lot of words waffling over Salazel but would only FOS him. I felt like this made me hypocritical because I adovcated proactiveness, so I jumped on you as soon as I read that post. The above sentence still gives me weird vibes, but you are not the worst of the lot.

*

Xine, I'm bewildered by your Post #53. I'm assuming you were adding side comments to my posts, because the comments did not seem to address the contents directly. More importantly, I feel like you barely explained your vote on McGriddle -- please do so. Did you misread? What did you think he was apologizing for? And why would it be scummy?

*

Salazel, I've given you A LOT of "noob slack," but I did say this:

The fact that he wasn't receptive to the explanations but rather submitted to them angrily is to his favour because, once again, I think the scummy route would have been to lay down and

plead inexperience

.

And you did follow it up with this:

So your saying that even though this is my

first game EVER anywhere

, that I shouldn't be afraid that Im going to by lynched on the very first day??

So when a IC decides that a

Newb is scared in is first game ever

, he must be scum? And then When an IC puts the same

newb

on a bandwagon and he gets even more nervous he now is playing nervously HE MUST BE SCUM! Or could it just be that Seeing as how

this is my first game ever

,that I'm nervous and

Id rather not be lynched on my first day

unless its for a good reason and AHA! he's nervous! doesn't seem like a good reason to me.

I don't think nervousness is a great reason either, especially when it comes to first games, but this is a spitball of AtE, ultra-defensiveness, pleading inexperience, overreaction, OMGUS, etc.

Here is my reason for finding you suspicious. Can you respond to it as well?

For me, it's not the fact that Salazel doesn't agree with the RVS -- it's the fact that his reason for voting no lynch is that there are no leads, and that reason is very weak, because he could have a) withheld his vote and/or b) been proactive and created leads through tactics such as RVS and RQS.

[Nina]

That was a big fucking post. Sorry.

HI VREN,

what made you think that we were still random voting? What is your opinion of Salazel? You've never played before either, so can you relate to his nervousness about being lynched on D1? Do you think you would react the same way as he has, under scrutiny?

HI DEVIOUS_BOOKWORM

, what stops you from posting more? How do you feel about lurkers? How do you feel about the phrase "Lynch All Lurkers"?

HI ZED

, you seem like you have things to say. Who do you find most suspicious at this point? Which person's vote (and reason) do you agree with the most, at this point? The least?

[Nina]

Zed, I don't think there will be concrete reasons on our Day 1. Your post could be paraphrased into "I'm not sure," so I'll wait until you've found whatever, but one thing: You said that you had no real suspicions but Liam's reasons were weak and Salazel was overly defensive and etc. -- do none of these things manifest into "real" suspicions? Why are Liam's reasons weak if you were questioning Salazel yourself in the same way? It reads like you don't want to committ to a side. I believe that you're not sure at this point, but the faster you put yourself out there, the better.

vote on McGrid...lol has always seemed false to me, especially when the author did not (laugh out loud) not just here in mafiascum land, but web-wide... weak case, yes, page 3=not much to go on.

His placement of lol still does not explain your reference to it as an apology. Once again, what did you think he was apologizing for and why was it incriminating?

*

McGriddle, I'm surprised that your vote on Salazel was a "joke," seeing as you cited defensiveness as the main reason and that is rather valid. What was the purpose of your joke vote? Do you find his defensiveness not actually suspicious, then?

I assume you don't find Salazel scummy, seeing as you defended him after saying your joke was a vote. Can you fully explain your views on him? Why is he not scum? The conundrum for me is that, from the skill level exhibited so far, Salazel's abuse of his inexperience seems like something he would do as both town and scum.

[Nina]

I'll respond to the other things another day, I just wanted to get the big post over with.

Salazel, you didn't even touch on the question I asked you. I don't have anything profound to say in response to your latest post, because it is the same argument you've been making this whole time (I am a newbie!). I wanted your defense for the original reason I found you suspicious -- which was

not

overdefensiveness.

I found you suspicious because:

1) You voted no lynch
2) Your reasons for voting no lynch were weak (no leads, RVS is ineffective)

You never would respond to my issue because the "bandwagon" started after and you were too busy degenerating or whatever. You still haven't. So I kind of want to vote for you.

I don't blame you for being nervous, I don't blame you for being afraid, and I've said so. But you could be nervous and afraid a little more quietly, you know. You're using it like a weapon. You've got it the wrong way around when you say "

im being singled out by people who are not newbs, for acting to newbish.

" How can anyone use 'newbishness' against you when you are using it to protect yourself? I don't like the way you twist things to fit your dramatic arguments.

You've got both hands steadied on your inexperience like a bloody sledgehammer, and I realize it's been like that from the very beginning:

Seeing as how I'm brand new and am still learning I would like to vote for Vote: No lynch today

Your preemptive defense shows that you were prepared to come in and defend yourself and every action under this cover.

You passed your no lynch vote under this cover

. The fact is that almost everyone else in this game is a newbie and no one has come close to exhibiting their newbishness as aggressively. Townies don't need to; they've got nothing to protect or hide. I feel like you came in with a tactic.

I did defend you earlier on, along the lines of, "You're guileless and mafia would be discreet," but tactics aren't very guileless. I don't know you -- maybe you're just naturally defensive, maybe you would do this as town, but you're my biggest question mark so far:

1) You haven't justified your no lynch vote satisfactorily
2) Your inexperience defense seems like a transparent tactic

Unvote

Vote: Salazel

[Nina]

To be absolutely honest, I didn't even notice I put him at L-1. Sorry.

You're right. He might get quickhammered and we have to get his thoughts on everybody and let him argue things out before that.

This is super anticlimatic after my post, but

Unvote

.

More later.

[Nina]

Everyone

, is there any use to responding to Salazel's latest post? It would be more opinion and discussion, but it would also be like arguing with a phantom.

This isn't a reliable argument or evidence or anything, it's pure gut, but I have to say that Salazel replacing out makes him seem just a little more town to me. I'm surprised that he did. It means that he took it hard, and I feel like, had he been scum, he wouldn't really have taken it that hard because ... he was scum, and good won out. This feels more like a "townie gives up in injury and frustration" move.

Can't lie, I don't feel too good.

McGriddle, I'm surprised that your vote on Salazel was a "joke," seeing as you cited defensiveness as the main reason and that is rather valid. What was the purpose of your joke vote? Do you find his defensiveness not actually suspicious, then?

It was still semi rv. Nah, not really, he's a newb, I remember my first game I was soo scared of being lynched that I had to tread on ice the whole time and when anyone called me on anything I flipped (I was townie)

I don't understand how "semi rv" explains anything, because the vote you placed on him wasn't random -- it was backed up with reason that you later dismissed. I don't see how the vote was a joke, I don't see how it was random; you didn't find him suspicious but you placed a vote just when pressure was beginning to mount on him. I don't think this vote is incriminating but I do think you're being rather obscure about it.

like I said before, we don't have much to work with yet, but I wanted to get my vote out there.

It's fine. I didn't like your vote at first, but I really like your explanation.

[Nina]

@Nina- Why are you going after Salazel so much?

Why, do you think I'm going after him too much?

There aren't many reasons you go after someone.

1) Because I am suspicious of him.
2) Because he is the main topic of discussion and therefore most of my comments concern him.

I comment on everything that catches my attention. Salazel is the center of attention, and therefore he gets the brunt of my posts. But once again, I comment on everything. Your question implies that I'm tunneling on Salazel, but if you look back at the past couple of pages, you'll see that I respond to as many people as I can, and I start as many different discussions as I can.

Why vote for him if you are just going to unvote him when it is pointed out to you that you put him at L -1?

Because when I voted for him, I hadn't realized that it would put him at L-1. I unvoted right after, as anticlimatic as it was, because I knew L-1 was a bad position and I didn't want to wait for someone else to unvote incase he got quickhammered during that time. It was my mistake.

Sorry if my questions are off from what is really going on. I'm just getting super confused right now.

Don't undermine your questions like that. They were good questions. This looks like you're scared of the heat your questions might get you, like you're trying to tread neutral ground again.

[Nina]

Re Nina's response to me: I didn't think you were going after Salazel too much, it just seemed a little sudden from you. First you were focused on everyone, and then you narrowed down on him because he was getting mostly everyone else's attention. Thats what got me.

It's not sudden because I've been replying to Salazel from the beginning. I am not narrowing down on him because I still respond to multiple people in most of my posts. I think this is a simple matter of ISOing me. Look at my posts. Look at what I quote. Look at who I address.

Any "narrowing" is only natural to the way this discussion has progressed. What makes me different from everyone else?

[Nina]

Man, I'm sorry guys.

I have already alerted the mod to my absense from August 22nd to September 3rd, and my lack of posting recently is me trying to finish off affairs before I leave.

I will post as soon as I can.