Newbie 1024 -- Minimalist Mafia (Game Over)

[Jay]

/confirm

[Jay]

1) EST
2) I've played a few games in the past, but this is my first time on this site.
3) I think I'll be able to post pretty regularly.
4) Male

[Jay]

Well since I suck at random day 1 votes I consulted the elders (random.org) and they told me to

Vote: Mute

.

[Jay]

@ Jay, now seems like a very odd time to place a random vote. Why wouldn't you place it when you answered Trendall's questions (timezone, availability, gender, ect.)?

I chose to place my vote then instead of when I was answering Trendall's questions because, like I said, I'm not used to random votes, so I wanted to try and make a vote that made some sort of sense instead of just picking some person whose name I didn't like, or something like that. However, I really didn't find anyone suspicious and decided to just use random.org instead.

[Jay]

I find Jay's random vote suspicious, because he could have placed it when others were, but instead holds off and places it now, when others are placing votes with at least a little reason now. Also, he says he does not like random votes, in which case it would have been more reasonable to not place a vote. Finally, he does so with no other content. At this point it is a minor thing, and the only thing that really seems suspicious to me at this point in the game.

The timing of that vote was mainly because of my inexperience with mafia games. See, I had been planning on waiting for a reason to vote for someone, but, since I'm stupid and didn't know exactly how the game worked, I thought there was some sort of time limit to have your votes in by, because on past games I've played, it is usually said that "Day 1 ends on [...] at [...] PM/AM," and if you did not vote by that time you received a thing called a phantom vote. I was worried I'd receive one of them, and thought that I'd better have my vote in by that time, when I posted my vote, so I just decided to go with a random one instead.

[Jay]

I wasn't finding you scummy at all until this post. I find it difficult to believe that you were that worried about not having your vote put in, but not worried enough to like, check Post 1 to see if there was anything in the rules about it. Plus, I'm not really sure exactly what a phantom vote is, seeing as I only play forum games here, but surely a completely random vote is no more useful than a phantom vote?

A phantom vote is when you don't have your vote in by the deadline and a vote is cast for you. When you get a certain number of these (I think it is three) you are automatically lynched. So, a completely random vote is much more useful than a phantom vote.

[Jay]

I was panicking when I posted my random vote, because i was worried I'd receive a phantom vote and that I'd look like a bad player (which I surely do now). When you panic you make stupid decisions without thinking them through, which was what I did.

Yenros, I find you slightly suspicious because of the way you are accusing me. I still do not really understand why you find my random vote scummy, and the way you said that you do not know how to explain better doesn't help. I didn't want to look like that guy who says "You think I look scummy so I'm gonna say that you are too!!!" but that note about not being able to explain made it seem more suspicious. Mafia who want to look like town sometimes make a large effort to find mafia so that people think,"Wow, he's trying so hard he must be town!" Until you are able to explain yourself better, you are my main suspicion.

Also sorry if there are some typos in here, I'm using my phone to write this.

[Jay]

But I am really not only saying that I'm suspcicious of him because he voted for me - I know better than to do that. I've seen the strategy that I mentioned (I think you called it Too Town to be Town) work before, and I'd like him to explain why he finds me scummy better, because I still do not understand him. That's why I didn't vote for him - I want to give him a chance before I jump the gun on something.

[Jay]

@Yenros: Your reply to the "too townie to be town" argument does make sense, and while I still do not entirely understand how my vote seems scummy, that might just be me.

@Beefster: Mujex isn't playing anymore, I don't think.

[Jay]

Hey guys, sorry I haven't been too active for the past two days, I've been pretty busy. So - recently I've been trying to reread the topic so I can make a more educated opinion about the whole Kayi/Beefster suspicion thing, and right now I think that Beefster is a little more suspicious. I first thought it was a little odd how erratically he changed his vote, but I thought this might just be his playing style and waited for something more suspcicious. The alignment fishing ordeal seemed awfully strange to me, as well. Also, it strikes me as odd that he did not notice that Lateralus had placed a vote but was still aware that he seemed to 'have his suspicions.' But I'm not completely finished rereading the topic, and am not 100% certain of this suspicion.

...By the way what does HoS mean? I'm pretty sure FoS means finger of suspicion but I'm not sure of this one. [/stupid newbie question]

[Jay]

@Yenros: Isn't placing a random vote late in a stage where people have already begun to put some logic behind their votes something scum would not want to do? It would surely draw attention to yourself, and the only reason for scum to place random votes is to slip by unnoticed. Placing the random vote when I did was exactly what scum would want to avoid doing, and, if anything, it only shows my inexperience.

[Jay]

@Mastin: Thanks for the advice (at least, I think it's advice). I had an idea of what WIFOM was, but now I understand it a lot better. I'll try not to use it anymore.

[Jay]

@Mute: You mentioned that you find L22 suspicious as well. What's your reasoning behind this? Unless I missed something from before, (in which case, sorry) you did not bother to explain why. I am curious.

[Jay]

Sorry I haven't been active in the past few days, I've been pretty busy. Also, sorry again for making a short "I'm still here!" post, but I just want everybody to know that I'm not dead. I'll be rereading the thread soon and try to makes posts with more content.

[Jay]

EBWOP: 'Makes' should be 'make.' Stupid typos.

[Jay]

...Wait, what does lylo mean?

I feel

really

stupid now, I'm not familiar with a lot of the terms you guys use.

[Jay]

Post #204 Jay really needs to do something. What's your thoughts on everything going on?

Well, with the Beefster reaction fishing debate I kind of agree with Yenros that this doesn't seem like something Mafia would do when they are this close to being lynched, but for now I think this is just something to keep in mind, because I still find Beefster to be suspicious. You (Lateralus) made a good point when you mentioned that Beefster's reaction fishing seems like a half-assed attempt to do something, but then again, I'm not familiar with reaction fishing, since this is my first game, so I'm not sure if the results are usually different or if it is always difficult to get any information when you use it.

Did Mute ever answer Yenros's questions about why he finds Kayi and I suspicious? I didn't ask about that because I thought there was a chance Mute just agreed with everything that was already said about it. I asked about L22 because I don't think anyone was suspicious of him before that. Mute might not have answered them just because they were busy, though, and hasn't gotten a chance to check back yet, so I'll wait for an answer from them.

[Jay]

EBWOP: There was another question that Yenros asked Mute, too, not just about why he finds Kayi and I suspicious.

[Jay]

@L22: To be completely honest, I haven't seen a whole lot of scummy things from Neruz. It doesn't seem like he's done anything out of the ordinary in awhile, the only exception being when someone (I don't remember who) pointed out that he and Kayi seemed to be agreeing a lot, although it looks like that has been put aside by what Kayi said in one of her more recent posts about you bringing it up again. But, now that you mention it, I'll look into Neruz a bit more and read over his past posts to see if I should be paying closer attention to him.

[Jay]

@Neruz: Thanks for explaining it (the no lynch) so clearly, I think I understand it a lot better now. So it's like, we'll have to no lynch at some point, and doing it earlier is the best bet for a town win? In that case:

VOTE: No Lynch

...Hey, whatever happened to Mute? They didn't respond to the prod?

[Jay]

I've been thinking about a few ideas lately. I don't necessarily think that these are true, but I have been wondering if they are possible, or if any thought should be put into them. Here they are, and, sorry if they are confusing:

Is it possible that Mute was not telling the truth about choosing to protect Kayi? This would mean that he is trying to prove to everyone that Kayi is town. Then, that would mean that Mute is being untruthful about being the doctor, although this does not make sense without a counterclaim. Unless, there is no doctor in this game and Mute took an enormous chance in claiming that role, which would make him scum, because if he were still town and had claimed doctor falsely, then mafia would probably still lynch him, right? After that he would not be lynched, and people may agree that Mastin's second point had taken place ("2: Mute is town, and the scum leave Mute alive to frame him"). I am afraid that this theory is getting into WIFOM, though, and besides, I am only spitballing here.

Yes, something about Mute's claim seems a little off, but in the end, I think he's town, because it doesn't seem like he'd have anything to gain from claiming early like this if he was lying. Someone would just counterclaim and then one of them would have to be lying. The fact that no one has tells me that Mute is telling the truth.

About No Lynching: Mastin, what you are saying makes sense. Listening to Mute would be a good idea, and, since he is the doctor, he'll probably be able to help us reach a conclusion that is backed with even more evidence than usual. However, for now, I want to think it over a little more before deciding to unvote or stick with it, because I want to be sure I completely understand the no lynch situation before coming to a final decision.

@Mute: I don't agree that Trendall hammering after L22 said that he might, and if he doesn't someone else should, is scummy because even before that Trendall was saying things like "I am ready to hammer but I'd like to be more certain of this choice before I do." I think that L22's post before that was not related.

[Jay]

Hey Nacho, welcome to this game.

Over the holiday, I've had enough time to think it over and I think that lynching probably is the better bet now that Mute has claimed. UNVOTE: No Lynch

@Mute: I had an alright holiday, thanks for asking.

I too, will be doing a quick reread of the topic because I feel kind of disoriented, what with the holiday and all the inactivity.

[Jay]

Hmm...Jay said he'd be fairly active. True, he seems active during certain times, but most of the time, his posts are every-other day.

Jay:

Any reason for this?

I've been really busy with school lately, but I trying my hardest to keep up and not have to be replaced, or even worse, stop all activity altogether. I'm sorry for this...

Jay randomly voted Mute. Doesn't sit well with me, considering Mute's claim. Jay says he was panicking, but I'm not sure the story is legitimate. Maybe on that website, but on here? That mechanic doesn't really exist. Unfortunately, that's the kind of thing you can never gather evidence either way for; I can't tell if he meant it.

I don't understand what you mean by that it does not sit well with you considering Mute's claim. Are you saying that I voted for Mute because I somehow knew he was the doctor? If so, I don't understand this, because how would I know that early in the game? My vote for Mute was completely random, and as for the fact that I never changed it, despite voicing suspicions of Yenros and Beefster, because I was not completely sure of my suspicions yet and wanted to think them over more. The Yenros suspicion was sorted out quickly, when he explained that the Too Townie Too Be Town Fallacy did not make sense (as did you, Mastin). With the Beefster suspicion, I was a little confused by the Kayi-Beefster suspicion... ah, thing, and from what I knew, Beefster seemed more suspicious. However, I felt hesitant to place a vote because of my confusion and I did not want to make another newbie mistake (the first being the late random vote).

You mention not knowing our abbreviations[/url]...so how did you know Wifom, exactly? Sites which use Wifom tend to use other terms you see here, too, 'cause most likely, they copied the terms from here.

When I had more time to research things, I looked WIFOM up on the Wiki. The other terms, like HoS, I had less time and I wanted a quicker answer, so I asked on the thread.

Jay:

Have you gained anything from any of your rereads? If so, Mind posting your thoughts?

My latest reread was mainly because I felt kind of out of the loop what with the Thanksgiving-holiday inactivity. For some reason it just felt like I was missing something, and rereading the past few pages helped me understand what was going on better, like Mute's suspicion of L22 (I don't know where this stands now, since he has been replaced), and a little more on no lynching that Nacho brought up (I still think it is better to lynch today, even with 6 players because like Mastin said, we will still have six players in practice after tonight).

That's all I have time for tonight, sorry if I did not answer some of your questions, Mastin, I tried to answer the ones that seemed the most important to me. Tomorrow when I get back on I'll answer more.

[Jay]

Yes! Some time after school to post!

I was beginning to become suspicious of L22 before he was replaced, mainly because I felt it was sort of strange that he so eagerly voted for Kayi and said he was all for a Kayi lynch shortly before Mute revealed he was the doctor and that he had protected Kayi. Maybe L22 saw this and decided to try and lynch Kayi once he knew the mafia kill did not work? He might not have expected Mute to claim so early. But, now, he has been replaced, so I guess I need to reassess it and see what Nacho does before placing a vote.

Before Night 1 I was beginning to find Mute actually suspicious, which was one of the reasons I kept my vote on him. But now, this is proved wrong.

Yenros seems slightly fishy to me. It is not necessarily what he has done, but it seems like he's flown under the radar basically the whole game. Pretty much nobody has voiced suspicions against him. This is mostly a gut feeling right now. Like Mastin asked, who are your suspicions?

[Jay]

Since it is the weekend I think I'll have a better oppurtunity to post.

Then why have the vote still on Mute at all, after the phantom issue was cleared up and it was clear that wouldn't happen on this site? (Outside of a really messed up theme game, at least.) And for that matter, you can never be 100% sure about anyone unless you're the cop, yet you certainly believed them to be scum at the time; why so reluctant to change votes from someone random to someone not?

Like I said before, I was beginning to become a little suspicious of Mute anyway, which is one of the reasons I kept my vote on him. His posting style seemed sort of odd, how he was inactive for a time and then suddenly came back aggresively voting Beefster, and talking about how he has given up on himself... but, now this isn't important, because I believe Mute is the doctor.

Out of curiosity, when'd you look? The article had been under recent discussion and editing for a while, so it might've changed.

I'm not sure, but it must've been sometime before Nov. 8th, which was when you gave your "SEssion" on WIFOM.

@Neruz: What was your past experience, and how could it make things worse? Was it in this game?

[Jay]

...Awww man. I just had this whole post made up and I was about to click submit, I previewed it and Mastin's newest posts basically answered all of my questions. Err. I don't know what to say now.

The only part that remains somewhat valid is this:

Your vote on Trendall seems kind of rushed. You mention fencesitting because he wanted to do an ISO before being fully sure of his suspicion of you, but how is that any different than how you did an ISO of me? It seems now that you thought I was suspicious, having voiced your suspicion of me before, so you did an ISO, and decided Trendall was a bit more suspicious. Then you mention you will be doing an ISO of Trendall, yourself. He probably just wants to use it as a tool to help his own case against you, just like you are with him. I don't really see how that is scummy.

[Jay]

Oh man, what did I miss?

Right now I've only really skimmed over all the recent posts because I don't have a lot of time right now and I'd like to post before I go.

So, yeah. As of now, I find Mastin more suspicious than Trendall. I felt that the fencesitting suspicion he brought up did not make much sense, and the example that Trendall cited above, in post 408, I think it was, he seems to have picked a random thing that Trendall has said and tried to make it appear scummy to fit his argument. The ISO of me, with the random-voting-the-doctor line, also seemed suspicious, but since it seems like Mastin has explained himself on this

a lot

, it'll just be a 'side note,' I guess.

Also I'm a little confused by all of these logical fallacies he is citing... so Burden of Proficiency (I think) was the one where someone finds another player scummy because they are supposed to be very good, and haven't been finding scum? And then, awhile back he said something about this thing called Hitler Built Autobahns, which I was never able to read about.

Next time I have time (hopefully tomorrow) I'll thoroughly read through page 17 and the last part of 16.

[Jay]

I kind of wish Nacho had explained some of the points about Neruz he found the scummiest instead of just quoting every single one of (more recent) posts and having a brief conclusion. The thing I don't like about his posts are that he doesn't include a lot of reasoning, he just states his opinions, gives one, maybe two examples, and that it all. I know he already addressed this in post 435, but I was thinking that this could just be a way to hide that he does not have a lot of reasons. In addition, he was L22's replacement, and like I said before, I was starting to become suspicious of him. This makes me a little more certain on this suspicion, although right now it is not concrete. Since I haven't been around for the past, two days, I think it was, once again I feel like I am missing something. This time I'll take Mastin's advice and go back to look over the past few pages.

FoS: Nachomamma8

Speaking of Mastin, I still find him suspicious, but a little less than before. His most recent defenses seem better than his older ones when people first started calling him out on the random-voting-the-doctor thing. Because of the recent Nacho thing, I'm a little more suspicious of him than I am Mastin now, but he is still my second suspicion. Your extremely long posts are difficult for me to focus on, which is why I missed some of the things you've said, and I want to go back and read them completely. Although, Kayi's ISO did make it easier to think them over.

Sorry if I seem overly neutral on this post but I want to post some content without jumping the gun on something... I like to be certain of my suspicions before making my vote, which might be a bad thing, given Mastin's past ISO of me pointing out that I voiced many suspicions but kept my vote on Mute the whole time.

Also, @Mastin: I must have missed your response in that post, sorry (I guess it is a good thing I'm looking over the last couple pages again).

[Jay]

@Trendall: I can see where you are coming from, but could you explain your Yenros vote a little more, just in case I'm missing something. I assume it is because you have answered many of those suspicions/arguments already, but... I'm not sure.

Then, when deflection and misrepresentation don't work, he results to OMGUS. Of course, he still FoSes Mastin and makes sure that his transition onto the largest Mastin wagon is smooth if the whole Nacho thing doesn't work out.

I don't necessarily think Mastin's case was OMGUS, because it was based on more than just you voting for him. The part that Mastin cited as making him feel more comfortable about whether it was OMGUS or not, talks about other reasons, as well.

Or, is this the good point? He's criticizing me for not providing more examples than just one. Surprising, since I thought Mastin's ISO was so daunting and so terrible, I figured that everyone would understand if I didn't back my point up with 20 examples.

Providing one example and writing a huge wall of text are not that different, because they are both unsatisfying. You are always left wanting something, whether it be more examples or less words. Maybe there's something in the middle that'd work better?

---

Tomorrow, (hopefully) when I get more time to post I'd like to look more into my Mastin suspicion. That'll take some time, and the thread had been growing rapidly recently. With the deadline only two days away, I hope, when I get back, there are not three more pages left to read...

[Jay]

What do you suggest?

I don't really know - I guess just enough examples to give them a good idea of what you mean but not enough to smother them.

Actually, I've been liking Mastin's defenses a lot lately. In the beginning when people first called him out for the ISO of me I thought the case on Trendall was rushed, but now I think this was probably because he was eager to prove that it was not a case on me, and show every one his more serious suspicions. Even though I still don't really agree with the fencesitting business, you did a good job of explaining to me

how

it is a scumtell. Some of his earlier behavior seemed scummy, mainly the ISO of me, and Trendall's points about hypocrisy and that deal with looking back on things that did not seem scummy, but saying they are now - but, ever since then he has seemed less suspicious to me. So:

VOTE: Nachomamma8

[Jay]

Does this mean that no one is lynched Day 2?

[Jay]

If mafia was purposely not killing anyone, what would they benefit from it? It seems to me like that'd be more of a hassle than anything. But, since this is the second time no one was killed, it seems like it is more of a possibility than before.

[Jay]

I didn't realize how busy I'd be. Sorry I haven't posted in such a long time... Tomorrow, I'll get on and state my suspicions. Right now my main suspicion is still Nacho, like in Day 2, but I haven't read all of (most of) Mastin's giant string of posts yet, so I'll get through that, review my suspicions, and try and make a post. Once again, sorry for the inactivity and this fluff post.

[Jay]

Okay, so I got through all of the new posts. It took me awhile, and Mastin's most are somewhat... perplexing. For example, he discussed Burden of Proficiency at length in the past, saying that it was a fallacy and should not be used. However, in his meta-read-thing of Trendall he adds points when Trendall uses BoP correctly and deducts points when he uses it incorrectly. This is like saying, "This is a fallacy when it is used against the wrong person, but with scum it is a perfectly good scumtell." He later does the same thing with fencesitting, splitting into two categories, 'town-fencesitting,' and 'scum-fencesitting,' or something like that. Before I asked Mastin about why he thought Trendall's (according to Mastin) fencesitting was scummy, and he told me about how I could ask any veteran mafia player and they would tell me that it was a valid scumtell. Well, if he felt so strongly about it why did he give Trendall points for it? Besides that, how can you tell if someone is town-fencesitting and scum-fencesitting? Doesn't that just go back to gut, eventually, which we've already talked about whether it is valid? I suppose these points could just be to see if his play is consistent, but then you include them in his final score, which is to determine whether he is scum or town.

@Neruz: If Nacho is your top suspect and Mastin is only a dead read, why aren't you voting for Nacho instead?

[Jay]

@Trendall: I was suspicious of Nacho too, so I wanted to look over his posts before making a decision.

It's kind of hard to tell, but him and Mastin are probably equally suspicious right now. However, lynching Mastin would probably make it much easier to get a good read on Nacho. I've been having trouble getting through his recent posts, which seem like a lot of minor details and explanations and only a few valid facts.

VOTE: Mastin

[Jay]

@Mute: Trendall basically answered my question. In addition to that, Mastin's posts were confusing and hard for me to read.

Welcome to the game, DLG. I suppose that, for now, I should unvote you...

UNVOTE: Mastin / DLG

...and allow you to introduce yourself.

Just a note:

I will not be here tomorrow, will have barely any time on Friday (because of Christmas Eve and all), and won't be here on Christmas Day. Also, I may not have time to post on Sunday, but I'm hoping that if everything works out, I'll be able to.

[Jay]

Sorry for all the inactivity, but with Christmas and all I couldn't get time to post.

Now, DLG has been questioning us about why we did not really find Mute scummy after he confirmed. This could just be that he is genuinely wondering about this, but this brings to mind a point that Mastin made some time ago:

2: Mute is town, and the scum leave Mute alive to frame him

Given that DLG is the same slot as Mastin, he could be using this logic to push us to think about Mute being scum, and maybe lynch him. This would also explain why Mute was not lynched Night 2 when a lot of people expected it to happen. After Mute is lynched (in this hypothetical series of events, of course) there would be no more doctor.

...Also given that quote above, Mastin's surprise when Mute was not lynched doesn't make sense when he had earlier predicted that something along those lines could happen.

[Jay]

You take a portion of a quote out of context, then use that to try to accuse Mastin of a contradiction. That is pure scum.

The reason that I only quoted a portion of what Mastin said is because I found it mentioned in a post of mine from earlier (#286). I was looking at that post because you had asked about why we had basically confirmed Mute as town, and in it, I had rambled about a few possiblities of Mute being scum. It was my fault for not actually finding Mastin's post with the actual point in it, and it was simply a mistake.

Players are not lynched during Night phase, they are night killed. Are you getting confused about the difference because you are having difficulties keeping your role and your town image separate? I detect a scum slip.

I don't see how this is a scumtell at all. If I had said that someone was killed Day whatever would that have been suspicious? The terms 'lynch' and 'night kill' are, to me, very similar, because they both mean the death of a player. I've gotten them mixed up before, but I don't see how confusing a term makes it look like I had "difficulties keeping my role and my town image seperate"...?

You had a vote on my slot. You retracted it when I replaced in. Yet, you use a misrepresentation of something Mastin posted to try to foster more suspicion of this slot. You do not, however, vote for me. Accusing a player of looking scummy, but not voting them is scummy.

I've been called out on this before, and it is because I like to be more certain of my suspicions before casting my vote. I was considering the things in my last post because I had been suspicious of Mastin, too, and since you are the same slot, I was analyzing your play to see if it was consistent. The last post was not a case on you at all, but rather me wanting to get an answer out of you to explain something I saw out of the ordinary. I guess I had misinterpreted your posts, though, because I thought that you were asking why no one found Mute suspicious after his claim.

You have been called out for lack of involvement/lurking multiple times. Your Day 1 play was called into question. You have deflected these suspicions with a plethora of self-deprecating "stupid Newbie" comments. That excuse is unacceptable. All players, new or experienced, are responsible for their posts and actions. Scummy play is scummy play and "stupid Newbie" is not a panacea for it. Consistently using it as a cover is scummy.

I don't really know what to say to these comments, because my actions - on Day 1, especially - really were because I didn't know any better. The first random vote I did after the RVS was because I had not been active in the past day or two and was worried. I hastily made a vote without reading the topic when I should've. For this I have no excuse but, as you call it, 'stupid newbie-ness.' I was not trying to use it as a cure for everything. I guess this just means I did a lot of stupid things earlier in the game.

Yours look like scum trying to skate by and push a mislynch.

Push a mislynch? You said above that it was strange I did not vote for you. Nowhere in my post does it say "DLG is scum everyone lynch him!" I was just bringing up something I felt was out of the ordinary. All I wanted was a response from this, hence, why I did not vote for you.

[Jay]

The way you say "Let's lynch this scum and win this game" seems a lot more like trying to push people to lynch me than anything that I said in my post which you found suspicious.

I don't understand the logic behind the 'confusing lynch and night kill' argument.

I'm trying to look at this from scum's perspective... but it still doesn't make sense. Could you explain this better?

So it is when a scum player gets there role and image mixed up... By image I assume that means them as a town player. So mixing up two similar words means that their actual role and image is crossed? How? I am not asking what a scum slip is, just how this particular instance is one?

Why did you keep your vote on Mute? I can't really find anything you posted about why he seemed scummy. But, you did not ever unvote him. This looks very much like scum wanting to appease the town's preference that people place votes while pushing along a mislynch.

I already discussed this with Mastin: #342

Like I said before, I was beginning to become a little suspicious of Mute anyway, which is one of the reasons I kept my vote on him. His posting style seemed sort of odd, how he was inactive for a time and then suddenly came back aggresively voting Beefster, and talking about how he has given up on himself... but, now this isn't important, because I believe Mute is the doctor.

It seems to me like you've found an oppurtunity and jumped on me to try and get the town to lynch me. The logic behind some of the evidence you use in suspcions of me does not make much sense (the confusing terms one, the pushing a mislynch one). I was suspicious of Mastin before you replaced in. This makes you even more of a logical choice.

VOTE: DLG

Also, I never answered your first point/question/suspicion from one of your last posts:

This was in Day 2. Before Mastin said he believed Mute was telling the truth. Before Mute was not NK'd on Night 2. How is Mastin's surprise at the start of Day 3 any different than anyone else's surprise? Mastin made that point while listing three possibilities about what might happen in Night 2. Why did you purposefully truncate his very next words?

I mentioned the thing about Mastin's surprise because earlier, after he posted the "Not Mute!?!?" thing, some players (I think it was Trendall and maybe someone else) were saying that this was a scumtell. I didn't really understand it, but when I saw what Mastin had said in the point I quoted (including the point that I had accidentally left out) I realized it really was strange. It was sort of an, "Oh! So that's what they meant," kind of thing, not "This made no sense lynch him!"

Yes, push a mislynch. Suppying impetus for a wagon on me while making sure you are not attached to it for wagon analysis purposes after the fact. Just like you did in Day 1 to Beefster. It seems to be your MO. It is scummy play.

In Day 1 I was not trying to start a wagon, or, supply impetus for a wagon, on Beefster. The reason I had voiced some suspicion of him without voting for him is because someone asked me directly where I stood on the Kayi-Beefster suspicion debate/whatever you want to call it.

[Jay]

That's all the time I have for tonight, but I'm still on Winter Break from school, so I'll be able to get on a lot more often this next week or so.

[Jay]

@Ghostlin: I apologize a lot for inactivity because I know that I am not a good player. I worry a lot that I am ruining the game with how I am playing. I tend to apologize a lot in real life, too. I guess it is just a nervous reaction sort of thing.

Up until now I considered Mute to be town, but what you are saying makes sense too. Gah - I'm kind of torn right now. What you are saying about Mute being scum does make sense, but I haven't noticed a whole lot of scummy behavior from Mute. Sure, maybe a few arguments that didn't make a lot of sense, but that was it. Maybe I haven't been paying close enough attention because of his doc claim. There is one thing you said that I am kind of confused about...

Well, if you're scum, you'd do it to throw town off track. Think about it: who's going to risk a counterclaim this early? No one sane. If say, person X was the doctor and person Y claimed it, the counterclaim would get the real doctor killed. The real doctor would earn more from keeping his fool mouth shut, and watch as Mute gets NKed/roleblocked so he can continue to work behind the scenes. Fishing for the counterclaim is scummy, not protown.

What do you mean? I may be misunderstanding this, but I'd think that it'd make more sense for the real doctor to counterclaim, because wouldn't that mean that fake-doctor was scum, trying to pose as the doctor? The reason I think I may be reading this wrong is because you say that Mute would be NKed. . . but I thought he was supposed to be scum in the hypothetical scenario?

[Jay]

Damn, I pretty much missed Day 4. Well, I agree that no lynch is the best option. I would cast a vote for it, but since we've already reached four, I guess that'd be pretty useless.

[Jay]

@Ghostlin: My main suspicion is DLG. Now, I could bring in some of the reasons I am suspicious of Mastin for more, but for the moment, I'll just focus on what DLG himself did that I don't like.

First off, note this post from Day 4:

I understand the math behind no lynching in this situation. The question for me comes down to whether or not I believe someone is likely enough to be scum to warrant taking the more aggressive approach of lynching today. I am confident enough in one suspect to go for it. I won't muddy things up by laying out that case if the majority of the town wants to no-lynch.

We'll be facing the same pressure on Day 5 as we are now. Get it wrong, and we lose. So, my vote is to lynch today.

I believe everyone should post their preference on this issue at their first opportunity.

He says that he understand why no lynching makes sense, but that he thinks we should lynch. Since he is scum, he would want to lynch, so that the game could end sooner. He knows that I am town, and with this post, he wanted people to agree to lynch so that he could start a bandwagon on me.

He's used a few scum slips with DLG, himself, say are small points. One of them is the fact that I mixed up the word 'lynch' and 'night kill,' so it ended up something like 'He'd be lynched Night 2.' Once again, I ask you if it would be suspicious for me to say that someone would be 'night killed day whatever'? I don't think this is even a plausible scum tell.

But I am really not only saying that I'm suspcicious of him because he voted for me -

I know better than to do that.

DLG supplied bolding

Another scum slip?

I missed this until now. I don't get this one, either. I said that I know better than to do that because of how often I've seen players call each other out for WIFOM and I knew it was a bad thing ... but I'm not sure if this is even what you are referring to. Could you explain?

As a side note, it's also funny how, after DLG made his case on me, Nacho, who a few people thought was Mastin's scum partner, was the first one to bandwagon. (#602)

[Jay]

Sorry for the inactivity, something came up on Friday and this is my first chance to get online.

@DLG: I understand that you wanted me to be active, but why would you assume that I was 'being afraid of becoming a suspect due to a poor argument?' This seems scummy to me. Making assumptions that end with 'this is only a concern for scum' make the player out to be scum. Even if you said that Trendall is now your main suspect, that could be a way to gather evidence to possbily lynch me later on.

The town consensus was to go no lynch. You had no part in that decision.

Neither did you...?

You mean OMGUS, not WIFOM. This looks something like a scum saying that they wouldn't be so silly as to do something so obvscum.

Yeah, they're both five letter acronyms, so I got them mixed up. Wouldn't a town player also know not to do something that silly because they don't want people to falsely think they're scum?

I did absolutely say that these potential scum slips are small - icing on the cake. They are not the cake itself, and you trying to defend yourself by focusing on these is extremely weak. It is called strawmanning, and is not a valid defense. It is even weaker to try to parlay these points into a case against me.

I was not trying to parlay these into a case against you, I was only focusing on them because I do not understand the logic behind them, still. Maybe I just don't understand the concept of scum slips. You're the first person who I have ever heard refer to these, so I am unfamiliar with them. But to me they seem like small mistakes than anyone can make.

What is your opinion of the debate between Trendall and Ghostlin?

I plan to address this in a follow up post a little bit later when I have more time.

Then let me rearrange, it'd be: DLG (2 first suspicions: Jay and Trendall), Trendall (2 first suspicions: Ghostlin and DLG), Nacho (two second suspicions: Ghostlin (tie with Jay), Trendall (tie with Ghostln)), Ghostlin (1 second suspicion: Trendall (Tied with Ghostlin), Jay (Ghostlin, 1 second suspicion, tied with Nacho).

I don't really understand what you're saying here... Are these the other player's suspicions, so you can kind of guess what may happen at the end of this day? Or something else I missed completely?

For the sake of completeness, is there anyone else you think might be buddying with or scum with your primary suspicions? (Same thing for Nacho when he posts.) I'm thinking if the same name pops up for scum suspect over and over, or at least three of us have one person in mind, we can isolate and analyze cases on that person or have them claim/defend first.

I kind of think that Nacho is DLG's scum partner, but this is more gut than anything. I need to look back on his older posts some more before being sure.

Jay has managed to continue his pattern of sheeping-only until today, when a case was provided on Trendall. I find this one discrepancy pretty scummy, especially considering that the one time he decides to defy his pattern is 1) when Trendall specifically comes under pressure, and 2) when it's LyLo, and the scum are one townie lynch away from winning.

I started posting more often before today, when DLG made his case on me during Day 4, which was a long time before Ghostlin first started with his argument against Trendall.

@Ghostlin: In mass roleclaims, the players just reveal what their role is, right? (I do know what popcorn claims are.) If this is correct, I'm alright with a popcorn claim.

I'll be back in a few hours with the Trendall-Ghostlin debate follow-up and further analysis.

[Jay]

Actually, I think I'll make the follow up post and answer Ghostlin's points tomorrow morning. I feel really sick, and I had been resting up until now. Anything I post would feel rushed and only made to keep a promise. I don't want to make a bad post like that, so I guess I'll just wait. Sorry.

[Jay]

I am a Vanilla Townie. I pick Nacho to go next.

[Jay]

I was feeling really bad yesterday and I couldn't use the computer, let alone play a mafia game, which is why I was kind of inactive/didn't post any content. Today I'm feeling a little, better though.

Second, why are you so paranoid of me? Did my initial case cut too close to the bone for your comfort?

I am not paranoid of you. I think that you are scum. I'm pointing out scummy/suspicious things that I see from you.

Your case against me (as opposed to my slot) was my opposition to no lynching and references to me pointing out scum slips. The same slips which I have pointed out were not the meat of my case against you. The same ones you keep arguing against as if to say that them being weak negates my whole case.

The same which, every time I ask you to explain them a little better, you aggressively attack me for using them as the bulk of my case against you, which I did not. You quoted two instances where I asked you to elaborate on the scum slips. The first was after I had already asked you to explain once and I still did not understand, which made me wonder if it really did say anything about alignment at all. The second time was me saying that I didn't understand a different scum slip you called out. No where did it say anything like 'This makes you scum, your scum slips obviously prove that you are not town,' but you continue to make it out as if this is exactly what I was saying. I was thinking that maybe if I knew more about how they were scum slips I could understand where you were coming from better, and explain myself in a better way. You responded to the second instance you quoted by explaining it better, and I disagreed with it. It was after this that you decided it was one of the major points of my case against you and, once again, attacked me for using scum slips.

That is a defense against lurking, not sheeping. Sheeping refers to following the herd. It's what you are accusing Nachomamma8 of doing in regards to you after I posted my case against you.

Oh.

Well, in the instances where he accused me of sheeping, it was because I had heard someone's evidence and agreed with them. Is this the same thing as sheeping? If so, how can you tell them apart? Should town players never agree with each other out of fear of being accused of sheeping, then?

It's also worthy to note that all of his suspicions have been weakly reasoned; a quick ISO shows Jay voting because "his logic doesn't make sense", "Neruz explained his reasoning more", and, for the DLG vote, "I think you're scum making a case on a townie and trying to get me lynched in LyLo.".

Point 1: Which vote was this on?
Point 2: It was not just Neruz, the other players who agreed to No Lynch included Trendall and Lateralus. You make it seem like the only reason I voted to No Lynch is because Neruz had decided to, but before that other players had talked about how it was the best option for a town win. That was why I voted for it. This was before Mute claimed.
Point 3: We were at MyLo, not LyLo. If he had succesfully started a bandwagon on me, the game would've ended with a scum win, if my suspicions proved to be correct.

[Jay]

Since DLG mentioned that Nacho voting me could be him seeing a different aspect of the same scum, I would also like to point out that when Nacho voted for me immediately after DLG's case (#602) his reasoning was something that DLG had already brought up before that:

So much of your suspicions seem founded on Trendall's and Neruz's points. Hopefully my answers to them answer you as well.

[...]

if you can explain how continuing to look for the second scum is suspicious I'd really appreciate it.

I meant that it seemed like you were bringing up evidence of me being scum without really making a big deal of it so that you could get other players to take the hint and vote for me; that way you could not be connected to a wagon. (Although this late in the game being connected to a wagon wouldn't make matter, anyway, since we're at LyLo.)

I propose we drop discussion of them altogether.

I agree, they're just causing confusion.

It is virtually impossible to distinguish scum sheeping and town agreeing. However, when a player does nothing but sheep other players' suspicions, it is indicative that they are only looking to push cases and not interested in generating any suspicions of their own through real scum hunting. Town had better be able to agree, otherwise there is no chance of winning. For me, one key I look for is if the second, third, etc. players agreeing bring new evidence or analysis to the debate.

I see what you are saying, and to be honest I do not have a lot to say in defense to this. Maybe I was too quick to agree when I thought someone was onto something? I don't know.

Jay wrote:
Point 2: It was not just Neruz, the other players who agreed to No Lynch included Trendall and Lateralus. You make it seem like the only reason I voted to No Lynch is because Neruz had decided to, but before that other players had talked about how it was the best option for a town win. That was why I voted for it. This was before Mute claimed.

@Neruz: Thanks for explaining it (the no lynch) so clearly, I think I understand it a lot better now. So it's like, we'll have to no lynch at some point, and doing it earlier is the best bet for a town win? In that case:

VOTE: No Lynch

...Hey, whatever happened to Mute? They didn't respond to the prod?

This means absolutely nothing. All you did was quote the post that you already talked about in your last post. I said that other people were discussing it, too. It doesn't matter that I said thanks to Neruz for explaining it better, he was the one who drew it out in more detail, but

there were others discussing it

. (Lateralus and Trendall) You're spending so much time focusing on the Neruz connection that you are ignoring the context of the post.

What does it matter whether it was MyLo or LyLo?

It doesn't really matter, I was just correcting you because I thought it might make a difference.

Why "if your suspicions proved to be correct"? Shouldn't a lynch on you end the game regardless of DLG's alignment?

I phrased that in a bad way, I guess. When I said 'if my suspicions proved to be correct' I wasn't talking about ending the game, I was talking about my suspicion as a whole, i.e., 'If my suspicions proved to be correct, the game would've ended sooner ...' etc.

[...]

and uses the wrong acronyms (or he says he does)

I said that I mixed up OMGUS and WIFOM because they're both five letter acronyms, not that I mix up acronyms a lot ... ?

About the Ghostlin / Trendall debate:

Ghostlin does bring up some good points. I think the scummiest thing that Trendall did, overall, was the hammer of Mute, even though he stated in the post that he thought he was obvtown. I just don't see why he would hammer, especially after Ghostlin had said for no one to hammer until the 48 hour mark. He mentioned why he thought that Mute was town in his defense, but never said why he decided to hammer in the end. Besides that, though, most of his arguments make sense to me, though. The Day 3 hammer, and, somewhat, the Day 1 hammer too, still seem too strange to ignore. I'm not where Trendall stands with me yet. Right now, he is probably more scummy than Ghostlin, but less scummy than DLG/Nacho.

[Jay]

I was- but there- that means...

[Jay]

I enjoyed this game a lot. I feel like I've learned a lot from it, and it really was enjoyable, blah blah blah. You know, all the generic stuff. I was wondering, though, do games usually have these many replacements? By the end, I think that Trend and I were the last original players left. I thought this was weird, but me being a so-called green newbie and all, I thought it might just be inexperience.

I wish I had played better, but since this is my first game, I guess it's all right. Maybe next time?

I'd also like to thank Red Coyote, in particular. I really enjoyed this game and I think you did a great job running it. That probably doesn't mean a lot coming from me, but, eh.

If only people had believed me!

[Jay]

I was wondering, though, do games usually have these many replacements?

I've seen some without even so much as a single replacement (And BaM practically requires it, though the players can ask for replacement), and some which have had something like ten. (In a Newbie Game. Most replacements I've ever seen would probably be a dozen or so, in a large, but they're probably some which have more.) There's no way to predict it. Ideally, no, they don't have that many, but one of the things which killed the game was the holidays, so I think that had a huge influence on it all.

Oh, that makes sense. Thanks for the answer.

If only people had believed me!

As mentioned, Jay, you became too defensive. Your scum hunting was there, but it was hidden by you defending yourself too much. If you had made more arguments against your suspects, instead of defending yourself, it might work better.

Yes, I see. The people-believing-me comment was made in jest.

[Jay]

I think one reason the other players got town reads on me is because that is the way I would do it as a townie. You might be wrong about your suspect, but that happens. As long as your reasoning is solid and confident, you will not be put under any undue scrutiny for it. Being too unsure leads to the impression that you are fence-sitting. That does end up looking bad.

I think I get it. People won't believe you if you don't believe yourself, I guess.

...Hey, did you set that up on purpose, where no matter what I still looked bad? Like, if I defended myself by saying 'I didn't vote for you anyway' it looks like fencesitting and is still scummy? If so, bravo - that is quite good play.

[Jay]

@DLG: Thanks for the compliments, and the suggestions, and everything. Yeah, that'd be pretty cool if we did get to play a game like that. It'd be fun to see how it'd turn out.

Also lol at the scum slip fiasco.

@Nacho: Noted. I'm already gonna keep in my the mind the self-confidence thing, but the agreeing with people too easily is new to me, and I'm glad you brought it up.

Hm, I never thought I'd be thanking both of my scum suspicions.