Newbie 1024 -- Minimalist Mafia (Game Over)

[Nachomamma8]

Hey Neruz.

I don't like that Mute is lynching Lateralus .
I'll have a post up tomorrow.

[Nachomamma8]

Vote: No Lynch

I haven't thoroughly read the game yet, but I did some selective reading since seeing a No Lynch wagon on Day 2 was extremely surprising to me. And from my understanding, the two main points for a no-lynch this early were to stop scum from finding the PRs, and because town statistically did worse lynching when even numbers were alive. Now, I normally like to wait to No Lynch until I have to, especially when we've ended up with even numbers because of a successful doc save; if they did it once, there's still the possibility of them doing it again and making numbers nice and odd again.
But now that the doctor's been outed, I see no reason not to do it now. The only way the numbers WILL become odd again is if we no-lynch, since Mute's powers are now officially useless. If we do it now without any discussion, we won't risk accidentally outing a possible cop by pushing him to L-1, and we will increase the chances of them surviving another night by not giving the mafia as much material to glean a cop read from.
As an added +10 bonus, no-lynching will give me time to catch up, and time for others to do all of those rereads they were looking to do without having a whole bunch of new material to deal with.

[Nachomamma8]

7 players.

...and the doctor's protect during the night isn't confirmed as town alongside her?

[Nachomamma8]

Why is Mute confirmed if Kayi isn't? If scum intentionally no-killed, then they could be setting up the doctor claim.

Meaning that we have 8 and theory, 6 in practice, which is... still even numbers, and we should still no-lynch.

[Nachomamma8]

Vote: Mastin

Okay. I've read up.
It's harder to get a read on you for your long posting, and I've noticed you use it to hide some terribe arguments. For example, the case on Jay. What's the point of posting something like "you random voted the doctor"? What does that have to do with his alignment? All it shows is that he isn't the doctor, and I'm pretty sure all of us realized that by now.

[Nachomamma8]

@Mastin:
My attack on you wasn't for your long posting; I'm perfectly content with that. My attack on you was for your weak attacks within those long posts.

You said Jay was your top suspect, and you did an ISO read on him. That qualifies as a case to me.

And might I say that it's scummy as hell that as soon as I apply a little pressure to you, you drop your case on Jay and try to pick one up on Trendall.



In other news, I'd love if Yoenros posted more.

[Nachomamma8]

Well, then, was I doing the same for you, Neruz? I had you in the EXACT SAME POST as an ISO read. PEOPLE ARE ADDRESSING THE JAY ISO WHILE IGNORING THE NERUZ ISO.

Starts the game voting for the IC. I am not particularly fond of this, quite honestly.
Something in this post seems off to me. I can't put my finger on it, but this post rubs me the wrong way.
However, I have a town read on Neruz, for posts like this.

The Jay ISO seemed like it was going somewhere, this isn't really all that impressive or memorable of useless.

As to the gut read on Jay random-voting the doctor, I still find that scummy. Call it gut, eh?

I could use some more semi-confirmed town in this joint.

[Nachomamma8]

Holy shit Kayi.
Also, the conclusion based on that case should be a vote, not two FoSes.

Analyzes the RVS (a little too much for my taste) even though he said he doesn't like the RVS. He immediately responds to my 'favorite alignment to play' question on the next post.

If one dislikes something, they want to get rid of it as soon as possible. So analyzing the RVS makes sense because it's a way to end it quicker.

[Nachomamma8]

Heyy, look at that, i'm back.

Jesus. Fucking. Christ.

Aaagh.

You seriously need to control yourself dude, i can handle long posts, but i cannot handle huge blocks of text.

You're doing it again you know. That response to the epicmafia thing could easily be about 1/4 as long and still communicate the same information.

I'm also going to add that i don't really support a Mastin lynch at this point. While i am

severely

tempted to support it just to ensure i never have to look at another one of those wall posts, intellectually i'm pretty sure that isn't a scum tell >.>

'Burden of Proficiency' is a somewhat mafia-specific form of the Argument from Authority. The thing is though that it's not actually a proper AfA.

What makes an AfA a logical fallacy is when the authoritive person comments about a subject that they have no authority for. If Albert Einstein made an authoritive statement about, say art, then assuming he is correct because he is Albert Einstein is an AfA. But if Mr. Einstein makes an authoritive statement about physics, then assuming he is correct is

not

an AfA.

Thus, whether or not the Burden of Proficiency is an AfA is on very shaky ground, as you could legitimately argue that experienced players -are- authoritive about catching scum, especially if there is prior evidence to indicate that the player in question does show a pattern of catching scum often as town. (For those of you in the know, Bayes' theorm technically applies here.)

@Mastin: It's not so much the walling itself which i find unreadable as it is your particular style. I have no problem whatsoever with large posts if those posts are large because they contain a lot of content and are edited nicely so that paragraphs are seperate and different subjects are clear and concise.

From what i can tell, this is not the case in your posts; you seem to either reiterate the same point in different language multiple times or bring up multiple points in the same sentance with no rhyme or reason, this, combined with the fact that you don't blank lines between paragraphs, makes reading your posts extremely difficult.

In a related note, your response to me, simply by adding empty lines between paragraphs, is about three times more readable than your prior posts.

As for me bringing up points multiple times, this has been explained already; I'm really bad with words, and yet, I want to get my message across as clearly as I can. The two end up making me fairly repetitive.

This is actually kind of important, because i'm getting the impression that you're committing an Argument Ad Nauseam, and i can't tell if it's deliberate or not.

Paragraph seperation varies pretty significantly from person to person, but i've found putting an empty line between major but related paragraphs, and 2 or more empty lines between major but unrelated paragraphs

really

helps reading comprehension.

It does allow people to skim more easily, since they can check each paragraph faster, but the alternitive is worse.

Atm i'm about even on Trendall and Mastin. On the one hand i have serious concerns that Mastin may be trying to obfuscate poor arguments deliberately, on the other hand the speed at which Trendall picked up what looked like a possible Mastin wagon worries me.

Both are pretty light though, certainly i don't feel either is enough to justify a vote.

That's not so bad. Like i said before, large posts are alright, it's just large posts + poor formatting which cripples legibility.

I would put an empty line between each quote though, makes it easier to read again.

"Hitler Built Autobahns. Hitler was evil. Therefore building Autobahns is evil." Is a subset of the Correlation Implies Causation fallacy, which basically goes as follows:

A did B.
A is bad.
Therefore doing B is bad.

Another example is:

A did X as scum in the last game.
A is doing X in this game.
Therefore A is scum.


The reason it is a fallacy is it does not look at the reasons behind the action, only the action itself. A may well have done X as scum, but that does not mean that X is a scumtell. To use a silly-extreme example; Scum post in threads in which they are scum. Therefore posting in threads is a scumtell.

The Correlation Implies Causation fallacy is one of the most common and insidious logical fallacies in the world because on the surface in a reasonable real-life situation away from clear and concise examples it can

seem

to be correct, even obviously so.

Plus,

everyone

is often accused of buddying when it turns out to just be 2 town who agree (or sometimes 1 town who agrees with 1 scum). It happens all the time, in fact i can't think of a game where hasn't happened.

Admittedly, this is largely because people frequently confuse "agreeing with someone else" for "buddying" (they are very different people, look them up.)

Unvote, Vote: Neruz

You're killing me, man.
That was your ISO. An ocean of fluff with a short intermission of fencsitting in between. I can't live with that.

[Nachomamma8]

If Mastin's posts are affecting you to THAT extent, then you have three options.
1) Lynch him. He's so anti-town he's sucking all your interest from the game.
2) Ignore him. We'll take care of him if he's scum, and you can find the partner that doesn't write so damn much.
3) Replace out. At this point, you're useless.

tl;dr no excuse bro

[Nachomamma8]

There were three options for a reason.

[Nachomamma8]

Welcome back.

Point 1: Yenros is V/LA until tomorrow, as I discovered as I first prodded him. As for Mute, well. The name kinda gave that one away. You know I'm providing content, Neruz.
Point 2: If I was making a case, I would have made a case. Vote + maybe a point or two = decent pressure. That sometimes gives people enough impetus to look into the person themselves (see: Mastin).
Point 3: You're easy to read when pressured enough. I didn't think you'd crack at the inital attack, but I'll take it regardless. And me and you were both gone for two days. I didn't post, you posted crap.

[Nachomamma8]

...and Mute gets the rebound and lays it up for 2!

I don't know why not wanting to waste time talking about a no lynch for 20 pages is scummy.
As for your other point, you're wrong. I actually assumed that your doc protect WAS successful and the maf DIDN'T set you up.

[Nachomamma8]

I'll explain everything out a little more since Jay's a bit confused.

My original vote on Neruz was due to his active lurking for the past couple of days before I attacked him. If you read the posts quoted in #428, you'll see that none of his posts in that span had any game-related content at all; it was talk about Mastin's playstyle with the single exception of a post where he fencesits on Mastin/Trendall, where he interestingly enough finds that one of them is probably scum, a statement I find scummy as hell because it's unfounded, and scum love to create fake connections in a group of two people where "at least one is scum" because then they get two mislynches and not just one. I will find active lurking scummier than lurking every single time. Everyone lurks, but it's usually in scum's best interest to post a lot and say a little.

I'm keeping my vote on Neruz because of his reaction to my vote. He first tries to deflect blame of his lack of posting onto Mastin by saying that he wasn't interested in the game because he didn't want to read Mastin's long posts. So, I offered him three alternatives if Mastin's posting was affecting him so thoroughly, one of which was lynching him. Neruz, of course, decides to ignore the rest of my post except for the part that said "Lynch him", and then tried to twist my post to make it appear that it was the ONLY thing I had said.

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.

In addition, after I post a response to his "case" against me, he ignores it and simply goes on his merry way.

It would be really bad in my eyes if Mute and him hadn't brought out several good points against Nacho.

Good points? What did you have in mind, exactly?

Furthermore, i find it a little concerning that you're apparantly willing to jump on me for fence sitting a bit and willingly admitting that i'm not hugely interested in the game right now, but havn't paid any attention at all to the rather large quantity of lurkers this game possesses. Jay has at least chimed in once during that period with some content, but Yenros posted nothing at all during that same period and as far as i can tell Mute hasn't posted anything of worth for an entire week. (Yes i know he claimed Doctor, but that doesn't give him a pass to just cease participation in the game) and in what is perhaps the perfect example of blatant hipocrasy, where's your content Nacho?

In this point, he basically calls me scum because I attacked him opposed to everyone else. He attacks me for not attacking Yenros, even though Yenros was on a V/LA at that time, and I already prodded him before. He also seems to expects me to be responsible for prodding lurkers. The only problem with this is that I'm not; I'm not going to waste my time twisting people's arms to post. If you're not posting, however, I'm not going to be shy in looking for scum intent behind your lurking. The content I have provided since my entrance in this game should be obvious; first, I pushed a no lynch, which is what I believed was the best course of action today, and then I pushed someone who I thought was scum, Mastin. This, like you've already mentioned, has triggered a decently-sized case/wagon to form on Mastin. If that isn't content, then what is?

One example. That's it? Blanket statement 'you use terrible arguments' and then one example? And that last sentance doesn't even make any sense inside or outside of context.

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. The last sentence is a doozy, but let me give you a hand. If you aren't self-voting and you're random-voting the doctor, it means you aren't the doctor.

Next post, you bring up the Jay thing again, or should i say still? Since you were basically having a little fight with Mastin over whether or not he had made a case on Jay.

Erm, it was a valid mindset to attack Mastin to see whether the Jay thing actually WASN'T a Jay case, or he was just trying to squirm out of his weak case.

Rather than poking the lurkers to try and get them to post more (and thus contribute to town discussion), you pull up a case on me, based on two days of discussion after i had already admitted i was losing interest in the game.

This is a good example of what I mentioned earlier about him expecting me to get the lurker's to contribute. And I don't know what you admitting you've lost interest has to do with anything at all. If I say I've lost interest in the game, does that give me a free pass to active lurk my ass off?

This seems to be contrary to my prior experience with you, and is definitely contrary to any form of town logic.

Now he brings up meta. The last game we played together, I lurked until LyLo as town, made a case on both scum, and defended myself adequately enough to give us the win. This meta should suggest that I don't really find lurking scummy, since I did it. It should also suggest that I'm probably not going to be the one who makes lurkers contribute, since I'm sometimes a lurker myself. In other words, his "meta" point doesn't actually make sense and is weak padding to his case. The "definitely contrary to any form of town logic" is crap rhetoric.

Mute's points are based on bias.
First of all, he's had confirmation bias of me being scum as soon as I entered this game. He was convinced my predecessor was scum, and there's not a whole lot I can do to change his mind. This is demonstrated easiest by the simple fact that his case on me is just her old case against Lat, which he hasn't quite let go of yet, and further demonstrated by his case on me, which his only point is based on a misunderstanding that could've been avoided, had he read my posts.
His second bias is against aggressive playstyles. This is obvious when she calls #314 "too aggressive to be town", even though Trendall was just commenting on the odd timing of her claim. It's also no coincidence that her town read other than Kayi is an extremely passive person, and Trendall and I are two of the more aggressive players in the game.

As soon as the player he was voting for got what it seemed a decent case/wagon on him, two/three days before the deadline he suddenly decides that he's not the scummiest person out there and changes his vote.

The Mastin wagon was moving of its own momentum; I didn't need to push it along anymore. So why not push someone else while the Mastin wagon develops?

He seems willing to vote anyone whose playstyle annoys him.

Read #429 - #432 again. You're falling prey to Neruz's misrepping tricks.

Nacho, do you really think Neruz is more likely to be scum than Mastin? If so, why?

Yes, and I think now that I've expanded more on my case, you see why.

Seemingly unrelated but not at all... please do explain to me the quote on your signature. Since it alludes your play, I think it would allow me to get a better read on you.

It refers to an ongoing game I'm not at liberty to discuss.

For reference, this is not doing Nacho any favors; he seems to ignore these things in me and Trendall (though that might just be that he didn't mention them there--will need to refer back to his previous posts). 'Sides, I have a town read on Neruz.

I disagree that Trendall is fencesitting. And am I reading this wrong, or are you seriously trying to call me scum because I didn't call YOU out on fluff?

I'll look at Nacho's response, and it looks like a read of Nacho will be needed before I form a more solid conclusion, but right now, I'm agreeing, and think Nacho looks more like scum.

Right. So you agree with him without reading the posts he's talking about?

If so, blatant hypocrisy, anyone? (Though, again, I haven't read Nacho; it's obvious I need to.)

I didn't believe you because you were backpedaling from your Jay suspicion and onto a Trendall suspicion. Neruz was simply criticizing the strength of my vote on him.

[Nachomamma8]

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.

By calling it OMGUS, I'm not saying that his case on me was "oh my god you suck", but rather that his case on me was inspired on the fact I was voting him.

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?

What do you suggest?

I remain open to be convinced otherwise, but until you turned up the only people i had any sort of reasonable scumread on were Trendall and Mastin, 'one of them is probably scum' seems like a fairly logical conclusion.

And how, exactly, do you get two mislynches just from that? Obviously if i conclude that there is likely to be scum within a group i am going to analyse the group very carefully, work out which one is scum and attempt to lynch that one. You seem to be implying that if that person flips town the correct response is to go "Oh that means the other person must be scum!" But without having conflicting accounts that is not even remotely the logical choice. If you conclude that there is probably scum within a group, pick out the person within said group you believe to be scum, lynch them and find they flip town, the correct conclusion is that you were probably wrong about there being scum in the group.

No. What making fake connections between townies does is set up for the mislynch; before the first mislynch, you say that one of the two is probably scum. Mislynch the first one. That sets you up to make a case against the other one the next day without people criticizing your position as much the next day. Thus, two mislynches. You wouldn't say that there's probably scum in a group if you were going to drop it the second one flips town.

Not really, it's been my experience that ISO's are so common on MS that active lurking is far more dangerous than normal lurking. I've repeatedly seen people get off lightly on normal lurking, but active lurking always draws attention. The fact that you think that my discussing things like logical fallacies and posting styles instead of directly scumhunting is a scumtell however proves that you either weren't paying attention to me in our last game or are deliberately trying to make me look scummy.

My experience shows different. We're stuck in gridlock, moving on.

I also find it interesting that you're implying that i've been active lurking the entire game, instead of for less than two days. You're basing quite a lot on very little there Nacho.

Where did I do this? Last I remember, I said something exactly like this:

My original vote on Neruz was due to his active lurking

for the past couple of days

before I attacked him.

Obviously I'm talking about REAL LIFE days, since the game hasn't lasted more that a couple game days. So, where are you finding your little implications?

I'm sorry. What? Mastin's long posts put me off the game, this is true, but how in the hell is that Mastin's fault?! I provided a reason for my lack of content, i did not deflect blame on to Mastin. It's my fault that Mastin's posting style puts me off, i'm not incapable of reading his posts, i just don't want to. Mastin cannot be blamed for the fact that i dislike his posting style.

It felt like you were trying to blame Mastin for your inactivity since you had been complaining so much about him lately.

The first of which was lynching him. And it doesn't actually matter that you offered other alternitives, you said that lynching someone was a viable reaction to disliking someone's posting style. I don't give a wooden nickle if you provided other options as well, one of those options was "I dislike how X posts, i should lynch him because of that." which is quite possibly one of the most anti-town reasons to lynch someone i can think of. I cannot see any reason town would ever want to lynch someone for that under any circumstances.

Did you think ignoring was a viable option?

This would seem to indicate that you don't actually know what OMGUS is. If you genuinely think my vote on you is OMGUS, then you seriously need to go read the wiki. Since you're a reasonably experienced player i find it highly unlikely that you actually believe this, so nice try. I'm hesitant to label this as a misrep, because in context it feels a whole lot more like a blatant lie.

Perhaps you should venture outside the wiki every once in a while. OMGUS doesn't have to be "you're voting for me, so I'm voting for you"; it can also be "you're voting me, so here's my case on you".

If you're talking about #436, i didn't respond to it because i wasn't sure what points your post was directed at. Since rather than quote my points and respond to them you instead chose to just go "Point 1", i had difficulty trying to understand what exactly you were responding to, as i did not number my points. In addition, after i did a quick reread of my post i couldn't see how it actually applied to the points i'd brung up, so i decided to pass it over.

Instead of asking me to explain my response to your case against me, you just ignored it? So are you really so confident about me being scum that you don't even give a shit about my defense?

No, i expect you to be responsible in scumhunting.

It's not my job to prod all the inactive people. It's EVERYONE'S job.

What? I think you're taking that line out of context. (You really seem to like doing that), this line was referencing the fact that you still hadn't brought up more than on example of 'Mastin's terrible arguments' which you apparantly based your vote on. You referred to multiple terrible arguments, but only ever referenced one argument, repeatedly.

No one needed another example. No one asked for another example. They FOUND the other examples. And I scumhunt by prodding first and making cases second, which means I don't come out with a bunch of examples at first. You know this. Remember, when I made small general points for why you were scum and asked you a few questions, then dropped the case completely?

Oh yes, lowered participation for two days is definitely active lurking my ass off. I mean, my god, that's just so much active lurking, i should be voting myself because i active lurked so much.[/sarcasm]

Again, you blow the fact that i didn't contribute much over two days way out of proportion and imply i active lurked far longer than i actually did. If i'd been active lurking all day this argument might hold water.

It's called using hyperbole to demonstrate a point. Don't act like it's new to you.

The contrary to any form of town logic is most definitely not rhetoric however. Town are looking to find scum, you find scum by looking for scum tells, you cannot find scum tells if a player is lurking.

But. I did make an effort to convince some of the lurkers to participate; the only one I DIDN'T focus on was mute. I don't remember you prodding any lurkers; did you?

[Nachomamma8]

I remain open to be convinced otherwise, but until you turned up the only people i had any sort of reasonable scumread on were Trendall and Mastin, 'one of them is probably scum' seems like a fairly logical conclusion.

And how, exactly, do you get two mislynches just from that? Obviously if i conclude that there is likely to be scum within a group i am going to analyse the group very carefully, work out which one is scum and attempt to lynch that one. You seem to be implying that if that person flips town the correct response is to go "Oh that means the other person must be scum!" But without having conflicting accounts that is not even remotely the logical choice. If you conclude that there is probably scum within a group, pick out the person within said group you believe to be scum, lynch them and find they flip town, the correct conclusion is that you were probably wrong about there being scum in the group.

This is the optimal town procedure, yes, but this isn't what ends up happening. I'll find an example later.

Which means it's still your job. Just because everyone has the same job doesn't lessen the fact that you have it too.

No, but just because I'm one of the few people who was actually working on his job doesn't mean that I should be expected to do all of it, comprende?

Uh, i'm not acting ilke hyperbole is new to me, i'm acting like it's a scum tell, because it is. Hyperbole is used to create a stronger impression than would normally be gotten from simply referencing the facts, now tell me Nacho, in a Mafia game, who would want to create a stronger impression than normal towards something. Which side would want to exxagurate in order to manipulate people into seeing something as better or worse than it really is? Hmm...

Town wants to do that because they can never be very confident whether they've truly netted scum or not, and acting more confident then you really are is a great way to apply a good amount of pressure.
Scum want to do that too so they can push a case harder with less evidence.

So, both sides...?

[Nachomamma8]

Bleh. I can't convince myself that Mastin is scum, though. Why would he NOT hammer me if he was? He set up the hammer perfectly by being vehemently against a no-lynch today, like Trendall said. Especially considering that I hadn't claimed yet.

And yeah, yeah, I'm working on it.

[Nachomamma8]

For now, though

Vote: Yoenros

.
I expect some content now...

[Nachomamma8]

Unvote, Vote: Yenros

It's more of a placeholder than anything. It will happily be pushed to a lynch if Yenros doesn't respond soon, however, since I've seen his name at the bottom of my screen for the second time in a row and he sure as hell isn't in any other games but this one.

[Nachomamma8]

I'm going to read that case just because of how long it probably took, but I'm not going to do that now because it's fucking long. Can we get a tl;dr?

Yenros, how's the rereading going?

[Nachomamma8]

Neruz, what caused your overnight revelation?

I'm still working on a post, yeah.

[Nachomamma8]

Spoiler: Mastin's 3 Main Points

This post doesn't read as fencesitting: it actually reads as Trendall leaning against Beefster, and towards Kayi. This early in the game, that goes against everything I know of Trendall; by meta, he should have been in the middle. It reads like slight "confusion" (making it almost look like fencesitting), but it definitely seems to be leaning towards Kayi. That's a definite -1.

Not significant. Just because these things happened in games doesn't mean that Trendall remembers them all, and it definitely doesn't account for any games he's read, any other games he's played, etc...

Promises content "tomorrow". "Tomorrow" turns out to mean "three days later". His follow-up post doesn't contain much (mostly things directed directly at him), and he once again promises content, stating the following week is his good week. It does come, three days later, but--while stronger than his previous post--is quite weak.

Bad connections are bad connections. You can't blame anyone for those.

This is an important post. I know OMGUS has been brought up in Trendall's past games. I'm too lazy to track down an example from Trendall's first game, but here's something interesting about Trendall's second game: He's used OMGUS as an argument against someone, before! -1, oh, so, -1.

But it ended up being wrong in the end.

While his case is weak, I still feel that it's genuine simply because all of these points aren't misreps or anything like that; he just puts far too much faith in things like meta and tends to miss certain situational points. But going through all of that unfortunately took just as long as I thought it would, so I'm done with this game for now.

@Trendall:
http://mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.ph ... 10&start=0
Do me a favor and read page 10 of the game and look at everyone's alignments.

[Nachomamma8]

What, really? In all that postage Mastin only had 3 points?

Three significant ones. The rest wasn't really worth reading.

I hate hate hate these 'I'm not going to make a counter argument but I am going to link you to something random and expect you to draw your own counter argument from it' things. What are you saying here, you didn't get hammered once when you were town, so you're town in this game? The problem I have with Mastin not hammering you isn't simply the fact that he didn't hammer. It's the fact that he didn't hammer when he said you were tied with me as his top suspect, didn't hammer despite the fact that he was very anti-no-lynch, and didn't hammer despite the fact that he thinks townspeople should be reckless and risk-taking. These are huge discrepancies in Mastin's behaviour that put both you and him into the spotlight.

There's not much else that I can do. It's a move that doesn't really make a whole lot of sense on Mastin's end, but I don't really see a reason for him not to hammer me if he was scum. Mastin's been playing mafia long enough where I'm sure he knew that he would catch heat for doing something like that, and I doubt he would stick his neck that far out to save a townie if he was scum.

Now i'm pretty sure that's not what you're trying to say, because that would be really, really dumb, so care to clarify?

Where did you get that from...?

[Nachomamma8]

Back from my unannounced V/LA of sorts.

Neruz, could you summarize your case on me?

Vote: Jay

Jay's scumminess is easily summed up by his voting pattern.

Day 1, he randomvotes all the way through.
Day 2, he votes no lynch after Neruz. Then, he unvotes no lynch after Neruz. Then, he votes me after Neruz.
Day 3, he votes Mastin after Neruz. Then, he unvotes DLG after Neruz. The only original vote he's placed this entire game, other than his random vote on Mute, is on DLG, after he made his case on him.

I'd really, REALLY like to hear from Yenros's replacement though.

[Nachomamma8]

I wouldn't mind a no-lynch, but I'd recommend that all this discussion doesn't accompany it. No reason to tell scum who finds them town and who doesn't.

Vote: No Lynch

[Nachomamma8]

First suspicion is Jay.
Second is Trendall.

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.

My second suspicion is Trendall mostly because of the Jay point and because of the hammer. Even if he didn't think that there was any chance of swaying opinion, it most likely would be a good idea to hear my opinion, considering my opinion. And there was also the fact that I never even doubted for a minute in ANY of my posts that Mute was town. It just seems to me like Trendall wanted Mute to be lynched, regardless of his "read" on Mute.

I'm also not in favor of a massclaim like Ghostlin provided. I would much rather have a popcorn claim, which means that whoever claims picks who claims next. In that claiming system, I would be willing to go first.

[Nachomamma8]

Vanilla Townie; that's everyone. Post coming.

[Nachomamma8]

V/LA for a couple of days

Sorry, I'm really, REALLY sick at this point and can't really post at the calibre an SE should be posting at.

The Jay case should speak for itself in a lot of ways, though. The most difficult part of being scum is faking suspicions, which means that newbie scum are prone to lurking and sheeping. From how active Jay has been in this game, I'd expect him to have at least SOME original suspicion on ANYONE, really, but I haven't seen it yet. 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.". The rest of you have managed to show at least some protown streak, so I'm fairly sure about Jay as scum, but not voting on account of The Sickness.

Trendall moved up on my suspect list thanks to the whole "I think Mute is obvtown, so I'm going to hammer." There were still plenty of people that hadn't commented at that point, and there was no reason to not wait for the rest of us to show up. We might've turned the Mute wagon around, or we might've forced scum to hammer and put THEM under pressure instead of Trendall. ScumTrendall, however, had plenty of motive to hammer; not only could he get rid of the doctor, but he could also come into D4 with a "I was right, you were wrong" mentality. This plan pretty much backfired with Ghostlin's posts, though.
Unfortunately, the hammer was pretty much the only thing that irks me to a great degree with Trendall. The rest of his play has been consistent, and I'm not half as confident as Trendall being scum as I am with Jay being scum. The only other thing I have against him actually isn't in his behavior, but PoE. I have decently strong town reads on Ghostlin and DLG, which leaves Trendall as scum. It's completely possible that DLG is scum, since the scum like framejobs (see: mute), and it doesn't take too much effort to see Mastin not hammering me as a frame job.

[Nachomamma8]

Point 1: Which vote was this on?

The DLG one.

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?

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.

What does it matter whether it was MyLo or LyLo?
Why "if your suspicions proved to be correct"? Shouldn't a lynch on you end the game regardless of DLG's alignment?

[Nachomamma8]

Vote: Trendall

No reasoning needed!

[Nachomamma8]

Don't cry, even though we are both scum

[Nachomamma8]

Hopefully

[Nachomamma8]

The only reason I say this is a way for the mafia to discredit my claim via a NK. Say they decide to no-kill on N2, and I say "oh hey another successful block," that'd make them look bad. They could kill me and be on with their merry way, and the game'd go on as planned. They could kill someone and hope I don't predict their kill. This could either result in "oh hey Mute just made a wrong call," or someone could come along and say "well he didn't block the kill, maybe he false-claimed and the real doctor's too busy laughing at this fool to want to oust himself." Sure it comes down to luck, picking the right targets to save, but if I were scum it's something I'd consider as a gambit.

Most post-game commentary has been covered. The following sections will be aimed to helping everyone improve their play. I won't comment on Beefster, Lat, Mastin unless they want me to (since they've long left the stage of newbiehood). Please, don't take offense to anything that I say; I'm only doing this that you're an impressive crowd that have a future on this site if you want it (and Neruz can tell you this isn't just crap because I don't do this for everybody):

Mute: Your instinct is incredibly, incredibly impressive. You made two consecutive successful protects, and kept your vote on scum until you died. But as Trendall said, finding them is only half the battle. so you'll have to write a case somehow. Naturally, it's easiest to just look for all of the buzzword scumtells, like fencesitting and parroting, but the best thing to do is just write why someone would do what they were doing if they were scum. Don't rely on NKs too much, scum control who to kill and they might be manipulating you to think a certain way. And stay active, keep pushing your beliefs. You would have been much more of a threat to me if you posted more. As to what to post more, it doesn't have to be anything original. Just don't let yourself be ignored.

Trendall: Your playstyle reminds me a lot of mine when I'm town. You're terse, but that's not necessarily a bad thing. Use that to your advantage. People are going to listen to what you're going to say because they don't have much to read, so say what's on your mind a bit more often. Particularly, I'm thinking of the Mute lynch. You shouldn't have let that happen. DLG and I wouldn't have been able to push that last day lynch through on you fought the Mute lynch a bit more. Also, when you're overswamped by walling, all you have to do is ask for a summary of the case on you. If they don't offer it, point out that it's just a bunch of rambling crap. You did manage to peg both scum and stick to your convictions, though, and that always deserves congratulations.

[Nachomamma8]

Neruz: You were one of the two people we actually ended up nightkilling, and you ALMOST lynched me D2. You're a very good player, and you had me pegged with the wall to such an extent where all I could do was lurk out of pressure. When I successfully did as much, you dropped me. Don't ever, ever do that. If you have someone extremely close to death and have the wind at your back and they suddenly slither away, you find them when they get back and you get lynched. Don't forget there are other people around you; I have no doubt in my mind that if you had tossed in a few posts with nothing but "more votes on Nacho", then I wouldn't have gotten away.

Jay: More confidence! You certainly covered yourself well enough; it was difficult making a case on you outside of how you voted, and none of the town really bought my or DLG's case on you. The problem with you is that you don't do more with your suspicions. I saw a few times where you questioned Mastin's posting, but you didn't vote or even follow up on it! Whenever you have a suspicion, it's usually not unfounded. So make sure it's heard, make sure you do something with it. Don't be willing to follow people so easily, either. The only person you have to trust is yourself; you'll learn this soon when the top townread you've been sheeping the entire game quickhammers at LyLo and posts "gg scumbuddy". I look forward to seeing the results of you following your convictions.

Concission: Not much to say here, but I will say that you at least hid your incorrect reads from the scumteam and got yourself killed, so that's damn good play for 11 posts.

Ghostlin: The Mute lynch Day 3 was a good decision on your part to push through; it was one of things that everyone was thinking and Mute would've been a liability in LyLo. You have picked up a useful skill in asking yourself questions (odd, right), but you're still missing a level of depth, and that's scum intention. You ask why the claimed doctor is still alive on Day 3, but ask why scum would clear Mute when they could clear a player with more towncred behind them. Ask yourself why someone with decently low activity during the game would suddenly snap into activity, that sort of thing. But you did a great job as a replacement, and you and Concission made a game that was threatening reaching a standstill interesting again.

DLG: . I've seen you play as both scum and town, and I've been impressed both times. I've noticed one distinct difference between your town and scum play though, and that's your use of indirect attacks. You tend to feel the waters in the town before making any significant votes, and this habit won't serve you well in circles of RC's level. Try to cut down on these attacks, or at least place a vote after them so you look more like a townie who honestly suspects someone.

RC: Don't forget that you're one of the people I will always replace for, and thanks for the smooth modding and putting up with my justified ribbing of your Texanosity.

[Nachomamma8]

No problem, I can do that.

When you came into this game, you came in strong and made some good posts. The problem was that there wasn't a whole lot of purpose behind them. They weren't to build town cred because you didn't bother people about them, and they weren't to get someone lynched who would've been harder to lynch then Beefster. When you're replacing in as scum, you're in a damn powerful position to do whatever the hell you'd like. Whether people like it or not, replacements have a fair bit of free town cred they can burn. Next time, use your position to gain your advantage; come in roaring with that case on Kayi and save the Beefster lynch for later, or start pounding the shit out of your partner to try to get some towncred. But don't just weakly jump on the flavor of the month wagon because that's a waste of replacement power. Next, when you try to kill your top suspect during the night and they don't die, continuing the case on them is an acceptable path. But think about having a sudden change of heart, repositioning, taking away credibility from the inevitable doc claim that's about to arrive and try to attack another lynch. You need to take your scum team to the next level by thinking past self-preservation and instinctual play and start thinking "what's the best possible position I can put my scumteam in now?"



And to the rest of you, don't forget there's still a community out there!
I'd recommend playing a couple of Open games after this Newbie; you'll get to play with a different type of player, and the setups aren't really all that weird yet.
Don't forget that in three months you'll be able to jump into the moderator business.
You can PM me about anything, really. I'm still willing to answer questions you have about the game, even after this one ends. Hell, if you want to play mafia with a familiar face (and get beat again ), you can always PM me and we can /in for a game together (or I could replace into one of yours).

[Nachomamma8]

Y'ALL Y'ALL Y'ALL Y'ALL Y'ALL Y'ALL