Minvitational Game 2

[mith]

Werebear, can you kill still?

[mith]

Well, if we think it's 3 Mafia, the choices are:

a. No lynch, Werebear doesn't kill ever again unless we're sure (cop says so, or whatever)
b. We lynch, hope we're right, and then if we are, have Werebear kill to get us back to an odd number (and I'd say we choose the kill as a group, now that we know he's innocent).

If we vote, I'm voting for Antrax, IS, or mole.

[mith]

Oh, Antrax and Samadhi: 1 vote can not give the Mafia the game. Even if there are three, and they all jump on the wagon, that's not enough votes.

FOS: to you both

[mith]

I was thinking about this Sofis, and I've come to the conclusion that whether we get a Mafia or not, it's best for Werescum to kill again tonight. That gets us back into the odd numbers, and he might get a Mafia, as well. Also, I think the Cop should come out if he has a Mafia or if he has two innocents other than Werebear. And maybe if he has less innocents than that as well. After all, that gives Werebear a better chance of getting scum, as well as us. So, yeah, surprisingly, I agree with IS. I still think he's scum though.

[mith]

Well, if the Cop (assuming there even is a Cop, there may not be one) has 2 innocents other than Werebear, then that leaves 4 unknowns. We lynch one, Were kills ones, and we're left with 3 knowns and 2 unknowns tomorrow, we win. Let's see...

Ok, ran over the numbers, pretty sure if the Cop only has one non-werebear innocent, we're much better off with him not coming out *if* there are really 3 Mafia. Didn't check other cases.

And of course, this all assumes there is only one Cop, there aren't Masons, things like that.

[mith]

Samadhi, I think we're all considering Werebear confirmed (though, he could be pulling something clever), and so there could definitely be 4 "known"s if a Cop came out.

[mith]

"Normal" Vigilantes can kill every night. I think DP started the once per game thing (though, I could be mistaken).

And yeah, I don't think Werescum is scum, but I won't trust him 100% until I'm 100% sure.

Anyway. I assume we're voting instead of doing a no lynch, and I assume a Cop isn't coming out, or he already would have. So, I will

Vote: Antrax

. Not totally a hunch, I'll explain my reasoning when I get home.

[mith]

Geez Antrax, you act like no one has ever voted for you before.

*If* there are 3 Mafia, *and* all three jumped on this bandwagon, we *still* wouldn't lose, because Werescum could kill one of them tonight. *Think* before you post, please. Given that you, IS, and Samadhi are in no hurry to vote, and we know Werescum is innocent, there is no way you are going to get 3 votes any time soon anyway.

[mith]

Alright, my case against Antrax. This ought to be fun.

1. Yesterday, he was incredibly adamant about lynching Quailman. He wanted Were to shoot him if he didn't get lynched, and used all sorts of Crap Logic (he was trying to lure the cop out?) to get him lynched, despite Quailman acting nothing like he does when he is scum.

2. There's this:

Yeah, I mean, only mafias ever lynch townies! Townies get mafias every time! What a great proposal.
I will not be intimidated by this pathetic concealed threat. I believe Quailman is mafia, and will vote for him. If I'm wrong, too bad, behave less like mafia next time or bother to defend yourself against valid accusations that arise.

Ok, fine, townies aren't always right, I'll be the first to agree with that. But

take responsibility for your actions

. You lynched Quailman. It is *not* his fault that you did so. This flippant attitude alone would earn you my vote.

3. Seems pretty paranoid that someone is going to get him lynched as well. Moreso that usual. *~shrug~*

4. Also seemed... not in a rush exactly, but close to it, to get the first day over with. But now, when he gets a couple votes, it's panic time! Oh no! There might be 3 Mafia, it's lynch or lose blah blah. Only reason it *might* be lynch or lose is because you were wrong yesterday. Besides, even if we lynch inncorrectly, Werebear can still save us by killing a Mafia tonight (he should kill tonight anyway).

5. Ok, the rest of it is a hunch. But I think there's plenty to vote on anyway.

[mith]

Oh, so it's fine risking the game for that. I'm convinced. What's the BENEFIT of taking this chance? And who gave you permission to take that risk for all of us?

Huh? Risking the game? There's no risk involved. You can't get three quick votes. Even if you did, Werebear could kill the quick voters. It's really simple.

6. Antrax usually doesn't miss obvious stuff like this, or who DP voted for yesterday, etc. Too many mistakes, not usual Antrax goodness.

[mith]

They found it convincing.

Oh, really?

Sofis:

So. Voting.

On the one hand, I find the main argument cited for lynching Quailman pretty uncompelling. While I don't think you should put someone one vote from a lynching while you're waiting for them to respond (hence my unvote) it's hardly very good evidence for mafiahood - as mith points out, it's unlikely that anyone would have cast the final vote, since that's a pretty sure way of getting lynched if Werebear turns out to be innocent (which he seems to be).

On the other hand, I find the arguments in favour of lynching the other people who have votes to be... well, nonexistant.

So I guess I'll vote: Quailman

IS:

At the risk of facing some random wrath later, im going to jump on this Quail bandwagon. This day will stall too much if we dont get it moving.

Unvote: Jalyn
Vote: Quailman

Am I saying the others aren't responsible? Of course not. More on this later. What I am saying is

you were wrong

, and several of us (most importantly to myself, me) thought your reasons were shaky, at best. Thus, it's a reason to vote for you. Did I say it was fool-proof evidence? No, again. It's a piece of the puzzle.

The point is, you were very adamant about lynching (or Werebear killing) someone who turned out innocent. Therefore, strike one.

You need to take your own advice. Every single person who voted for Quailman did it out of his own free will. The fact I was the one who tried to persuade people into joining it is 100% irrelevant. If I'm wrong, nobody's twisting your arm to follow me. You didn't follow, 5 people did, bam, he's dead.

Once again, Antrax

completely

misses my point. Read what I quoted you saying again:

If I'm wrong, too bad, behave less like mafia next time or bother to defend yourself against valid accusations that arise.

I was saying *you* and the *people that voted for Quailman* should take responsibility, as opposed to "Oh well, don't act like scum". You're taking no responsibility whatsoever. Quail is just a casualty of war or something. I don't like it. Take some bloody responsibility when you're wrong. You certainly make it plenty known when you're right.

Loaded language, load of crap, yadda yadda, move on.

I think your use of the word loaded has become loaded. Seriously, wth? I think you're paranoid. You don't want to address it, you want to hide behind the word "loaded", suit yourself.

And again, mith feels he has the right to endanger the entire game. Yeah, we might lynch a mafia today. Or Werebear might shoot a mafia tonight. Or there might be just two mafia. SO WHAT? What does it benefit us to play by these nice scenarios and risk an immediate loss, when the rational move is to assume the worst case scenario, and play cautiously?

And my posts are loaded? Where did I ever say we shouldn't play cautiously? Where did I ever say I was risking anything? I am convinced you are scum. Thus, I am voting for you. The cop has had *ample* time to come out, and hasn't. You keep saying risk over and over like it adds anything to your argument. What risk? You have two frickin' votes, you need 5. There is *no way* the Mafia can jump quickly on your wagon without it being obvious who they are, and

if I am Mafia, you still wouldn't have enough votes!

. Stop hiding behind this cautious nonsense and admit you just don't want to get lynched.

The person for whom he voted yesterday was completely irrelevant to my case, which was "hi, DP's lurkming". So, I didn't bother to go back and double check it.

Again, I wasn't only talking about that, I was also talking about how insane you're being about the fact that you have two votes. Again, you focus on one small part of my argument that you might be able to explain away.

I've made worse mistakes in the past (anyone remember Mafia 45?)

Yes, I do. Do you? I recall you being Mafia in that game.

so don't try to talk to my arrogance.

Who said I was even talking to you in my last post? I'm presenting my case, so that others can decide for themselves. Defend away, I'm not playing to anything of yours, I just think you're scum.

Because he's endangering the town.

By voting for you. I've seen this argument before. IS used to make long rants about how if someone lynched him, it would destroy the town (heck, the universe).

News flash. You're not that important. Oh, look, played to your arrogance.

Because I believe at least one of my current voters is scum.

What kind of reasoning is that? You think I'm scum because you think either DP or I must be??

Because his case against me is wrong on many points.

As you have so eloquently pointed out, by ignoring half the stuff I say and passing the rest off as loaded.

Because he seems keen on playing a game of chance, instead of mafia.
This is like the pascal arguement. Sure, I may be wrong, there may be fewer than 3 mafia or werebear might shoot the voters or I could wake up and find out this was all a dream, and I'm actually a 16 year old Japanese girl serving someone in a masion; the question is, is your gain worth the risk? The answer is, no. If you want to accuse me, you don't need to vote for me to do so. Debate can go on without the votes to propel it forward. So, you're risking everything for 0 gain. If that's how a good guy behaves (not to mention a relatively rational one), then I apparently misunderstood the game since I started playing.

Will someone, other than Antrax-the-amazing, please explain to me how Antrax having 2 votes is even

risking

throwing the game away? I could have put a FOS on him. I already did. And you know what? Nothing changed since I did that 2 days ago. So I voted for him. There are 3 people, Antrax, IS, and Samadhi, who are playing this "I won't vote until Antrax says I can" strategy, and Werebear we know is innocent, so even if the Mafia tried to quickly bandwagon him, they couldn't get him enough votes.

And

even if they could, that would just mean I couldn't be Mafia. So, Antrax, you can argue all you want that I'm an idiot (and you'd be wrong, if you took the time to actually think about the situation), but you aren't getting me lynched on it.

To sum up, in the words of a well known Mafia player:

Antrax, you must be stupid or evil.

(that last part was a joke, and if he jumps on me for trying to get him lynched by playing to his arrogance or whatever nonsense, I will scream. )

[gslamm]

Bah, I had this reply typed out this morning, and managed to erase it all by a clumsy mouse highlight.

Anyway, here we go again.

Quote:
and several of us (most importantly to myself, me) thought your reasons were shaky, at best.

Yet, somehow, magically, failed to sway more voters your way. I wish I had your vision mith, it sure seems 20/20 to me.

Whether more people agreed with me or you is irrelevant. The fact is, you were wrong, and several of us thought your reasoning as bad (most importantly to myself, me).

Chalk it up to you being more convincing or whatever, it doesn't change the wrongness.

The accusation "you are paranoid" has no substance; if you want a serious response, please show where and when I act in that "paranoid" way. Don't they teach you debate at schools?

No substance? I thought the reasoning behind that is obvious. Let's see... you have *two* votes, and you're acting as if I have committed the eighth deadly sin. Yesterday, you made some post about how you thought people would come after you for defending Werebear even though you hadn't, which seemed really bizzare to me since, at that point, you were perhaps the *least* convinced of Werebear's innocence (or, at least, wanted it to appear that way). You seem to think that you being lynched would be the worst thing ever. Those three'll do for now.

You're obviously not getting this.

I'm

not getting it?

It's like providing the 5th vote for Quailman.

And clearly Quailman was scum because of it.

all very safe on paper, but there is some risk involved.

Yes, and there is some risk involved in you being a 16-year-old Japanese school girl who shoots lasers out of your ass, too. There's risk in everything. If you want a sure thing, play a different game.

You want me to make up scenarios? fine!

Mafia lynch me

, then the fabled mafia doc blocks Werebear, they shoot Werebear, win.

I think I've already shown that the Mafia can't just lynch you. Try again. And if anyone believes there is actually a Mafia Doc, I've got some sunny property in Limeyworld to sell you.

Or, 2 mafia and an innocent lynch me, Werebear shoots the innocent, mafia win.

And this requires an innocent helping. But no innocent would *ever* vote for you, would they?

Or, Mafia member uses his magical once-per-game duo vote, or mafia hypnotist, or bloody mafia prostitue.

Or you could be a Japanese schoolgirl. What's your point? Do you really think there are 3 Mafia and one can vote twice? (even if there was, we'd need *six* to lynch, so you still couldn't be offed by just the Mafia). And we have no evidence whatsoever of vote control in anyone that has posted. This is just grasping at straws.

The point is simple.

Well, yes, your point is simple. It's also incorrect.

These scenarios do exist, as slim as they may be.

Ok, you've got me here. You're right, there *is* some chance that quercitron was smoking some crack when he made this game, and there are actually 5 Mafia, one of whom is a Godfather with three votes, two extra kills, and a protection, and you can shoot lasers out of your schoolgirl ass.

And the one thing slimmer than the chance of them existing, is the absolutely NOTHING you benefit from voting me right now.

Wrong

. What I gain nothing from is sitting here for two days waiting for a Cop to come out, and then *not* doing anything when nothing happens. What I gain nothing from is letting someone I think is scum try to convince everyone that voting for him is bad just because voting in general is bad, when I know perfectly well he's just trying to save his own skin. What I gain nothing from is believing these fantasies you have about being a Japanese schoolgirl rather than concentrating on actual evidence.

CASE CLOSED! Damn, I didn't realise I'm so transparent. OF COURSE I DON'T WANT TO GET LYNCEHD. Sheesh. How does that, in any way, make your hasty vote any better?

My point was not that self-preservation is bad, but that your argument is full of Crap Logic. You are accusing me of voting hastily and all that, but the only basis for your argument is that you don't want to get lynched. My example from yesterday comes through today. Yesterday you voted Quailman in part because he was the 5th vote on Were's wagon. Samadhi was the 5th on Quail's. The difference? One agreed with you.

Today, I was the second vote on yours. Samadhi was the second on DP's. Difference?

You get the idea.

If you want to come at me for making a bad play, fine, but if you're only doing it because you, personally, don't agree with me, or because you're scum trying to save your hide, then it's not logic, just opinion.

That, and it's not even a hasty vote, I made my intentions known several days ago, and have acted on them. And guess what? In the full day since I voted, how many votes have you gained? 0. Unless you count IS's vote/unvote.

Quote:
Again, you focus on one small part of my argument that you might be able to explain away.

No, you are. Seriously, you attacked my actions in the early day, I explained it really was an honest mistake. If that wasn't your intention, maybe you need to stop posting fluff and fix on your main points.

Unlike you, apparently, I pool together all my evidence, however innocent it may seem. It was clearly *not* my main point, since the

only

time I even mentioned it was comparing it to another mistake, which I consider much more serious.

Quote:
Yes, I do. Do you? I recall you being Mafia in that game.

And? It still was a mistake, not part of some cleverly-planned strategy.

So is your insistence that we shouldn't vote until you say we can a mistake, or a strategy to buy you time?

Quote:
I'm not playing to anything of yours

That's great, because I'm not scum. Seriously, your self testimony is worthless. What was that sentence supposed to contribute? You also denied trying to rouse me on day 1, doesn't mean you didn't try it.

And you saying you're innocent has no weight either. What's your point? Am I no longer allowed to state facts and opinions in Mafia either?

Quote:
Will someone, other than Antrax-the-amazing, please explain to me how Antrax having 2 votes is even risking throwing the game away?

A good idea is to read what I write. I've explained it over and over again, both in this post and in the last.

Funny, coming from someone who ignores others posts (the reasoning behind voting for Werebear yesterday, for example).

I am reading your posts, and I don't agree with it. You saying it, gasp, doesn't make it correct. I was hoping someone else would show an opinion on the matter.

Quote:
There are 3 people, Antrax, IS, and Samadhi, who are playing this "I won't vote until Antrax says I can" strategy

Which, obviously, mafia could NEVER fake until the crucial moment! Damn, you're getting smarter by the minute. Any second now you'll need skull-expansion surgery, or something.

Geez, yeah, that'd be brilliant. Samadhiscum gives you vote number 5 after telling everyone to be cautious, Werebear kills him. This isn't brain surgery here.

I love the bolded part. I call it "no explanation necessary".

Explanation? I've explained and explained and explained. It's very logical. There is *very little* chance of you getting lynched quickly by the Mafia, and the fact that

I think you are scum

outweighs the whole Japanese ass-shooting probability.

And I'm going for the "he's evil, get him" lynch, not the "he's stupid" one. Has to do with you being scum, etc.

And here, I will admit I made a mistake. I see what you're getting at now. I thought you were going the "look, that's stupid, he must be Mafia" route, rather than the "look, that'd be stupid unless he was Mafia" route you tried with DP. And, hopefully the others are convinced that my voting for you was far from stupid. I don't see anyone agreeing with you about me, at least.

I also don't see them not voting. Gee, imagine that. People voting, in a Mafia game.

You're just ranting about how stupid it is because it's you, not because I'm being hasty.

In short, you are characterising me

Yes, as scum. Isn't that what we're supposed to do?

, claim I ignore the "important points" you raise, when those "important" points are defined as "the 2 points that seemed less central at the time so weren't replied to"

Um, yeah, I addressed this one. You focused on something I used as an analogy (this [the whole hasty nonsense] is a mistake,

like

you missing DP's vote). When something is an analogy like that, and is mentioned absolutely nowhere else in the post, why would you possibly consider it more important than the part you ignored?

refuse to accept a perfectly mathematical claim

Yes, because you saying it's perfectly mathematical makes it perfectly correct as well. *~rolls eyes~*

(for which you pretend not to see the repeatedly-made explanation)

Where did I pretend not to see it? I've been arguing about it with you! I think you're wrong, I'm not ignoring it.

and in general trying to provoke me since day 1.

I provoke people in every Mafia game. So do you. It's how you get them to talk. Now everyone has all this crap from you to look over, so they can decide for themselves. I'm happy with that. Let the people decide.

If this is innocent behaviour, well then, call me wrong again, what can I say. Your case against me is "he led the Quailman bandwagon" and "he's using evil math tricks to show that maybe it's best to discuss BEFORE voting, much like they do in real life", puffed up by a lot of demagoguery and some plain lies or pretense of misunderstanding. Strong!

I believe my case actually had six points. Shall I go over them again?

1. You led the bandwagon of an innocent.
2. Not taking responsibility for said bandwagon, and instead passing it off as "oh well, he shouldn't have been so suspicious, not my fault".
3. General paranoia over people voting for you, and other things mentioned above.
4. Accusing me (and DP) of hastiness.
5. Hunch.
6. Missing obvious things (IMO), ties into 4 mostly.

Brilliant summary though. You're right, I'm completely against discussing stuff before voting. That's why I voted for you in my

7th

post of the day, 3 RL days after day 2 started.

*~waits patiently for the next response~*

Oh yeah, and:

Yeah, few things are as fun as blatantly throwing a game. Miss Mafia 3 days, IS?
Antrax

This is the silliest thing I've ever seen. He's throwing the game 'cause he wants to vote for you? Huh?

Now for the rest of you.

unvote: Antrax
Vote: DP

Ok, ill bite.

Bite on what? Do you think Antrax is scum, or DP? Or do you just not care? Better be careful, Antrax will get you for not being cautious. Oh, wait, no, he agrees with you, nevermind.

Okay, so at least the nonscum elements in this town can be reasoned with. Don't be afraid to read mith's posts, despite being long and tedious.

I've seen this one before, though I can't remember who did it, or what game it was. You make little random posts that have no logic whatsoever in them to insult the person you're arguing with. Ok, sure, go for it. Have a blast.

This jumped out at me from mith's posts
Quote:
Seems pretty paranoid that someone is going to get him lynched

Quote:
I think you're paranoid


Paranoid? Doesn't that kind of presume that he's a townie?

Well, in most cases, I'd probably agree with you. Antrax, though, I don't generally associate paranoia-over-being-lynched with innocence for him. He is generally less concerned about surviving and more concerned about being right at the end of the game. Strikes me as Mafiaish. *~shrug~*

I'll be gone for all of tomorrow and most of the day after, so the next time I'll be able to check the thread will be in about 40 hours. Please give me a grace period in case anyone actually brings up a substantial point against me, as opposed to a load of crap and vindictive voting (against which I can't defend, anyhow).

Again with the above random insult. I don't get it, I expect better out of you.

And bah, why can't you wait a few more minutes? Stupid mouse slip.

[edit to fix tag]

[mith]

Dang, that's long. Sorry, just have a tendency to respond to every point someone makes.

[mith]

Well, I'd switch if you would explain. But I'm not going to change just on your word.

I'm sure Antrax will switch to DP to save his skin, so it's up to the other two to decide who dies.

[mith]

Looks like DP'll be lynched when Antrax gets back, then. Not going to preach against it like yesterday, I don't have much of a read on DP, I can't really think of any games he's been scum in that I've been around long enough to notice (believe it or not, my basis for Quail not being Mafia wasn't even a recent game, it goes back to the memorable (at least to me) Mafia 5. probably not too wise, but it hasn't let me down on Quail yet. ).

Anyway, yeah, if you're wrong, Were will kill you, so not too big of a risk. If you're right, Were will probably kill me or Antrax, and whoever he kills, we'll hope he gets it right this time.

One small thing worries me, of course. If there are 3 Mafia, and Samadhi and DP are two of them, would Samadhi sell out his scum buddy at this point to gain trust? (Don't worry Samadhi, I don't really suspect you yet, just tend to think of worst-case scenarios and such)

[mith]

Oh yeah, hadn't thought about him possibly shooting the Cop. The reason I was thinking he should shoot is that we need parity back (the whole odd even thing). Having an even number of players basically wastes a player (for example, 2-6 and 2-5 are both lynch-or-lose, and we're actually better off dumping the extra townie in a no lynch). So, I would've rather given Werebear a *chance* at getting a Mafia, with a wasted townie anyway. But we don't want to risk him getting the Cop, yeah.

[mith]

(starting to wonder if there even is a Cop)

[mith]

Pah, what I do? But if he doesn't want to risk shooting the Cop, bring it on, Werescum.

[mith]

Isn't there already a Doc dead?

[mith]

Which I've explained thoroughly.

And I've countered equally (well, more, only you're going to rely on the old lots-of-words=lots-of-crap argument, I see) thoroughly.

Quote:
Yesterday, you made some post about how

you thought people would come after you for defending Werebear even though you hadn't

, which seemed really bizzare to me since, at that point, you were perhaps the *least* convinced of Werebear's innocence

Here's that part of that post:
Quote:

Okay, I will.

Suppose Werebear is lying scum? Then people go back, "aha, Antrax defended him, die die die suck scum". Only I haven't defended Werebear

, I've attacked a person I thought is mafia. I have no idea about Werebear's guilt or innocence, but I know we'll know tomorrow for sure.

You really need to stop counting on me being too lazy to reply to plain lies.

Someone please explain what the hell he's talking about here. I said you thought people would come after you for defending Werebear, even though you hadn't defended Werebear, and you bolded part of your post saying you hadn't defended Werebear. ???

Ignoring a lot of fluff, where Antrax ignores my most of my argument against me being at all hasty. Oh there's, this:

There was more of this, but it's obvious mith is ignoring the amazing idea of discussing WITHOUT voting until the end. You know, just like EVERY SINGLE GAME IN REAL LIFE goes. What a wacky person that Antrax is.

Now tell me Antrax, when, in *any* Mafia game, has anyone (other than possibly you) ever held off casting a second vote with 5 needed because it would be hasty? Hm? You certainly have no qualms about voting before "the end".

I haven't been ignoring *anything* in your posts. Isn't that one of your complaints? I've responded to every single one of your points. Let me go pull one up that, yes, I would say is the main bit, and yes, which you ignored most of. You got the first part, but not the rest. Let's try again.

Quote:
And the one thing slimmer than the chance of them existing, is the absolutely NOTHING you benefit from voting me right now.

Wrong

. What I gain nothing from is sitting here for two days waiting for a Cop to come out, and then *not* doing anything when nothing happens. What I gain nothing from is letting someone I think is scum try to convince everyone that voting for him is bad just because voting in general is bad, when I know perfectly well he's just trying to save his own skin. What I gain nothing from is believing these fantasies you have about being a Japanese schoolgirl rather than concentrating on actual evidence.

You see, I'm voting for someone I'm convinced is scum. So are you; that's why, rather than making a strongly worded post saying "Gee, I think mith is scum", you just voted for me (that, or you're scum, of course). In Mafia, you

vote

for people.

Clearly this new method of voting for people you think are guilty hasn't led to a quick lynch. It was never going to.

Quote:

Funny, coming from someone who ignores others posts (the reasoning behind voting for Werebear yesterday, for example).

Of course! You posted one word "random", and I should've realised straight away that as opposed to the dictionary meaning of the word, it actually stands for "Rotten Arbitary Neo-Doofus or Mafia", which means he's either very stupid, or mafia, and be convinced straight away.

Ok, this is the second time you've completely missed/overlooked something about this particular point. Allow me to bold it so you won't miss it yet again.

Sofis and jeep both voted Werebear immediately after I did, giving the same reasoning that I had in mind. Whether you could gather that reasoning from two word comment is completely irrelevant, since the reasoning was posted by others.

I also never said you should be convinced by this logic, or that I now thought Werebear was scum. The entire point of me even bringing it up yesterday was that you said Quailman was casting a fifth vote for no reason, and I said he had reason if you bothered to read other people's posts (not mine!).

Lies. I've ranted against speed before. Speed cost the town games in the past. Remember alien mafia?

Actually, speed cost you your life in that game, it didn't cost the town the game. What cost the town the game was CF not responding for almost a week.

I try to explain my motives for voting, to give people a chance to challenge them. You obviously use your magic skills to figure out who's mafia, and then just do anything to try to lynch them

Um, no. Let's go over the facts, shall we?

I posted 7 times *before* voting for you, two mentioned suspicion of you. Mostly, I Was discussing whether the Cop should come out. (Interesting side-note. I argued against you calling DP's vote a hasty vote. If I were Mafia, why would I draw all this attention to myself by allowing you to make the same claim on me?)
On the third RL day of this day, I finally voted. I said I would explain my reasoning when I got home. You freaked. You also, as I just now noticed, urged the Cop to come out, ignoring the entire Cop-coming-out-logic that Sofis and I (and others) had been discussing. Incidentally, I *would* charactize this as a Mafia move, because I did something similar in game 1.
I posted my reasoning.
You responded, by quoting most everything I said.
I responded, by quoting most everything you said.
...

You see why it got long?

Anyway, point. I had plenty of reasoning. You just give me more every time you post.

Uh, yes. If you accept the basic assumptions, the conclusion follows logically. You, of course, chose to decide there's no risk in voting hastily, because you don't like the conclusion, but I wonder if the other players in the game share your opinion.

And this is exactly what I've been asking them. I know IS thought you flipped out in your initial post after my vote, so I can't imagine him agreeing that my vote was hasty. Sofis is voting for you, so I doubt he'd agree either. DP, of course, would not agree, but he's probably scum so I won't count on that to sway you. Anyway, that's 4 thinking you're full of it. Want a true majority?

Only you've been inflating this "crap" into monstrous proportions, to discourage people from reading, posting, or doing much of anything. Good job, I'd've never believed it might work for you in this game.

Not any more than you, really. Your three posts combined come in at 1250 words. Your post back on page three was getting close to 1000. Is it that surprising that when I quote someone's entire post, I double the size? I only do it because you give me so much crap to respond to.

Anyway, I'll leave it at that, since you people seem to hate long arguments. I believe I've come in at just under 1200 for this one. Whee.

[mith]

Actually, one more small thing, and I want you to respond to this, Antrax, you can ignore the entire post if you'll answer this.

Why are you voting for me, if we should hold our votes til "the end"?

[mith]

Because I'm convinced you and your goons are trying to get me lynched, and thus there's no chance of sudden mafia invasion of my bandwagon.

And I'm convinced you're Mafia, thus there's no chance of a sudden Mafia invasion of my bandwagon, either. Come on, Antrax, this is ridiculous, you just told me I wasn't allowed to bypass your impeccable logic just because I think you're scum.

Because DP has 4 votes after someone with a role accused him.
Because handicapping myself when nobody else seems to be following it (even though nobody made a single explanation of why I'm wrong) is bad play, on my part. It's useless to be the only righteous man if all it means is that your purpose is lost in the mob.

To quote the brilliant logician, referee,

No way

. You voted for me

before anyone voted for DP

. You accuse me of lying? Please.

And no one has explained why you're wrong? Do I even need to comment on that? Come on, this is just pathetic.

Why aren't you defending your 6-point arguement against me? Isn't that the summary of all the bad and evil things I'm apparently guilty of? Why are you still continuing the 1000-word posts?

Um, to the last question, I was responding to *your* 1200 words. I didn't get to the last post because I was trying to keep it shorter than 2000 words (and because I was running late for church). We've already been over all the arguments anyway, I've responded to every single thing you made in that last post.

To summarize, stop acting like the God of the meta-game. I've spent over two years thinking about this stuff, I'm quite solid in Mafia logic. Do you want a repeat of the random vote argument from Newbie 4? I wasn't being hasty, you're yet again trying to tell people how to play, you hide behind "logic", refusing to listen to other people's arguments (unless you like them, of course), even though they are generally better thought out than your own. And you smell funny. Ok, maybe not that last.

[mith]

Heh, way to defend yourself against my post. You completely ignore that your reasoning for voting for me is:

1. Hypocritical
2. A Big Fat Lie

And instead concentrate on the idea that half the town are idiots. Well done.

[mith]

Ah, the old "I know you are but what am I." What are you, 5?

I know you didn't ignore the post, and it wasn't even long, a mere 355 words. Surely you can handle that much reading.

[mith]

Everyone sees where Antrax lied, right? I'm not dreaming this?

*~wanders off to sleep~*

[mith]

Aha, there was a cult. So that's how Samadhi knew.

And I was right. Die Antrax die. Way to go Werebear, doing your job.

Now then. What do we do about the cult? If we treat them as good, we could just have them recruit us, effectively making a Mason group that Mafia can't be recruited into. There should be one scum left, with one confirmed innocent. What should the Cult do? Actually, there may've just been the one cult, we've had two torn certificates, and quercitron credited one to DP. I'm so confused.

[mith]

Yeah, I don't guess the original cult would've warrented a torn townie certificate.

If we could rely on the cult not getting killed, he could just recruit one of us, and then we're guaranteed that either the recruit or werebear is alive tomorrow, along with the cult (or the recruit would fail, and the cult would know who the Mafia is). But, the cult might get killed, so that's got a 2/3 chance of working (assuming we don't try to lynch the cult today, if we do that it doesn't work at all).

Not lynching doesn't work either, there's flaws in any plan involving that.

Anyway, IS, clearly there is only one cult, or the cult would just come out and lynch one of the unknowns.

[boring probability]So, let's see... we try lynching today. We have a 1/4 chance of getting the scum, 1/4 chance of trying to lynch the cult (and then 1/3 chance of getting the scum, 2/3 of it coming down to a 50-50 for werebear tomorrow), 1/2 lynching an innocent townie. In the third case, we then have a 2/3 chance of the cult surviving the night, giving us the win. Otherwise, we have a 1/2 chance of werebear picking correctly in the lynch tomorrow. So, overall, 5/6 chance of winning. We had better win. [/bp]

Anyway, I'll kick off the voting, and

Vote: mole

, simply because he wasn't on the Quailman-wagon (odd reason, I know, but after last game, where all three of us were on the first lynch, I suspect the Mafia wouldn't do that again, especially with just two of them. and I know I wasn't on the Quailman-wagon either, but if you actually think I'm scum after yesterday, you're crazy ). Vote subject to change, of course, hopefully we'll have some lively discussion.

[mith]

Interesting. I vote for mole, citing reasons for the cult to stay hidden (I think my numbers were off though, I forgot to take away the lynched innocent in case three). IS continues to believe there are two cult, even though there have only been two torn certificates, and one was credited to DP. So there *is* only one cult. mole comes out as this cult, despite reasons to stay hidden, and probably out of spite for me voting for him.

Hopefully Sofis is the real cult and will come save me. I'm just a townie, so mole must be lying (unless the cult was able to recruit Mafia, and he failed on a townie?), so I will stick with my vote. And if I get lynched, IS better make me a banner.

Werebear, I don't think you should kill anyone tonight unless you are absolutely sure there is only one possibility. The Mafia could just kill you and win if you're wrong.

[mith]

Oh, and the other possibility would be that the first torn townie was Samadhi himself, the second was a failed attempt on DP, and the third was him trying to recruit Antrax (so no certificate)? In which case, there would be no cult at all.

[mith]

Aha, just noticed the actual content of mole's last post. "Sure, Werebear, take out Sofis for me, then I win." Ha, you're so scum. 2 of 3 ain't bad.

[mith]

Well, I'm left to conclude that either:

1. quercitron screwed up
2. mole is lying scum and there are no cult left
3. mole is cult *and* mafia
4. something really weird, like me being a hobbyist or something like that, that would prevent me from being recruited and that I wouldn't know about

So, quercitron, did you screw up?

My suggestion, obviously biased but hopefully also logical, is that we lynch mole. As Sofis says, he would probably need Sofis and Werebear dead to win, and we aren't sure that the cult can't kill yet.

If mole is Mafia, we win, obviously.

If mole is cult, I don't know what the hell he is up to, but you are all going to be convinced I'm scum. However, I would suggest that Werebear not kill me. Then Sofis can check me, and either the Mafia will kill Werebear (in which case Sofis will nab the Mafia), or Sofis (in which case, even if Werebear is wrong and lynches me instead of IS, Werebear can then kill IS for a draw).

So, if we lynch mole, the worst we can do is draw. If you lynch me, there's still the possibility that mole and IS are mafia and cult (and the cult is evil).

Anyway, I'm positive mole is lying, so I stick with my vote. You can read the game for yourself and decide which of us has actually been innocent in this game.

[mith]

Oh, 5., and this throws a wrench into everything: what if the cult failed only because Samadhi was killed?

We could try no-lynching. mole could try to recruit IS, while Sofis checks me. If mole fails to recruit IS, or claims to have failed, then we've got three possible Mafia (me, mole, IS), so a 2/3 chance of winning (one lynch, one werebear kill). If mole claims to succeed, and IS disputes this, we have the mole scum. If mole succeeds and IS concurs, you'll lynch me, and I'll be left wondering if someone is a schoolgirl ass-shooter, 'cause quercitron is on crack.

I'm so confused. Still convinced mole is scum though.

[mith]

Oh, and just in case I haven't already convinced everyone to vote for me...

Confused look of not quite suspicion, but close: Sofis

. Why did you check Werebear and Antrax? Werebear had a way to prove himself, and Antrax was going to get killed by Werebear (although, I guess that wasn't as much of a sure thing as the first).

[mith]

Yeah, but that first is like checking yourself or something. Whether you have any strong reason to check someone or not, you should still *try*. You might've gotten lucky, or cleared me. And Cops usually can't catch Serial Killers anyway. *~shrug~*

[mith]

(Don't mind me, I'm just annoyed. If mole is lying, I feel like Sofis should've cleared me, and if Sofis is lying, I'm left completely confused by the whole cult thing, and if neither is lying, both of those, and if both are lying, then I'm even more confused. )

[mith]

Quick argument summary I'm having with IS in chat:

Why Furball shouldn't shoot if mole is cult/innocent:

If I a Mafia, I would not be able to shoot Furball, because obviously I would get lynched the next day (Sofis would check me, game over). Given that, he shouldn't shoot me, because he can wait to see who I killed, and then even if he's wrong about me, he gets a draw.

If I'm not Mafia, obviously he shouldn't shoot me, because the Mafia shoots him and wins.

Or, to look at it the other way around, as I did in chat:

He shoots, the Mafia kills him and wins if he's wrong. He'd kill me, so it's a loss.

He doesn't shoot, the Mafia can either shoot him, and leave our cop alive (I wouldn't dare do this if I were Mafia, obviously). Or if they don't shoot him, then he can at least get a draw, if he's wrong about me.

So, yeah, it's bad for Werebear to shoot. He probably will anyway, if mole isn't scum, but that's my logic and I'm sticking to it.

[mith]

And more crap in my defense, since I won't have a chance to speak once mole is lynched:

I was the main instigator in catching Antrax.
It would be stupid of me to claim townie if I wasn't. I could've claimed Cop, Doc, Real Cult, or any number of other things after mole's accusation. I claimed townie because it's the simple truth.
I'm not scum.

[mith]

He was trying to save his own skin, though I don't see why he tried *that*. As he put it, that's what he gets (or rather, we get) for playing at 1:30 AM.

Also, Werebear, bah. I told you why you shouldn't kill me. Me and IS would've nailed Sofis, I was already onto him for the weak Cop claim, and of course IS was.

Don't get to yell at quercitron. Shame, too.

Btw Antrax, I did see your Cop claim, it made me the tiniest bit hesitant about going after you, but I was still pretty sure. Your argument was full of holes. This was hardly your plan's doing, mole screwed us over.

[mith]

Yeah, that would've been interesting. I had all sorts of arguments prepared if you said I was scum. Don't know if I would've convinced IS or not. Pretty sure IS could've convinced me though.

And bah, I just realized, on day 2, IS and I were the only townies. And we had a chance to win it, if Werebear hadn't killed me. Funny, really.

[mith]

I love it when a plan comes together

How else was I supposed to take that?

[mith]

If there had been 3 Mafia and a Traitor, I would've hunted quercitron down.

[mith]

I really wish you'd mentioned that idea before you killed me. I would've shot that down. Even if you shot, in that case, the Mafia wins by shooting you.

Shooting last night was just a bad idea all around.